BMC Geriatrics (May 2017)

Validation and psychometric properties of the commitment to hip protectors (C-HiP) index in long-term care providers of British Columbia, Canada: a cross-sectional survey

  • Alexandra M.B. Korall,
  • Judith Godin,
  • Fabio Feldman,
  • Ian D. Cameron,
  • Pet-Ming Leung,
  • Joanie Sims-Gould,
  • Stephen N. Robinovitch

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0493-5
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 17, no. 1
pp. 1 – 13

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background If worn during a fall, hip protectors substantially reduce risk for hip fracture. However, a major barrier to their clinical efficacy is poor user adherence. In long-term care, adherence likely depends on how committed care providers are to hip protectors, but empirical evidence is lacking due to the absence of a psychometrically valid assessment tool. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey in a convenience sample of 529 paid care providers. We developed the 15-item C-HiP Index to measure commitment, comprised of three subscales: affective, cognitive and behavioural. Responses were subjected to hierarchical factor analysis and internal consistency testing. Eleven experts rated the relevance and clarity of items on 4-point Likert scales. We performed simple linear regression to determine whether C-HiP Index scores were positively related to the question, “Do you think of yourself as a champion of hip protectors”, rated on a 5-point Likert scale. We examined whether the C-HiP Index could differentiate respondents: (i) who were aware of a protected fall causing hip fracture from those who were unaware; (ii) who agreed in the existence of a champion of hip protectors within their home from those who didn’t. Results Hierarchical factor analysis yielded two lower-order factors and a single higher-order factor, representing the overarching concept of commitment to hip protectors. Items from affective and cognitive subscales loaded highest on the first lower-order factor, while items from the behavioural subscale loaded highest on the second. We eliminated one item due to low factor matrix coefficients, and poor expert evaluation. The C-HiP Index had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.96. A one-unit increase in championing was associated with a 5.2-point (p < 0.01) increase in C-HiP Index score. Median C-HiP Index scores were 4.3-points lower (p < 0.01) among respondents aware of a protected fall causing hip fracture, and 7.0-points higher (p < 0.01) among respondents who agreed in the existence of a champion of hip protectors within their home. Conclusions We offer evidence of the psychometric properties of the C-HiP Index. The development of a valid and reliable assessment tool is crucial to understanding the factors that govern adherence to hip protectors in long-term care.

Keywords