Last updated: 2026-09-13

The Department of Health Centre for Health Protection's "Report of Unintentional Injury Survey 2018" (published August 2021) states that among the injury episodes sustained by elderly people aged 65 and above, 74.5% were due to falls. The base for that 74.5% is the number of "injury episodes" (up to three most serious ones per respondent), not the number of people injured; the same report's person-based figures are a different set — among elderly people aged 65 and above, 5.4% had sustained fall-related injury episodes in the 12 months before enumeration, and for those aged 75 and above the figure is 6.7%. The "Limitations of study" section of the same report states that the survey did not include "inmates of institutions such as elderly homes". On what to do after a fall, the Department of Health Elderly Health Service's "Fall Prevention" page states: "Even if there is no obvious wound, you should consult a doctor promptly if you have difficulty moving or in severe pain as you may have sustained a fracture". On the Government's position on bone mineral density screening, the wording of the Legislative Council written reply of 18 May 2022 is "there is insufficient scientific evidence to support the provision of bone mineral density screening service"; the reply of 20 November 2019 is differently worded but consistent in position. ⚠️ The biggest misreading: neither the "88.6%" nor the "47.1% against 31.0%" below is "how many elderly people fell" — the base for the first is the number of injury episodes, and the second is a proportion of injury episodes across all ages broken down by sex, not an elderly figure.

What is osteoporosis?

Osteoporosis is a bone disorder in which bone mass falls and bones become weak and brittle, so that they break easily. The Centre for Health Protection's "Men's Health Line - Osteoporosis" page (footer prints "Revision Date: 2025/12/30") states:

Osteoporosis is a systemic skeletal disorder that is characterized by decreased bone mass, leading to weak and brittle bones that have higher risk of fractures.

The Department of Health Family Health Service's "Osteoporosis in Women" page (the page prints "(Content revised 10/2018)") puts it differently:

Osteoporosis is a metabolic disease of the bone which leads to a reduction in the bone density. The density of the affected bones become lower and the bones become more fragile, and are therefore more likely to break, resulting in fractures.

In other words, the two Government pages are describing the same thing: osteoporosis itself usually has no obvious symptoms, and fracture is what can cause pain. The same Family Health Service page states:

Osteoporosis generally produces no symptoms on its own. If osteoporosis-related fracture occurs, there may be localised pain over the fracture sites..
An osteoporotic fracture may occur even after relatively minor trauma or fall.
Common sites of osteoporotic fracture include thigh bone (near the hip joint), spine (vertebrae) and forearm (near the wrist).
The spine can fracture without any trauma. Vertebral fracture can result in a hunched-back and a decrease in body height, and sometimes back pain.

⚠️ This is why "falls" and "osteoporosis" appear in the same article. Of the common fracture sites the Centre for Health Protection page lists, the forearm is "usually at the wrist area, often resulted from a fall", and the hip is likewise "usually resulted from a fall".

⚠️ The last sentence of that same passage states that the spine can fracture "without any trauma", and that vertebral fracture can result in "sometimes back pain". The official pages do not treat "there was no impact" or "there is back pain" as a reason to rule the condition in or out.

Who most needs to know: anyone who thinks "my bones don't hurt, so I'm fine". The official pages state that there are no obvious symptoms.

When does bone loss start? Why does it happen?

Bone is constantly being broken down and rebuilt; with age, more is broken down than is built. The Centre for Health Protection page, in its own words:

Our bone is a dynamic organ. New bone tissue is being made while old bone tissue is being broken down. As we get past around age of 30, the process of new bone formation began to slow down relative to the process of old bone removal. This means that more bone cells are removed than new ones added, leading to gradual loss of bone mass. The risk of osteoporosis increases in later life if the person starts with a lesser bone mass and has a more rapid rate of bone loss.

The Family Health Service page writes about the same thing in more detail, and brings out the role of menopause:

In general, bone mass is most rapidly built during childhood and adolescence, and reaches its peak in the mid-30s. After that, the optimal bone mass is maintained during young adulthood.
From around age 40, the loss of bone mass becomes obvious, with a period of more rapid loss in women approaching menopause due to oestrogen withdrawal.

The concluding remarks of the Elderly Health Service's "Osteoporosis" page use a different age again:

Bone metabolism is a continuing process and bone loss starts as early as 35-years-old. Hence everyone should take steps to prevent osteoporosis.

⚠️ Three Government pages have written "past around age of 30", "from around age 40" and "as early as 35-years-old" respectively; this site quotes each as written, and has not merged them into a single age. Nor does this article make any statement about which of them is the more accurate.

The official "74.5%" and "88.6%" — how many people is that?

The base for both figures is the number of "injury episodes", not the number of people — and this is the easiest thing in the whole article to get wrong. The "Report of Unintentional Injury Survey 2018" first makes clear what it was asking about:

A total of 326 100 injury episodes from the 321 300 persons who had sustained injury episode(s) in the 12 months before enumeration were estimated. In the survey, all respondents who had sustained injury episode(s) in the 12 months before enumeration were asked to provide the details of up to three most serious injury episodes they had sustained during the aforementioned period.

And "injury episode" itself is defined:

In this survey, an "injury episode" is defined as "an unintentional injury that is serious enough to limit the normal activities of a person". It can be a serious accident resulting in hospitalization, or it can be a mild injury with or without treatment. Poisoning is also included if it fulfills the definition as stated above.

The 74.5% in the report's own words:

Among the elderly injury episodes which took place in the 12 months before enumeration, nearly three quarters (74.5%) were due to falls. It was followed by sprain (9.9%), hit / struck (8.4%) and cutting and piercing (2.2%) (Table 3.48-3.49).

The 88.6% in the report's own words:

The proportion of elderly injury episodes caused by falls increased with age, from 59.8% for elderly aged 65 to 69, to 64.4% for elderly aged 70 to 74, and further to 88.6% for elderly aged 75 and above (Table 3.49).

⚠️ The report itself marks the first sentence (Table 3.48-3.49) and the second (Table 3.49); and Table 3.49 prints its own base: "Base: Elderly injury episodes (up to three most serious ones) sustained by respondents aged 65 and above in the 12 months before enumeration". That is: among the injury episodes elderly people reported (up to three each), 74.5% of the episodes had falls as the main cause; for those aged 75 and above, 88.6% of the episodes. This is not "88.6% of people aged 75 and above fell".

The same report's person-based figures are three others:

Among the 1.21 million elderly persons aged 65 and above (as at first quarter of 2019), 5.4% were estimated had sustained fall-related injury episodes in the 12 months before enumeration. Analyzed by gender, the proportion for elderly women aged 65 and above (6.5%) was higher than that for elderly men (4.2%) (Table 3.51).

