Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Prevent fractures but adherence is a problem
For an older person a hip fracture is a devastating
injury that greatly increases disability and mortality.1
Most hip fractures in older people occur due to a fall on to the
greater trochanter of the femur.2 Clinicians and others
have suspected this for a long time and logically have thought about
methods of protecting this area. The first patent for a device designed
to protect the hip was granted in the United States in
1959.3
Hip protectors are devices that reduce the force transmitted to the
proximal part of the femur through the greater trochanter in a fall. A
pad or shield is held in place over the greater trochanter as shown in
the figure. There are many types of these devices marketed around the
world, and they fit into two broad categories. The first type pads the
area of the hip with an energy absorbing material. The second type uses
a semi-rigid plastic shield to divert force from the trochanteric
region to the soft tissues of the thigh. In vitro testing of these
devices shows a range of energy diminution, and some controversy exists
about the extent of reduction of energy needed to prevent the
fracture.4
After considerable biomechanical development the first large scale
randomised trial of hip protectors was conducted in 1991.5 This study showed a 56% risk reduction through use of hip protectors on an intention to treat basis, although adherence with use of the hip
protectors was only 24%. In this and subsequent studies the ward or
facility in which the older person was living was randomised rather
than the individual user. A Cochrane review on this topic concluded
that use of hip protectors appeared justified in certain high risk
populations, but cost effectiveness was unclear and "acceptability by
users of the protectors remains a problem."6 Another
recently published large scale cluster randomised trial has reported
broadly similar conclusions as earlier trials.7
Hip protectors should be used at all times when the person is at
risk of falling. For many older people this will mean use both during
the day and night, and this requires strong commitment from the user or
the person providing care for them. Adherence with the use of hip
protectors is an important area that requires further investigation and
discussion.
8 9
In the setting of residential care, where
all the reported trials have been based, adherence will be largely
determined by the commitment of nursing and personal care staff in the
institution. In community settings adherence will be dependent on the
users themselves and may be more problematic.
Practical issues should be considered when using hip protectors. At
least three pairs of hip protector underwear will be needed for each
user. Women have been the main participants in the clinical trials
reported and hip protector underwear is generally a modified women's
continence garment. Hip protectors for men are now available from some
manufacturers. Many users of hip protectors are incontinent, and
continence pads can be used inside hip protector underwear. As the
figure shows, some users of hip protectors prefer to wear other
underwear under the hip protectors. This reduces the amount of
laundering of the hip protectors and also the number of hip protector
garments that need to be purchased. When used in institutions it is
recommended that the hip protector shields are sewn into the underwear
to reduce staff effort and time. Shields can be supplied that are
removed from the garment for laundering. This can reduce the cost of
hip protectors and underwear, which is about £40 per pair, for the
most widely marketed hip protectors in the United Kingdom. The cost of
hip protectors is an impediment to use for some people. It is hoped
that they will be accepted for subsidy by schemes supplying
equipment.
Hip protectors seem to be an effective technology at this stage of
their development. Some improvement in design is necessary to encourage
greater acceptance by users. There is also a small but documented
failure rate for hip protectors.
7 10
Adverse local skin
and other effects also occur but appear to be rare.7 Some
frail older people require help while dressing and using the toilet
while wearing hip protectors and thus lose independence in these
activities.11
Many clinical trials of hip protectors are in progress, and some
have been reported at recent international meetings.6 One
has found that people in the community who use hip protectors feel more
confident that they can avoid injury by wearing them.12 Hip protectors are an emerging and promising technology that can reduce
the chance of hip fractures in the setting of residential aged care and
for highly motivated community users. They are potentially suitable for
use by older people at high risk of hip fracture rather than older
people generally.
Rehabilitation Studies Unit, Department of Medicine, University
of Sydney, Ryde, NSW 1680, Australia (ianc{at}mail.usyd.edu.au)
Footnotes
IC has been a chief investigator in research studies of hip protectors that have received funding from the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, and the Northern Sydney Area Health Service. Tytex Pty Ltd provided hip protectors at reduced cost for some of these studies. Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Hospital, where IC has an honorary position, has developed and manufactures hip protectors for research and retail sale.
| 1. | Marottoli RA, Berkman LF, Cooney LM. Decline in physical function following hip fracture. J Am Geriatric Soc 1992; 40: 861-866[ISI][Medline]. |
| 2. | Apley AG, Solomon L, eds. Apley's system of orthopaedics and fractures. 7th ed. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 1993:655. |
| 3. | Raymond ML, inventor. Fracture preventing hip protecting means. United States Patent 2 889 830. 1959;9 Jun. |
| 4. | Kannus P, Parkkari J, Poutala J. Comparison of force attenuation properties of four different hip protectors under simulated falling conditions in the elderly: an in vitro biomechanical study. Bone 1999; 25: 229-235[Medline]. |
| 5. | Lauritzen JB, Petersen MM, Lund B. Effect of external hip protectors on hip fractures. Lancet 1993; 341: 11-13[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 6. | Parker MJ, Gillespie LD, Gillespie WJ. Hip protectors for preventing hip fractures in the elderly. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001; 2: CD001255. |
| 7. |
Kannus P, Parkkari J, Niemi S, Pasanen M, Palvanen M, Jarvinen M, et al.
Prevention of hip fracture in elderly people with use of a hip protector.
N Engl J Med
2000;
343:
1506-1513 |
| 8. |
Villar MTA, Hill P, Inskip H, Thompson P, Cooper C.
Will elderly rest home residents wear hip protectors?
Age Ageing
1998;
27:
195-198 |
| 9. |
Parkkari J, Heikkila J, Kannus P.
Acceptability and compliance with wearing energy-shunting hip protectors: A 6-month prospective follow-up in a Finnish nursing home.
Age Ageing
1998;
27:
225-230 |
| 10. | Specht-Leible N, Oster P. Hip fracture with correctly positioned external hip protector. Age Ageing 1999; 28: 497. |
| 11. | Becker C, Walter-Jung B, Nikolaus T. The other side of hip protectors. Age Ageing 2000; 29: 186. |
| 12. |
Cameron ID, Stafford B, Cumming RG, Birks C, Kurrle SE, Lockwood K, et al.
Hip protectors improve falls self-efficacy.
Age Ageing
2000;
29:
57-62 |
Read all Rapid Responses