Validation of HIV risk screening tool to identify infected adults and adolescents greater than 14 years at community level in Tanzania and Zambia

Introduction: There are several risk factors being used to identify undiagnosed HIV-infected adults. As the number of undiagnosed people gets less and less, it is important to know if existing risk factors and risk assessment tools are valid for use. Methods: Data from the Tanzania and Zambia Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment (PHIA) household surveys which were conducted during 2016 was used. We first included 12 risk factors (being divorced, separated or widowed; having an HIV+ spouse; having one of the following within 12-months of the survey: paid work, slept away from home for ≥1-month, having multiple sexual partners, clients of sex workers, sexually transmitted infection, being tuberculosis suspect, being very sick for ≥3-months; ever sold sex; diagnosed with cervical cancer; and had TB disease into a risk assessment tool and assessed its validity by comparing it against HIV test result. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of the tool were assessed. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve comparison statistics was also used to determine which risk assessment tool was better. Results: HIV prevalence was 2.3% (2.0%-2.6%) (n=14,820). For the tool containing all risk factors, HIV prevalence was 1.0% when none of the risk factors were present (Score 0) compared to 3.2% when at least one factor (Score ≥1) was present and 8.0% when ≥4 risk factors were present. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 82.3% (78.6%-85.9%), 41.9%(41.1%-42.7%), 3.2%(2.8%-3.6%), and 99.0%(98.8%-99.3%), respectively. The use of a tool containing conventional risk factors (all except those related with working and sleeping away) was found to have higher AUC (0.65 vs 0.61) compared to the use of all risk factors (p value <0.001). Conclusions: The use of a screening tool containing conventional risk factors improved HIV testing yield compared to doing universal testing. Prioritizing people who fulfill multiple risk factors should be explored further to improve HIV testing yield.

Unadjusted and adjusted fracture risk assessment tool and the hip fracture risk in patients with type 2 diabetes / 中华内分泌代谢杂志

Objective:To evaluate and compare the clinical value of unadjusted fracture risk assessment tool(FRAX) and adjusted FRAX in predicting the risk of hip fracture in patients with type 2 diabetes(T2DM).Methods:In this 10-year retrospective cohort study, 1 730 patients with T2DM were collected from August 2009 to July 2013. The 10-year risk of hip fracture was calculated using the China FRAX model. Hip fracture events during the follow-up period were collected through electronic medical records and telephone interviews. The value of FRAX and adjusted FRAX in predicting the risk of hip fracture in T2DM patients was evaluated from two aspects of discrimination and calibration. Cox regression model was used to investigate the relationship between diabetes related factors and hip fracture.Results:A total of 39 participants(2.3%) experienced hip fracture during a median follow-up of 10 years. The area under the curve of unadjusted FRAX was 0.760, but the calibration ability was poor [calibration χ2: 75.78, P<0.001; calibration ratio(observation/prediction): 3.97(95% CI 2.76~5.17)]. There was no significant improvement in calibration ability of adjusted FRAX. After adjustment for unadjusted or adjusted hip fracture probability calculated by FRAX(FRAX-HF), duration, estimated glomerular filtration rate, insulin use, cerebrovascular diseases, and diabetic peripheral neuropathy were significantly associated with an increased risk of hip fracture( P<0.05). Conclusion:The FRAX tool significantly underestimated the risk of hip fracture in T2DM patients, and there was still significantly underestimation after adjustment due to the failure to eliminate the influence of diabetes-related factors such as disease duration and peripheral neuropathy.

Clinical risk factors for fracture risk prediction in patients with type 2 diabetes using adjusted FRAX / 中华内分泌外科杂志

Objective:To study the clinical risk factors for osteoporotic fracture (OF) risk prediction in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using adjusted fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) .Methods:A cross-sectional study of 429 patients with T2DM who were hospitalized in the Department of Endocrinology and Geriatrics of the Affiliated Huaian No. 1 People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from Sep. 2019 to Sep. 2020 was conducted. Participants were divided into OF low-risk group and OF high-risk group. Participant characteristics (age, gender, height, weight, waist, blood pressure, history of drug treatment, serum glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) , high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) , triglyceride, serum uric acid, alkaline phosphatase, and thyroid stimulating hormone levels, urine protein/creatinine ratio, urea, creatinine and TPOAB) and dual energy x-ray absorptiometry results were obtained and analyzed. Logistic regression model was used to investigate the relationship between the OF risk of T2DM assessed by adjusted FRAX and clinical risk factors.Results:Patients in the OF high-risk group accounted for 9.09% of the subjects. After adjustment for other variables, the duration of diabetes was still positively associated with significantly elevated risk of OF assessed by adjusted FRAX ( OR 7.660, 95% CI 1.661-35.334, P=0.009) , whereas the blood uric acid was negatively associated with significantly elevated risk of OF assessed by adjusted FRAX ( OR 0.345, 95 % CI 0.128-0.928, P=0.035) .Likewise, LDL-C levels decreased the odds of the risk of OF assessed by adjusted FRAX ( OR 0.316, 95 % CI 0.114-0.881, P=0.028) . There was no significant relationship between alkaline phosphatase ( OR 1.902, 95 % CI 0.904-4.004, P=0.090) as well as total cholesterol ( OR 0.297, 95% CI 0.056~1.560, P=0.151) levels and the elevated risk of OF assessed by adjusted FRAX. Conclusion:Diabetes duration could be a risk factor for OF risk prediction in patients with T2DM using adjusted FRAX, and serum uric acid and LDL-C could be protective factors for OF risk prediction in patients with T2DM using adjusted FRAX.

Advances in Predicting Fracture Risk Based on Hip Bone Properties / 医用生物力学

With the increasing life span of the population and the increasing proportion of the elderly population, the elderly with osteoporosis are prone to hip fractures, which brings heavy economic burdens to the family and society. The progress in predicting hip fractures from the aspects of the proximal femur geometry, bone mineral density (BMD), fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) and finite element analysis (FEA) based on computed tomography (CT) imaging was reviewed, in order to understand the influencing factors of fracture risk, improve the accuracy of hip fracture risk prediction for the elderly, detect the high fracture risk group at an early stage, and hence to reduce the occurrence of fractures with appropriate preventing measures, and provide theoretical references for the prevention and treatment of hip fractures.

Validity of the New Caries Activity Test using Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction / 대한소아치과학회지

Periogen is a new caries activity test using real-time polymerase chain reaction. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of Periogen by evaluating the correlation with dmft, dmfts indices and comparing with Cariview and caries risk assessment tool (CAT).83 children under 6 participated in this study. Dmft, dmfts indices and CAT were collected through an examination of oral health status. Plaque samples for Periogen and Cariview were collected and manipulated according to the manufactures' instructions.The correlation coefficient of Periogen, Cariview and CAT with the dmfts index were 0.38, 0.56 and 0.66 in each (p < 0.01). The sensitivity of Periogen, Cariview and CAT were 43%, 76% and 95% and specificity were 80%, 72% and 74% respectively. Area under curve under the receiver operating characteristic curves in each method indicated 0.69, 0.81 and 0.85.CAT and Cariview were more effective in evaluation the risk of dental caries than Periogen so far. To be used Periogen clinically, more improvements for higher validity were needed.

Evaluation of the Braden Scale Implementation by nurses: A Case Study in a Specialized Hospital in the Dhaka City.

Objective: The aim of this routine to research (R to R) developmental study was to implement the Braden Scale (BS) to identify risks of pressure ulcer (PU) development among hospitalized patients with spinal cord injury admitted in National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedic Rehabilitation (NITOR), Bangladesh. Methods: Roger’s Diffusion of Innovation Theory and PU related literature were used to guide the development of the implementation. The subjects were 10 nurses and 13 doctors who were working at the NITOR. Different strategies were provided for the implementation of the BS including workshops to provide knowledge, persuasion, and decision making to implement the BS for the nurse participants. The outcomes of this study were to determine: (a) nurses’ adoption in terms of the rate of using the BS and the accuracy of using the BS to identify PU risks, (b) nurses’ satisfaction to use the BS, and (c) doctors’ satisfaction on the implication of the BS to identify the risks of PUs in hospitalized adult patients with paraplegia. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics and percentage of agreement. Results: Weekly proportions of nurses’ adoption in terms of the rate of using the BS ranged from 96% to 100%. The accuracy of using the BS yielded percentage of agreement between 70.6% to 100% for each item of the BS. Nurses’ and doctors’ satisfactions were at very high levels. Mean score of nurses’ satisfaction was 98.5% (SD=1.23) and mean score of doctors’ satisfaction was 89.79% (SD=4.17). Conclusion: Nurses are capable to assess PU risks of paraplegic patients independently by using the BS and may be incorporated to identify PU risks in addition to their work protocol. After identifying the PU risks, effective nursing care should be implemented to the patients in order to prevent the PU formation.