The proportion of elderly sustained fall-related injury episodes in the 12 months before enumeration increased with age, from 4.0% for those aged 65 to 69 to 5.2% for those aged 70 to 74, and further to 6.7% for those aged 75 and above (Table 3.52).

In one line: for the same 75-and-above age group, the figure is 88.6% on an episode base and 6.7% on a person base. There is no contradiction between the two, because they are measuring two different things.

Who do these figures cover? The "Limitations of study" section, in its own words:

The survey covered the land-based non-institutionalized population in Hong Kong. Injury episodes sustained by inmates of institutions such as elderly homes, and persons living on boats or vessels were not included.

Further down the same section it also states:

It should be noted that the figures represented the proportion of the population sustaining an unintentional injury that was serious enough to limit their normal activities in the 12 months before enumeration. Minor unintentional injuries were not included if they did not limit the normal activities of the persons injured. If these minor unintentional injuries were taken into account, the rate of unintentional injury in Hong Kong is expected to be higher.

⚠️ Both limitations apply to every percentage above — 74.5%, 88.6%, 5.4%, 6.7%, 6.5% and 4.2% are all figures for community-dwelling (non-institutionalised) elderly people and do not include residents of homes for the elderly; and an injury episode has to have been serious enough to limit normal activities to be counted, with the report itself stating that the rate would be higher if minor injuries were included. Readers whose family member lives in a residential care home will not find that person in these figures.

⚠️ The report also has a sex breakdown on the same base (Table 3.48, whose base is elderly injury episodes, as in Table 3.49): falls account for 75.8% of the injury episodes of elderly women aged 65 and above, and 72.2% of those of elderly men. That is the pair on the same base as the 74.5%; the pair of 6.5% and 4.2% above is on a person base (Table 3.51).

Who most needs to know: anyone alarmed by a claim along the lines of "nearly 90% of elderly people fall".

Are "47.1% of women, 31.0% of men" elderly figures?

No, they are not figures specific to elderly people. That pair is a proportion of injury episodes across all ages broken down by sex; elderly people can be included in it, but it cannot stand for the elderly group. The report's own words, together with the sentence immediately before that states the base:

Among the total injury episodes occurred in the 12 months before enumeration, the most common main cause was falls (39.4%). It was followed by sprain (26.2%), hit / struck† (13.3%), sports (7.4%) and cutting and piercing (3.6%). There were no reported cases of poisoning or electric shock in this survey.

Analyzed by gender, a higher proportion of injury episodes in females were related to falls (47.1% vs. 31.0% for male injury episodes) in the 12 months before enumeration. However, a higher proportion of injury episodes in males were related to hit / struck (16.9% vs. 10.1% for female injury episodes) and sports (9.9% vs. 5.1% for female injury episodes) during the aforementioned period. The proportions of injury episodes related to sprain were similar for both genders (Table 2.3-2.4).

Table 2.3 prints its base: "Base: Injury episodes (up to three most serious ones) sustained by the respondents in the 12 months before enumeration", with all ages together totalling 326 100 episodes (170 300 for females, 155 800 for males).

⚠️ The sex breakdown for elderly people is the two pairs in the previous section (75.8% against 72.2% in Table 3.48, and 6.5% against 4.2% in Table 3.51); 47.1% against 31.0% is not a synonym for either of them. Calling 47.1% against 31.0% an elderly proportion changes the population the original table covers.

⚠️ Another thing to be clear about: the Centre for Health Protection's "Non-Communicable Diseases Watch", August 2022 issue, writes that pair as "females (47.1%) reported a higher proportion of fall-related injuries than males (31.0%)", and states that falls "contributed to 66.4%, 61.8% and 88.6% of injury episodes among young children aged 4 or below, elders aged 65–74 and those aged 75 or above, respectively". Those three figures, and the age groups that go with them, are the same as those printed in Table 2.4 of the report, and the base is likewise "Injury episodes (up to three most serious ones) sustained by the respondents in the 12 months before enumeration". The report separately has Table 3.49, which splits 65-69 (59.8%), 70-74 (64.4%) and 75 and above (88.6%), on a base of elderly injury episodes. The two tables differ in both grouping and base, so whichever figure you cite, you have to stay with the table it comes from.

Is there a "falls" line in the cause-of-death statistics?

No. The Centre for Health Protection's "Number of registered deaths by leading cause of death" does not break falls out separately. The table's heading and its basis for ranking, in its own words:

Number of registered deaths by leading cause of death (based on ICD 10th Revision) : 2001 - 2025
(Ranking according to the number of registered deaths in 2025)

The row ranked fifth is labelled "5. External causes of morbidity and mortality † (ICD-10: V01-Y89)"; its 2024 column is 2,133 and its 2025 column is 2,106 (that column heading carries a "#").

⚠️ That 2,106 is not a number of deaths from falls. "External causes of morbidity and mortality" is Chapter XX of ICD-10, coding range V01-Y89, a whole chapter that includes traffic accidents, falls, drowning, poisoning, suicide and homicide among other things, and the table prints no subtotal, row or column for falls. The notes to the same table also state:

† According to the ICD 10th Revision, when the morbid condition is classifiable under Chapter XIX as "Injury, poisoning and certain other consequences of external causes", the codes under Chapter XX for "External causes of morbidity and mortality" should be used as the primary cause of death.
# Provisional figures.

⚠️ "#" means provisional figures, and the 2025 column carries that mark while the 2024 column does not. The two rows above and below in the same table are cerebrovascular diseases (2,786 provisional for 2025) and nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis (1,763 provisional for 2025), and "All causes" for 2025 (provisional) is 51750.

⚠️ Neither of the two Centre for Health Protection documents cited in this article — the cause-of-death table (2001-2025) and the "Report of Unintentional Injury Survey 2018" — prints a number of deaths from falls in Hong Kong: the former has no falls breakdown, and the latter is a survey of occurrence, not cause-of-death statistics.

