Literature DB >> 20683703

Availability and use of hip protectors in residents of nursing homes.

J Klenk1, S Kurrle, U Rissmann, A Kleiner, S Heinrich, H-H König, C Becker, K Rapp.   

Abstract

SUMMARY: Potential predictors of availability and use of hip protectors were studied in residents of 48 nursing homes. The likelihood of being offered a hip protector was reduced in men, in residents with very low or very high care needs, in residents with migration background, and in recipients of welfare aid.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to analyze potential predictors of availability and use of hip protectors in residents of nursing homes.
METHODS: In 48 German nursing homes, individual information on availability and use of hip protectors was collected from all institutionalized residents (3,924 residents; 78.2% women). Information on nursing home characteristics was obtained by telephone interview. The effect of individual variables and of nursing home characteristics on hip protector availability and use was estimated using multilevel logistic regression analyses.
RESULTS: The prevalence of hip protectors being made available was 10.0% in women and 6.2% in men. Sixty-four percent of those with a hip protector used it during the 4 weeks prior to the examination. The likelihood of being offered a hip protector was reduced in men (odds ratio (OR), 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.43; 0.83), in residents with very low or very high care needs (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.18; 0.56 and OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.38; 0.79, respectively), in residents with a migration background (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.09; 0.99), and in recipients of welfare aid (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.44; 0.81). Nursing home characteristics such as the size of the nursing home or staff participation rate in training measures had no effect on hip protector availability and use.
CONCLUSION: Predictors of hip protector availability were sex, the degree of care need, migration status, and welfare aid. The lower availability of hip protectors in residents with welfare aid and migration status may be an indicator for health inequality in the German health system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20683703     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-010-1366-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  13 in total

1.  Not to be taken as directed.

Authors:  Marshall Marinker; Joanne Shaw
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-02-15

2.  Compliance with external hip protectors in nursing homes in Norway.

Authors:  L Forsén; S Sandvig; A Schuller; A J Søgaard
Journal:  Inj Prev       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.399

3.  An in-service evaluation of hip protector use in residential homes.

Authors:  Paul Thompson; Carol Jones; Adrian Dawson; Peter Thomas; Tracy Villar
Journal:  Age Ageing       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 10.668

4.  Can hip protector use in the nursing home be predicted?

Authors:  Lisa A Honkanen; Niall Monaghan; M C Reid; David Newstein; Karl Pillemer; Mark S Lachs
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 5.562

5.  The effect of type of hip protector and resident characteristics on adherence to use of hip protectors in nursing and residential homes--an exploratory study.

Authors:  Peter D O'Halloran; Liam J Murray; Gordon W Cran; Louise Dunlop; George Kernohan; Timothy R O Beringer
Journal:  Int J Nurs Stud       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 5.837

6.  Fractures after nursing home admission: incidence and potential consequences.

Authors:  K Rapp; S E Lamb; J Klenk; A Kleiner; S Heinrich; H-H König; T Nikolaus; C Becker
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-02-24       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Does the type of flooring affect the risk of hip fracture?

Authors:  A H R W Simpson; S Lamb; P J Roberts; T N Gardner; J Grimley Evans
Journal:  Age Ageing       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 10.668

8.  Predictors of adherence with the recommended use of hip protectors.

Authors:  Susan E Kurrle; Ian D Cameron; Susan Quine
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 6.053

9.  Hip protectors: recommendations for conducting clinical trials--an international consensus statement (part II).

Authors:  I D Cameron; S Robinovitch; S Birge; P Kannus; K Khan; J Lauritzen; J Howland; S Evans; J Minns; A Laing; P Cripton; S Derler; D Plant; D P Kiel
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Factors associated with hip protector adherence among older people in residential care.

Authors:  C Cryer; A Knox; E Stevenson
Journal:  Inj Prev       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.399

View more
  3 in total

1.  [Fall and fracture prevention based on the National Expert Standard. Implementation and costs in a real world setting in nursing homes].

Authors:  S Heinrich; I Weigelt; K Rapp; C Becker; U Rissmann; H-H König
Journal:  Z Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 1.281

2.  Reduction of femoral fractures in long-term care facilities: the Bavarian fracture prevention study.

Authors:  Clemens Becker; Ian D Cameron; Jochen Klenk; Ulrich Lindemann; Sven Heinrich; Hans-Helmut König; Kilian Rapp
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-08-30       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Long-term evaluation of the implementation of a large fall and fracture prevention program in long-term care facilities.

Authors:  Patrick Roigk; Clemens Becker; Claudia Schulz; Hans-Helmut König; Kilian Rapp
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 3.921

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.