4.5 Article

Interpretation and use of FRAX in clinical practice

Journal

OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL
Volume 22, Issue 9, Pages 2395-2411

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-011-1713-z

Keywords

Bone mineral density; Clinical risk factors; Fracture probability; Risk assessment

Funding

  1. Amgen
  2. Merck Frosst
  3. Sanofi-Aventis
  4. Warner Chilcott
  5. Novartis
  6. Genzyme
  7. HORIZON trial
  8. Alliance for Better Bone Health
  9. Glaxo Smith Kline
  10. Roche
  11. Merck Sharp
  12. Dohme
  13. Lilly
  14. Wyeth
  15. Servier
  16. Nycomed
  17. Eli Lilly
  18. Danone
  19. Merck
  20. Tarsa
  21. Tarsa Pharmaceuticals
  22. Merck Co
  23. Medical Research Council [MC_UP_A620_1014, U1475000001] Funding Source: researchfish
  24. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0508-10082] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The introduction of the WHO FRAXA (R) algorithms has facilitated the assessment of fracture risk on the basis of fracture probability. Its use in fracture risk prediction has strengths, but also limitations of which the clinician should be aware and are the focus of this review Introduction The International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) appointed a joint Task Force to develop resource documents in order to make recommendations on how to improve FRAX and better inform clinicians who use FRAX. The Task Force met in November 2010 for 3 days to discuss these topics which form the focus of this review. Methods This study reviews the resource documents and joint position statements of ISCD and IOF. Results Details on the clinical risk factors currently used in FRAX are provided, and the reasons for the exclusion of others are provided. Recommendations are made for the development of surrogate models where country-specific FRAX models are not available. Conclusions The wish list of clinicians for the modulation of FRAX is large, but in many instances, these wishes cannot presently be fulfilled; however, an explanation and understanding of the reasons may be helpful in translating the information provided by FRAX into clinical practice.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available