On the share of deaths accounted for by "unintentional injuries", the Government printed a different set of figures in a Legislative Council written reply of 2 April 2025 (the Secretary for Health, Professor Lo Chung-mau, replying to the Hon Chau Man-kong). The sentence that introduces that set, in its own words:

In terms of injury surveillance, in addition to conducting the city-wide injury survey decennially, the DH also collects, analyses and publishes mortality and discharge statistics every year, enabling relevant stakeholders to understand the situation of unintentional injuries among Hong Kong residents. The proportion of unintentional injuries out of registered deaths and inpatient discharges (including deaths) in the past three years are as follows:

The reply gives the data source as the Department of Health and the Hospital Authority: as a percentage of total registered deaths, 1.7 per cent in 2021, 1.5 per cent in 2022 and 1.9 per cent in 2023; as a percentage of total registered deaths aged 65 or above, 1.4 per cent, 1.2 per cent and 1.5 per cent respectively. The same table also has an "inpatient discharges (including deaths) due to unintentional injuries" half, which this article sets out as well: as a percentage of total inpatient discharges, 4.5 per cent in 2021, 4.3 per cent in 2022 and 4.5 per cent in 2023; as a percentage of total inpatient discharges aged 65 or above, 4.3 per cent, 4.2 per cent and 4.4 per cent respectively, that column being noted as "Including Hospital Authority hospitals and private hospitals inpatients." The same reply also states: "The DH does not maintain other statistics requested in the question."

⚠️ That sentence itself says where else official figures are to be found: besides the city-wide injury survey conducted once a decade, the Department of Health publishes mortality and discharge statistics on its own website every year. Those annual statistics are outside the range of statistics this article compares; the limits of the three documents listed in this section cannot be stretched into "the Government has no falls statistics".

⚠️ "Unintentional injuries" means accidents, and does not include suicide or homicide; the whole V01-Y89 chapter in the cause-of-death table above does include them. The two sets of figures cannot be substituted for each other.

What do the official pages say about what to do after an elderly person falls?

The Department of Health Elderly Health Service's "Fall Prevention" page sets out steps for handling a fall (the footer date does not identify a content version); they are quoted verbatim below:

Management of Falls
Elders should assess their risk of falls regardless of having previous falls or not. After a fall, elders should do the following:
Stay calm.
Assess the degree of injury. Slowly move the body if injury is not severe.
Move along the floor until you reach a wall or stable furniture, then try to get up with the support of the furniture.
If you are unable to get up, you should make a phone call, ask for assistance via Personal Emergency Link Service or open the main door and call for help loudly.
Cleanse the wound first if there is any abrasion.
Even if there is no obvious wound, you should consult a doctor promptly if you have difficulty moving or in severe pain as you may have sustained a fracture.
Review the situation, look for any environmental hazards, and consult a doctor for follow-up on the causes of falls such as dizziness if necessary.

⚠️ All of the above is the Department of Health page's own wording, quoted as it stands; this article has not rewritten it into instructions, and makes no judgment about how urgent any individual person's situation is.

The full text of the "Outcomes of Falls" section on the same page:

According to the statistics from Elderly Health Centre in 2023, among 35,000 aged 65 or above community dwelling elders, 15.7% had experienced falls at least once within 1 year. Among those who had falls, about 9.8% had fractures. Fall is one of the most disabling conditions of the elderly, which can have significant impact on the elders' functioning, independence and quality of life. Furthermore, falls had a significant adverse impact on the elders' self-confidence - some would even avoid leaving their homes after only minor falls for fear of falling again. Their social life was thus affected, putting them at risk of developing low mood or depression. Falls could even be fatal if the elders failed to get up and seek medical help.

⚠️ The last sentence is the Department of Health's own: falls "could even be fatal if the elders failed to get up and seek medical help". That sentence and the step above it — "If you are unable to get up, you should make a phone call, ask for assistance via Personal Emergency Link Service or open the main door and call for help loudly" — belong together on that page.

⚠️ The population behind that 15.7% is users of the Elderly Health Centres, not a sample of the whole Hong Kong population; and what it counts is having "experienced falls at least once", not having been injured badly enough to limit daily activities. So it cannot be set side by side with the 5.4% from the survey above, nor treated as a trend.

On cost, question 2 of the Hospital Authority's "Public Healthcare Fees and Charges Reform - FAQ" page states that "Urgent radiology services for inpatients and A&E patients remain free of charge"; that sentence is about radiology services as an item, not about the Accident and Emergency attendance fee itself. Gazette Notice No. 6792 provides that the charges for medical attention and treatment at an Accident and Emergency Department "include ... urgent radiology services and other examinations", and the fee per attendance comes in two sets: item 1.3(A)(a), "Eligible Persons", $400 (patients triaged as Category I (critical) to II (emergency) are exempted from charge), and item 2.2(A)(a), "Non-Eligible Persons", $2,100. This article makes no judgment about which category any reader falls into (the full wording and the conditions that apply are in the section on charges below).

The Department of Health Elderly Health Service's "Fall Prevention" page also lists risk factors and practical tips. The risk factors, in its own words:

Falls do not happen without a reason - they usually occur due to the interaction of multiple risk factors:
Visual impairment
Poor balance e.g. Parkinson's disease, stroke or dementia
Joint or gait problem e.g. osteoarthritis of knee, stroke
Dizziness e.g. cardiac arrhythmia, postural hypotension
Side effects of medications e.g. dizziness or poor balance due to the use of anti-hypertensive drugs, hypnotics or polypharmacy
Stress due to urinary incontinence
Improper clothing e.g. too long or too loose
Environmental hazards in the home e.g. slippery floor, inadequate illumination, obstacles on the floor, and unsuitable furniture at home

The general principle and the home section:

Falls can be prevented but a multi-pronged approach is required to address the various risk factors. Elders are advised to perform physical activity such as Tai Chi frequently to strengthen their muscles and to improve their flexibility, coordination, cardiopulmonary function and balance. They also need to note the following tips to reduce the risk of falls.

  1. Beware of environmental hazards in the home
    Keep walkways clear
    Remove unnecessary objects on the floor. Keep all walking surfaces dry. Avoid waxing the floors
    Paint door sills with sharp colors or attach bright-colored tapes along them
    Suitable furniture
    Choose stable chairs with suitable height
    Avoid sitting on sofas, low chairs, folding chairs or chairs with wheels
    Choose chairs with armrests to facilitate standing
    Sufficient lighting
    Install nightlights or bedside lamps
    Position switches at convenient locations
    Kitchen and toilet safety
    Use non-slip mats instead of using cloths as floor mats
    Use non-slip tiles in bathrooms. Apply non-slip tapes and install grab bars in the bathtub

The clothing and footwear section:

  1. Choose appropriate clothing and shoes
    Clothing
    Wear clothes that fit—avoid clothes that are too long or too loose
    Choose clothes and pants that are easy to put on and take off
    Footwear
    Pick shoes of the right fit
    Select shoes with non-slip soles
    Replace shoes with worn out soles
    Avoid wearing slippers when going out or only wear socks when walking indoor
    Ensure shoelaces are properly tied, or wear adaptive footwear with velcro straps and zippers

⚠️ That page's "Fall Prevention Tips" has six sections, and only sections 1 and 2 are quoted above. The two sentences in sections 3 to 6 that bear directly on fracture are, in that page's own words, "Wear hip protection pants to reduce the risk of fracture after falls" and "Use walking aids (e.g. stick, quadripod and walking frame) properly according to physiotherapist's instruction".

