Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:09:21.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of a New Cervical Immobilization/Extrication Device

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Steven M. Joyce  and
Chris S. Moser
Steven M. Joyce*
Affiliation:
Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
Chris S. Moser
Affiliation:
Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
*
Emergency Department, University of Utah Hospital, 50 N. Medical Drive, Salt Lake City, Utah 84132USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A new cervical immobilization device (the Philadelphia Red E.M. Collar with Head Immobilizer/Stabilizer), has been introduced as an adjunct in extricating potentially neck-injured patients. This study compared the efficacy of immobilization using the collar to that of the short spine board. In addition, experienced EMS personnel rated the collar in simulated field situations.

Methods:

In Part I of the study, the collar and a short spine board were applied to 25 adult volunteers in a sitting position, using standard methods. Each subject then exerted maximal force inflexion, extension, rotation, and abduction. Degrees of head motion from neutral position were measured in each direction. Mean values were compared using Student's t-test. For Part II, 10 EMS personnel were asked to apply the collar to volunteers. Each rated the performance of the collar on a scale of 1 (poor) to 4 (excellent) regarding: ease of application (sitting and supine), ease of extrication (lifting, logrolling, transfer), access to patient (chest auscultation, CPR, airway management), storage, and overall utility.

Results:

The collar was significantly better than the short spine board in both lateral and rotational immobilization (p<0.001). There was no significant difference for flexion or extension (p>0.05). The Red E.M. limited motion to a mean of 15° or less in any direction. Ratings by EMS personnel for the device (meant±standard error) were: ease of application (sitting) 3.5±0.2, (supine) 2.7±0.2; ease of extrication 3.1±0.2; access to patient 3.4±0.2; storage 3.1±0.3; and overall utility 3.1±0.2.

Conclusion:

This study indicates that the Philadelphia Red E.M. Collar with Head Immobilizer/Stabilizer is an effective and practical adjunct to stabilization and extrication of potentially neck-injured patients.

Type
Brief Report
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , March 1992 , pp. 61 - 64
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Podolsky, S, Baraff, LJ, Simon, RR et al. : Efficacy of cervical spine immobilization methods. J Trauma 1983;23:461–465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Cline, JR, Scheidel, E, and Bigsby, EF: A comparison of methods of cervical immobilization used in patient extrication and transport. J Trauma 1985;25:649–653.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Huerta, C, Griffith, R, Joyce, SM: Cervical spine stabilization in pediatric patients: Evaluation of current techniques. Ann Emerg Med 1987;16:1121–1126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Thorn, D, Land, R: Spinal immobilization devices, Part 1: Cervical extrication collars. JEMS 1982;7:26–32.Google Scholar
5. Thorn, D, Land, R: Spinal immobilization devices, Part 2: Cervical extrication devices. JEMS 1983;8:23–30.Google Scholar
6. Thorn, D, Land, R: Spinal immobilization devices, Part 3: Full spinal immobilizers. JEMS 1983;8:34–43.Google Scholar
7. McCabe, JB, Nolan, DJ: Comparison of the effectiveness of different cervical immobilization collars. Ann Emerg Med 1986:15;50–53.Google Scholar
8. Aprahamian, C, Thompson, BM, Finger, WA, Darin, JC: Experimental cervical spine injury model: Evaluation of airway management and splinting techniques. Ann Emerg Med 1984;13:21–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed