Horizontal Slide Creates Less Cervical Motion When Centering an Injured Patient on a Spine Board
| Autor: | Bryan P. Conrad, Mark L. Prasarn, MaryBeth Horodyski, Nicole Scott, Glenn R. Rechtine, Laura Ann Zdziarski, Allyson Long, Dewayne Dubose |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2015 |
| Předmět: |
Joint Instability
Male medicine.medical_specialty Lateral flexion Movement Motion (geometry) Patient Positioning Neck Injuries 03 medical and health sciences Immobilization 0302 clinical medicine Circular motion Translational displacement Cadaver medicine Humans Aged Orthodontics Aged 80 and over Moving and Lifting Patients business.industry 030208 emergency & critical care medicine 030229 sport sciences Surgery Biomechanical Phenomena Neurologic injury medicine.anatomical_structure Spinal Injuries Emergency Medicine Cervical Vertebrae Female Cadaveric spasm business Cervical vertebrae |
| Zdroj: | The Journal of emergency medicine. 50(5) |
| ISSN: | 0736-4679 |
| Popis: | Background A patient with a suspected cervical spine injury may be at risk for secondary neurologic injury when initially placed and repositioned to the center of the spine board. Objectives We sought to determine which centering adjustment best limits cervical spine movement and minimizes the chance for secondary injury. Methods Using five lightly embalmed cadaveric specimens with a created global instability at C5–C6, motion sensors were anchored to the anterior surface of the vertebral bodies. Three repositioning methods were used to center the cadavers on the spine board: horizontal slide, diagonal slide, and V-adjustment. An electromagnetic tracking device measured angular (degrees) and translation (millimeters) motions at the C5–C6 level during each of the three centering adjustments. The dependent variables were angular motion (flexion-extension, axial rotation, lateral flexion) and translational displacement (anteroposterior, axial, and medial-lateral). Results The nonuniform condition produced significantly less flexion-extension than the uniform condition ( p = 0.048). The horizontal slide adjustment produced less cervical flexion-extension ( p = 0.015), lateral bending ( p = 0.003), and axial rotation ( p = 0.034) than the V-adjustment. Similarly, translation was significantly less with the horizontal adjustment than with the V-adjustment; medial-lateral ( p = 0.017), axial ( p p = 0.006). Conclusions Of the three adjustments, our team found that horizontal slide was also easier to complete than the other methods. The horizontal slide best limited cervical spine motion and may be the most helpful for minimizing secondary injury based on the study findings. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect