Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNutbeam, Tim
dc.contributor.authorFenwick, Rob
dc.contributor.authorMay, Barbara
dc.contributor.authorStassen, Willem
dc.contributor.authorSmith, Jason E
dc.contributor.authorBowdler, Jono
dc.contributor.authorWallis, Lee
dc.contributor.authorShippen, James
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-16T13:57:35Z
dc.date.available2024-04-16T13:57:35Z
dc.date.issued2022-01-15
dc.identifier.citationNutbeam T, Fenwick R, May B, Stassen W, Smith JE, Bowdler J, Wallis L, Shippen J. Assessing spinal movement during four extrication methods: a biomechanical study using healthy volunteers. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2022 Jan 15;30(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s13049-022-00996-5en_US
dc.identifier.eissn1757-7241
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s13049-022-00996-5
dc.identifier.pmid35033160
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14200/4217
dc.description.abstractBackground: Motor vehicle collisions are a common cause of death and serious injury. Many casualties will remain in their vehicle following a collision. Trapped patients have more injuries and are more likely to die than their untrapped counterparts. Current extrication methods are time consuming and have a focus on movement minimisation and mitigation. The optimal extrication strategy and the effect this extrication method has on spinal movement is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the movement at the cervical and lumbar spine for four commonly utilised extrication techniques. Methods: Biomechanical data was collected using inertial Measurement Units on 6 healthy volunteers. The extrication types examined were: roof removal, b-post rip, rapid removal and self-extrication. Measurements were recorded at the cervical and lumbar spine, and in the anteroposterior (AP) and lateral (LAT) planes. Total movement (travel), maximal movement, mean, standard deviation and confidence intervals are reported for each extrication type. Results: Data from a total of 230 extrications were collected for analysis. The smallest maximal and total movement (travel) were seen when the volunteer self-extricated (AP max = 2.6 mm, travel 4.9 mm). The largest maximal movement and travel were seen in rapid extrication extricated (AP max = 6.21 mm, travel 20.51 mm). The differences between self-extrication and all other methods were significant (p < 0.001), small non-significant differences existed between roof removal, b-post rip and rapid removal. Self-extrication was significantly quicker than the other extrication methods (mean 6.4 s). Conclusions: In healthy volunteers, self-extrication is associated with the smallest spinal movement and the fastest time to complete extrication. Rapid, B-post rip and roof off extrication types are all associated with similar movements and time to extrication in prepared vehicles.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBioMed Centralen_US
dc.relation.urlhttps://sjtrem.biomedcentral.com/en_US
dc.rights© 2022. The Author(s).
dc.subjectEmergency medicineen_US
dc.titleAssessing spinal movement during four extrication methods: a biomechanical study using healthy volunteers.en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.source.journaltitleScandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
dc.source.volume30
dc.source.issue1
dc.source.beginpage7
dc.source.endpage
dc.source.countryEngland
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
oa.grant.openaccessnaen_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record