ArticleClinical rheumatology2009
The challenges of interpreting efficacy of hip protector pads in fracture prevention in high-risk seniors.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the stability of human locomotion: a review of current measures.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Efficacy of hip protector pads to prevent hip fracture is controversial. This study was done to evaluate two comparable groups for fracture risk. Two matched cohorts of long-term care residents in Canada, assessing the efficacy of hip protector pads. Evaluation included demographics, medications/diagnoses, cognition (Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE)), balance (Berg), bone mineral density (calcaneal ultrasound), falls/injuries at baseline and completion. Of the 58 participants, there were two confirmed hip fractures (8%) in the hip pad (one while wearing the pad) and eight (24%) in the control groups. But baseline demographics showed significant differences between hip pad (25) and control groups (33) in MMSE, Berg and osteoporosis treatment, all being less in the hip pad group. This persisted at completion, with a higher mortality in the hip pad group. Baseline differences predisposed the hip pad group to a higher fracture risk, but there were fewer hip fractures in this group. Small numbers, multifactorial nature of hip fractures and the inability to control for many of these variables in the real world make efficacy of hip protector pads difficult to confirm. Hip protector pads should be offered as part of the osteoporosis management of frail elderly, especially in those unable/unwilling to take pharmacotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.