Rheumatology Advance Access originally published online on January 7, 2009
Rheumatology 2009 48(4):327-329; doi:10.1093/rheumatology/ken454
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
EDITORIALS |
The National Osteoporosis Guideline Group's new guidelines: what is new?
1University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay, NHS Trust, Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Lancaster and Clinical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
Correspondence to: M. Bukhari, Department of Rheumatology, Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Ashton road, Lancaster LA1 4RP, UK. E-mail: marwan.bukhari@mbht.nhs.uk
| The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below. |
Introduction
The importance of osteoporosis (OP) to the health economy is widely documented [1]: with costs of fractures alone of £1.73 billion, the ageing population also will lead to a doubling of this estimated cost. Recent advances in the literature regarding the diagnoses and management of OP have occurred. Although there have been Royal College of Physicians (RCP) guidelines published in 1999, 2000 and 2002 [2–4] and National Institute for Healthcare and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidances and the new final appraisal determination document from NICE [5–7], they have not been updated with recent advances including the newly developed World Health Organization FRAXTM data (www.shef.ac.uk/frax), which give a 10-yr fracture risk assessment and explains how it fits in the treatment paradigm. Additionally, newer treatments including zolendronate are not included. Other groups not included in current guidance are men or women receiving glucocorticoid
New issues discussed in the guidance
How to define and assess OP
Assessment of fracture risk
Strategies for OP prevention and treatment
Prevention and treatment
Case finding
Recommendations
Conclusion