Archives of Osteoporosis

, 13:115 | Cite as

Judicious use of DXA-BMD in assessing fracture risk by using clinical risk factors in the Indian population

  • Beena BansalEmail author
  • Ambrish Mithal
  • Shweta Rebecca Chopra
  • Shubhda Bhanot
  • M. Shafi Kuchay
  • Khalid J. Farooqui
Original Article



FRAX scores were significantly higher in patients admitted with fragility fractures than controls and can be useful in choosing the right patients for bone density testing, thus using of an expensive test judiciously.


This study was planned to compare the FRAX scores for the risk for major osteoporotic fracture (FRAX-MOF) and hip fracture (FRAX-HF) in patients with fragility fractures (cases) and those admitted for other indications (controls) in the orthopedic ward in our institute.


Historical and anthropometric data were prospectively recorded from 500 consecutive patients admitted in the orthopedic ward in in Medanta, the Medicity, Gurgaon, India. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for FRAX-MOF and FRAX-HF and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated between cases and controls.


The FRAX-MOF was significantly high in cases as compared to controls (7.34 ± 4.41 versus 5.64 ± 4.3; p = 0.001). The FRAX-HF was also significantly high in cases as compared to controls (2.95 ± 3.13 versus 1.67 ± 2.21; p < 0.001). The areas under the curves were 0.627 for FRAX-MOF and 0.654 for FRAX-HF. For FRAX-MOF, a cutoff of 2 has a 90% sensitivity, but only 15% specificity; whereas a cutoff of 10.5 had a specificity of 90% to differentiate those with and without fractures, but only 23% sensitivity. For FRAX-HF, a cutoff 0.3 had about 90% sensitivity and 20% specificity, whereas a cutoff of 3.5 had 90% specificity and 25% specificity to differentiate cases and controls.


This study compared the FRAX-MOF and FRAX-HF in patients with and without fragility fractures and derived cutoffs for practical clinical use of FRAX-MOF and FRAX-HF to optimize the use of DXA-BMD.


FRAX India Osteoporosis Fractures 


  1. 1.
    Mithal A, Bansal B, Kyer CS, Ebeling P (2014) The Asia-pacific regional audit-epidemiology, costs, and burden of osteoporosis in India 2013: a report of international osteoporosis foundation. Indian J Endocrinol Metab 18:449–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miller PD (2016) Underdiagnoses and undertreatment of osteoporosis: the battle to be won. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 101:852–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Varthakavi PK, Joshi AS, Bhagwat NM, Chadha MD (2014) Osteoporosis treatment in India: call for action. Indian J Endocrinol Metab 18:441–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kanis JA, Borgstrom F, De Laet C, Johansson H, Johnell O, Jonsson B, Oden A, Zethraeus N, Pfleger B, Khaltaev N (2005) Assessment of fracture risk. Osteoporos Int 16:581–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kanis JA, McCloskey EV, Johansson H, Cooper C, Rizzoli R, Reginster JY (2008) European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 19:399–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kanis JA, Jonsson B (2002) Economic evaluation of interventions for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 13:765–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koh LK, Saw SM, Lee JJ, Leong KH, Lee J (2001) Hip fracture incidence rates in Singapore 1991–1998. Osteoporos Int 12:311–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kanis JA, Johnell O, De Laet C, Jonsson B, Oden A, Ogelsby AK (2002) International variations in hip fracture probabilities: implications for risk assessment. J Bone Miner Res 17:1237–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marwaha RK, Tandon N, Garg MK, Kanwar R, Narang A, Sastry A, Saberwal A, Bhadra K, Mithal A (2011) Bone health in healthy Indian population aged 50 years and above. Osteoporos Int 22:2829–2836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Paul T, Thomas N, Seshadri M, Oommen R, Jose A, Mahendri N (2008) Prevalence of osteoporosis in ambulatory postmenopausal women from a semiurban region in Southern India: relationship to calcium nutrition and vitamin D status. Endocr Pract 14:665–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kadam NS, Chiplonkar SA, Khadilkar AV, Khadilkar VV (2018) Prevalence of osteoporosis in apparently healthy adults above 40 years of age in Pune City, India. Indian J Endocrinol Metab 22:67–73PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dhanwal DK, Siwach R, Dixit V, Mithal A, Jameson K, Cooper C (2013) Incidence of hip fracture in Rohtak district, North India. Arch Osteoporos 8:135–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vaishya R, Vijay V, Agarwal AK, Maheshwari P (2017) Assessment of osteoporotic fracture risk in urban Indian population using quantitative ultrasonography & FRAX tool. Indian J Med Res 146:S51–S56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cherian KE, Kapoor N, Shetty S, Naik D, Thomas N, Paul TV (2018) Evaluation of different screening tools for predicting femoral neck osteoporosis in rural south Indian postmenopausal women. J Clin Densitom 21(1):119–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Watts NB, Lewiecki EM, Miller PD, Baim S (2008) National Osteoporosis Foundation 2008 Clinician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis and the World Health Organization Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX): what they mean to the bone densitometrist and bone technologist. J Clin Densitom 11:473–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Watts NB, Bilezikian JP, Camacho PM, Greenspan SL, Harris ST, Hodgson SF, Kleerekoper M, Petak SM (2010) American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists Medical Guidelines for clinical practice for the diagnosis and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Endocr Pract 16:1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Baddoura R, Awada H, Okais J, Salamoun M, Ayoub G, Ziadé N, El Hajj-Fuleihan G (2006) An audit of bone densitometry practice with reference to ISCD, IOF and NOF guidelines. Osteoporos Int 17:1111–1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Compston J, Bowring C, Cooper A, Cooper C, Davies C, Francis R, Kanis JA, Marsh D, McCloskey E, Reid DM, Selby P, National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (2013) Diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and older men in the UK: National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) update 2013. Maturitas 75:392–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kanis J (2013) Commentary on guidelines on postmenopausal osteoporosis - Indian Menopause Society. J Midlife Health 4:129–131PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Beena Bansal
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ambrish Mithal
    • 1
  • Shweta Rebecca Chopra
    • 2
  • Shubhda Bhanot
    • 1
  • M. Shafi Kuchay
    • 1
  • Khalid J. Farooqui
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Endocrinology and DiabetesMedanta, the MedicityGurgaonIndia
  2. 2.EndocrinologyMedanta, the MedicityGurgaonIndia

Personalised recommendations