首页> 外文期刊>The Internet Journal of Emergency and Intensive Care Medicine >A Study To Compare The Usefulness Of Double Soft Cervical Collar Versus Hard Cervical Collar (Philadelphia Collar) For Neck Immobilization
【24h】

A Study To Compare The Usefulness Of Double Soft Cervical Collar Versus Hard Cervical Collar (Philadelphia Collar) For Neck Immobilization

机译:比较双软颈托与硬颈托(费城颈托)对颈部固定的有效性的研究

获取原文
       

摘要

Objective: This is a study to compare the usefulness of double soft cervical collar versus the hard cervical collar for neck immobilization.Hypothesis: With the usage of the double cervical soft collar, the degree of immobilization can be achieved similar to that of a hard cervical collar.Methods and materials:The study was conducted using healthy volunteers from emergency medicine training residents recruited for the study on a voluntary basis.All the participants wore all the four types of cervical collars one after another and scored their experience with each collar in the data sheet. The four types of cervical collars were worn by the participants as follows:i. Hard cervical collar was worn normally.ii. Single soft cervical collar was worn in a traditional manner with the sticky portion to the back of the neck.iii. Single soft cervical collar was worn in reverse manner with the sticky portion to the front of the neck.iv. Double cervical collar worn with the first soft cervical collar in the traditional manner with the sticky portion to the back and on top of it, the second soft cervical collar in the reverse manner with the sticky portion to the front of the neck.The participants were asked to score in the score sheet depending upon their subjective feelings with regards to tightness and inability to move the neck for all the 4 forms of cervical collars.Results:The total number of subjects (residents and attending) was 18. They were asked to circle the scores for two subjective feelings in all the 4 varieties of cervical collars.The two subjective feelings were-- tightness and easy movement of the neck. In each of them there are 4 different scores as below.A. Tightness around the neck :Score 1: No tightnessScore2: Slightly tightScore 3: Almost tightScore 4: Very tight.B. Movement of the neck upon wearing different cervical collars:Score 1: Movement of the neck freely.Score 2: Movement of the neck with slight difficulty.Score 3: Movement of the neck with great difficultyScore 4: No movement of the neck.The scores were as follows:For hard collar: All 18 participants gave a score of 4 for Tightness; and for Movement of neck a score of 3.For single soft cervical collar (worn in both traditional & reverse manners): All gave a score of 2 for Tightness and for Movement.For double soft cervical collar: For Tightness around neck- 18/18 gave a score of 4. For Movement of the neck- 1/18 gave a score of 2 and 17/18 gave a score of 3.Interestingly no participant gave a score of 4 for Movement, with any of the 4 collars. It means they can still move the neck, even with a hard cervical collar.Statistics:We compared all the scores for different cervical collars for both Tightness around the neck and for Movement of the neck, after wearing collars. Pearson Chi-square two tailed p-value is <0.0001.Conclusions:According to our study, both the hard and double cervical collars were superior to the usage of single cervical collar. The usage of the double cervical collar is as effective as hard cervical collar. Surprisingly, our study has shown that participants even with the hard cervical collar can move the neck. In real traumatic situations, our study indicates requirement of additional reinforcements to the hard cervical collar, such as sand bags etc. Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;mso-style-noshow:yes;mso-style-priority:99;mso-style-parent:"";mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-para-margin-top:0in;mso-para-margin-right:0in;mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt;mso-para-margin-left:0in;line-height:107%;mso-pagination:widow-orphan;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} Background A rigid cervical collar has been traditionally used for traumatic cervical spine injuries
机译:目的:这项研究比较双软颈圈和硬颈圈在固定颈椎方面的有效性。假设:通过使用双颈软领,可以达到与硬颈椎相似的固定程度方法和材料:本研究是由自愿招募参加研究的急诊医学培训居民的健康志愿者进行的,所有参与者都一遍又一遍地佩戴了所有四种类型的颈圈,并对他们在每个颈圈中的使用情况进行了评分数据表。参与者佩戴的四种类型的颈圈如下:i。正常情况下会戴硬颈圈。ii。单个柔软的颈托以传统方式佩戴,其粘性部分位于脖子的后部。iii。单个柔软的颈项圈以相反的方式穿着,其粘性部分位于脖子的前部。iv。双颈项圈以传统方式与第一软颈项圈一起佩戴,其粘性部分位于背部和顶部,第二软颈项圈以相反的方式佩戴,其粘性部分位于颈部的前部。要求他们根据主观感觉对所有4种形式的颈托的紧度和无法移动脖子的评分表上的得分。结果:受试者(住户和参加者)的总数为18。圈出所有4个子宫颈项圈中两种主观感觉的得分,这两种主观感觉分别是-紧绷和脖子容易移动。他们每个人都有4个不同的分数,如下所示。脖子上的紧绷:得分1:没有绷紧得分2:稍微绷紧得分3:几乎紧绷得分4:非常紧绷B.佩戴不同颈圈时颈部的运动:得分1:自由运动的脖子得分2:轻微困难的脖子的运动得分3:困难很大的颈部的运动得分4:脖子没有运动。如下:对于硬领:所有18位参与者的紧密度得分为4;对于颈部运动,得分为3.对于单项柔软的颈项圈(以传统方式和相反方式佩戴):对于紧实度和运动性,得分均为2;对于双重软性颈项圈:对于颈部的紧密度为18 / 18分的得分为4。颈部运动的得分为1/18,得分为2,17 / 18的得分为3。有趣的是,没有参与者对4个项圈中的任何一个给出4分。统计数据:我们比较了不同颈圈的所有得分,包括戴颈圈后脖子周围的紧度和脖子运动的得分。 Pearson卡方平方的两个尾部p值<0.0001。结论:根据我们的研究,硬颈圈和双颈圈均优于单颈圈。双颈圈的用法与硬颈圈一样有效。令人惊讶的是,我们的研究表明,即使颈部坚硬的颈圈也能使参与者移动脖子。在实际的创伤情况下,我们的研究表明需要对硬颈托进行额外的加固,例如沙袋等。正常0假假假EN-US X-NONE X-NONE / *样式定义* / table.MsoNormalTable {mso-样式名称:“普通表”; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:是; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent :“”; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt; mso- para-margin-left:0in;行高:107%; mso分页:寡妇孤儿;字体大小:11.0pt;字体家族:“ Calibri”,“ sans-serif”; mso-ascii-font-家庭:Calibri; mso-ascii-主题字体:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}背景技术传统上,刚性颈托用于创伤颈椎损伤

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号