Medicine (Northwest Academic Centre) - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6
-
ItemUtilisation of primary total knee joint replacements across socioeconomic status in the Barwon Statistical Division, Australia, 2006-2007: a cross-sectional study(BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2012)OBJECTIVES: There are few Australian data that examine the association between total knee joint replacement (TKR) utilisation and socioeconomic status (SES). This study examined TKR surgeries with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA) performed for residents of Barwon Statistical Division (BSD) for 2006-2007. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: BSD, South-eastern Victoria, Australia PARTICIPANTS: All patients who underwent a TKR for OA, 2006-2007, and whose residential postcode was identified as within the BSD of Australia, and for whom SES data were available, were eligible for inclusion. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Primary TKR data ascertained from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Residential addresses were matched with the Australian Bureau of Statistics census data, and the Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage was used to determine SES, categorised into quintiles whereby quintile 1 indicated the most disadvantaged and quintile 5 the least disadvantaged. Age-specific and sex-specific rates of TKR utilisation per 1000 person-years were reported for 10-year age bands. RESULTS: Females accounted for 62.7% of the 691 primary TKR surgeries performed during 2006-2007. The greatest utilisation rates of TKR in males was 7.6 observed in those aged >79 years, and in 10.2 in females observed in those aged 70-79 years. An increase in TKR was observed for males in SES quintile four compared to quintile 1 in which the lowest utilisation which was observed (p=0.04). No differences were observed in females across SES quintiles. CONCLUSIONS: Further investigation is warranted on a larger scale to examine the role that SES may play in TKR utilisation, and to determine whether any social disparities in TKR utilisation reflect health system biases or geographic differences.
-
ItemMusculoskeletal Deterioration in Men Accompanies Increases in Body Fat(WILEY, 2014-03)OBJECTIVE: To examine body fat and musculoskeletal changes in men over 5 years. METHODS: Body composition was evaluated for men in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study using whole body dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) during two time-periods. DXA was performed for 1329 men (25-96 years) during 2001-2006 and for 900 men (25-98 years), 2006-2011. The masses of fat, lean, and bone were expressed relative to the square of height (kg/m2). Each compartment was also expressed as a percentage relative to body weight (%fat, %lean, %bone). RESULTS: Mean BMI increased from 26.9 kg/m2 in 2001-2006, to 27.2 kg/m2 in 2006-2011 (P = 0.04). Mean fat mass increased by 9.0% from 6.98 kg/m2 (95% CI 6.84-7.11) in 2001-2006, to 7.60 kg/m2 (7.44-7.77) in 2006-2011 (P < 0.001); mean lean mass decreased by 0.9%, from 18.92 kg/m2 (18.83-19.01) to 18.75 kg/m2 (18.64-18.86) (P = 0.02), and mean bone mass decreased 1.6% from 1.041 kg/m2 (1.034-1.047), to 1.024 kg/m2 (1.016-1.032). Mean %fat increased from 23.4% to 25.2%, mean %lean decreased from 72.6% to 70.9% and mean %bone decreased from 4.0% to 3.9% (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: An increase in BMI, which reflects a substantial increase in body fat mass and declines in both lean and bone mass was reported. This may have implications for future development of bone fragility, sarcopenia, and sarcopenic obesity.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableCohort Profile: Geelong Osteoporosis Study(OXFORD UNIV PRESS, 2012-12)
-
ItemPatterns of treatment in Australian men following fracture(SPRINGER LONDON LTD, 2011-01)UNLABELLED: This study aimed to describe treatment initiation rates for men who had recently sustained a fracture. Most (75.9%) men potentially eligible for subsidised treatment at the time of fracture remained untreated even after a subsequent fracture. INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to describe treatment initiation rates for men who had recently sustained a fracture. METHODS: The study was conducted as part of the Geelong Osteoporosis Study in south-eastern Australia. Men in the study area who had sustained an incident fracture in the period July 2006 to December 2007 were identified from hospital radiology reports. A self-report questionnaire was sent to eligible participants approximately 12 months after fracture. Respondents were asked for details of medications prescribed for 'osteoporosis/fracture/low bone mass' before and after fracture, and where applicable, reasons for cessation of treatment. We analysed the results for 109 men aged 50 years and older who had sustained fracture in the study period. RESULTS: Most (75.9%) men potentially eligible for subsidised treatment at the time of fracture remained untreated. Of the 87 men who were untreated, nine had osteoporosis at the hip and/or spine and 29 (26.6%) reported having sustained a low trauma prior fracture. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with previously published data showing low rates of treatment initiation in men eligible for osteoporosis treatment. There appear to be barriers involving participants' and medical practitioners' knowledge, beliefs and attitudes regarding osteoporosis and treatment, as well as in the doctor-patient partnership in osteoporosis management. Establishment of clinical pathways for fracture management beyond orthopaedic care may be one of a range of appropriate responses.
-
ItemHigh-sensitivity C-reactive protein and fracture risk in elderly women(AMER MEDICAL ASSOC, 2006-09-20)
-
Item