INTRODUCTION: In the prehospital setting, spine-injured patients must be transferred to a spine board to immobilize the spine. This can be accomplished using both manual techniques and mechanical devices. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the scoop stretcher to limit cervical spine motion as compared to 2 commonly used manual transfer techniques. METHODS: Three-dimensional angular motion generated across the C5-C6 spinal segment during execution of 2 manual transfer techniques and the application of a scoop stretcher was recorded first on cadavers with intact spines and then repeated after C5-C6 destabilization. A 3-dimensional electromagnetic tracking device was used to measure the maximum angular and linear motion produced during all test sessions. RESULTS: Although not statistically significant, the execution of the log roll maneuver created more motion in all directions than either the lift-and-slide technique or with scoop stretcher application. The scoop stretcher and lift-and-slide techniques were able to restrict motion to a comparable degree. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of the scoop stretcher to limit spinal motion in the destabilized spine is comparable or better than manual techniques currently being used by primary responders.
INTRODUCTION: In the prehospital setting, spine-injured patients must be transferred to a spine board to immobilize the spine. This can be accomplished using both manual techniques and mechanical devices. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the scoop stretcher to limit cervical spine motion as compared to 2 commonly used manual transfer techniques. METHODS: Three-dimensional angular motion generated across the C5-C6 spinal segment during execution of 2 manual transfer techniques and the application of a scoop stretcher was recorded first on cadavers with intact spines and then repeated after C5-C6 destabilization. A 3-dimensional electromagnetic tracking device was used to measure the maximum angular and linear motion produced during all test sessions. RESULTS: Although not statistically significant, the execution of the log roll maneuver created more motion in all directions than either the lift-and-slide technique or with scoop stretcher application. The scoop stretcher and lift-and-slide techniques were able to restrict motion to a comparable degree. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of the scoop stretcher to limit spinal motion in the destabilized spine is comparable or better than manual techniques currently being used by primary responders.
Authors: Bryan P Conrad; Diana L Marchese; Glenn R Rechtine; Mark Prasarn; Gianluca Del Rossi; Marybeth H Horodyski Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2013-08-16 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Ron Courson; James Ellis; Stanley A Herring; Barry P Boden; Glenn Henry; Darryl Conway; Lance McNamara; Timothy L Neal; Margot Putukian; Allen K Sills; Kimberly P Walpert Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Daniel K Kornhall; Jørgen Joakim Jørgensen; Tor Brommeland; Per Kristian Hyldmo; Helge Asbjørnsen; Thomas Dolven; Thomas Hansen; Elisabeth Jeppesen Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2017-01-05 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Bryan P Conrad; Gianluca Del Rossi; Mary Beth Horodyski; Mark L Prasarn; Yara Alemi; Glenn R Rechtine Journal: Surg Neurol Int Date: 2012-07-17
Authors: Per Kristian Hyldmo; Gunn E Vist; Anders Christian Feyling; Leif Rognås; Vidar Magnusson; Mårten Sandberg; Eldar Søreide Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2015-09-17 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Mark L Prasarn; MaryBeth Horodyski; Matthew J DiPaola; Christian P DiPaola; Gianluca Del Rossi; Bryan P Conrad; Glenn R Rechtine Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2015-09-08