Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 13, 2026
Cortical Bone Assessment Using Ultrasonic Guided Waves: A Reproducibility Study in a Healthy Population
Published on: January 31, 2025
Assessing fracture risk in people with MS: a service development study comparing three fracture risk scoring systems
Ruth Dobson1, Sara Geraldine Leddy, Sunay Gangadharan
1Centre for Neuroscience and Trauma, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK.
Objectives:
Suboptimal bone health is increasingly recognised as an important cause of morbidity. Multiple sclerosis (MS) has been consistently associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis and fracture. Various fracture risk screening tools have been developed, two of which are in routine use and a further one is MS-specific. We set out to compare the results obtained by these in the MS clinic population.
Design:
This was a service development study. The 10-year risk estimates of any fracture and hip fracture generated by each of the algorithms were compared.
Setting:
The MS clinic at the Royal London Hospital.
Participants:
88 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of MS.
Outcome Measures:
Mean 10-year overall fracture risk and hip fracture risk were calculated using each of the three fracture risk calculators. The number of interventions that would be required as a result of using each of these tools was also compared.
Results:
Mean 10-year fracture risk was 4.7%, 2.3% and 7.6% using FRAX, QFracture and the MS-specific calculator, respectively (p<0.0001 for difference). The agreement between risk scoring tools was poor at all levels of fracture risk.
Conclusions:
The agreement between these three fracture risk scoring tools is poor in the MS population. Further work is required to develop and validate an accurate fracture risk scoring system for use in MS.
Trial Registration:
This service development study was approved by the Clinical Effectiveness Department at Barts Health NHS Trust (project registration number 156/12).
