Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jones, T.
Right arrow Articles by Davie, M. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jones, T.
Right arrow Articles by Davie, M. W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The British Journal of Rheumatology, Vol 37, 539-543, Copyright © 1998 by British Society for Rheumatology


ORIGINAL PAPERS

Bone mineral density at distal forearm can identify patients with osteoporosis at spine or femoral neck

T Jones and MW Davie
Charles Salt Research Centre, Robert Jones and Agnes Hunt Hospital, Oswestry, Shropshire.

Forearm bone mineral density (BMD) was investigated in women to identify osteoporosis at the spine or femoral neck (or both) defined by WHO criteria (T score -2.5) without requirement for fracture. BMD was measured by single-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DTX100) and by dual- energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the lumbar spine and femoral neck in 422 subjects aged 22-90 yr. A total of 62% of subjects with osteoporosis (at the spine, femoral neck, or both sites) were detected with 89% specificity [receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis] and included all subjects below forearm BMD 0.34 g/cm2. Conversely, above 0.419 g/cm2, only 10% of patients had osteoporosis. A total of 71.8% of women could be assigned either to those who warranted therapy (<0.34 g/cm2) or to those who did not (>0.419 g/cm2) with 90% certainty. Subjects with forearm BMD between 0.34 and 0.419 g/cm2, who constituted 28.2% of the total group and included 31% of subjects with osteoporosis, had a 40% chance of having osteoporosis. This leads to a high identification rate on subsequent DXA scanning, which is thus used efficiently.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin. Chem.Home page
M. Worsfold, D. E. Powell, T. J.W. Jones, and M. W.J. Davie
Assessment of Urinary Bone Markers for Monitoring Treatment of Osteoporosis
Clin. Chem., December 1, 2004; 50(12): 2263 - 2270.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
P J Ryan
Bone densitometry in the management of Colles' fractures: which site to measure?
Br. J. Radiol., December 1, 2001; 74(888): 1137 - 1141.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.