Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Practice Point
  • Published:

Will absolute fracture risk prediction facilitate treatment of osteoporosis?

Abstract

Development of valid risk prediction tools for osteoporosis could substantially improve patient care. These tools have the potential to identify individuals at increased fracture risk and specifically direct interventions towards them rather than low-risk individuals. In this Practice Point commentary, I discuss a study by Hans et al. that adds to our current understanding of fracture risk prediction. This large, prospective study aimed to develop a 10-year hip fracture risk prediction tool that combined quantitative ultrasound of the heel bone with clinical risk factors. The authors found that combined use of these parameters was highly predictive of future fracture risk in a cohort of almost 13,000 elderly, white, European women. Significant clinical risk factors included BMI, previous fracture, history of recent fall, current smoking, failed chair test, and diabetes mellitus; age was also found to be a significant risk factor. Before embracing such tools, however, we must acknowledge some important unknowns about their utility.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. McGinn TG et al. (2000) Users' guides to the medical literature: XXII: how to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 284: 79–84

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Laupacis A et al. (1997) Clinical prediction rules. A review and suggested modifications of methodological standards. JAMA 277: 488–494

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. D'Agostino RB Sr et al. (2001) Validation of the Framingham coronary heart disease prediction scores: results of a multiple ethnic groups investigation. JAMA 286: 180–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kanis JA et al. (2005) Assessment of fracture risk. Osteoporos Int 16: 581–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cummings SR et al. (1995) Risk factors for hip fracture in white women. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. N Engl J Med 332: 767–773

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hans D et al. (2008) Assessment of the 10-year probability of osteoporotic hip fracture combining clinical risk factors and heel bone ultrasound: the EPISEM prospective cohort of 12958 elderly women. J Bone Miner Res [10.1359/jbmr.080229]

  7. Geusens P et al. (2008) Impact of systematic implementation of a clinical case finding strategy on diagnosis and therapy of postmenopausal osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res [doi: 10.1359/jbmr.080212]

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

DH Solomon receives research support from the NIH (AR 047782 and AR 055989).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Solomon, D. Will absolute fracture risk prediction facilitate treatment of osteoporosis?. Nat Rev Endocrinol 4, 480–481 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpendmet0891

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpendmet0891

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing