Comparison of DXA-based versus CT-based indices to predict prevalent fracture history in men with spinal cord injury.

Fracture risk prediction remains challenging in adults with spinal cord injury. Here, we compare the ability of CT- and DXA-derived indices to discriminate between those with and without prevalent osteoporotic fracture. Novel CT-derived indices may offer improved assessment of fragility fracture risk as well as improved monitoring of response to therapies. INTRODUCTION: Individuals with spinal cord injury are particularly susceptible to osteoporosis. As advanced imaging techniques become more readily available clinically, there is limited information on the relative strength of various outcomes for fracture risk prediction. The purpose of this study was to compare the ability of DXA-based versus CT-based indices to predict prevalent fracture history in adults with spinal cord injury. METHODS: Thirty-six men with known SCI underwent dual energy X-ray absorptiometry and computed tomography assessments of the lower extremities. We used age-adjusted area under the curve models to compare the predictive value for each bone parameter to identify prevalent fracture history. RESULTS: CT-based indices outperformed DXA-based indices at all sites. The site with the highest AUC was the trabecular BMD at the proximal tibial epiphysis. CONCLUSIONS: CT imaging may have clinical utility to improve fracture risk prediction in adults with SCI. More work is needed to confirm these findings and to assess the value of CT-based indices to predict incident fracture, monitor longitudinal bone loss, and monitor response to various therapies, both pharmacological and rehabilitation.

Costs and Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Art Therapy versus Standard Breast Cancer Support Group for Women with Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The results of several studies have demonstrated that women and men with a cancer diagnosis benefit from interventions to reduce distress and improve quality of life (QOL). However, little is known about the costs and effectiveness of such interventions. Identifying a stress-reduction program that is low cost and effective is important for payers, employers, and healthcare professionals, as well as for patients with cancer. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the direct costs and effectiveness of the mindfulness-based art therapy (MBAT) program compared with the cost and effectiveness of a breast cancer support group (BCSG). METHODS: This economic pilot study evaluated the direct costs and effectiveness of a mindfulness-based intervention for stress reduction in patients with breast cancer who are receiving care versus the cost of a usual care support group used as the comparator. The cost variables for each cohort included the cost of program delivery (ie, staff and supplies), mileage reimbursements, medication costs, and healthcare utilization costs. Effectiveness was measured by a change in quality-adjusted life-year derived from the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) QOL battery. RESULTS: Overall, the cost for 191 participants in the MBAT intervention group was $992.49 per participant compared with $562.71 per participant for the BCSG intervention. Both interventions achieved a similar change in healthcare utilization based on the SF-36 QOL battery. Although the MBAT intervention was more costly than a BCSG intervention, sensitivity analysis showed that the cost-effectiveness of the MBAT intervention could achieve parity with that of a BCSG if some intervention-related costs, such as staff time and supplies, were reduced. CONCLUSION: As psychosocial cancer care becomes more refined with time, it will be important to determine the best and most cost-effective interventions for patients with cancer, particularly in light of healthcare reform. Information from this study could help inform payers, employers, and other stakeholders regarding which interventions would be least costly and most effective for patients with cancer.