Epidemiology of distal radius fracture in Akershus, Norway, in 2010–2011

Solvang, Håkon; Nordheggen, Robin Andre; Clementsen, Ståle; Hammer, Ola-Lars; Randsborg, Per-Henrik

doi:10.1186/s13018-018-0904-0

Cited by 30 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Adjusted for age, sex, and at-risk population, the incidence in 2016 was 24% lower than that in 2001 in the same general population. A recent study from Norway on acute distal radius fractures in one hospital's catchment area (suburban and urban areas in and outside Oslo) during the years 2010 and 2011 showed that the overall annual incidence among inhabitants aged 16 years or older was 19.7 (95% CI 18.7-20.7) per 10,000 [11]. That incidence was lower than the incidence reported in 2 earlier Norwegian studies from Oslo (1-year study period in 1998-1999) [22] and from Bergen (1988) [23], respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In previous studies conducted in Europe, North America, and Asia, the overall incidence rates of distal radius fracture have been shown to increase over time [6][7][8]. Other more recent studies have shown no change, or even a decrease, in the incidence [9][10][11]. During the last decade, programs for screening and treating osteoporosis have been implemented in health care, potentially affecting the incidence of distal radius fracture.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incidence of distal radius fracture in a general population in southern Sweden in 2016 compared with 2001

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this population-based study, we compared the incidence of distal radius fracture in 2016 with that in the same region's adult general population in 2001 using radiographs to identify fracture cases. We showed that the incidence decreased by 24% in 2016 compared with 2001 indicating an important development.Introduction We conducted an epidemiological study on residents of northeastern Skåne in southern Sweden (population 182,000) to determine the overall incidence of distal radius fracture and the incidence according to age, sex, and fracture characteristics in the region's adult population during 2016, and to study the change in incidence in the same general population between 2001 and 2016 using wrist radiographs to identify fracture cases. Methods Two orthopedic surgeons examined all wrist radiographs performed at the only two emergency hospitals in the study region to identify individuals, above 18 years of age, who sustained fracture of the distal radius during 2016. We used Poisson regression analysis adjusting for age, sex, and at-risk population to compare the incidence in 2016 with the incidence in 2001, previously estimated using similar methodology. Results The overall incidence in 2016 was 22 (95% CI 20-25) per 10,000; the incidence in women was 34 (95% CI 30-39) and in men was 10 (95% CI 8-12) per 10,000. The overall incidence in 2016 was 0.76 (95% CI 0.70-0.82) of the incidence in 2001 (p < 0.0001). The incidence in the 3 age groups 19-49, 50-79, and ≥ 80 years was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.69-1.20), 0.67 (95% CI, 0.55-0.82), and 0.49 (95% CI, 0.25-0.97) of the incidence in 2001, respectively. Conclusion In a general population in Sweden, a statistically significant and clinically important decrease in the incidence of distal radius fracture occurred between 2001 and 2016, driven by lower incidence in individuals 50 years or older.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incidence of distal radius fracture in a general population in southern Sweden in 2016 compared with 2001

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Distal radius fractures are the most common of all fractures during a lifespan. A Norwegian study found an overall annual incidence of 19.7 per 10,000 inhabitants 16 years or older [ 1 ]. In women, the incidence of distal radius fractures increases progressively with age from the perimenopausal period, while in men, the incidence remains low until later in life [ 2 , 3 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No association between osteoporosis and AO classification of distal radius fractures: an observational study of 289 patients

