Table 3.45. Relative bone density among postmenopausal women for smokers compared with nonsmokers, cross-sectional studies

StudyPopulationSmoking statusRelative bone
density * (%)
Comments
Holló et al. 1979 Volunteers
Aged 61-75 years
Hungary
41 smokers
125 nonsmokers
Radius: -6.0 **
Rundgren and Mellström 1984 Population sample
Aged 70, 75, 79 years
Sweden
111 current smokers
825 never smoked
Calcaneus: -13.6 to
-31.4 ** >§<§
Sowers et al. 1985b Population sample
Aged 55-80 years
United States
72 ever smoked
252 never smoked
Distal radius: +1.6Adjustment for age,
muscle mass
Jensen 1986 Population sample
Aged 70 years
Denmark >§<§
77 current smokers
103 never smoked
Radius: -5.2
Jensen and Christiansen 1988 Clinical trial participants
Aged 45-54 years
Denmark >§<§
56 smokers
54 nonsmokers
Distal forearm: -1.3
Hansen et al. 1991 Clinical trial participants
Menopause in past 3 years
Denmark
61 current smokers
117 nonsmokers
Lumbar spine: -3.4
Radius: +1.0
Femoral neck: -5.8 **
Trochanter: -8.1 **
Ward's triangle: -8.2 **
Findings similar after adjustment for multiple factors
Krall and Dawson-Hughes 1991 Clinical trial participants
Low-to-moderate calcium intake
Aged 40-70 years
United States >§<§
35 current smokers
285 nonsmokers
Lumbar spine: +0.4
Radius: -0.5
Femoral neck: -0.8
Calcaneus: -2.4
Multiple regression: pack-years significant predictor of bone density of radius
Bauer et al. 1993; Orwoll et al. 1996 Volunteers
Aged > 65 years
United States
970 current smokers
8,734 nonsmokers
Distal radius: -5.8 **
Femoral neck: -4.5 **
Age-adjusted estimates
Multivariate-adjusted estimate for radius, -2.1%
Age- and weight-adjusted estimate for hip, -1.9% **
Cheng et al. 1993 Responders to population survey
Aged 75 years
Finland
10 current smokers
161 nonsmokers
Calcaneus: -15Estimate adjusted for body mass
Analysis of variance: statistically significant differences among former and current smokers and persons who never smoked
Hollenbach et al. 1993 Responders to population survey
Aged 60-100 years
United States
181 current smokers
573 nonsmokers
Lumbar spine: -0.3
Mid-radius: -2.6
Ultradistal radius: -1.3
Total hip: -5.0 **
Estimates adjusted for multiple factors
Nguyen et al. 1994 Responders to population survey
Australia
1,080 participantsLumbar spine: -5.9 **
Femoral neck: -7.6 **
Estimates adjusted for age, weight
Egger et al. 1996 Responders to study of long-term residents
Aged 63-73 years
England
23 current smokers
99 never smoked
Lumbar spine: -8.2
Femoral neck: -3.9
Estimates adjusted for multiple factors
Kiel et al. 1996 Participants in cohort study
Aged > 70 years
United States
51 current smokers
222 never smoked
Never used menopausal estrogen
Radial shaft: 0
Ultradistal radius: -5.8
Femoral neck: -0.7
Trochanter: -2.4
Ward's area: -3.4
L2-L4 spine: +4.1
Estimates adjusted for multiple factors
Ever used menopausal estrogen
Radial shaft: -4.4
Ultradistal radius: -19.0
Femoral neck: -3.2
Trochanter: -8.0 **
Ward's area: -7.3
L2-L4 spine: +2.2
Estimates adjusted for multiple factors
Law et al. 1997a Healthy volunteers
Aged <65 years
England
105 current smokers
288 never smokers
Distal radius: 0
*

Relative bone density = (bone density in smokers - bone density in nonsmokers)/bone density in nonsmokers, based on unadjusted bone density means, unless otherwise noted in comments.

**

Statistically significant at p < 0.05.

Dates of subject recruitment not stated.

>§<§

Different age groups.

From: Chapter 3. Health Consequences of Tobacco Use Among Women

Cover of Women and Smoking
Women and Smoking: A Report of the Surgeon General.
Office on Smoking and Health (US).

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.