SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2014
Hip protectors for preventing hip fractures in older people.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
67 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 168 citations in OpenAlex.
- Age-moderating effects and training characteristics of neuromuscular training for preventing knee injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Does hip protector prevent falls and hip fractures? An umbrella review of meta-analyses.BMC geriatrics · 2024Pooled it
- Hydrogel dressings for donor sites of split-thickness skin grafts.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Compliant sports floors and fall-related injuries: evidence from a residential care setting and updated meta-analysis for all patient care settings.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2023Pooled it
- Evaluation of Clinical Practice Guidelines on Fall Prevention and Management for Older Adults: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2021Pooled it
- Hip protectors are cost-effective in the prevention of hip fractures in patients with high fracture risk.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2020Pooled it
- 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 · 2020Pooled it
- Intervention effect estimates in cluster randomized versus individually randomized trials: a meta-epidemiological study.International journal of epidemiology · 2019Pooled it
- Interventions for preventing falls in older people in care facilities and hospitals.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Clinical guidelines for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: summary statements and recommendations from the Italian Society for Orthopaedics and Traumatology.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2017Guideline
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Recommendations for preventing fracture in long-term care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2015Guideline
- Wearable airbag technology and machine learned models to mitigate falls after stroke.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2022Trial
- The Flooring for Injury Prevention (FLIP) Study of compliant flooring for the prevention of fall-related injuries in long-term care: A randomized trial.PLoS medicine · 2019Trial
- Preventing Hip (Proximal Femoral) Fractures: An Evidence-Based Review for Clinicians.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- DXA-derived biofidelic finite element models for quantifying the efficacy of hip protectors.JBMR plus · 2026Article
- Improved prediction of hip fracture using multi-faceted biomechanical computed tomography.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2026Article
- Sex differences in fall circumstances and injury biomechanics among older adults: A narrative review.Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine · 2026Review
- Review
7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOlder people living in nursing care facilities or older adults living at home are at high risk of falling and a hip fracture may occur after a fall. Hip protectors have been advocated as a means to reduce the risk of hip fracture. Hip protectors are plastic shields (hard) or foam pads (soft), usually fitted in pockets in specially designed underwear.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 1999, and updated several times, most recently in 2010.
objectivesTo determine if the provision of external hip protectors (sometimes referred to as hip pads or hip protector pads) reduces the risk of fracturing the hip in older people. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (December 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1950 to week 3 November 2012), MEDLINE In-Process (18 December 2012), EMBASE (1988 to 2012 Week 50), CINAHL (1982 to December 2012), BioMed Central (January 2010), trial registers and reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing an intervention group provided with hip protectors with a control group not provided with hip protectors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We sought additional information from trialists. Data were pooled using fixed-effect or random-effects models as appropriate. MAIN
resultsThis review includes 19 studies, nine of which were cluster randomised. These included approximately 17,000 people (mean age range 78 to 86 years). Most studies were overall at low risk of bias for fracture outcomes. Trials tested hard or soft hip protectors enclosed in special underwear in 18 studies.Pooling of data from 14 studies (11,808 participants) conducted in nursing or residential care settings found moderate quality evidence for a small reduction in hip fracture risk (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.00); the absolute effect is 11 fewer people (95% CI, from 20 fewer to 0) per 1000 having a hip fracture when provided with hip protectors.There is moderate quality evidence when pooling data from five trials in the community (5614 participants) that shows little or no effect in hip fracture risk (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.58); the absolute effect is two more people (95% CI 2 fewer to 6 more) per 1000 people having a hip fracture when provided with hip protectors.There is probably little to no effect on falls (rate ratio 1.02, 95% CI 0.9 to 1.16) or fractures other than of the hip or pelvis (rate ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07). However, the risk ratio for pelvic fractures is RR 1.27 (95% CI 0.78 to 2.08); this is an absolute effect of one more person (95% CI 1 fewer to 5 more) per 1000 having a pelvic fracture when provided with hip protectors.The incidence of adverse events while wearing hip protectors, including skin irritation, ranged from 0% to 5%. Adherence, particularly in the long term, was poor. AUTHORS'
conclusionsHip protectors probably reduce the risk of hip fractures if made available to older people in nursing care or residential care settings, without increasing the frequency of falls. However, hip protectors may slightly increase the small risk of pelvic fractures. Poor acceptance and adherence by older people offered hip protectors is a barrier to their use. Better understanding is needed of the personal and design factors that may influence acceptance and adherence.
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.