Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMorrissey, Hana
dc.contributor.authorSubasinghe, Sewwandi
dc.contributor.authorBall, Patrick
dc.contributor.authorLekamwasam, Serath
dc.contributor.authorWaidyarathne, Eisha .I.
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-10T13:21:54Z
dc.date.available2019-07-10T13:21:54Z
dc.date.issued2019-03-31
dc.identifier.citationSubasinghe, H.W.A.S., Lekamwasam, S., Ball, P., Morrissey, H. and Waidyaratne, E.I., 2019. Performance of Sri Lankan FRAX algorithm without bone mineral density and with Quantitative Ultrasound data input. Ceylon Medical Journal, 64(1), pp.17–24. DOI: http://doi.org/10.4038/cmj.v64i1.8836en
dc.identifier.issn2386-1274en
dc.identifier.doi10.4038/cmj.v64i1.8836en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/622530
dc.description.abstractIntroduction Fracture risk assessment algorithm (FRAX) is the most validated method available to predict fracture risk. Its use is restricted due to limited availability of Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA). FRAX has the option of assessing facture risk without BMD data. Objectives To assess the ability of Sri Lankan FRAX algorithm without BMD input in evaluating fracture risk. The possibility of replacing the BMD input with Quantitative Ultrasound (QUS) data of radius in calculating fracture risk also assessed. Methods Data of clinical risk factors associated with fractures were collected from community dwelling postmenopausal women (n=339). DXA scans were performed in all subjects and QUS scans (in radius) were performed in a randomly selected sample (n=207). Ten-year risks of major osteoporotic fracture (MOFR) and hip fracture (HFR) were calculated with BMD, without BMD (FRAX-FN0) and with US T score instead of BMD (FRAX-UST). Results and conclusion Nearly 35.7% had high risk of fractures. FRAX-FN0 had 79.2% sensitivity, 80.1% specificity, 68.8% positive predictive value (PPV) and 87.4% negative predictive value (NPV). FRAX-UST showed 78.4% sensitivity, 70% specificity, 59.8% PPV and 85% NPV. ROC AUCs were above 0.80 in both FRAX-FN0 and FRAX-UST. The standard errors of estimate (SEE) were less in FRAX-FN0 (3.96 and 2.76 for MOFR-FN0 and HFR-FN0 respectively) compared to FRAX-UST (6.13 and 4.83 for MOFR-UST and HFR-UST, respectively). In conclusion, Sri Lankan FRAX without BMD is an acceptable alternative in areas with restricted DXA facility. Radial QUS data cannot be used as a substitute to FN-BMD in Sri Lankan FRAX.en
dc.formatapplication/pdfen
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherThe Sri Lanka Medical Associationen
dc.relation.urlhttps://cmj.sljol.info/articles/abstract/10.4038/cmj.v64i1.8836/en
dc.subjectBone mineral densityen
dc.subjectFRAXen
dc.subjectPostmenopausal womenen
dc.subjectUltrasound bone scanen
dc.titlePerformance of Sri Lankan FRAX algorithm without bone mineral density and with Quantitative Ultrasound data inputen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.identifier.journalCeylon Medical Journalen
dc.date.updated2019-07-03T19:55:17Z
dc.date.accepted2019-01-31
rioxxterms.funderJiscen
rioxxterms.identifier.project100719HMen
rioxxterms.versionVoRen
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2019-07-10en
dc.source.volume64
dc.source.issue1
dc.source.beginpage17
dc.source.endpage24
refterms.dateFCD2019-07-10T13:21:33Z
refterms.versionFCDAM
refterms.dateFOA2019-07-10T13:21:55Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
frax paper-CMJ-published.pdf
Size:
539.5Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/