Log in

Geometric characteristics of the proximal femur and hip fracture risk

  • Published:
Osteoporosis International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Hayes WC, Gerhart TN. Biomechanics of bone: applications for assessment of bone strength. Bone Miner Res 1985;3:259–94.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Courtney AC, Wachtel EF, Meyers ER, et al. Age-related reductions in the strength of the femur tested in a fall-loading configuration. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995;77:387–95.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Faulkner KG, Cummings SR, Black D, et al. Simple measurement of femoral geometry predicts hip fracture: the study of osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Miner Res 1993;8:1211–7.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Glüer CC, Cummings SR, Pressman A, et al. Prediction of hip fractures from pelvic radiographs: the study of osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Miner Res 1994;9:671–7.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Faulkner KG, McClung M, Cummings SR. Automated evaluation of hip axis length for predicting hip fracture. J Bone Miner Res 1994;9:1065–70.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Faulkner KG, Genant HK, McClung M. Bilateral comparison of femoral bone density and hip axis length from single and fan beam DXA scans. Calcif Tissue Int 1995;56:26–31.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Boonen S, Dequeker J, Geusens P, et al. Measurement of femoral geometry in type I and type II osteoporosis: differences in hip axis length consistent with heterogeneity in the pathogenesis of osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Miner Res, in press.

  8. Nakamura T, Turner CH, Yoshikawa T, et al. Do variations in hip geometry explain differences in hip fracture risk between Japanese and white Americans? J Bone Miner Res 1994;9:1071–6.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Peacock M, Turner CH, Liu G, et al. Better discrimination of hip fracture using bone density, geometry and architecture. Osteoporosis Int 1995;5:167–73.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gilsanz V, Loro ML, Roe TF, et al. Vertebral size in elderly women with osteoporosis. J Clin Invest 1995;95:2332–7.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Faulkner KG. Hip axis length and osteoporotic fractures [letter to the editor]. J Bone Miner Res 1995;10:506–8.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Beck TJ, Ruff CB, Bissessur K. Age-related changes in female femoral neck geometry: implications for bone strength. Calcif Tissue Int 1993;53:(Suppl 1):S41–6.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hayes WC, Myers ER, Morris JN, et al. Impact near the hip dominates fracture risk in elderly nursing home residents who fall. Calcif Tissue Int 1993;52:192–8.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hayes WC. Letter to the editor [reply]. Calcif Tissue Int 1994;54:175–7.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cummings SR, Nevitt MC, Browner WS. Risk factors for hip fracture in white women. N Engl J Med 1995;332:767–73.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Geusens, P. Geometric characteristics of the proximal femur and hip fracture risk. Osteoporosis Int 6 (Suppl 3), 27–30 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01623761

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01623761

Keywords

Navigation