Cargando…

Safety of the lateral trauma position in cervical spine injuries: a cadaver model study

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal intubation is not always an option for unconscious trauma patients. Prehospital personnel are then faced with the dilemma of maintaining an adequate airway without risking deleterious movement of a potentially unstable cervical spine. To address these two concerns various al...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hyldmo, P. K., Horodyski, M. B., Conrad, B. P., Dubose, D. N., Røislien, J., Prasarn, M., Rechtine, G. R., Søreide, E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5069596/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26952653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aas.12714
_version_ 1782460967834091520
author Hyldmo, P. K.
Horodyski, M. B.
Conrad, B. P.
Dubose, D. N.
Røislien, J.
Prasarn, M.
Rechtine, G. R.
Søreide, E.
author_facet Hyldmo, P. K.
Horodyski, M. B.
Conrad, B. P.
Dubose, D. N.
Røislien, J.
Prasarn, M.
Rechtine, G. R.
Søreide, E.
author_sort Hyldmo, P. K.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Endotracheal intubation is not always an option for unconscious trauma patients. Prehospital personnel are then faced with the dilemma of maintaining an adequate airway without risking deleterious movement of a potentially unstable cervical spine. To address these two concerns various alternatives to the classical recovery position have been developed. This study aims to determine the amount of motion induced by the recovery position, two versions of the HAINES (High Arm IN Endangered Spine) position, and the novel lateral trauma position (LTP). METHOD: We surgically created global cervical instability between the C5 and C6 vertebrae in five fresh cadavers. We measured the rotational and translational (linear) range of motion during the different maneuvers using an electromagnetic tracking device and compared the results using a general linear mixed model (GLMM) for regression. RESULTS: In the recovery position, the range of motion for lateral bending was 11.9°. While both HAINES positions caused a similar range of motion, the motion caused by the LTP was 2.6° less (P = 0.037). The linear axial range of motion in the recovery position was 13.0 mm. In comparison, the HAINES 1 and 2 positions showed significantly less motion (−5.8 and −4.6 mm, respectively), while the LTP did not (−4.0 mm, P = 0.067). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that in unconscious trauma patients, the LTP or one of the two HAINES techniques is preferable to the standard recovery position in cases of an unstable cervical spine injury.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5069596
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50695962016-11-01 Safety of the lateral trauma position in cervical spine injuries: a cadaver model study Hyldmo, P. K. Horodyski, M. B. Conrad, B. P. Dubose, D. N. Røislien, J. Prasarn, M. Rechtine, G. R. Søreide, E. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Emergency Medicine BACKGROUND: Endotracheal intubation is not always an option for unconscious trauma patients. Prehospital personnel are then faced with the dilemma of maintaining an adequate airway without risking deleterious movement of a potentially unstable cervical spine. To address these two concerns various alternatives to the classical recovery position have been developed. This study aims to determine the amount of motion induced by the recovery position, two versions of the HAINES (High Arm IN Endangered Spine) position, and the novel lateral trauma position (LTP). METHOD: We surgically created global cervical instability between the C5 and C6 vertebrae in five fresh cadavers. We measured the rotational and translational (linear) range of motion during the different maneuvers using an electromagnetic tracking device and compared the results using a general linear mixed model (GLMM) for regression. RESULTS: In the recovery position, the range of motion for lateral bending was 11.9°. While both HAINES positions caused a similar range of motion, the motion caused by the LTP was 2.6° less (P = 0.037). The linear axial range of motion in the recovery position was 13.0 mm. In comparison, the HAINES 1 and 2 positions showed significantly less motion (−5.8 and −4.6 mm, respectively), while the LTP did not (−4.0 mm, P = 0.067). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that in unconscious trauma patients, the LTP or one of the two HAINES techniques is preferable to the standard recovery position in cases of an unstable cervical spine injury. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-03-07 2016-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5069596/ /pubmed/26952653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aas.12714 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Emergency Medicine
Hyldmo, P. K.
Horodyski, M. B.
Conrad, B. P.
Dubose, D. N.
Røislien, J.
Prasarn, M.
Rechtine, G. R.
Søreide, E.
Safety of the lateral trauma position in cervical spine injuries: a cadaver model study
title Safety of the lateral trauma position in cervical spine injuries: a cadaver model study
title_full Safety of the lateral trauma position in cervical spine injuries: a cadaver model study
title_fullStr Safety of the lateral trauma position in cervical spine injuries: a cadaver model study
title_full_unstemmed Safety of the lateral trauma position in cervical spine injuries: a cadaver model study
title_short Safety of the lateral trauma position in cervical spine injuries: a cadaver model study
title_sort safety of the lateral trauma position in cervical spine injuries: a cadaver model study
topic Emergency Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5069596/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26952653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aas.12714
work_keys_str_mv AT hyldmopk safetyofthelateraltraumapositionincervicalspineinjuriesacadavermodelstudy
AT horodyskimb safetyofthelateraltraumapositionincervicalspineinjuriesacadavermodelstudy
AT conradbp safetyofthelateraltraumapositionincervicalspineinjuriesacadavermodelstudy
AT dubosedn safetyofthelateraltraumapositionincervicalspineinjuriesacadavermodelstudy
AT røislienj safetyofthelateraltraumapositionincervicalspineinjuriesacadavermodelstudy
AT prasarnm safetyofthelateraltraumapositionincervicalspineinjuriesacadavermodelstudy
AT rechtinegr safetyofthelateraltraumapositionincervicalspineinjuriesacadavermodelstudy
AT søreidee safetyofthelateraltraumapositionincervicalspineinjuriesacadavermodelstudy