Evaluation of Repeat Scan Rates and Service Utilization Patterns in DXA Examinations: A Retrospective Analysis of 35,827 Scans
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Original Investigation
E-PUB
27 February 2026

Evaluation of Repeat Scan Rates and Service Utilization Patterns in DXA Examinations: A Retrospective Analysis of 35,827 Scans

Turk J Osteoporos. Published online 27 February 2026.
1. Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi Sincan Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Ortopedi ve Travmatoloji Kliniği, Ankara, Türkiye
No information available.
No information available
Received Date: 24.09.2025
Accepted Date: 22.12.2025
E-Pub Date: 27.02.2026
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to investigate the utilization patterns of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans performed over a three-year period at University of Health Sciences Türkiye, Sincan Training and Research Hospital by evaluating the distribution of scan types, repeat intervals, and utilization characteristics across diagnostic groups.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study included 35,827 DXA scans from 17,857 unique patients performed between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2024. Demographic data, scan types, request-to-scan intervals, and ICD-10 diagnostic codes were evaluated. Repeat scans were classified by time interval. Descriptive statistics and intergroup comparisons were performed.

Results

The mean patient age was 61 years (interquartile range: 52-70), and 78% were female. Lumbar spine scans were the most frequent (52%), followed by femoral (33%) and whole-body scans (15%). At least one repeat scan was observed in 22% of patients. Among repeats, 2.8% were technical repeats (within 7 days), 14.4% occurred within the first year, and 12.2% after ≥2 years. Repeat rates were significantly higher in patients with osteoporosis (M81) and postmenopausal status (N95) compared to other groups (p<0.001). The median request-to-scan interval was 5 days.

Conclusion

Our analysis revealed that technical repeats and early follow-up scans constitute a considerable proportion of DXA services. Reinforcing adherence to clinical indications, re-evaluating repeat scan criteria, and strengthening quality control processes are recommended to improve the efficiency of DXA utilization and optimize healthcare resources.

Keywords:
DXA, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, repeat scans, osteoporosis, postmenopausal status, healthcare utilization

References

1
Watts NB. Fundamentals and pitfalls of bone densitometry using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Osteoporos Int. 2004;15:847-54.
2
Camacho PM, Petak SM, Binkley N, Clarke BL, Harris ST, Hurley DL, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis – 2016. Endocr Pract. 2016;22(Suppl 4):1-42.
3
Camacho PM, Petak SM, Binkley N, Diab DL, Eldeiry LS, Farooki A, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis – 2020 update. Endocr Pract. 2020;26(Suppl 1):1-46.
4
Licata AA, Binkley N, Petak SM, Camacho PM. Consensus statement by the AACE/ACE on the quality of DXA scans and reports. Endocr Pract. 2018;24:220-9.
5
Morgan SL, Prater GL. Quality in dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans. Bone. 2017;104:13-28.
6
Krueger D, Shives E, Siglinsky E, Libber J, Buehring B, Hansen KE, et al. DXA errors are common and reduced by use of a reporting template. J Clin Densitom. 2019;22:115-24.
7
Jones A, Goh M, Milat F, Ebeling PR, Vincent A. DXA reports fail to adhere to international guidelines. J Clin Densitom. 2021;24:453-9.
8
Taş N, Melikoğlu MA. Lumbar osteoarthritis in patients with osteoporosis evaluated with the Lane and Wilke scale and its effect on DXA scores. J Clin Densitom. 2024;27:101525.
9
Kendler DL, Compston J, Carey JJ, Wu CH, Ibrahim A, Lewiecki EM. Repeating measurement of bone mineral density when monitoring with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: 2019 ISCD official position. J Clin Densitom. 2019;22:489-500.
10
Medical Advisory Secretariat. Utilization of DXA bone mineral densitometry in Ontario: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2006;6:1-180.
11
Leslie WD, Morin SN, Martineau P, Bryanton M, Lix LM. Factors associated with bone density monitoring while on antiosteoporosis treatment. J Clin Densitom. 2020;23:568-75.
12
Park H, Yang H, Heo J, Jang HW, Chung JH, Kim TH, et al. Bone mineral density screening interval and transition to osteoporosis in Asian women. Endocrinol Metab (Seoul). 2022;37:506-12.
13
Shevroja E, Reginster JY, Lamy O, Al-Daghri N, Chandran M, Demoux-Baiada AL, et al. Update on the clinical use of trabecular bone score (TBS) in the management of osteoporosis: results of an expert group meeting organized by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO), and the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) under the auspices of WHO Collaborating Center for Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Health and Aging. Osteoporos Int. 2023;34:1501-29.
14
Messina C, Monaco CG, Ulivieri FM, Sardanelli F, Sconfienza LM. DXA body composition in secondary osteoporosis. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85:1493-8.