Osteoporosis case finding in the general practice: phalangeal radiographic absorptiometry with and without risk factors for osteoporosis to select postmenopausal women eligible for lumbar spine and hip densitometry

Mass screening for osteoporosis using DXA measurements at the spine and hip is presently not recommended by health authorities. Instead, risk factor questionnaires and peripheral bone measurements may facilitate the selection of women eligible for axial bone densitometry. The aim of this study was to validate a case finding strategy for postmenopausal women who would benefit most from subsequent DXA measurement by using phalangeal radiographic absorptiometry (RA) alone or in combination with risk factors in a general practice setting. The sensitivity and specificity of this strategy in detecting osteoporosis (T-score < or =2.5 SD at the spine and/or the hip) were compared with those of the current reimbursement criteria for DXA measurements in Switzerland. Four hundred and twenty-three postmenopausal women with one or more risk factors for osteoporosis were recruited by 90 primary care physicians who also performed the phalangeal RA measurements. All women underwent subsequent DXA measurement of the spine and the hip at the Osteoporosis Policlinic of the University Hospital of Berne. They were allocated to one of two groups depending on whether they matched with the Swiss reimbursement conditions for DXA measurement or not. Logistic regression models were used to predict the likelihood of osteoporosis versus "no osteoporosis" and to derive ROC curves for the various strategies. Differences in the areas under the ROC curves (AUC) were tested for significance. In women lacking reimbursement criteria, RA achieved a significantly larger AUC (0.81; 95% CI 0.72-0.89) than the risk factors associated with patients' age, height and weight (0.71; 95% C.I. 0.62-0.80). Furthermore, in this study, RA provided a better sensitivity and specificity in identifying women with underlying osteoporosis than the currently accepted criteria for reimbursement of DXA measurement. In the Swiss environment, RA is a valid case finding tool for patients with risk factors for osteoporosis, especially for those who do not qualify for DXA reimbursement.

Chlamydia prevalence in young attenders of rural and regional primary care services in Australia: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE To estimate chlamydia prevalence among 16-29-year-olds attending general practice clinics in Australia. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING A cross-sectional survey was conducted from May 2010 to December 2012. Sexually experienced 16-29-year-olds were recruited from 134 general practice clinics in 54 rural and regional towns in four states and in nine metropolitan clinics (consecutive patients were invited to participate). Participants completed a questionnaire and were tested for chlamydia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Chlamydia prevalence. RESULTS Of 4284 participants, 197 tested positive for chlamydia (4.6%; 95% CI, 3.9%-5.3%). Prevalence was similar in men (5.2% [65/1257]; 95% CI, 3.9%-6.4%) and women (4.4% [132/3027]; 95% CI, 3.5%-5.2%) (P = 0.25) and high in those reporting genital symptoms or a partner with a sexually transmissible infection (STI) - 17.0% in men (8/47; 95% CI, 2.8%-31.2%); 9.5% in women (16/169; 95% CI, 5.1%-13.8%). Nearly three-quarters of cases (73.4% [130/177]) were diagnosed in asymptomatic patients attending for non-sexual health reasons, and 83.8% of all participants (3258/3890) had attended for non-sexual health reasons. Prevalence was slightly higher in participants from rural and regional areas (4.8% [179/3724]; 95% CI, 4.0%-5.6%) than those from metropolitan areas (3.1% [17/548]; 95% CI, 1.5%-4.7%) (P = 0.08). In multivariable analysis, increasing partner numbers in previous 12 months (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] for three or more partners, 5.11 [95% CI, 2.35-11.08]), chlamydia diagnosis in previous 12 months (AOR, 4.35 [95% CI, 1.52-12.41]) and inconsistent condom use with most recent partner (AOR, 2.90 [95% CI, 1.31-6.40]) were significantly associated with chlamydia in men. In women, increasing partner numbers in previous 12 months (AOR for two partners, 2.59 [95% CI, 1.59-4.23]; AOR for three or more partners, 3.58 [95% CI, 2.26-5.68]), chlamydia diagnosis in previous 12 months (AOR, 3.13 [95% CI, 1.62-6.06]) and age (AOR for 25-29-year-olds, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.12-0.44]) were associated with chlamydia. CONCLUSIONS Chlamydia prevalence is similar in young men and women attending general practice. Testing only those with genital symptoms or a partner with an STI would have missed three-quarters of cases. Most men and women are amenable to being tested in general practice, even in rural and regional areas.