Who most needs to know: carers tidying a parent's home, choosing their shoes or installing grab bars.

Does the Government provide territory-wide bone mineral density screening for elderly people?

Both of the Legislative Council replies cited in this article, from 2019 and from 2022, state that at the time there was not sufficient evidence to support territory-wide bone mineral density screening. That dated policy position does not mean that people at risk do not need an individual assessment. Part (3) of the reply of 20 November 2019, in its own words:

(3) Since there is no sufficient scientific evidence to support a territory-wide osteoporosis screening programme (including one for the elderly), the DH does not provide bone mineral density screening service. However, eligible elderly persons aged 65 or above are issued with elderly health care vouchers of $2000 each year for seeking private primary healthcare services that suit their needs, which may include the management of osteoporosis and other chronic diseases. People who are at risk of developing osteoporosis due to, for example, underweight, previous history of bone fracture, premature menopause, smoking habit or heavy drinking, or a family history of osteoporosis or fracture, should take active control of the risk factors and seek medical advice on appropriate medical options, such as bone mineral density assessment or treatment.
　　In respect of public-private collaboration, the HA will, while taking account of relevant expert advice, continue to communicate with the public and patient groups, and work closely with stakeholders to look into the feasibility of introducing new initiatives. In exploring the launch of new Public-Private Partnership (PPP) programmes, the HA will carefully consider a number of factors, including the service demand, case suitability, potential complexity, capacity and readiness in the private market, as well as the long-term financial sustainability of the PPP Fund.

⚠️ Part (3) has two paragraphs, and both are quoted above as written. The Member's question asked whether the Government would "consider implementing territory-wide bone mineral density screening under a public-private partnership model, so as to identify and treat osteoporosis patients early", so the second paragraph is the Government's answer to the public-private collaboration half of that question. That paragraph does not mention bone mineral density screening, and does not displace the sentence in the first paragraph that "the DH does not provide bone mineral density screening service"; what it says is that the Hospital Authority will "look into the feasibility of introducing new initiatives" in public-private partnership, and it lists the factors to be considered.

How the reply of 18 May 2022 (the Secretary for Food and Health, Professor Sophia Chan, replying to the Hon Alice Mak) puts it:

　　As mentioned in part (2) of this reply, the Government adopts an evidence-based approach. Currently there is insufficient scientific evidence to support the provision of bone mineral density screening service. People who are at risk of developing osteoporosis, such as being underweight, having a history of bone fracture, premature menopause, smoking habit or heavy drinking, or a family history of osteoporosis or fracture, should take active control of the risk factors and seek medical advice on appropriate management options, such as whether bone mineral density assessment or treatment is needed.

The second paragraph of part (2) of the same reply is more direct about the arrangements for District Health Centres. In its own words:

　　As there is currently no sufficient scientific evidence to support a Government policy for carrying out osteoporosis screening, DHCs have no plan to provide osteoporosis screening services to the public at the moment. The Food and Health Bureau will keep in view relevant services of DHCs which aim to provide evidence-based, effective and efficient primary healthcare services via district-based medical-social collaboration in the community under the steer of the Steering Committee on Primary Healthcare Development.

⚠️ Two things have to be read together in that paragraph: District Health Centres "have no plan" to provide osteoporosis screening services because there is "no sufficient scientific evidence to support a Government policy for carrying out osteoporosis screening"; and the same paragraph also states that the Food and Health Bureau "will keep in view relevant services of DHCs". This site quotes it as written and makes no prediction about whether that will change.

⚠️ This site quotes both replies as written, and has not turned any paragraph of either into a recommendation to have a test, nor told anyone to have a bone mineral density test. What the official texts say is: there is not sufficient evidence to support screening; people with the risk factors listed above "should take active control of the risk factors and seek medical advice on appropriate management options". Whether to have an assessment is a matter to discuss with a doctor.

On the Hospital Authority, the same 2022 reply also states:

　　Apart from AGFF Nursing Coordination Services, the HA clinicians will also make referrals on follow-up check-up service, including dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for bone mineral densities, when indicated.

So how many people in Hong Kong have osteoporosis? Part (1) of the same 2022 reply states: "The DH and the HA do not maintain statistics of osteoporosis." Two of the other documents cited in this article each print a prevalence figure of their own, and this article sets both out:

This condition is not limited to women and can also occur in men too. A study done by the Chinese University of Hong Kong in 2004 showed that 13% of men aged 65 and over suffered osteoporosis.

(Centre for Health Protection, "Men's Health Line - Osteoporosis" page)

Like in the rest of the world, osteoporosis has become an increasingly common health problem in Hong Kong, affecting an estimated 400,000 people.

(Hospital Authority Smart Patient, "Geriatric Hip Fracture" page)

⚠️ Neither can be treated as Hong Kong's current number of people with the condition: the first is a university study from 2004 covering only men aged 65 and over, and that page prints no study name, sample size or sampling method; the second is an "estimate", and that page prints no year, source, method or age range, and the article carries no revision date. This site quotes both, but treats neither as a territory-wide prevalence figure.

Who most needs to know: anyone wondering whether "it's time to get my bones scanned". Neither of the two Legislative Council written replies cited in this article sets an age threshold; they list risk factors and "seek medical advice".

Who said "10 000 hip fractures a year, one-fifth dying within a year"?

That statement comes from the preamble to a Legislative Council Member's question, prefaced with "It has been reported that"; it is not a figure from the Government, the Hospital Authority or the Department of Health. The question of 20 November 2019, in its own words:

It has been reported that as indicated by the findings of a medical research, one in three women and one in five men who are over 50 years old will suffer from a osteoporotic fracture at some point in their lives. In addition, there are about 10 000 new cases of hip fracture each year in Hong Kong and, among such cases, one-fifth of the patients pass away within one year, about half of them sustain permanent impairment of mobility, and about half of them need to be admitted to residential care homes.

And the Government's answer to part (1) of the same question was:

(1) The HA does not maintain statistics on patients with osteoporosis and those with fractures, as well as the related expenditure on treatment.

⚠️ In one line: that statement is the Member's own in the question, and the Government's answer to the same question is that it does not keep figures of that kind. Any account that attributes the whole of that sentence to the Government, the Hospital Authority or the Department of Health does not match the original.

