Musculoskeletal conditions are a major burden on individuals, health systems, and social care systems, with indirect costs being predominant. This burden has been recognized by the United Nations and WHO, by endorsing the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010. This paper describes the burden of four major musculoskeletal conditions: osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, and low back pain. Osteoarthritis, which is characterized by loss of joint cartilage that leads to pain and loss of function primarily in the knees and hips, affects 9.6% of men and 18% of women aged > 60 years. Increases in life expectancy and ageing populations are expected to make osteoarthritis the fourth leading cause of disability by the year 2020. Joint replacement surgery, where available, provides effective relief. Rheumatoid arthritis is an inflammatory condition that usually affects multiple joints. It affects 0.3-1.0% of the general population and is more prevalent among women and in developed countries. Persistent inflammation leads to joint destruction, but the disease can be controlled with drugs. The incidence may be on the decline, but the increase in the number of older people in some regions makes it difficult to estimate future prevalence. Osteoporosis, which is characterized by low bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration, is a major risk factor for fractures of the hip, vertebrae, and distal forearm. Hip fracture is the most detrimental fracture, being associated with 20% mortality and 50% permanent loss in function. Low back pain is the most prevalent of musculoskeletal conditions; it affects nearly everyone at some point in time and about 4-33% of the population at any given point. Cultural factors greatly influence the prevalence and prognosis of low back pain.

/pdf/burden-of-major-musculoskeletal-conditions-1xayk0ikb2.pdf

Burden of major musculoskeletal conditions

Fracture incidence and association with bone mineral density in elderly men and women: the Rotterdam Study.

https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/27959/staa_01_epidemiologyoffracturesinenglandandwales.pdf?sequence=2

Epidemiology of fractures in England and Wales

Purpose As the population in developed countries continues to age, the incidence of osteoporotic distal radius fractures (DRFs) will increase as well. Treatment of DRF in the elderly population is controversial. We systematically reviewed the existing literature for the management of DRFs in patients aged 60 and over with 5 common techniques: the volar locking plate system, nonbridging external fixation, bridging external fixation, percutaneous Kirschner wire fixation, and cast immobilization (CI). Methods We reviewed articles retrieved from MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL Plus that met predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria in 2 literature reviews. Outcomes of interest included wrist arc of motion, grip strength, functional outcome measurements, radiographic parameters, and the number and type of complications. We statistically analyzed the data using weighted means and proportions based on the sample size in each study. Results We identified 2,039 papers and selected 21 papers fitting the inclusion criteria in the primary review of articles with a mean patient age of 60 and older. Statistically significant differences were detected for wrist arc of motion, grip strength, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score, although these findings may not be clinically meaningful. Volar tilt and ulnar variance revealed significant differences among groups, with CI resulting in the worst radiographic outcomes. The complications were significantly different, with CI having the lowest rate of complications, whereas the volar locking plate system had significantly more major complications requiring additional surgical intervention. Conclusions This systematic review suggests that despite worse radiographic outcomes associated with CI, functional outcomes were no different from those of surgically treated groups for patients age 60 and over. Prospective comparative outcomes studies are necessary to evaluate the rate of functional recovery, cost, and outcomes associated with these 5 treatment methods. Type of study/level of evidence Therapeutic III.

/pdf/a-systematic-review-of-outcomes-and-complications-of-4f6wj5ldlt.pdf

A Systematic Review of Outcomes and Complications of Treating Unstable Distal Radius Fractures in the Elderly

Purpose External fixation and open reduction and internal fixation have been the traditional techniques for surgical fixation of unstable distal radius fractures. The existing literature has not identified which is superior, primarily because of the lack of comparative trials. We performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature on external fixation and internal fixation of distal radius fractures to determine the dominant strategy based on available scientific evidence. Methods We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for English-language articles published between 1980 and 2004 that satisfied predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The outcomes of internal and external fixation were compared using continuous measures of grip strength, wrist range of motion, and radiographic alignment and categoric measures of pain, physician-rated outcome scales, and complication rates. Outcomes were pooled by random-effects meta-analysis and meta–regression analysis was used to control for patient age, presence of intra-articular fracture, duration of follow-up period, and date of publication. Sensitivity analyses were used to test the stability of the meta-analysis results under different assumptions. Results Forty-six articles were included in the review with 28 (917 patients) external fixation studies and 18 (603 patients) internal fixation studies. Meta-analysis did not detect clinically or statistically significant differences in pooled grip strength, wrist range of motion, radiographic alignment, pain, and physician-rated outcomes between the 2 treatment arms. There were higher rates of infection, hardware failure, and neuritis with external fixation and higher rates of tendon complications and early hardware removal with internal fixation. Considerable heterogeneity was present in all studies and adversely affected the precision of the meta-analysis. Conclusions The current literature offers no evidence to support the use of internal fixation over external fixation for unstable distal radius fractures. Comparative trials using appropriately sensitive and validated outcome measurements are needed to guide treatment decisions.

A Meta-Analysis of Outcomes of External Fixation Versus Plate Osteosynthesis for Unstable Distal Radius Fractures

Fracture of the distal forearm is one of the most frequent osteoporotic fractures. However, there are few data concerning its incidence in Britain. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of distal forearm fracture in adult British men and women. Six centers took part in the study: Aberdeen, Hull, Nottingham, Portsmouth, Southampton and Truro. At each center, men and women aged 35 years and over with an incident distal forearm fracture and who resided in the catchment area of the main hospital at that center, were identified during a 12 month period. Incident fractures were identified from all possible point-of-contact sources in each locality, including accident and emergency records, fracture clinics, ward listings and plaster room registers. The population at risk was defined geographically according to postcode and the denominator obtained from 1991 census data mapped to these postcodes. During the 12 month study period, 3161 individuals with distal forearm fracture were identified. The age-adjusted incidence, age 35 years and over, was 36.8/10 000 person-years in women and 9.0/10 000 person-years in men. In women, the incidence of fracture increased progressively with age from the perimenopausal period, while in men the incidence remained low until later life. Fractures were more frequently left-sided (55.6%) and 19.4% of subjects required hospitalization. On the basis of these data we estimate that 71 000 adult men and women sustain a distal forearm fracture in Britain each year. Compared with previous British surveys the pattern of incidence with age appears to have changed in women, the reason for this is unclear.

W. A. Wallace

Papers

Incidence of distal forearm fracture in British men and women