Literature DB >> 19045534

The force attenuation provided by hip protectors depends on impact velocity, pelvic size, and soft tissue stiffness.

Andrew C Laing1, Stephen N Robinovitch.   

Abstract

Wearable hip protectors represent a promising strategy for preventing hip fractures. However, there is lack of agreement on biomechanical testing standards and subsequent uncertainty about the ability of hip protectors to attenuate impact force during a fall. To address this issue, we designed a fall impact simulator that incorporated a "biofidelic" surrogate pelvis, which matched the surface geometry and soft tissue stiffness measured in elderly women (n=15). We then used this system to measure the attenuation in peak femoral neck force provided by two commercially available soft shell protectors (Safehip Soft and Hipsaver) and one rigid shell protector (Safehip Classic). Finally, we examined how the force attenuation provided by each protector was influenced by systematic changes in fall severity (impact velocity), body size (pelvis size), and soft tissue stiffness. With the biofidelic pelvis, the force attenuation averaged over all impact velocities was 27% for Safehip Soft, 17% for Safehip Classic, and 19% for Hipsaver. However, the rank order of hip protectors (and especially the performance of Safehip Classic) varied with the test conditions. Safehip Classic attenuated force by 33% during a low velocity (1 ms) fall, but only by 8% for a high velocity (4 ms) fall. In the latter condition, improved attenuation was provided by the soft shell hip protectors (19% by Safehip Soft and 21% by Hipsaver). As soft tissue stiffness increased from softest to most rigid, the attenuation provided by Safehip Classic increased 2.9-fold (from 26% to 76%), while Safehip Soft increased 1.7-fold (from 36% to 60%) and Hipsaver increased 1.1-fold (from 36% to 38%). As pelvis size decreased from largest to smallest, the attenuation provided by Safehip Classic increased 8-fold, but for a high velocity fall and moderate tissue stiffness, never exceeded that provided by Safehip Soft and Hipsaver. Our results indicate that, under biofidelic testing conditions, the soft shell hip protectors we examined generally provided greater force attenuation (averaging up to 27%) than the hard shell protector. Measured values of force attenuation were highly sensitive to variations in impact velocity, pelvic size, and pelvic soft tissue stiffness. This indicates the need to develop international testing standards to guide market approval, the selection of protectors for clinical trials, and the design of improved hip protectors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19045534     DOI: 10.1115/1.2979867

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech Eng        ISSN: 0148-0731            Impact factor:   2.097


  11 in total

1.  Effects of hip abductor muscle forces and knee boundary conditions on femoral neck stresses during simulated falls.

Authors:  W J Choi; P A Cripton; S N Robinovitch
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  The effects of pad geometry and material properties on the biomechanical effectiveness of 26 commercially available hip protectors.

Authors:  Andrew C Laing; Fabio Feldman; Mona Jalili; Chun Ming Jimmy Tsai; Stephen N Robinovitch
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2011-09-06       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 3.  Sideways fall-induced impact force and its effect on hip fracture risk: a review.

Authors:  M Nasiri Sarvi; Y Luo
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-07-20       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 4.  Test systems for the biomechanical evaluation of hip protectors: a systematic review.

Authors:  S A Yahaya; Z M Ripin; M I Z Ridzwan
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2019-08-24       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Biomechanical testing of hip protectors following the Canadian Standards Association express document.

Authors:  B E Keenan; S L Evans
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Hip protectors: recommendations for biomechanical testing--an international consensus statement (part I).

Authors:  S N Robinovitch; S L Evans; J Minns; A C Laing; P Kannus; P A Cripton; S Derler; S J Birge; D Plant; I D Cameron; D P Kiel; J Howland; K Khan; J B Lauritzen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-10-06       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Validation and psychometric properties of the commitment to hip protectors (C-HiP) index in long-term care providers of British Columbia, Canada: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Alexandra M B Korall; Judith Godin; Fabio Feldman; Ian D Cameron; Pet-Ming Leung; Joanie Sims-Gould; Stephen N Robinovitch
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2017-05-03       Impact factor: 3.921

8.  Development and validation of a questionnaire for analyzing real-life falls in long-term care captured on video.

Authors:  Yijian Yang; Rebecca Schonnop; Fabio Feldman; Stephen N Robinovitch
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 3.921

9.  A multiscale model to predict current absolute risk of femoral fracture in a postmenopausal population.

Authors:  Pinaki Bhattacharya; Zainab Altai; Muhammad Qasim; Marco Viceconti
Journal:  Biomech Model Mechanobiol       Date:  2018-10-01

10.  Development of a stick-on hip protector: A multiple methods study to improve hip protector design for older adults in the acute care environment.

Authors:  E Post; V Komisar; J Sims-Gould; Amb Korall; F Feldman; S N Robinovitch
Journal:  J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng       Date:  2019-12-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.