⚠️ One point to keep separate: the half-sentence in the Member's preamble about "about half of them sustain permanent impairment of mobility" has a different counterpart of its own on the Hospital Authority Smart Patient "Geriatric Hip Fracture" page: "All patients who have had a hip fracture will require walking aids for several months, and nearly half will permanently rely on canes or walkers to move around." That sentence is published by the Hospital Authority, but what it is about is the need for a walking aid, not "permanent impairment of mobility"; the two cannot be substituted for each other. As for the "about 10 000 new cases each year" and the "one-fifth dying within one year" in the preamble, neither is to be found on the Hospital Authority pages cited in this article.

Among the sources cited in this article, the only figure for a number of hip fractures published by the Hospital Authority is on its Smart Patient "Geriatric Hip Fracture" page (the article carries no revision date; the website footer prints "Copyright© 2024 Hospital Authority"):

In 2009, nearly 4500 hip fracture operations were performed in Hospital Authority.

⚠️ That is a number of operations in 2009; it is not a current figure, and it is not a number of new cases. On the same page, the one-year mortality figure is one whose source that page itself states is not Hong Kong data: "According to the International Osteoporosis Foundation, between 12% and 20% of people will die within one year following a hip fracture." Apart from the "it has been reported that" preamble to the Member's question, none of the 18 sources cited in this article gives a one-year mortality rate after hip fracture for Hong Kong.

What is a bone mineral density test? What does it cost in the public system?

Diagnosis uses dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). The Family Health Service page, in its own words:

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is specifically used in the diagnosis and monitoring of treatment effect for osteoporosis.
It measures bone density by X-rays (commonly measures the lower spine and the hip joint).
The whole process is simple, quick and safe.
If you suspect that you may be suffering from osteoporosis, please seek advice from your family doctor.

The Elderly Health Service page separates out two instruments:

Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DEXA)---for diagnosis and monitoring of treatment effect.
Quantitative Ultrasound (QUS)---for screening purpose, not suitable for diagnosis.

⚠️ DEXA and ultrasound (QUS) are not the same thing: the official page states that QUS is for screening purposes and is not suitable for diagnosis.

Before the prices, one thing has to be said first: the Hospital Authority's list of public charges has two parallel sets of fees, for "Eligible Persons" and for "Non-Eligible Persons", plus a "General" section. The Appendix I contents of Gazette Notice No. 6792 (sections 18(1) and 18(2) of the Hospital Authority Ordinance (Cap. 113), effective from 1 January 2026), in its own words:

  1. Eligible Persons
    1.1 Inpatient charges for public wards
    1.2 Inpatient charges for special accommodation wards
    1.3 Outpatient charges
    1.4 Day hospital / day procedure charges
    1.5 Charges for community services
    1.6 Charges for non-urgent radiology services
    2. Non-eligible Persons
    2.1 Inpatient charges for public wards
    2.2 Outpatient charges
    2.3 Charges for day procedure
    2.4 Charges for day hospitals
    2.5 Charges for community services
    2.6 Charges for obstetrics services
    2.7 Charges for non-urgent radiology services
    3. General
    3.1 Diseases under the International Health Regulations (IHR) of the World Health Organization (WHO)
    3.2 Mentally handicapped patients
    3.3 Tuberculosis, sexually transmitted diseases and leprosy
    3.4 Transfers
    3.5 Privately purchased medical items
    3.6 Organs / hematopoietic stem cells transplantation

Who counts as an "Eligible Person" — paragraph 2 of the same Notice, in its own words:

(a) Only patients falling into the following categories are eligible for the rates of charges applicable to 'Eligible Persons': -
(i) Holders of Hong Kong Identity Card issued under the Registration of Persons Ordinance (Chapter 177), except those who obtained their Hong Kong Identity Card by virtue of a previous permission to land or remain in Hong Kong granted to them and such permission has expired or ceased to be valid;
(ii) children who are Hong Kong residents and under 11 years of age; or
(iii) other persons approved by the Chief Executive of the Hospital Authority.
(b) For other patients, the rates of charges applicable to 'Non-Eligible Persons' shall apply.

Paragraph 3, immediately following, in its own words:

  1. The Chief Executive of the Hospital Authority will determine the appropriate rates of charges to be applied to a patient.

⚠️ Paragraphs 2 and 3 have to be read together: paragraph 2(a)(iii) is itself "other persons approved by the Chief Executive of the Hospital Authority", and paragraph 3 provides that the Chief Executive of the Hospital Authority determines the appropriate rates of charges to be applied to a patient. The categories above are the Notice's eligibility criteria; a person's status in an individual case and the fees payable are still settled by the Hospital Authority, and this article makes no judgment about which category any reader falls into.

The "Eligible Persons" set, that is item 1.6, in its own words:

1.6 Charges for non-urgent radiology services
For patients receiving non-urgent radiology services (except for services relating to attendance at a family medicine clinic (including integrated clinic)) in addition to the services as specified in sections 1.1 to 1.5 above, the following rates of charges per item of examination or procedure will apply according to the following item categories:
$
(i) Basic — No charge
(ii) Intermediate — 250
(iii) Advanced — 500

The "Non-Eligible Persons" set, that is item 2.7 of the same Notice, in its own words:

2.7 Charges for non-urgent radiology services
For patients receiving non-urgent radiology services in addition to the services as specified in sections 2.1 to 2.2, 2.3(C), and 2.4 to 2.6 above, the following rates of charges per item of examination or procedure will apply according to the following item categories:
$
(i) Basic — 400
(ii) Intermediate — 1,600
(iii) Advanced — 4,700

⚠️ So: free / $250 / $500 are the charges for "Eligible Persons"; for the same three tiers, the same Notice provides $400 / $1,600 / $4,700 for "Non-Eligible Persons". All the Hospital Authority charges cited below in this article are from the "Eligible Persons" set; this article makes no judgment about which category any reader falls into.

Question 3 on non-urgent radiology in the Hospital Authority's fees reform FAQ lists the following categories (this site's summary):

  • Basic Item: X-ray, free of charge.
  • Intermediate Item: fluoroscopy, ultrasonography and mammography, $250.
  • Advanced Item: computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, breast interventional radiology, angiography and vascular interventional radiology, non-vascular interventional radiology, nuclear medicine and positron emission tomography-computed tomography, $500.

The question before it on the same page, on which services are charged for, reads in the original:

Q2. Which type of patient needs to charge for non-urgent radiology services?
The charges apply to non-urgent radiology services arranged through out-patient clinics, Accident & Emergency (A&E) follow-up appointments, day inpatient service, or upon discharge from inpatient care. Urgent radiology services for inpatients and A&E patients remain free of charge.

⚠️ The second part of that answer bears directly on falls: the page states that urgent radiology services for inpatients and Accident and Emergency patients remain free of charge, and that the three-tier charges are for "non-urgent" radiology services. The same page also states: "In general, payment for non-urgent radiology services must be settled at least 14 calendar days before the appointment date."

⚠️ Bone mineral density testing / DEXA does not appear in any of the three tier lists above. None of the three Hospital Authority charging documents cited in this article (Gazette Notice No. 6792, the "Fees and Charges" page, and the fees reform FAQ page) expressly assigns bone mineral density testing to one of the tiers, so a DEXA price cannot be derived from these three documents alone. The Notice itself does say where the item-by-item radiology charge list is to be found: the Appendix II contents of Gazette Notice No. 6792 do not list radiology items individually, printing only the single line "Annex II Radiology Services*", with the asterisk on that page noting "Annexes I to V are available at the website of the Hospital Authority (http://www.ha.org.hk > Patients > Service Guides > Fees and Charges)." The price range in this article is limited to the three documents above and does not cover those item-by-item annexes.

Has any organisation published its own prices?

One has: The Family Planning Association of Hong Kong prints its booking details on its "Bone Health" page, and its service fees on another page. How that page describes the service:

The Osteoporosis Clinic of The Family Planning Association of Hong Kong offers consultation, bone density measurement (DEXA) , laboratory tests, treatment and follow-up services for people who are at high risk of osteoporosis. This service is available through internal referral, please refer to the Booking Details below.

The "Booking Details" on that page come under two headings, with two routes under each, four in all. In the original:

Women aged 26 or above, or married:
Obtain referral letter within six months of issue from Hong Kong public hospitals or out-patient clinics / Hong Kong registered medical practitioners : please make an appointment directly for *Bone Density Measurement (DEXA) (service fee: HK$600) and click here to submit your booking request, leaving your name and contact information to schedule your appointment or call our FPA Clinic Services Hotline at (852) 2572-2222.
Do not obtain referral letter within six months of issue from Hong Kong public hospitals or out-patient clinics / local registered medical practitioner : please make an appointment for doctor consultation (service fee: HK$350), our doctor will assess whether the client is suitable for *Bone Density Measurement (DEXA) (service fee: HK$600). Please click here to submit your booking request, leaving your name and contact information to schedule your appointment or call our FPA Clinic Services Hotline at (852) 2572-2222.
Men aged 26 or above:
Obtain referral letter within six months of issue from Hong Kong public hospitals or out-patient clinics / Hong Kong registered medical practitioners : please make an appointment directly for *Bone Density Measurement (DEXA) (service fee: HK$600) and click here to submit your booking request, leaving your name and contact information to schedule your appointment or call our FPA Clinic Services Hotline at (852) 2572-2222.
Do not obtain referral letter within six months of issue from Hong Kong public hospitals or out-patient clinics / local registered medical practitioner : please make an appointment for doctor consultation (service fee: HK$350), our doctor will assess whether the client is suitable for *Bone Density Measurement (DEXA) (service fee: HK$600). Please click here to submit your booking request, leaving your name and contact information to schedule your appointment or call our FPA Clinic Services Hotline at (852) 2572-2222.

Below the four routes, the page prints an asterisked footnote:

*Please note: this examination is conducted at Wan Chai Sexual & Reproductive Health Centre

⚠️ Both headings print "aged 26 or above" (the women's heading adding "or married"): this $600 and $350 are tied to age (and, for women, to marital status); that page prints no arrangement for men under 26 and none for unmarried women under 26 (the men's heading prints only "Men aged 26 or above:", without the "or married" formulation); and the asterisk on that page points to a restriction on location — the examination is conducted at the Wan Chai Sexual & Reproductive Health Centre.

Doing the arithmetic (the same under both headings): with a referral letter issued within six months → DEXA HK$600; without a referral letter → doctor consultation HK$350, and if the doctor's assessment finds the client suitable, DEXA HK$600 on top, HK$950 in all. ⚠️ That HK$950 is this site's addition of two figures from the "Bone Health" page; it is not a total the Family Planning Association itself prints. And the HK$350 figure appears only in the booking details on the "Bone Health" page: the service fee table below prints no line for a consultation at $350 (its Consultation & Assessment section prints "Doctor Consultation without Basic Check-up $220" and "Referral Clinic Doctor Consultation $450", while $350 is the examination fee for the Women's Health Check-up and the Men's Health Check-up), so that total of HK$950 cannot be reassembled from the service fee table.

Fees relating to bone density measurement (Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry, DEXA). Source: The Family Planning Association of Hong Kong, "Bone Health" service fee page (the page prints no effective date, revision date or update date, only "Fees are subject to change without prior notice"): https://www.famplan.org.hk/en/our-services/clinic-services/bone-health/fee , Last updated: 2026-09-13. The booking conditions (women aged 26 or above, or married / men aged 26 or above; referral letter) and the location of the examination are on the "Bone Health" page for the same service: https://www.famplan.org.hk/en/our-services/clinic-services/bone-health , Last updated: 2026-09-13.
Item (as that page prints it)Fee (HK$)
Bone Density Measurement (DEXA)$600
Doctor Consultation without Basic Check-up$220
Referral Clinic Doctor Consultation$450
Nurse Fee$80
Osteoporosis Medicines$150 (per box)

⚠️ That page prints "Fees are subject to change without prior notice", and neither page prints an effective date; the above are the fees that organisation had published as at 8 September 2026, and they do not constitute a market price comparison or a range of private hospital charges.

⚠️ This article does not compare or recommend any hospital, clinic or doctor. The DEXA price example above covers only the fee table The Family Planning Association of Hong Kong publishes itself.

Calcium and vitamin D — what are the official figures?

The Department of Health Family Health Service's "Meeting your calcium needs" page (the page prints "(Content revised 10/2024)") prints recommended daily intakes, with a footnote of its own. In the original:

How much calcium do we need?*
Adults : 800-1000 mg
Pregnant woman and lactating mother : 800-1000 mg
Adults 50 years old or above : 800-1300 mg
*With reference to the recommendations by the World Health Organisation and Chinese Nutrition Society.

In its "Calcium supplement" section, the same page prints the upper limit with the same asterisked footnote. In the original:

Calcium supplement
If you cannot obtain adequate calcium from diet, you may need a calcium supplement. Too much calcium can damage your health. Taking food and supplements together, one should not consume more than 2000mg* calcium daily. Consult your healthcare professional first if you consider having calcium supplements.
*With reference to the recommendations by the World Health Organisation and Chinese Nutrition Society.

