Summary of New Research Finds That Commonly Used Osteoporosis Tool Is Suboptimal:
A study comparing the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) and the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST) found that OST is a more effective tool for identifying women with osteoporosis-level bone mineral density and thus at risk for fractures in younger postmenopausal women aged between 50 and 64 years. The study examined 10 years of follow-up data from nearly 67,200 younger postmenopausal participants in the Women’s Health Initiative for major osteoporotic fractures of the hip, spine, forearm, and shoulder. The researchers found that FRAX did not accurately predict risk across different racial and ethnic groups, and it should not be routinely used to make screening decisions for younger postmenopausal women. OST was more straightforward and did not require including race or ethnicity information.
*****
Assessing Fracture Risk in Postmenopausal Women: FRAX vs. OST
Osteoporosis is a severe condition affecting millions worldwide, especially women. The condition is characterized by low bone density and an increased risk of fractures, and it commonly affects older individuals, particularly postmenopausal women. Early diagnosis and preventive measures are crucial in managing this condition, which often remains asymptomatic until a fracture occurs. The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) and the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST) assess fracture risk in postmenopausal women. However, a recent study found that FRAX may be less effective than OST in predicting fracture risk in younger postmenopausal women.
FRAX and OST: Similarities and Differences
FRAX is a widely used tool that assesses the 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fractures, incorporating a patient’s clinical risk factors, including age, sex, height, weight, previous fractures, parental hip fracture history, and smoking status. FRAX then calculates the risk using a bone mineral density (BMD) measurement at the femoral neck. Additionally, the tool includes race and ethnicity information to better predict the risk of fractures. On the other hand, OST is a simple tool that uses age and weight to estimate a patient’s BMD without considering race or ethnicity.
FRAX vs. OST: Which is Better?
In a recent study led by Dr. Carolyn Crandall, the efficacy of FRAX and OST in predicting fracture risk in postmenopausal women aged 50 to 64 was evaluated. The Women’s Health Initiative program data showed that the FRAX tool did not perform optimally in predicting fracture risk among younger postmenopausal women from different racial and ethnic groups. This was mainly attributed to the controversy surrounding including race and ethnicity in clinical risk prediction tools. Conversely, OST demonstrated excellent efficacy in identifying individuals with osteoporosis within each racial and ethnic category, regardless of age.
Why OST is the Better Tool
OST is a highly effective tool for identifying women with osteoporosis-level BMD, which puts them at risk for fractures and does not require including racial or ethnic information. Dr. Carolyn Crandall, the study’s lead author, noted that screening aims to identify women with osteoporosis by BMD, making them potential candidates for osteoporosis drug therapy. OST is more straightforward, effective and doesn’t require unnecessary information like race or ethnicity.
Conclusion
In conclusion, assessing fracture risk in postmenopausal women is critical in preventing osteoporosis-related fractures. FRAX and OST are tools used to estimate the risk of fractures; however, OST is more effective than FRAX in identifying women with osteoporosis-level BMD at risk for fractures. Furthermore, FRAX’s racial/ethnic information inclusion should not be routinely used to make screening decisions in younger postmenopausal women because they might not predict the risk of fractures, particularly among women from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. The OST tool is a simple, effective, and reliable tool for assessing fracture risk in postmenopausal women of all races and ethnicities, making it an essential tool for healthcare professionals.
