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
. 2008 Aug;54(8):1140-1141, 1141.e1-5.

Osteoporosis screening for men: are family physicians following the guidelines?

Natalie Cheng  1 , Michael E Green
Affiliations

Osteoporosis screening for men: are family physicians following the guidelines?

Natalie Cheng et al. Can Fam Physician. 2008 Aug.

Abstract
in English, French

Objective: To determine rates of screening for osteoporosis among men older than 65 years and to find out whether family physicians are following the recommendations of the Osteoporosis Society of Canada's 2002 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Osteoporosis in Canada.

Design: Chart audit.

Setting: The Family Medicine Centre at Hotel Dieu Hospital in Kingston, Ont.

Participants: All male patients at the Family Medicine Centre older than 65 years for a total of 565 patients associated with 20 different physicians' practices.

Main outcome measures: Rates of screening with bone mineral density (BMD) scans for osteoporosis, results of BMD testing, and associations between results of BMD testing and age.

Results: Of the 565 patients reviewed, 108 (19.1% of the study population) had received BMD testing. Rates of screening ranged from 0% to 38% in the 20 practices. Among 105 patients tested (reports for 3 patients were not retrievable), 15 (14.3%) were found to have osteoporosis, 43 (41.0%) to have osteopenia, and 47 (44.8%) to have normal BMD results. No significant association was found between BMD results and age. Screening rates were higher among men older than 75 years than among men aged 65 to 75 and peaked among those 85 to 89 years old.

Conclusion: On average, only about 20% of male patients older than 65 years had been screened for osteoporosis, so most of these men were not being screened by BMD testing as recommended in the guidelines. Considering the relatively high rates of osteoporosis and osteopenia found in this study and the known morbidity and mortality associated with osteoporotic fractures in this population, higher rates of BMD screening and more widespread treatment of osteoporosis could prevent many fractures among these patients. Family physicians need to become more aware of the risk factors indicating screening, and barriers to screening and treatment of osteoporosis in men need to be identified and addressed.

OBJECTIF: Déterminer le taux de dépistage de l’ostéoporose chez les hommes de plus de 65 ans et voir si les médecins de famille suivent les directives de pratique clinique de 2002 pour le diagnostic et le traitement de l’ostéoporose de la Société de l’ostéoporose du Canada.

TYPE D’ÉTUDE: Revue de dossier.

CONTEXTE: Le Family Medicine Center de l’Hôtel-Dieu de Kingston, Ont.

PARTICIPANTS: Tous les patients mâles de plus de 65 ans du Family Medicine Center, soit un total de 565 clients de 20 bureaux médicaux différents.

PRINCIPAUX PARAMÈTRES ÉTUDIÉS: Taux de dépistage de l’ostéoporose par ostéodensimétrie (ODM), résultats de l’ODM et association entre les résultats de l’ODM et l’âge.

RÉSULTATS: Sur les 565 patients étudiés, 108 (19,1%) avaient subi une ODM. Les taux de dépistage variaient de 0% à 38% dans les 20 établissements. Sur les 105 patients testés (les résultats manquaient pour 3 patients), 15 (14,3%) présentaient de l’ostéoporose, 43 (41,0%) de l’ostéopénie et 47 (44,8%) des résultats normaux. Il n’y avait pas d’association significative entre les résultats de l’ODM et l’âge. Les taux de dépistage chez les plus de 75 ans étaient plus élevés que chez les patients de 65 à 75 ans; ce taux était maximal dans le groupe des 85 à 89 ans.

CONCLUSION: En moyenne, seulement 20% des patients mâles de plus de 65 ans avaient subi un dépistage de l’ostéoporose, la plupart n’ayant donc pas eu de dépistage par ODM tel que préconisé par les directives. Étant donné les taux relativement élevés d’ostéoporose et d’ostéopénie observés dans cette étude, et connaissant la morbidité et la mortalité associées aux fractures ostéoporotiques dans cette population, on croit qu’un plus fort taux de dépistage et un traitement plus agressif de l’ostéoporose pourraient prévenir plusieurs fractures chez ces patients. Le médecin de famille devrait mieux connaître les facteurs de risque qui incitent au dépistage; il faudrait aussi cerner les facteurs qui nuisent au dépistage et au traitement de l’ostéoporose chez l’homme.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Physicians’ rates of screening male patients older than 65 years for osteoporosis
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

  • Adherence to osteoporosis guidelines.
    Sehmer J. Sehmer J. Can Fam Physician. 2008 Nov;54(11):1524; author reply 1524-5. Can Fam Physician. 2008. PMID: 19005115 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Hanley DA. Prevention and management of osteoporosis: consensus statements from the Scientific Advisory Board of the Osteoporosis Society of Canada. 1. Introduction. CMAJ. 1996;155(7):921–3. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jackson SA. Vertebral fracture definition from population-based data: preliminary results from the Canadian Multicenter Osteoporosis Study (CaMos) Osteoporos Int. 2000;11(8):680–7. - PubMed
    1. Goeree R. An assessment of the burden of illness due to osteoporosis in Canada. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can. 1996;18(Suppl):15–24.
    1. Jaglal SB. The impact and consequences of hip fractures in Ontario. Can J Surg. 1996;39(2):105–11. - PMC - PubMed
    1. McKercher HG. Family physicians and osteoporosis. Meeting the challenge [editorial] Can Fam Physician. 2003;49:405–7 (Eng). 412–4 (Fr). - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms