Incidence of distal forearm fracture in British men and women

Citation
Tw. O'Neill et al., Incidence of distal forearm fracture in British men and women, OSTEOPOR IN, 12(7), 2001, pp. 555-558
Citations number
18
Categorie Soggetti
Endocrynology, Metabolism & Nutrition
Journal title
OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL
ISSN journal
0937941X → ACNP
Volume
12
Issue
7
Year of publication
2001
Pages
555 - 558
Database
ISI
SICI code
0937-941X(2001)12:7<555:IODFFI>2.0.ZU;2-L
Abstract
Fracture of the distal forearm is one of the most frequent osteoporotic fra ctures. However, there are few data concerning its incidence in Britain. Th e aim of this study was to determine the incidence of distal forearm fractu re in adult British men and women. Six centers took part in the study: Aber deen, Hull, Nottingham, Portsmouth, Southampton and Truro. At each center, men and women aged 35 years and over with an incident distal forearm fractu re and who resided in the catchment area of the main hospital at that cente r, were identified during a 12 month period. Incident fractures were identi fied from all possible point-of-contact sources in each locality, including accident and emergency records, fracture clinics, ward listings and plaste r room registers. The population at risk was defined geographically accordi ng to postcode and the denominator obtained from 1991 census data mapped to these postcodes. During the 12 month study period, 3161 individuals with d istal forearm fracture were identified. The age-adjusted incidence, age 35 years and over, was 36.8/10000 person-years in women and 9.0/10000 person-y ears in men. In women, the incidence of fracture increased progressively wi th age from the perimenopausal period, while in men the incidence remained low until later life. Fractures were more frequently left-sided (55.6%) and 19.4% of subjects required hospitalization. On the basis of these data we estimate that 71000 adult men and women sustain a distal forearm fracture i n Britain each year. Compared with previous British surveys the pattern. of incidence with age appears to have changed in women, the reason for this i s unclear.