Osteoporosis in patients with developmental disability: a clinic experience — ASN Events

Osteoporosis in patients with developmental disability: a clinic experience (#54)

Darshika Christie-David 1 2 , David Chipps 1 , Sue Lynn Lau 1 2 3
  1. Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia
  2. University of Sydney, Sydney
  3. University of Western Sydney, Sydney

Background: Severe developmental disability increases the risk of osteoporosis1 . Predictors of fracture are poorly-defined in this group. Methods: We performed an audit of patients with moderate/severe developmental disability attending an outpatient endocrine clinic from 2010-2013. Demographic data, mobility, medication use, secondary screening,  prior fractures, BMD and osteoporosis therapies were retrospectively obtained from records. Results: 47 patients, average age 48±6 years were reviewed.  64% male, 96%  in long-term residential-care. 55% ambulant without assistance, 28% wheelchair bound. Comorbidities included hypothyroidism (38%), reflux (64%) and seizure disorders (66%). 31 patients took anticonvulsant medication. Of 28 patients with known fractures, distal peripheral fractures were the most common site of first fracture (46%), followed by vertebral (32%) and proximal peripheral (21%). In 14 cases, a traumatic episode was not identified - 10 discovered on x-ray (mostly vertebral) and 4 found after carers noted swelling/deformity. 15(54%) had a subsequent fracture and 11% had multiple subsequent fractures. 7 re-fractures occurred whilst on current oral bisphosphonate therapy, another 2 occurred in patients with previous oral bisphosphonate use, remaining 6 had  received no anti-resorptive treatment. 4 patients switched to zoledronate due to falling BMD and concerns about tolerance or absorption of oral bisphosphonates. Difficulties due to scoliosis/kyphoscoliosis/deformity were noted during BMD measurement in 23 of 46 patients. The mean(±SD) lumbar-spine T-score was -2.0±1.3, and femoral-neck T-score was -3.1(±1.0), with no difference between those who did or did not fracture. Predominantly-ambulant patients were significantly more likely to have sustained fractures than predominantly-wheel-chair bound (78% vs 35% p=0.003). There was no significant difference in fracture site or BMD T-scores between ambulant and non-ambulant patients. Anticonvulsant use did not associate with fracture or BMD in this small sample. Conclusion: Distal peripheral fractures and 'asymptomatic' vertebral fractures found on x-ray are common in this population, even in the wheelchair-bound. Greater mobility was associated with greater fracture risk. Re-fracture rate is significant, despite oral bisphosphonate therapy. Difficulties with BMD assessment,  gastro-intestinal problems and under-recognition of fractures are potential issues. Scant evidence is available to guide management decisions such as screening, fracture-risk prediction and optimum use of osteoporosis therapy in this relatively young cohort.

  1. Leslie WD, et al. Bone density and fragility fractures in patients with developmental disabilities. Osteoporosis International. 2009; 20(3):379-83.
@ESASRB