EPIDEMIOLOGY OF OSTEOPOROTIC FRACTURES IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND THE RUSSIAN MODEL OF FRAX

Introduction. The incidence of fractures of the proximal femur (FPF), fractures of the forearm and humerus was studied in two cities of the Russian Federation. This index was used to create the Russian model FRAX and to assess the present and future burden of fractures. Objective. So far, little is known about the epidemiology of fractures in Russia. The aim of the study was to determine the incidence of major fractures to create a Russian model of FRAX and evaluate the present and future burden of fractures. Materials and methods. In well-defined populations of two Russian cities, we had determined a number FPF and forearm fractures of the humerus for 2-2-year period. Data were combined and the resulting incidence used to calculate FRAX model for the Russian Federation and to calculate the projected number of fractures in the Russian Federation in 2010 and 2025. Results. A total of 6012 fractures were identified. Among all FPF, 27% of Pervouralsk and 1.8% in Yaroslavl were not registered on the official data of medical institutions. The incidence of fractures increased with age and was higher in women than in men. The probability of experiencing a FPF in later life at the age of 50 years was 4% of men and 7% of women. Total number FPF in 2010 was 112 thousand cases and it is expected to rise by 2025 to 159 thousand a year. The estimated number of major osteoporotic fractures will increase from 590 thousand to 730 thousand cases for the same period. Conclusions. Osteoporotic fractures are a serious health problem for Russia. It is necessary to take urgent measures to improve emergency care at FPF and long-term care for this and other osteoporotic fractures.

burden of fractures, fracture risk, arm fracture, femur fracture, humerus fracture

1. World Health Organization (2007) Assessment of osteoporosis at the primary health care level. WHO, Geneva. (www.who.int/chp/topics/rheumatic/en/index.hlml). Accessed 26 Feb 2012

2. Kanis J.A. on behalf of the World Health Organization Scientific Group (2008) Assessment of osteoporosis at the primary healthcare level. Technical Report.WHO Collaborating Centre, University of Sheffield, UK. Available at http://www. shef.ac.uk/FRAX/index.htm. Accessed 26 Feb 2012

3. Kanis J.A., Johnell O., Oden A., Johansson H., McCloskey E.V. (2008) FRAX™ and the assessment of fracture probability in men and women from the UK. Osteoporos Int 19:385-397

4. Kanis J.A., Johnell O., De Laet C., Jonsson B., Oden A., Oglesby A. (2002) International variations in hip fracture probabilities: implications for risk assessment. J Bone Miner Res 17:1237-1244

5. Cauley J.A., El-Hajj Fuleihan G., Arabi A., Fujiwara S., Ragi-Eis S., Calderon A. et al. (2011) Official Positions for FRAX® clinical regarding international differences from Joint Official Positions Development Conference of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry and International Osteoporosis Foundation on FRAX®. J Clin Densitom 14:240-262

6. Cauley J., Danielson M., Neives J., Silverman S., Chen Z., Looker A., Curtis J., Hanley D., Calderon A. (2010) Are the US calculators for ethnic minorities accurate enough for clinical use? ISCD/IOF FRAX International Task Force resource document

7. Kanis J.A., Hans D., Cooper C., Baim S. et al. (2011) Interpretation and use of FRAX in clinical practice. Osteoporos Int 22:395-411

8. Yershova O., Belova K., Nazarova A., et al. (2010) Incidence of hip fractures in Yaroslavl. Abstracts of IV Russian Congress on Osteoporosis, Saint-Petersburg. Osteoporosis and osteopathies 2010 Suppl.1, 33 [in Russian]

9. Gladkova E., Khodyrev V., Lesnyak O. (2011) Analysis of the epidemiology of fragility fractures using the data from primary care physicians. Osteoporos Osteopathies 1:14-18 [in Russian]

10. United Nations (2008) Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat, World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision, http://esa.un.org/unpp, Saturday, January 08, 2011; 12:46:30 PM. Accessed 26 Feb 2012

11. Kanis J.A., Oden A., Johnell O., Jonsson B., de Laet C., Dawson A. (2001) The burden of osteoporotic fractures: a method for setting intervention thresholds. Osteoporos Int 12:417-427

