Journal of clinical densitometry : the official journal of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry · 2026
Agreement analysis and inter-method agreement of quantitative ultrasound readings, and comparison with clinical risk factors: A bimodal approach to osteoporosis screening in the community of Terengganu.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abdullah Nur Fatihah, Ibrahim Mohd Salami, Zulkafli Wan Muhammad Azly Wan, Bakar Mohamad Zakwan Helmi Abu, Rahman Laila Maisarah A, Sharifudin Mohd Ariff Bin, Yusuf Harmy Mohamed, Kamudin Nur Azree Ferdaus
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis is an increasingly prevalent condition in Malaysia, raising concern over fracture risk and its impact on healthcare. The limited availability of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) necessitates the development of practical alternatives for community-based screening. This study evaluated the inter-method agreement between quantitative ultrasound (QUS) and FRAX using a bimodal approach in community-based osteoporosis screening in Terengganu, Malaysia, and assessed the intra-rater reliability of QUS readings.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted between 2023 and October 2025 involving 450 participants recruited from urban, rural, and workplace settings. The data collected included age, calcium and vitamin D intake, use of osteoporosis medication, history of bone scans, physical activity, smoking status, and community bone health screening using the bimodal approach, which comprises calcaneal QUS and FRAX. Inter-rater agreement reliability between QUS and FRAX was assessed using Gwet's AC2, while intra-rater reliability of the QUS measurement was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
RESULTS: Overall, the calcium and vitamin D intake were relatively low, with only 43.5% of rural participants taking these supplements, and only 18.3% engaging in regular exercise. The QUS identified 52.2% of participants as prioritised (T-score less -1.5), while FRAX only 9.1% (>10% major osteoporotic fracture or 3% hip fracture). Leveraging both readings, the bimodal approach identified 227 participants at high risk. The inter-method agreement supported this outcome between QUS and FRAX, which was fair (AC2 = 0.236). It was higher in males (AC2 = 0.925) and adults aged 60-80 years (AC2 = 0.930). The QUS reading showed consistency across repeated measures, with high intra-rater reliability of QUS (ICC = 0.89).
CONCLUSION: The combination of QUS and FRAX in a bimodal screening approach provides a reliable method for assessing osteoporosis risk. This strategy provides a practical foundation for enhancing bone health screening, particularly in rural communities where access to DXA is limited.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted between 2023 and October 2025 involving 450 participants recruited from urban, rural, and workplace settings. The data collected included age, calcium and vitamin D intake, use of osteoporosis medication, history of bone scans, physical activity, smoking status, and community bone health screening using the bimodal approach, which comprises calcaneal QUS and FRAX. Inter-rater agreement reliability between QUS and FRAX was assessed using Gwet's AC2, while intra-rater reliability of the QUS measurement was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
RESULTS: Overall, the calcium and vitamin D intake were relatively low, with only 43.5% of rural participants taking these supplements, and only 18.3% engaging in regular exercise. The QUS identified 52.2% of participants as prioritised (T-score less -1.5), while FRAX only 9.1% (>10% major osteoporotic fracture or 3% hip fracture). Leveraging both readings, the bimodal approach identified 227 participants at high risk. The inter-method agreement supported this outcome between QUS and FRAX, which was fair (AC2 = 0.236). It was higher in males (AC2 = 0.925) and adults aged 60-80 years (AC2 = 0.930). The QUS reading showed consistency across repeated measures, with high intra-rater reliability of QUS (ICC = 0.89).
CONCLUSION: The combination of QUS and FRAX in a bimodal screening approach provides a reliable method for assessing osteoporosis risk. This strategy provides a practical foundation for enhancing bone health screening, particularly in rural communities where access to DXA is limited.