Feasibility of FRAX for Prediction of Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures in Korea

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility and limitations of fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) for osteoporotic vertebral fractures in the Korean population. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The FRAX algorithm is country specific and uses clinical risk factor data to calculate an individual patient's 10-year probability of hip fracture and 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture. However, it has not been adequately investigated for Korean. METHODS: One hundred ninety four patients who had all risk factor data for the calculation of FRAX were divided into two groups depending on the existence of vertebral fractures: the fracture group was comprised of 88 patients and the non-facture group comprised of 105 patients. We analyzed prediction of the fracture by applying respectively the Korean, Japanese, USA and UK model, and compared their FRAX results by calculating lumbar bone mineral density (BMD) instead of femoral neck BMD. RESULTS: The prediction of vertebral fracture using FRAX was 10.9 +/- 6.2% in the fracture group, 9.5 +/- 5.5% of the non-fracture group in the Korean model (p = 0.108); 17.9 +/- 10.2% in the fracture group, 14.6 +/- 9.0% in the non-fracture group in the Japanese model (p = 0.017). Only the Japanese model exhibited significant difference in vertebral fracture risk. The prediction of vertebral fracture using lumbar BMD instead of femoral neck BMD was 19.5 +/- 12.1% in the fracture group, 16.0 +/- 10.3% in the non-fracture group in the Korean model (p = 0.029). All models had statistically significant differences for the prediction of osteoporotic vertebral fracture. CONCLUSIONS: The 10-year probability of osteoporotic vertebral fracture had underestimation of the risk considering treatment eligibility based on the National Osteoporosis Foundation guidelines. BMD that accurately reflects the contribution of each result to fracture risk should be preferred for the prediction of fracture using FRAX, when lumbar spine and hip BMD measurements are both performed for clinical purposes in Korean.

Osteoporosis Medication Treatment Thresholds for Patients with a Distal Radius Fracture as Determined using Bone Mineral Density and the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool

OBJECTIVE: To compare the treatment thresholds for osteoporosis medication based on bone mineral density (BMD) results and fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) risks in patients with a distal radius fracture. METHODS: The data of 116 consecutive women aged 50~89 years (mean 64.5 years) with a distal radius fracture were collated to identify clinical risk factors, which were inserted into the FRAX algorithm to calculate 10-year fracture risks. Proportions of patients indicated for osteoporosis medication based on BMD alone and based on FRAX risks were determined. Sensitivity estimation was done with FRAX plus BMD as a gold standard measurement for osteoporosis treatment. RESULTS: Of the 116 patients, 38% needed osteoporosis medication based on BMD alone, and 41% were indicated for treatment based on FRAX plus BMD. These proportions were not significantly different (P = 0.481). However, 56% of patients were indicated for treatment based on FRAX excluding BMD, which was significantly larger than the proportion determined by BMD alone (P = 0.001) or FRAX plus BMD (P = 0.003). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value for BMD alone were 75%, 93%, 90%, 82% and those for FRAX without BMD were 83%, 70%, 69%, 84%. CONCLUSION: No difference was found in the proportion of patients that need osteoporosis medication based on BMD results alone and FRAX plus BMD risks, suggesting BMD measurement can be sufficient to detect candidates for osteoporosis medication in patients with a distal radius fracture. FRAX excluding BMD may include too many patients that do not need osteoporosis treatment.