Dataset Information

A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most widely used technique to measure bone mineral density (BMD). Appropriate and accurate use of DXA is of great importance, and several guidelines have been developed in the last years. Our aim was to evaluate the quality of published guidelines on DXA for adults. METHODS:Between June and July 2016 we conducted an online search for DXA guidelines, which were evaluated by four independent readers blinded to each other using the AGREE II instrument. A fifth independent reviewer calculated scores per each domain and agreement between reviewers' scores. RESULTS:Four out of 59 guidelines met inclusion criteria and were included. They were published between 2005 and 2014. Three out of four guidelines reached a high level of quality, having at least five domain scores higher than 60%. Domain 1 (Scope and Purpose) achieved the highest result (total score = 86.8 ± 3.7%). Domain 6 (Editorial Independence) had the lowest score (total score = 54.7 ± 12.5%). Interobserver agreement ranged from fair (0.230) to good (0.702). CONCLUSIONS:Overall, the quality of DXA guidelines is satisfactory when evaluated using the AGREE II instrument. The Editorial Independence domain was the most critical, thus deserving more attention when developing future guidelines. MAIN MESSAGES:• Three of four guidelines on DXA had a high quality level (>60%). • Scope/purpose had the highest score (86.8 ± 3.7%). • Editorial Independence had the lowest score (54.7 ± 12.5%). • Interobserver agreement ranged from fair (0.230) to good (0.702).

SUBMITTER: Messina C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5438319 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative.

Messina Carmelo C Bignotti Bianca B Bazzocchi Alberto A Phan Catherine M CM Tagliafico Alberto A Guglielmi Giuseppe G Sardanelli Francesco F Sconfienza Luca Maria LM

Insights into imaging 20170421 3

<h4>Objectives</h4>Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most widely used technique to measure bone mineral density (BMD). Appropriate and accurate use of DXA is of great importance, and several guidelines have been developed in the last years. Our aim was to evaluate the quality of published guidelines on DXA for adults.<h4>Methods</h4>Between June and July 2016 we conducted an online search for DXA guidelines, which were evaluated by four independent readers blinded to each other using ...[more]

PMID: 28432574

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesFracture liaison services are designed to identify patients needing osteoporosis treatment after a fracture. Some fracture liaison service designs involve a prescreening step, for example, fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX®). Another possible prescreening tools are bone mass density assessment in the acute setting. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of prescreening tools.MethodsIn the present prospective cohort study, women aged >55 years with a radius fracture were included. Patients were recruited at the emergency department after experiencing their fracture. All patients performed fracture risk assessment by fracture risk assessment tool, and bone mass density assessment by digital X-ray radiogrammetry and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (prescreening steps) as well as full routine evaluation at the osteoporosis unit (endpoint). The main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and area under the curve.ResultsForty-one women were recruited (mean age: 70 ± 8 years). Of these, 54% fulfilled the treatment indication criteria of osteoporosis after a full examination. Fracture risk assessment tool without bone mass density (cutoff ⩾ 15%) for prescreening patients had a high sensitivity (90%) but a low area under the curve (0.50) and specificity (16%). The highest area under the curve (0.73) was found prescreening with bone mass density assessment (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry or digital X-ray radiogrammetry) having a sensitivity of 59%-86% and specificity of 61%-90%.ConclusionThis study, though small, raises questions regarding the effectiveness of using a prescreening step in fracture liaison services for high-risk individuals. In this cohort, FRAX® without bone mass density had a low precision, with a risk of both underestimating and overestimating patients requiring treatment. Bone mass density assessment in the acute setting could improve the precision of prescreening. Further investigations on the effectiveness and health economics of prescreening steps in fracture liaison services are needed.

Project description:Objective:The objective of this study was to investigate the diagnostic discordance of osteoporosis by quantitative computed tomography (QCT) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in Chinese elderly men. Methods:A total of 313 males older than 60 years, who underwent both spinal QCT and lumbar spine and hip DXA in our department, were included. The diagnostic criteria established by the World Health Organisation in 1994 were used for DXA to diagnose osteoporosis, and the criteria recommended by the International Society of Clinical Densitometry were used for QCT. The osteoporosis detection rate by the two techniques was calculated, and the difference was compared. The minor discordance was considered present when the different diagnostic classes between the two techniques were adjacent. Major discordance was present when the diagnosis by one technique was osteoporosis and the other was normal. The computed tomography images were reviewed by radiologists to assess whether vertebral fracture, aorta calcification or degeneration was present. Results:In the 313 participants (mean age, 79.6 ± 7.2 years), the osteoporosis detection rate was 10.9% for DXA (lumbar spine and hip) and 45.1% for QCT, a significant difference (p < 0.001). The major discordance, minor discordance and concordance of diagnosis between the two techniques were seen in 8.3%, 50.8% and 40.9%, respectively. QCT detected osteoporosis better than DXA. The causes of this discordance were degeneration of spine, abdominal aorta calcification and vertebral fractures. Conclusion:Our study demonstrated that discordance was common when using QCT and DXA to diagnose osteoporosis and that spinal degeneration, aorta calcification and fracture obscure the bone mineral density measurement of spine by DXA. QCT is a more sensitive method of choice to identify osteoporosis in elderly Chinese men. The translational potential of this article:This study investigated the diagnostic discordance of osteoporosis by quantitative computed tomography (QCT) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in Chinese elderly men. The results demonstrated that QCT is a more sensitive method of choice to identify osteoporosis in elderly Chinese men. This work may help clinicians make an appropriate choice of technique for the accurate diagnosis of osteoporosis and identify the patients at high risk of osteoporosis who should be treated early to prevent fractures. This may influence the therapeutic plan and the overall prognosis of patients.

Dataset Information

A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative.

Publications

A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets