INTRODUCTION: This study ascertains the minimum level of follow-up exercise required to maintain bone gains induced by an 8-week jumping exercise in rats.
METHODS: Twelve groups of 12-week old rats (n = 10 rats per group) were given either no exercise for 8 (8S) or 32 weeks (32S), or received 8 weeks of standard training program (8STP) that consisted of 200 jumps per week, given at 40 jumps per day for 5 days per week, followed by 24 weeks of exercise at loads of either 40 or 20 or 10 jumps per day, for either 5, or 3, or 1 day/week. Bone mass, strength, and morphometric properties were measured in the right tibia. Data were analyzed using one-way analyses of variance.
RESULTS: Bone mass, strength, mid-shaft periosteal perimeter and cortical area were significantly (p < 0.05) higher in the rats given 8STP than that in the 8S group. The minimal level of exercise required to maintain the bone gains was 31, 36, 25, and 21 jumps per week for mass, strength, periosteal perimeter and cortical area, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Eight weeks of jumping exercise-induced bone gains could be maintained for a period of 24 weeks with follow-up exercise consisting of 11% to 18% of the initial exercise load.
INTRODUCTION: The International Osteoporosis Foundation and European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis published guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in 2019. This manuscript seeks to apply this in an international setting, taking additional account of further categorisation of increased risk of fracture, which may inform choice of therapeutic approach.
METHODS: Clinical perspective and updated literature search.
RESULTS: The following areas are reviewed: categorisation of fracture risk and general pharmacological management of osteoporosis.
CONCLUSIONS: A platform is provided on which specific guidelines can be developed for national use to characterise fracture risk and direct interventions.
PURPOSE: Minimum clinical standards for assessment and management of osteoporosis are needed in the Asia-Pacific (AP) region to inform clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and to improve osteoporosis care. We present the framework of these clinical standards and describe its development.
METHODS: We conducted a structured comparative analysis of existing CPGs in the AP region using a "5IQ" model (identification, investigation, information, intervention, integration, and quality). One-hundred data elements were extracted from each guideline. We then employed a four-round Delphi consensus process to structure the framework, identify key components of guidance, and develop clinical care standards.
RESULTS: Eighteen guidelines were included. The 5IQ analysis demonstrated marked heterogeneity, notably in guidance on risk factors, the use of biochemical markers, self-care information for patients, indications for osteoporosis treatment, use of fracture risk assessment tools, and protocols for monitoring treatment. There was minimal guidance on long-term management plans or on strategies and systems for clinical quality improvement. Twenty-nine APCO members participated in the Delphi process, resulting in consensus on 16 clinical standards, with levels of attainment defined for those on identification and investigation of fragility fractures, vertebral fracture assessment, and inclusion of quality metrics in guidelines.
CONCLUSION: The 5IQ analysis confirmed previous anecdotal observations of marked heterogeneity of osteoporosis clinical guidelines in the AP region. The Framework provides practical, clear, and feasible recommendations for osteoporosis care and can be adapted for use in other such vastly diverse regions. Implementation of the standards is expected to significantly lessen the global burden of osteoporosis.
INTRODUCTION: To investigate the longitudinal associations of bone mineral measures with antiepileptic drug (AED) use, including enzyme-inducing (EIAED) and non-enzyme-inducing (NEIAED) types, and other predictors of bone loss in a study of 48 same-sex twin/age-matched sibling pairs (40 female, 8 male) discordant for AED use.
METHODS: Using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and content (BMC) at the hip regions, forearm, lumbar spine, and whole body were measured twice, at least 2 years apart. The mean within-pair difference (MWPD), MWPD%, and mean annual rate of aBMD change were adjusted for age, weight, and height. Predictors of bone loss were evaluated.
RESULTS: AED users, compared to non-users, at baseline and follow-up, respectively, had reduced aBMD at the total hip (MWPD% 3.8, 4.4%), femoral neck (4.7, 4.5%), and trochanter regions (4.1, 4.6%) (p 0.05) regions did not differ within pairs. Nevertheless, EIAED users had greater aBMD loss than non-users (n = 20 pairs) at the total hip (1.7 vs. 0.3%, p = 0.013) and whole body regions (0.7% loss vs. 0.1% BMD gain, p = 0.019), which was not found in NEIAED-discordant pairs (n = 16). AED use >20 years predicted higher aBMD loss at the forearm (p = 0.028), whole body (p = 0.010), and whole body BMC (p = 0.031).
CONCLUSIONS: AED users had reduced aBMD at the hip regions. Prolonged users and EIAED users had greater aBMD loss, predicting a higher risk of bone fragility. Further prospective studies of AED effects on bone microarchitecture are needed.