The effectiveness of screening to identify patients with osteoporosis/high risk of fractures in primary health care

Background. The organization of screening for osteoporosis is an actual problem due to the need for early detection of patients with high risk of fractures and initiation of their treatment.

Aim. The aim of our study was to study the effectiveness of screening for osteoporosis (high risk of fractures) in postmenopausal men and women 40 years and older.

Materials and methods. Screening was performed by outpatient doctors for all people aged 40 years and older who applied for various reasons. The doctor asked standard questions included in the FRAX questionnaire.

Results. In 2017– 2020, 11,013 people were screened by outpatient doctors — 31.7% of the total attached population aged 40 years and older. According to the screening results, 21.9% people were identified with a high risk of fractures. The average 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fractures in these patients (19.0±7.9%) was statistically significantly higher compared to the rest of the screened (7.6±3.3%), p=0.0001. 60% (1,450 people) of the group of individuals with an identified high risk of fractures were patients with FRAX in the area of therapeutic intervention. Among them were patients with indications of a fracture and without a history of fractures. In the remaining 40%, the high risk was determined only on the basis of the fact of a previously suffered fracture (their FRAX index was below the intervention threshold). In general, using only the FRAX calculator, 40 men and 1410 women were identified as having a high risk of fractures, which accounted for 1.3% of the male and 17.7% of  the female screened population, respectively. With the simultaneous use of FRAX and anamnestic data on a previous fracture, 13.3% of men and 25.3% of women in the screening population had a high risk of fractures.

Conclusion. Screening in primary health care has allowed us to identify 21.9% of the screened population of men and women aged 40 years and older (postmenopausal women) as having a high risk of fractures. Screening with simultaneous calculation of the 10-year risk of fractures according to FRAX and clarification of the presence of a history of fractures was the most effective.

1. Curtis EM, Harvey NC, Cooper C. The burden of osteoporosis. In: Harvey NC, Cooper C. editors. Osteoporosis: a lifecourse epidemiology approach to skeletal health. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2018. P. 1–20.

2. Wang QY, Ding N, Dong YH, et al. Pharmacological Treatment of Osteoporosis in Elderly People: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Gerontology. 2021;67(6):639-649. doi: https://doi.org/10.1159/000514449

3. Willems D, Javaid MK, Pinedo-Villanueva R, et al. Importance of Time Point–Specific Indirect Treatment Comparisons of Osteoporosis Treatments: A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-Analyses. Clin Ther. 2022;44(1):81-97. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2021.11.015

4. Schousboe JT, Shepherd JA, Bilezikian JP, Baim S. Executive summary of the 2013 International Society for Clinical Densitometry Position Development Conference on bone densitometry. J Clin Densitom. 2013;16(4):455-466. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocd.2013.08.004

5. Kanis JA, Cooper C, Rizzoli R, Reginster JY; Scientific Advisory Board of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis (ESCEO) and the Committees of Scientific Advisors and National Societies of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF). European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int. 2019;30(1):3-44. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-018-4704-5

6. Reid IR. A broader strategy for osteoporosis interventions. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2020;16(6):333-339. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41574-020-0339-7

7. Belaya ZE, Rozhinskaya LY, Grebennikova TA, et al. Summary of the draft federal clinical guidelines for osteoporosis. Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2020;23(2):4-21. (In Russ.). doi: https://doi.org/10.14341/osteo12710

8. Shepstone L, Lenaghan E, Cooper C, et al. SCOOP Study Team. Screening in the community to reduce fractures in older women (SCOOP): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018 Feb 24;391(10122):741-747. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32640-5

9. Rubin KH, Rothmann MJ, Holmberg T, et al. Effectiveness of a twostep population-based osteoporosis screening program using FRAX: the randomized Risk-stratified Osteoporosis Strategy Evaluation (ROSE) study. Osteoporos Int. 2018;29(3):567-578. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-017-4326-3

10. EUnetHTA OTCA19 Assessment Team. Screening for osteoporosis in the general population. Collaborative Assessment. Diemen (The Netherlands): EUnetHTA; 2019. Report No.: OTCA19. Available from: https://www.eunethta.eu

11. Lesnyak O, Zakroyeva A, Babalyan V, et al. FRAX-based intervention thresholds in eight Eurasian countries: Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, the Russian Federation, and Uzbekistan. Arch Osteoporos. 2021;16(1):87. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-021-00962-1

12. Ezhegodnyi statisticheskii sbornik «Travmatizm, ortopedicheskaya zabolevaemost’, organizatsiya travmatologo-ortopedicheskoi pomoshchi v Rossiiskoi Federatsii v 2019 godu». Moscow; 2021. (In Russ.). Доступно по: https://cito-priorov.ru/cito/files/science/sbornik.pdf

