title: Cost-Effectiveness of Osteoporosis Screening Strategies for Men.
abstract: Osteoporosis affects many men, with significant morbidity and mortality. However, the best osteoporosis screening strategies for men are unknown. We developed an individual-level state-transition cost-effectiveness model with a lifetime time horizon to identify the cost-effectiveness of different osteoporosis screening strategies for US men involving various screening tests (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry [DXA]; the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool [OST]; or a fracture risk assessment strategy using age, femoral neck bone mineral density [BMD], and Vertebral Fracture Assessment [VFA]); screening initiation ages (50, 60, 70, or 80 years); and repeat screening intervals (5 years or 10 years). In base-case analysis, no screening was a less effective option than all other strategies evaluated; furthermore, no screening was more expensive than all strategies that involved screening with DXA or the OST risk assessment instrument, and thus no screening was "dominated" by screening with DXA or OST at all evaluated screening initiation ages and repeat screening intervals. Screening strategies that most frequently appeared as most cost-effective in base-case analyses and one-way sensitivity analyses when assuming willingness-to-pay of $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) or $100,000/QALY included screening initiation at age 50 years with the fracture risk assessment strategy and repeat screening every 10 years; screening initiation at age 50 years with fracture risk assessment and repeat screening every 5 years; and screening initiation at age 50 years with DXA and repeat screening every 5 years. In conclusion, expansion of osteoporosis screening for US men to initiate routine screening at age 50 or 60 years would be expected to be effective and of good value for improving health outcomes. A fracture risk assessment strategy using variables of age, femoral neck BMD, and VFA is likely to be the most effective of the evaluated strategies within accepted cost-effectiveness parameters. DXA and OST are also reasonable screening options, albeit likely slightly less effective than the evaluated fracture risk assessment strategy. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
authors.affiliation: Swedish Center for Research and Innovation, Swedish Health Services, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
authors.forename: Smita
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Nayak
authors.affiliation: University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
authors.forename: Susan L
authors.initials: SL
authors.lastname: Greenspan
mesh_terms: D015502:Absorptiometry, Photon / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods; D000367:Age Factors; D000368:Aged; D015519:Bone Density; D005272:Femur Neck / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000378:metabolism; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D008875:Middle Aged; D010024:Osteoporosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000191:economics / Q000378:metabolism; D018570:Risk Assessment; D016103:Spinal Fractures / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000191:economics / Q000378:metabolism
keywords: FRACTURE PREVENTION; FRACTURE RISK ASSESSMENT; HEALTH ECONOMICS; OSTEOPOROSIS; SCREENING