Literature DB >> 9201855

Efficacy of five cervical orthoses in restricting cervical motion. A comparison study.

V Askins1, F J Eismont.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Twenty volunteers, 10 men and 10 women, with clinically and radiographically normal cervical spines were studied.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of five cervical orthoses in their ability to restrict cervical motion in flexion, extension, lateral tilt, rotation, and intervertebral motion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The five cervical orthoses evaluated were the Philadelphia collar (Philadelphia Collar Co., Philadelphia, PA), Aspen (International Healthcare Devices, Long Beach, CA), Stifneck (Laerdal, Armonk, NY), Miami J (Jerome Medical, Moorestown, NJ), and NecLoc (Jerome Medical, Moorestown, NJ) orthoses. Together these five orthoses comprise 80% of the rigid cervical and extrication devices in current use.
METHODS: The normal and unrestricted ranges of active cervical motion in flexion, extension, and lateral tilt were measured in each subject and compared with the motion permitted in each of the five cervical orthoses. Lateral radiographs of the cervical spine in the neutral position and at maximum flexion and extension were obtained. Measurements of flexion, extension, and combined flexion-extension were determined for the cervical spine as a whole as measured from the occiput to the seventh cervical vertebra and at each intervertebral cervical level. Lateral tilt was measured on an anteroposterior radiograph at the extreme of motion. Rotation was measured using a compass goniometer. Each volunteer served as his own control for the radiographic and goniometric measurements. RESULTS AND
CONCLUSION: The NecLoc cervical orthosis demonstrated statistically superior restriction of cervical motion in flexion, extension, rotation, and lateral tilt in comparison with the other four orthoses studied in healthy volunteers. The Miami J cervical orthosis was the next most restrictive orthosis and was superior to the Philadelphia Collar and Aspen orthosis in all parameters of motion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9201855     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199706010-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  14 in total

Review 1.  Anterior decompression for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  P W Pavlov
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-09-10       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Comparison of Cervical Spine Motion During Application Among 4 Rigid Immobilization Collars.

Authors:  Colleen Y. James; Bryan L. Riemann; Barry A. Munkasy; A Barry Joyner
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  A 3D motion analysis study comparing the effectiveness of cervical spine orthoses at restricting spinal motion through physiological ranges.

Authors:  Nicholas Rhys Evans; Georgina Hooper; Rachel Edwards; Gemma Whatling; Valerie Sparkes; Cathy Holt; Sashin Ahuja
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  On-scene treatment of spinal injuries in motor sports.

Authors:  M Kreinest; M Scholz; P Trafford
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2016-12-22       Impact factor: 3.693

Review 5.  [Tumors and metastases of the upper cervical spine (C0-2). A special challenge].

Authors:  D J Jeszenszky; D Haschtmann; O Pröbstl; F S Kleinstück; C E Heyde; T F Fekete
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 1.087

6.  National athletic trainers' association position statement: acute management of the cervical spine-injured athlete.

Authors:  Erik E Swartz; Barry P Boden; Ronald W Courson; Laura C Decoster; MaryBeth Horodyski; Susan A Norkus; Robb S Rehberg; Kevin N Waninger
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2009 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.860

7.  Intra-instrument reliability of 4 goniometers.

Authors:  R Kevin Pringle
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2003

Review 8.  Management of Cervical Spine Fractures: A Literature Review.

Authors:  Mohammad Waseem Beeharry; Komal Moqeem; Mujeeb U Rohilla
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-04-11

Review 9.  Risks associated with magnetic resonance imaging and cervical collar in comatose, blunt trauma patients with negative comprehensive cervical spine computed tomography and no apparent spinal deficit.

Authors:  C Michael Dunham; Brian P Brocker; B David Collier; David J Gemmel
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2008-07-14       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 10.  Development of a new Emergency Medicine Spinal Immobilization Protocol for trauma patients and a test of applicability by German emergency care providers.

Authors:  Michael Kreinest; Bernhard Gliwitzky; Svenja Schüler; Paul A Grützner; Matthias Münzberg
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2016-05-14       Impact factor: 2.953

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.