Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the cost-effectiveness of alternative fracture risk assessment strategies for people with intellectual disabilities (ID) aged ≥40 years from a UK National Health Services perspective over a lifetime horizon. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis using a lifetime decision-analytical model. SETTING: UK primary care, with data from literature and national databases. PARTICIPANTS: People with ID. INTERVENTIONS: Three strategies were assessed: (S1) Risk assessment using the UK QFracture score; (S2) use of IDFracture (a fracture risk prediction tool specifically developed for adults with ID); and (S3) conducting a one-time dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan in all. S1 and S2 were followed by DXA scan for those at risk. At-risk individuals received treatment according to UK practice (bisphosphonates plus vitamin D and calcium for osteoporosis, and vitamin D and calcium alone for osteopenia). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Direct healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: In the base case, S2 (ICER: -£2568/QALY) was dominant (ie, less costly and more effective) and S3 (ICER: £1678/QALY) was cost-effective relative to S1 for major osteoporotic fracture (MOF). For hip fracture, S2 (ICER: £32 116/QALY) and S3 (ICER: £49 536/QALY) were not cost-effective relative to S1 under the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence-recommended cost-effectiveness thresholds. Findings from the sensitivity analyses were predominantly consistent with the base-case results. Subgroup analyses showed that age-specific and gender-specific strategies could be used. CONCLUSION: For people with ID aged ≥40 years, a proactive approach to risk assessment for MOF is not only clinically beneficial, but also cost-effective.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1136/bmjopen-2025-110008

Type

Journal article

Publication Date

2026-04-17T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

16

Keywords

Fractures, Bone, General Practice, HEALTH ECONOMICS, Preventive Health Services, Vulnerable Populations, Humans, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Osteoporotic Fractures, United Kingdom, Risk Assessment, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Female, Middle Aged, Absorptiometry, Photon, Male, Intellectual Disability, Adult, Aged, Osteoporosis, State Medicine, Health Care Costs, Decision Support Techniques