⚠️ The two sets of figures carry the same asterisk and point to the same footnote, "With reference to the recommendations by the World Health Organisation and Chinese Nutrition Society" (that is, recommendations published by the Department of Health, not derived from local Hong Kong data); they are the two sides of a single set of recommendations — an intake of 800 to 1,300 mg a day on one side, and a ceiling on the other of "not ... more than 2,000mg" from food and supplements combined. The page states the reason for the ceiling as "Too much calcium can damage your health", and also states "Consult your healthcare professional first if you consider having calcium supplements." This site quotes it as written, and does not tell anyone to take or not to take calcium supplements.

Another Department of Health Family Health Service page, "Osteoporosis in Women" (Content revised 10/2018), answers on bone soup and vinegar-ginger stew in the original:

Is 'pork bone soup' or 'pork hock in ginger vinegar ' a good source of calcium?
No. Calcium in pork or fish bones does not dissolve in water. Therefore, the calcium content in bone soup is low. The eggs and pork hock are rich in protein, but not calcium. In fact, this stew is high in fat (especially saturated fat) and sugar. Try to limit your intake and remove the skin and visible fat when you are cooking or having these dishes. Choose lean meat instead.

On vitamin D, the same "Osteoporosis in Women" page, in the original:

Most of the vitamin D is made in the skin when we are exposed to sunlight. Expose the face and arms in sunlight for about 10 minutes in mid-morning or mid-afternoon daily. People with darker skin tone or wearing sunscreen need longer exposure. Minimise direct exposure of the skin to the sunlight especially during mid of the day.
Some vitamin D can be obtained by eating fatty fish (such as salmon, sardine, mackerel, tuna, cod, eel, etc.), egg york, milk or milk products/soy milk added with vitamin D, but food alone is usually not sufficient to meet your need.

As for supplements, the same page states:

Some people may have too little sunlight exposure and therefore they should seek advice from doctor, dietitian or pharmacist about vitamin D supplements. They are:
People in clothes covering the face, arms and legs most of the time;
People staying indoors mostly and having very little sun exposure (e.g. those working for long hours indoors or living in institutions);
People who have a darker skin tone and have limited exposure to sunlight.

⚠️ Who those "some people" are, that page lists itself in three categories; this site quotes them as written, adding nothing and removing nothing. The example in the second category expressly includes people "living in institutions". That is a different matter from the scope of the 2018 survey above: the survey "did not include" injury episodes sustained by inmates of institutions such as elderly homes, which is about who was in the survey sample; this Family Health Service page is about who is prone to vitamin D deficiency. This site quotes the original and makes no statement about whether any person needs to take a supplement.

⚠️ The four Department of Health pages cited in this article (Family Health Service "Osteoporosis in Women" and "Meeting your calcium needs", Elderly Health Service "Osteoporosis", and Centre for Health Protection "Men's Health Line - Osteoporosis") print no milligram or international unit figure for daily vitamin D for adults or elderly people. That does not mean no Hong Kong body has ever published one.

Common questions

  • An elderly person has fallen — what do the official pages say? The "Management of Falls" section of the Department of Health Elderly Health Service's "Fall Prevention" page states: "Even if there is no obvious wound, you should consult a doctor promptly if you have difficulty moving or in severe pain as you may have sustained a fracture"; it also states "If you are unable to get up, you should make a phone call, ask for assistance via Personal Emergency Link Service or open the main door and call for help loudly", and that falls "could even be fatal if the elders failed to get up and seek medical help". This site quotes the original.
  • Is "74.5% of elderly people fell" right? No. What the report says is: among the elderly injury episodes which took place in the 12 months before enumeration, 74.5% were due to falls; Table 3.49 prints the base as "Elderly injury episodes (up to three most serious ones) sustained by respondents aged 65 and above in the 12 months before enumeration". On a person basis, 5.4% of those aged 65 and above had sustained fall-related injury episodes in the 12 months. That survey covered the land-based non-institutionalised population, and the report states that injury episodes sustained by "inmates of institutions such as elderly homes" were not included.
  • Can the 61.8% in "Non-Communicable Diseases Watch" be found in the report? Yes, in Table 2.4: on the falls row, it is 66.4% at age 0-4, 61.8% at 65-74 and 88.6% at 75 and above — the same as the three figures that issue cites. The report separately has Table 3.49, which splits 65-69 (59.8%), 70-74 (64.4%) and 75 and above (88.6%), on a different base and with different groupings from Table 2.4.
  • Did 2,106 people die from falls in 2025? No. 2,106 is the number of registered deaths for the whole "External causes of morbidity and mortality" chapter (ICD-10: V01-Y89) in the 2025 column (provisional figures) of the Centre for Health Protection's cause-of-death table; that chapter includes traffic accidents, falls, drowning, poisoning, suicide and homicide among others, and the table prints no subtotal for falls.
  • Has the Government said everyone should have a bone density scan at 65? Neither of the two replies cited in this article sets such a blanket testing threshold. The two Legislative Council written replies of 2019 and 2022 are consistent in position: there is insufficient scientific evidence to support the provision of bone mineral density screening service. The replies list risk factors (being underweight, a history of bone fracture, premature menopause, smoking habit or heavy drinking, or a family history of osteoporosis or fracture) and state that the people concerned "should take active control of the risk factors and seek medical advice on appropriate management options".
  • How much does a bone density scan cost in a public hospital? This article cannot answer that. From 1 January 2026 the Hospital Authority's non-urgent radiology services are charged in three tiers under Gazette Notice No. 6792: item 1.6 ("Eligible Persons") is Basic free of charge, Intermediate $250 and Advanced $500; item 2.7 ("Non-Eligible Persons") is $400, $1,600 and $4,700 for the same three tiers. But the three Hospital Authority charging documents cited in this article do not place bone mineral density testing / DEXA in any tier; the Appendix II contents of the Notice print only the single line "Annex II Radiology Services*", noting that the annexes are available on the Hospital Authority website, and the price range in this article does not cover those item-by-item annexes. The same set of documents also states that "Urgent radiology services for inpatients and A&E patients remain free of charge" — that sentence is about radiology services as an item, not about the Accident and Emergency attendance fee itself: item 1.3(A)(a) of Gazette Notice No. 6792 provides $400 per attendance at an Accident and Emergency Department for "Eligible Persons", with patients triaged as Category I (critical) to II (emergency) exempted from charge; item 2.2(A)(a) provides $2,100 per attendance for "Non-Eligible Persons", and both sets of charges for medical attention and treatment state that they "include ... urgent radiology services and other examinations".
  • How many hip fractures are there in Hong Kong each year? The 18 sources cited in this article have no answer. "There are about 10 000 new cases of hip fracture each year in Hong Kong and, among such cases, one-fifth of the patients pass away within one year" comes from the "it has been reported that" preamble to a Legislative Council Member's question of 2019; the Government's answer to the same question was that the Hospital Authority does not maintain statistics on patients with osteoporosis and those with fractures. What the Hospital Authority Smart Patient page prints is nearly 4,500 hip fracture operations in 2009.
  • How many people in Hong Kong have osteoporosis? The Legislative Council written reply of 2022 states that "The DH and the HA do not maintain statistics of osteoporosis." Two other figures appear on pages cited in this article: the Centre for Health Protection page cites "A study done by the Chinese University of Hong Kong in 2004 showed that 13% of men aged 65 and over suffered osteoporosis"; and the Hospital Authority Smart Patient page states that osteoporosis is "affecting an estimated 400,000 people". This article treats neither as a territory-wide prevalence figure.
  • How much calcium should I have a day? Is there an upper limit? The Department of Health Family Health Service's "Meeting your calcium needs" page prints 800-1000 mg for adults and 800-1300 mg for adults 50 years old or above; the same page also states that "Taking food and supplements together, one should not consume more than 2,000mg calcium daily", the reason given being "Too much calcium can damage your health", and states "Consult your healthcare professional first if you consider having calcium supplements." Both sets of figures carry the same footnote.