Hjelle

Gjertsen

Apalset

et al. 2020

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background It is mechanically plausible that osteoporosis leads to more severe peripheral fractures, but studies investigating associations between BMD and radiographically verified complexity of distal radius fractures are scarce. This study aims to study the association between osteoporosis, as well as other risk factors for fracture, and the AO classification of distal radius fractures. Methods In this observational study, 289 consecutive patients aged ≥40 years with a distal radius fracture were included. Bone mineral density (BMD) of the hips and spine was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and comorbidities, medication, physical activity, smoking habits, body mass index (BMI), and history of previous fracture were registered. The distal radius fractures were classified according to the Müller AO system (AO) (type B and C regarded as most complex). Results Patients with osteoporosis (n = 130) did not have increased odds of a more complex distal radius fracture (type B + C, n = 192)) (n = vs type A (n = 92) (OR 1.1 [95% CI 0.5 to 2.3]) compared to those with osteopenia /normal BMD (n = 159). Patients with AO fracture types A or C had a higher prevalence of osteoporosis than patients with type B fracture. Conclusions Distal radius fracture patients with osteoporosis did not sustain more complex fractures than those with osteopenia/normal BMD according to the AO classification system. The AO classification of distal radius fracture cannot be used to decide which patients should be referred to DXA scan and considered for secondary fracture prevention.

show abstract

“…However, when analyzed site by site, the relation with age, which was highly significant in the multivariate analysis for incident MOFs, remained significant only for spine and hip, with a HR for hip of 5.7 for patients older than 70, at any value of BMD. Several epidemiological studies, but not all, have shown that, although hip and vertebral fracture incidence continue to rise steeply with advancing age, that of wrist and other peripheral fractures tend to plateau between 60 and 70. An explanation could be that, because of their better neuromuscular control, younger people are more able to protect themselves with their arms and legs and therefore sustain more distal than proximal fractures …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does the Prediction Accuracy of Osteoporotic Fractures by BMD and Clinical Risk Factors Vary With Fracture Site?

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several clinical risk factors (CRFs) have been shown to predict the risk of fragility fractures independently of BMD, but their accuracy in the prediction of a particular fracture site has not been extensively studied. In this study based on longitudinal data from the FRISBEE cohort (Fracture Risk Brussels Epidemiological Enquiry), we evaluated if CRFs are specific for sites of incident osteoporotic fractures during follow‐up. We recruited 3560 postmenopausal women, aged 60 to 85 years, from 2007 to 2013, and surveyed yearly for the occurrence of fragility fractures during 6.2 years (median). We analyzed the association between CRFs included in the FRAX (fracture risk assessment tool) model or additional CRFs (falls, sedentary lifestyle, early untreated menopause, diabetes, use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or proton pump inhibitors) and the first incident validated major osteoporotic fracture (MOF; n = 362; vertebra, hip, shoulder, and wrist) or other major fractures (n = 74; ankle, pelvis/sacrum, elbow, knee, long bones). Uni‐ and multivariate analyses using the Cox proportional hazards model were used. For MOFs considered together, the risk of fracture was highly associated in uni‐ and multivariate analyses (p<0.01) with osteoporosis (T‐score < −2.5), prior fracture, age, BMD (assessed by DXA), and fall history (HR 2.34, 1.82,1.71, 1.38, and 1.32, respectively). For each site analyzed separately, prior OF, age, smoking, and total hip BMD remained independent predictors for hip fractures (HR 5.72, 3.98, 3.10, 2.32, and 1.92, respectively); osteoporosis, age, prior OF, glucocorticoids, and spine BMD for vertebral fracture (HR 2.08, 1.87, 1.78, 1.76, and 1.45, respectively); osteoporosis, prior OF, and femoral neck BMD (HR 1.83, 1.60, and 1.56, respectively) for wrist fracture; osteoporosis, prior OF, and spine BMD (HR 2.48, 1.78, and 1.31, respectively) for shoulder fracture; prior OF and diabetes (HR 2.62 and 2.03) for other major fractures. Thus, a prior fracture and BMD were the best predictors of fracture risk at any site. Other CRFs have a weaker predictive value, which is a function of the site of a future fracture. © 2019 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

show abstract

Epidemiology of distal radius fracture in Akershus, Norway, in 2010–2011

Cited by 30 publications

References 32 publications

Incidence of distal radius fracture in a general population in southern Sweden in 2016 compared with 2001

Incidence of distal radius fracture in a general population in southern Sweden in 2016 compared with 2001

No association between osteoporosis and AO classification of distal radius fractures: an observational study of 289 patients

Does the Prediction Accuracy of Osteoporotic Fractures by BMD and Clinical Risk Factors Vary With Fracture Site?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About