Abstract
Hip protectors appear to be effective in reducing the incidence of hip fractures. However, compliance is often poor. Therefore, the objective of this study was to examine the compliance and determinants of compliance with external hip protectors. A prospective study was performed in residents from apartment houses for the elderly, homes for the elderly and nursing homes with a high risk for hip fracture (n=276). The study was performed within the framework of the Amsterdam Hip Protector Study, a randomized controlled trial examining the effect of external hip protectors on the incidence of hip fractures. Compliance was assessed by unannounced visits at 1, 6 and 12 months after inclusion in the study. During the visits, a member of the research team checked whether the participant was wearing the hip protector and, if so, whether it was worn correctly. Furthermore, data on potential determinants of compliance were collected by interviewing the participants or their nurses. Compliance was 60.8% after 1 month (n=217), 44.7% after 6 months (n=246), and 37.0% after 12 months (n=230). Of those wearing the hip protector, 86.7%, 91.7% and 96.5% of the participants were wearing the hip protector correctly after 1, 6 and 12 months respectively; and 14.8%, 16.1% and 8.8% respectively reported wearing the hip protector at night. Compliance after 12 months was predicted by the compliance after 1 month (RR=2.04; 90% CI: 1.05–3.96). Furthermore, people who experienced one or more falls in the half year before baseline had a lower probability of being compliant at 6 months (RR=0.72; 90% CI: 0.52–0.99). In conclusion, compliance is a very important issue in hip protector research and implementation. Although, the compliance percentages were moderately high during the unannounced visits in this study, not everyone was wearing the protector correctly and most participants did not wear the hip protector during the night.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Boereboom FT, de Groot RR, Raymakers JA, et al (1991) The incidence of hip fractures in The Netherlands. Neth J Med 38:51–58
Johnell O, Nilsson B, Obrant K, et al (1984) Age and sex patterns of hip fracture—changes in 30 years. Acta Orthop Scand 55:290–292
Kannus P, Parkkari J, Niemi S (1995) Age-adjusted incidence of hip fractures. Lancet 346:50–51
Kannus P, Parkkari J, Sievanen H, et al (1996) Epidemiology of hip fractures. Bone 18:57S–63S
Lips P (1997) Epidemiology and predictors of fractures associated with osteoporosis. Am J Med 103:3S–8S
Kanis JA (1993) The incidence of hip fracture in Europe. Osteoporos Int 3 [Suppl 1]:10–15
Keene GS, Parker MJ, Pryor GA (1993) Mortality and morbidity after hip fractures. BMJ 307:1248–1250
Parker MJ, Anand JK (1991) What is the true mortality of hip fractures? Public Health 105:443–446
De Laet CE, van Hout BA, Burger H, et al (1999) Incremental cost of medical care after hip fracture and first vertebral fracture: the Rotterdam study. Osteoporos Int 10:66–72
Parker MJ, Gillespie LD, Gillespie WJ (2001) Hip protectors for preventing hip fractures in the elderly. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 2. Update Software, Oxford.
Lauritzen JB, Petersen MM, Lund B (1993) Effect of external hip protectors on hip fractures. Lancet 341:11–13
Heikinheimo R, Jantti P, Aho H, et al (1996) To fall but not to break—Safety Pants. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Injury Prevention and Control, Melbourne, Australia.
Ekman A, Mallmin H, Michaelsson K, et al (1997) External hip protectors to prevent osteoporotic hip fractures. Lancet 350:563–564
Chan DK, Hillier G, Coore M, et al (2000) Effectiveness and acceptability of a newly designed hip protector: A pilot study. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 30:25–34
Kannus P, Parkkari J, Niemi S, et al (2000) Prevention of hip fracture in elderly people with use of a hip protector. N Engl J Med 343:1506–1513
Cameron ID, Venman J, Kurrle SE, et al (2001) Hip protectors in aged-care facilities: a randomized trial of use by individual higher-risk residents. Age Ageing 30:477–481
Harada A, Mizuno M, Takemura M, et al (2001) Hip fracture prevention trial using hip protectors in Japanese nursing homes. Osteoporos Int 12:215–221
Hubacher M, Wettstein A (2001) Acceptance of hip protectors for hip fracture prevention in nursing homes. Osteoporos Int 12:794–799
Lips P, van Ginkel FC, Netelenbos JC, et al (1990) Lower mobility and markers of bone resorption in the elderly. Bone Mineral 9:49–57
Tombaugh TN, McIntyre NJ (1992) The mini-mental state examination: a comprehensive review. J Am Geriatr Soc 40:922–935
Villar MTA, Hill P, Inskip H, et al (1998) Will elderly rest home residents wear hip protectors? Age Ageing 27:195–198
Cameron ID, Stafford B, Cumming RG, et al (2000) Hip protectors improve falls self-efficacy. Age Ageing 29:57–62
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Colette van Eck, Trees Haverkort, Annemarieke Kessler, Jacqueline Kroon, Els Lommerse, Laura Schaap, Joke Velders, Nicolette Verheus and Mireille Wolfers for their help in collecting the data; the 'Praeventiefonds' for funding this study; Sahvatex and Artu Biologicals for providing the hip protectors; and the residents and nursing staff of the participating homes for the elderly and nursing homes for all their help and time
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
van Schoor, N.M., Asma, G., Smit, J.H. et al. The Amsterdam Hip Protector Study: compliance and determinants of compliance. Osteoporos Int 14, 353–359 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-003-1382-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-003-1382-7