Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21899845›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomechanics2011

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

Andrew C Laing, Fabio Feldman, Mona Jalili, Chun Ming Jimmy Tsai, Stephen N Robinovitch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomechanics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Test systems for the biomechanical evaluation of hip protectors: a systematic review.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Biomechanical testing of hip protectors following the Canadian Standards Association express document.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew C LaingInjury Biomechanics and Aging Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1. actlaing@uwaterloo.ca
Fabio Feldman
Mona Jalili
Chun Ming Jimmy Tsai
Stephen N Robinovitch
Simon Fraser University · CAFraser Health · CAUniversity of Waterloo · CA

Funding

CIHR 100487CIHR 103945
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wearable hip protectors (padded garments) represent a promising strategy to decrease impact force and hip fracture risk during falls, and a wide range of products are currently marketed. However, little is known about how design features of hip protectors influence biomechanical effectiveness. We used a mechanical test system (simulating sideways falls) to measure the attenuation in femoral neck force provided by 26 commercially available hip protectors at three impact velocities (2, 3, and 4m/s). We also used a materials testing machine to characterize the force-deflection properties of each device. Regression analyses were performed to determine which geometric (e.g., height, width, thickness, volume) and force-deflection properties were associated with force attenuation. At an impact velocity of 3m/s, the force attenuation provided by the various hip protectors ranged between 2.5% and 40%. Hip protectors with lower stiffness (measured at 500N) provided greater force attenuation at all velocities. Protectors that absorbed more energy demonstrated greater force attenuation at the higher impact velocities (3 and 4m/s conditions), while protectors that did not directly contact (but instead bridged) the skin overlying the greater trochanter attenuated more force at velocities of 2 and 3m/s. At these lower velocities, the force attenuation provided by protectors that contacted the skin overlying the greater trochanter increased with increasing pad width, thickness, and energy dissipation. By providing a comparison of the protective value of a large range of existing hip protectors, these results can help to guide consumers and researchers in selecting hip protectors, and in interpreting the results of previous clinical trials. Furthermore, by determining geometric and material parameters that influence biomechanical performance, our results should assist manufacturers in designing devices that offer improved performance and clinical effectiveness.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsHipMaterials TestingProtective DevicesStress, MechanicalHumans

Identifiers

PMID21899845
PMCPMC3435428
OpenAlexW2051797053

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.