You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 280 No. 24, December 23, 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Editorial
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (13)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letter
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Rheumatology
 •Osteoporosis
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Bone Mass, Bone Fragility, and the Decision to Treat

Robert P. Heaney, MD

JAMA. 1998;280:2119-2120.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

The explosion of osteoporosis-related diagnostic and therapeutic options in the past 6 to 10 years has created its own challenges. Guidelines have recently been published concerning who should be tested1 but, in a sense, that issue is moot. Bone mass measurement technology is proliferating rapidly, and physicians increasingly are confronted with ostensibly healthy individuals who bring them a printout showing that they have low bone mass. Should the physician recommend one of the growing array of bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators, hormone replacement therapy regimens, or dietary supplements? Normally, the clinician treats the patient, not a test, but when it comes to prevention, the test result may be all the physician has to go on.

Osteoporosis is now defined as a condition of skeletal fragility due to low bone mass, microarchitectural deterioration of bone tissue, or both.2 This important revision emphasizes the fragility and relegates bone . . . [Full Text of this Article]

From Creighton University, Omaha, Neb.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTER

Alendronate and Fracture Prevention
, , , , , and
JAMA. ;282():324-325.
FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Effect of Alendronate on Risk of Fracture in Women With Low Bone Density but Without Vertebral Fractures: Results From the Fracture Intervention Trial
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , and
JAMA. ;280():2077-2082.
FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Antiresorptive Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: Comparison of Study Designs and Outcomes in Large Clinical Trials with Fracture as an Endpoint
Marcus et al.
Endocr. Rev. 2002;23:16-37.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Alendronate and Fracture Prevention
Cummings et al.
JAMA 1999;282:324-325.
FULL TEXT  

Alendronate Reduces Fracture Risk in Women With Low Bone Density
JWatch General 1999;1999:1-1.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1998 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.