Literature DB >> 11310463

The use of the spinal board after the pre-hospital phase of trauma management.

D Vickery1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: For pre-hospital spinal immobilisation the spinal board is the established gold standard. There are concerns that its subsequent use in hospital may adversely affect patient outcome. This review examines the effect of prolonged patient immobilisation on the spinal board.
METHODS: A database search of the literature and review of relevant trauma texts.
RESULTS: Complications associated with the use of the spinal board were found in five clinically relevant categories: pressure sore development; inadequacies of spinal immobilisation and support; pain and discomfort; respiratory compromise; and quality of radiological imaging.
CONCLUSION: The spinal board should be removed in all patients soon after arrival in accident and emergency departments, ideally after the primary survey and resuscitation phases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11310463      PMCID: PMC1725508          DOI: 10.1136/emj.18.1.51

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Med J        ISSN: 1472-0205            Impact factor:   2.740


  19 in total

1.  An experimental study of some pressure effects on tissues, with reference to the bed-sore problem.

Authors:  T HUSAIN
Journal:  J Pathol Bacteriol       Date:  1953-10

2.  A review of seven support surfaces with emphasis on their protection of the spinally injured.

Authors:  P W Main; M E Lovell
Journal:  J Accid Emerg Med       Date:  1996-01

3.  Spinal board for road casualties.

Authors:  K C Easton
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1970-01-24

Review 4.  Guidelines for resuscitation and transfer of patients with serious head injury.

Authors:  D Gentleman; M Dearden; S Midgley; D Maclean
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-08-28

5.  Risk factors for early occurring pressure ulcers following spinal cord injury.

Authors:  A R Mawson; J J Biundo; P Neville; H A Linares; Y Winchester; A Lopez
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 2.159

6.  Effect of spinal immobilization devices on pulmonary function in the healthy, nonsmoking man.

Authors:  D Bauer; R Kowalski
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 5.721

7.  Spinal immobilization on a flat backboard: does it result in neutral position of the cervical spine?

Authors:  D L Schriger; B Larmon; T LeGassick; T Blinman
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 5.721

8.  Respiratory effects of spinal immobilization in children.

Authors:  R W Schafermeyer; B M Ribbeck; J Gaskins; S Thomason; M Harlan; A Attkisson
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 5.721

9.  Advanced trauma life support. A time for reappraisal.

Authors:  J R Bennett; A R Bodenham; J C Berridge
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 6.955

10.  Padded vs unpadded spine board for cervical spine immobilization.

Authors:  R Walton; J F DeSalvo; A A Ernst; A Shahane
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 3.451

View more
  6 in total

1.  Comparison of a long spinal board and vacuum mattress for spinal immobilisation.

Authors:  M D Luscombe; J L Williams
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 2.740

2.  Early acute management in adults with spinal cord injury: a clinical practice guideline for health-care professionals.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.985

3.  The 6-plus-person lift transfer technique compared with other methods of spine boarding.

Authors:  Gianluca Del Rossi; Marybeth H Horodyski; Bryan P Conrad; Christian P Di Paola; Matthew J Di Paola; Glenn R Rechtine
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2008 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.860

4.  Effect of training in advanced trauma life support on the kinematics of the spine: A simulation study.

Authors:  Raquel Gordillo Martin; Pedro E Alcaráz; Laura Juguera Rodriguez; Antonio Nieto Fernandez-Pacheco; Elena Marín-Cascales; Tomás T Freitas; Manuel Pardo Rios
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 1.817

5.  Vacuum mattress or long spine board: which method of spinal stabilisation in trauma patients is more time consuming? A simulation study.

Authors:  Roessler Ms; M Riffelmann; N Kunze-Szikszay; M Lier; O Schmid; H Haus; S Schneider; Heuer Jf
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 2.953

6.  Backboard time for patients receiving spinal immobilization by emergency medical services.

Authors:  Derek R Cooney; Harry Wallus; Michael Asaly; Susan Wojcik
Journal:  Int J Emerg Med       Date:  2013-06-20
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.