Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2005 Jul;16(7):764-72.
doi: 10.1007/s00198-004-1748-5. Epub 2004 Sep 30.

Performance of four clinical screening tools to select peri- and early postmenopausal women for dual X-ray absorptiometry

Affiliations

Performance of four clinical screening tools to select peri- and early postmenopausal women for dual X-ray absorptiometry

B Rud et al. Osteoporos Int. 2005 Jul.

Abstract

Several methods to select postmenopausal women for dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) have been proposed. We decided to compare the performance of three clinical decision rules (SCORE, ORAI, OST) with the usual case-finding strategy based on the presence of a major risk factor for future fracture (CFMRF). The study subjects were 2009 healthy, white, peri- or early postmenopausal women participating in the Danish Osteoporosis Prevention Study (DOPS). DXA results expressed as T-scores and scores on SCORE, ORAI, OST and CFMRF were extracted from the DOPS database. First, we evaluated the screening tools as originally described by the developers. The resulting sensitivities and specificities ranged from 18% to 92% and from 66% to 85%, respectively. Only OST achieved a high sensitivity (92%) with respect to femoral neck T-score < or = -2.5; however, the sensitivity with respect to lumbar spine T-score < or = -2.5 was only 51%. Next, the performance of the screening tools was evaluated against T-score < or = -2.0 (and T-score < or = -2.5) in at least one of the regions: femoral neck, total hip or lumbar spine. Using ROC curve analysis, we determined cut-offs yielding sensitivities as close as possible to 90%. The CFMRF and the ORAI tool were too coarse to yield 90% sensitivity. The performances of OST and SCORE were equal from a clinical perspective in that the sensitivities and the specificities varied from 89% to 94% and from 23% to 28%, respectively. The performance of CFMRF was no better than could be expected by chance, yielding a sensitivity of 19% and a specificity of 85%. Applying SCORE or OST 75% of the women would have to be referred for densitometry to identify 90% of the women with T-score < or = -2.0 (or T-score < or = -2.5) in at least one region. In conclusion, our results question the utility of all the evaluated tools for screening peri- and early postmenopausal women for low BMD. However, if a decision on referral has to be made, it may be based on the simple OST rule, which performed as well as or better than any of the other tools.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Scand J Rheumatol. 2001;30(1):35-9 - PubMed
    1. Maturitas. 2000 Oct 31;36(3):181-93 - PubMed
    1. Osteoporos Int. 1997;7(4):390-406 - PubMed
    1. Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Oct;51(471):806-10 - PubMed
    1. Calcif Tissue Int. 1993 May;52(5):344-7 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources