ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 0114

Incidence of Follow-Up Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry Scanner Error: A Contributor to Precision Error

Kevin Lee1, Karam Al Jumaily1, Mu Lin2, Kerry Siminoski3 and Carrie Ye4, 1Internal Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 2Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 3Radiology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 4Rheumatology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2020

Keywords: Bone density, Dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), osteoporosis

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Friday, November 6, 2020

Title: Osteoporosis & Metabolic Bone Disease Poster

Session Type: Poster Session A

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Osteoporosis is characterized by decreased bone tissue microarchitecture. This leads to reduced bone density and quality and is a significant contributor to morbidity, mortality, and resources. Current guidelines recommend serial BMD measurement with a DXA scan every 1 to 3 years and the latest position paper from International Society for Clinical Densitometry explicitly states the use of the same or cross-calibrated DXA scanners. Interpreting follow-up DXA scan results from different scanners that are not cross-calibrated may lead to erroneous clinical decisions. This retrospective study aims to determine the proportion of patients who had follow-up DXA scans done on different scanners that have not been cross-calibrated and to determine potential risk factors that may contribute to this type of error.

Methods: Service code X128 was used to extract DXA scan records from the Physician Claim Database (PCD) between 1 April 2009 and 31 December 2018, inclusively. Patients at least 18 years of age with at least 2 DXA scans completed during this period were included. Variables for each patient and DXA scan were obtained from the Pharmacy Information Network and PCD using pre-defined pharmaceutical, ICD-9, and ICD-10 codes.

The imaging facility identifier codes of all follow-up scans were compared to that of the immediately preceding scan. A follow-up scan was considered to have a scanner error (SE) if it was performed on different scanner that was not cross-calibrated. Logistic regression model with repeated measurements was used to calculate odds ratios for variables leading to SE.

Results: At least 2 DXA scans were done by 264,866 patients for a total of 470,641 follow-up DXA scans. Of the follow-up DXA scans, 116,401 (25%) were done on a different scanner. With consideration of cross-calibrations done between these different scanners, 88,922 (19%) had a SE. Overall, 97,813 patients (37%) had at least one follow-up DXA scan done at a different facility. With cross-calibration considered, 75,928 (29%) of all patients experienced at least one SE.

Factors associated with SE include increasing time between consecutive DXA scans (OR 1.2502, CI 1.2435-1.2569), rheumatoid arthritis (OR 1.1830, CI 1.1277-1.2410), and fragility fractures (OR 1.0564, CI 1.0339-1.0794). Factors associated with less SE include use of osteoporosis medication (OR 0.8922, CI 0.8753-0.9095), increasing follow-up scan year (OR 0.9762, CI 0.7260-0.9798), and older age at time of last DXA scan (OR 0.9942, CI 0.9933-0.9950). Female sex did not significantly affect SE (OR 0.9725, CI 0.9433-1.0026). The imaging facility groups at which follow-up DXA scans were performed was also associated with differing risk of patients experiencing SE.

Conclusion: Proper management of osteoporosis requires interpretation of comparable DXA scans. This study found that a large proportion of follow-up DXA scans were of minimal clinical utility due to use of different DXA scanners that were not cross-calibrated. Using such results pose significant risk to patients and economic cost to the healthcare system. Interventions are needed to decrease this type of DXA scan error.

Baseline characteristics

Percentage of follow-up DXA scans and patients

Factors associated with scanner error


Disclosure: K. Lee, None; K. Al Jumaily, None; M. Lin, None; K. Siminoski, None; C. Ye, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Lee K, Al Jumaily K, Lin M, Siminoski K, Ye C. Incidence of Follow-Up Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry Scanner Error: A Contributor to Precision Error [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020; 72 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/incidence-of-follow-up-dual-energy-x-ray-absorptiometry-scanner-error-a-contributor-to-precision-error/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2020

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/incidence-of-follow-up-dual-energy-x-ray-absorptiometry-scanner-error-a-contributor-to-precision-error/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology