Journal of Biomechanics
Volume 43, Issue 5 , Pages 818-825, 22 March 2010

The effect of positioning on the biomechanical performance of soft shell hip protectors

  • W.J. Choi

      Affiliations

    • Injury Prevention and Mobility Laboratory, Department of Biomedical Physiology and Kinesiology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5A 1S6
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +17787826679; fax: +17787823040.
  • ,
  • J.A. Hoffer

      Affiliations

    • Neurokinesiology Laboratory, Department of Biomedical Physiology and Kinesiology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
  • ,
  • S.N. Robinovitch

      Affiliations

    • Injury Prevention and Mobility Laboratory, Department of Biomedical Physiology and Kinesiology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5A 1S6
    • School of Engineering Science, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada

Accepted 20 November 2009. published online 17 December 2009.

Abstract 

Wearable hip protectors represent a promising strategy for reducing risk for hip fracture from a sideways fall. However, small changes in pad positioning may influence their protective benefit. Using a mechanical hip impact simulator, we investigated how three marketed soft shell hip protectors attenuate and redistribute the impact force applied to the hip, and how this depends on displacement from their intended position by 2.5 or 5cm superiorly, posteriorly, inferiorly or anteriorly. For centrally-placed protectors, peak pressure was reduced 93% below the unpadded value by a 16mm horseshoe-shaped protector, 93% by a 14mm horseshoe protector, and 94% by a 16mm continuous protector. In unpadded trials, 83% of the total force was applied to the skin overlying the proximal femur (danger zone). This was lowered to 19% by the centrally placed 16mm horseshoe protector, to 34% by the 14mm horseshoe, and to 40% by the 16mm continuous protector. Corresponding reductions in peak force delivered to the femoral neck (relative to unpadded) were 45%, 38%, and 20%, respectively. The protective benefit of all three protectors decreased with pad displacement. For example, displacement of protectors by 5cm anteriorly caused peak femoral neck force to increase 60% above centrally-placed values, and approach unpadded values. These results indicate that soft shell hip protectors provide substantial protective benefits, but decline in performance with small displacements from their intended position. Our findings confirm the need for correct and stable positioning of hip protectors in garment design.

Keywords: Hip fracture, Falls, Hip protectors, Location of greater trochanter, Displacement

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0021-9290(09)00669-1

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.11.023

Journal of Biomechanics
Volume 43, Issue 5 , Pages 818-825, 22 March 2010