OsteoStrong and bone health: a scoping review

Osteostrong proposes that exercise on proprietary machines once weekly for 10 minutes increases bone mineral density. Because OsteoStrong franchises are open/opening in multiple countries, healthcare providers must be able to answer questions about OsteoStrong's efficacy and safety. Our objective was to synthesize current research on the efficacy and safety of OsteoStrong for healthcare providers who must be able to answer patients' questions about OsteoStrong's efficacy and safety.

We conducted a rapid scoping review with searches in five databases. We included studies in English involving OsteoStrong machines, in any population and using any comparator, that measured falls, fractures, or bone strength. Screening and data abstraction were completed by two independent reviewers using Covidence. We used tables and descriptive statistics to chart data.

The search resulted in 1388 studies and nine were included; five were abstracts or unpublished. Seven studies were observational studies (e.g., case study/series, non-randomized trial) and two were randomized trials comparing OsteoStrong to exercise. There were no randomized controlled trials comparing OsteoStrong to a control group. Most studies had small sample sizes and potential conflicts of interest. The two largest studies included individuals on concurrent anti-resorptive treatment. Two of the trials reported on fractures, falls, or adverse events. Most trials reported on bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine and proximal femur. Effects on BMD were inconsistent across trials.

The research on OsteoStrong is mainly limited to small observational studies that are at risk of bias because of conflict of interest, imprecision, publication in a predatory journal, participants on anti-resorptive medications, or poor-quality research reporting. The effects of OsteoStrong on bone strength outcomes are inconsistent, and currently there is little data on safety of this intervention.