13. Statisticheskii sbornik Ministerstva zdravookhraneniya Rossiiskoi Federatsii. (In Russ.). Доступно по: https://minzdrav.gov.ru/ministry/61/22/stranitsa-979/statisticheskie-i-informatsionnye-materialy/statisticheskiy-sbornik-2017-god

14. Rothmann MJ, Möller S, Holmberg T, et al. Nonparticipation in systematic screening for osteoporosis-the ROSE trial. Osteoporos Int. 2017;28(12):3389-3399. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-017-4205-y

15. Morin SN, Lix LM, Leslie WD. The importance of previous fracture site on osteoporosis diagnosis and incident fractures in women. J Bone Miner Res. 2014;29(7):1675-1680. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.2204

16. Center JR, Bliuc D, Nguyen T V., Eisman JA. Risk of Subsequent Fracture After Low-Trauma Fracture in Men and Women. JAMA. 2007;297(4):387. doi: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.297.4.387

17. Gehlbach S, Saag KG, Adachi JD, et al. Previous fractures at multiple sites increase the risk for subsequent fractures: the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women. J Bone Miner Res. 2012;27(3):645-653. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.1476

18. Lesnyak OM, Gladkova EN, Ershova OB, et al. The ten-year probability of fractures with the FRAX tool: which threshold for intervention to be used and how? Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2019;57(6):626-635 (In Russ.). doi: https://doi.org/10.14412/1995-4484-2019-626-635

19. Leslie WD, Schousboe JT, Morin SN, et al. Fracture risk following high-trauma versus low-trauma fracture: a registrybased cohort study. Osteoporos Int. 2020;31(6):1059-1067. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-05274-2

20. Evstigneeva LP, Kuznetsova EV, Nizamutdinova RM, Lavrent’ev AS. Vyyavlyaemost’ i lechenie osteoporoza u patsientov starshikh vozrastnykh grupp s perelomom distal’nogo otdela predplech’ya. Ural’skii meditsinskii zhurnal. 2010;7(72):91-96. (In Russ.).

21. Toroptsova NV, Nikitinskaya OA, Dobrovolskaya OV. Treatment adherence in patients with osteoporosis in daily clinical practice. Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2014;52(3):336-341. (In Russ.). doi: https://doi.org/10.14412/1995-4484-2014-336-341

22. Fitilev SB, Shkrebneva II, Vozzhaev AV, et al. Gipolipidemicheskaya terapiya u patsientov, perenesshikh infarkt miokarda (farmakoepidemiologicheskoe issledovanie). Klinicheskaya farmakologiya i terapiya. 2017;26(1):88-92. (In Russ.).

23. Efros LA, Samorodskaya IV. Medikamentoznoe lechenie bol’nykh ishemicheskoi bolezn’yu serdtsa posle koronarnogo shuntirovaniya za period s 2000 po 2009 gody. Byulleten’ NTsSSKh im. AN. Bakuleva RAMN. 2013;14(5):57-67. (In Russ.).

24. Tolpygina SN, Polyanskaya YuN, Martsevich SYu. Gipolipidemicheskaya terapiya u patsientov s khronicheskoi ishemicheskoi bolezn’yu serdtsa v 2004-2010 gg. po dannym registra «Prognoz IBS». Ratsional’naya farmakoterapiya v kardiologii. 2015;11(2):153-158. (In Russ.).

25. Skripnikova IA, Myagkova MA, Shalnova SA, et al. Epidemiology of risk factors and estimating 10-year probability of osteoporotic fractures in the Russian Federation. Arch Osteoporos. 2022;17(1):62. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-022-01093-x

26. Mikhailov EE, Benevolenskaya LI. Epidemiology of osteoporosis and fractures. Ed. by L.I. Benevolenskaya. Primary on Osteoporosis. Moscow: BINOM. Laboratoriya znanii; 2003. P. 10-55. (In Russ.).

27. Kanis JA, McCloskey E V., Johansson H, et al. Case finding for the management of osteoporosis with FRAX® — assessment and intervention thresholds for the UK. Osteoporos Int. 2008;19(10):1395-1408. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-008-0712-1

28. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A, et al. Intervention thresholds for osteoporosis in men and women: a study based on data from Sweden. Osteoporos Int. 2005;16(1):6-14. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-004-1623-4

29. Marques A, Lourenço Ó, Ortsäter G, et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Intervention Thresholds for the Treatment of Osteoporosis Based on FRAX® in Portugal. Calcif Tissue Int. 2016;99(2):131-141. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-016-0132-8

30. Lippuner K, Johansson H, Borgström F, et al. Cost-effective intervention thresholds against osteoporotic fractures based on FRAX® in Switzerland. Osteoporos Int. 2012;23(11):2579-2589. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1869-6

31. Marques A, Lucas R, Simões E, et al. Do we need bone mineral density to estimate osteoporotic fracture risk? A 10-year prospective multicentre validation study. RMD Open. 2017;3(2):e000509. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2017-000509