12. Russian State Statistics Committee (2011) www.gks.ru (Russian state statistics committee) http://www.gks.ru/wps/wcm/connect/rosstat/rosstatsite/main/population/demography/c2cb4b80449fc2f3a8fcb8b37074422a. Accessed 26 Feb 2012

13. Elffors I., Allander E., Kanis J.A. et al. (1994) The variable incidence of hip fracture in southern Europe: the MEDOS Study. Osteoporos Int 4: 253-263

14. Cummings S.R., Melton L.J. (2002) Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Lancet 359: 1761-1767

15. Johnell O., Gullberg B., Allander E., Kanis J.A. (1992) The apparent incidence of hipracture in Europe: a study of national register sources. MEDOS Study Group. Osteoporos Int 2: 298-302

16. Cheng S.Y., Levy A.R., Lefaivre K.A., Guy P., Kuramoto L., Sobolev B. (2011) Geographic trends in incidence of hip fractures: a comprehensive literature review. Osteoporos Int 22: 2575-2586

17. International Osteoporosis Foundation (2011) The Eastern European & Central Asian Regional Audit Epidemiology, costs and burden of osteoporosis in 2010. IOF, Nyon. Available at http://www.iofbonehealth.org/publications/eastern-european-central-asian-audit-2010.html. Accessed 26 Feb 2012

18. Levine S., Makin M., Menczel J., Robin G., Naor E., Steinberg R. (1970) Incidence of fractures of the proximal end of the femur in Jerusalem: a study of ethnic factors. J Bone Joint Surg Am 52: 1193-1202

19. Wittich A., Bagur A., Mautalen C. et al. (2010) Epidemiology of hip fracture in Tucuman, Argentina. Osteoporos Int 21: 1803-1807

20. Jonsson B., Gardsell P., Johnell O., Redlund-Johnell I., Sernbo I. (1992) Differences in fracture pattern between an urban and a rural population: a comparative population-based study in southern Sweden. Osteoporos Int 2: 269-273

21. Finsen V., Benum P. (1987) Changing incidence of hip fractures in rural and urban areas of central Norway. Clin Orthop Relat Res 218: 104-110

22. Bulajic-Kopjar M., Wiik J., Nordhagen R. (1998) Regional differences in the incidence of femoral neck fractures in Norway. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 118: 30-33

23. Kaastad T.S., Meyer H.E., Falch J.A. (2008) Incidence of hip fracture in Oslo, Norway: differences within the city. Bone 22: 175-178

24. Chevalley T., Herrmann F.R., Delmi et al. (2002) Evaluation of the age-adjusted incidence of hip fractures between urban and rural areas: the difference is not related to the prevalence of institutions for the elderly. Osteoporos Int 13: 113-118

25. Matković V., Ciganovic M., Tominac C., Kostial K. (1980) Osteoporosis and epidemiology of fractures in Croatia. An international comparison. Henry Ford Hosp Med J 28: 116-126

26. Jacobsen S.J., Goldberg J., Miles T.P., Brody J.A., Stiers W., Rimm A.A. (1990) Regional variation in the incidence of hip fracture. US white women aged 65 years and older. JAMA 264: 500-502

27. Madhok R., Melton L.J. 3rd, Atkinson E.J., O’Fallon W.M., Lewallen D.G. (1993) Urban vs rural increase in hip fracture incidence. Age and sex of 901 cases 1980-89 in Olmsted County, U.S.A. Acta Orthop Scand 64: 543-548

28. Kanis J.A., Johansson H., Oden A., Dawson-Hughes B., Melton L.J. 3rd, McCloskey E.V. (2010) The effects of a FRAX revision for the USA. Osteoporos Int 21: 35-40

29. Tuzun S., Eskiyurt N., Akarirmak U., Saridogan M., Senocak M., Johansson H., Kanis J.A., Turkish Osteoporosis Society (2012) Incidence of hip fracture and prevalence of osteoporosis in Turkey: the FRACTURK Study. Osteoporos Int 23(3): 949-955

30. Clark P., Lavielle P., Franco-Marina F. et al. (2005) Incidence rates and life-time risk of hip fractures in Mexicans over 50 years of age: a population-based study. Osteoporos Int 16: 2025-2030

31. Czerwinski E., Kanis J.A., Trybulec B., Johansson H., Borowy P., Osieleniec J. (2009) The incidence and risk of hip fracture in Poland. Osteoporos Int 20: 1363-1367