Related article: 〈Your public specialist appointment is far off and your condition has worsened — can you ask to be seen earlier?〉

What this article does not state

  • This article does not treat the 2,106 (2025 provisional figure) for "External causes of morbidity and mortality" as a number of deaths from falls. That ICD-10 chapter (V01-Y89) also includes traffic accidents, drowning, poisoning, suicide and homicide, and that table prints no falls breakdown at all.
  • This article does not give a number of deaths from falls in Hong Kong. Neither the Centre for Health Protection cause-of-death table (2001-2025) nor the "Report of Unintentional Injury Survey 2018" cited in this article prints that figure; the Legislative Council written reply of 2 April 2025 states that the Department of Health publishes mortality and discharge statistics on its website every year, and those annual statistics are outside the range of statistics this article compares.
  • This article does not write 74.5% or 88.6% as proportions of people injured. The base for both is the number of injury episodes (up to three most serious ones per person).
  • This article does not treat any percentage from the 2018 survey as including residents of residential care homes for the elderly. The report states that the survey did not include "Injury episodes sustained by inmates of institutions such as elderly homes, and persons living on boats or vessels", and also states that minor injuries were not counted.
  • This article does not use 47.1% against 31.0% as an elderly figure. The base for that pair is all injury episodes across all ages; for elderly people the report separately prints Table 3.48 (episode base: 75.8% for women, 72.2% for men) and Table 3.51 (person base: 6.5% against 4.2%).
  • This article does not mix the age groupings of Table 2.4 and Table 3.49. 61.8% comes from Table 2.4 (aged 65-74); 59.8% and 64.4% come from Table 3.49 (aged 65-69 and 70-74).
  • This article does not attribute "there are about 10 000 new cases of hip fracture each year in Hong Kong and, among such cases, one-fifth of the patients pass away within one year" to the Government, the Hospital Authority or the Department of Health. That sentence comes from the "it has been reported that" preamble to a Legislative Council Member's question, and the Government's answer to the same question was that it does not keep the figures concerned.
  • This article does not give a one-year mortality rate after hip fracture for Hong Kong. The 12% to 20% on the Hospital Authority Smart Patient page is attributed by that page itself to the International Osteoporosis Foundation; the "one-fifth" in the 2019 Legislative Council question preamble carries the words "it has been reported that", and the Government's answer to the same question was that it does not keep the figures concerned.
  • This article does not treat "13% of men aged 65 and over" or "an estimated 400,000 people" as Hong Kong's current number of people with the condition. Both are quoted as written, with the information each page does not print set out alongside.
  • This article does not state the price of a bone mineral density test in a public hospital. Gazette Notice No. 6792, the Hospital Authority "Fees and Charges" page and the fees reform FAQ page cited in this article all fail to place DEXA in the Basic, Intermediate or Advanced tier.
  • This article makes no judgment as to whether any reader is an "Eligible Person" or a "Non-Eligible Person". The classification criteria are as set out in the original text of Gazette Notice No. 6792.
  • This article's DEXA price example covers only the fee table The Family Planning Association of Hong Kong publishes itself. It does not represent the range of charges across Hong Kong or in private hospitals.
  • This article does not quote sections 3 to 6 of the six tip sections on the "Fall Prevention" page in full.
  • This article does not cite any Hong Kong local clinical guideline on osteoporosis. The 16 Government pages and documents cited in this article (three Legislative Council written replies, the cause-of-death table, the 2018 survey report, that report's press release, "Non-Communicable Diseases Watch", the two Elderly Health Service pages, the Centre for Health Protection "Men's Health Line - Osteoporosis" page, the two Family Health Service pages, the Hospital Authority Smart Patient page, Gazette Notice No. 6792, the Hospital Authority "Fees and Charges" page and the fees reform FAQ page) print no named Hong Kong clinical guideline.
  • This article prints no recommended daily vitamin D figure for adults or elderly people. The four relevant Department of Health pages cited in this article do not print one.
  • This article does not advise anyone to have a bone mineral density test, or to take or stop taking any supplement, and makes no judgment as to whether any individual person needs testing or treatment. What the official texts say is to discuss with a doctor, or to consult a healthcare professional first.
  • This article does not compare or recommend any hospital, clinic or doctor.
  • This is the English edition. The Traditional Chinese edition is the authoritative version of this article. Quotations above are reproduced from the official English text published by the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and by The Family Planning Association of Hong Kong, not translated by this site.

This article is health information, not medical advice.

Sources

Official arrangements and charges may be updated; what the Department of Health, the Hospital Authority and the organisations concerned publish governs. This article is health information, not medical advice, and cannot judge whether any individual person needs testing or treatment. On handling a fall, the Department of Health Elderly Health Service's "Fall Prevention" page states: "Even if there is no obvious wound, you should consult a doctor promptly if you have difficulty moving or in severe pain as you may have sustained a fracture"; the same page also states that falls "could even be fatal if the elders failed to get up and seek medical help", and "If you are unable to get up, you should make a phone call, ask for assistance via Personal Emergency Link Service or open the main door and call for help loudly".