Cargando…

Cervical collars and immobilisation: A South African best practice recommendation

INTRODUCTION: The consequences of spinal injury as a result of trauma can be devastating. Spinal immobilisation using hard trauma boards and rigid cervical collars has traditionally been the standard response to suspected spinal injury patients even though the risk may be extremely low. Recently, ad...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stanton, D., Hardcastle, T., Muhlbauer, D., van Zyl, D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: African Federation for Emergency Medicine 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6234176/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30456099
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2017.01.007
_version_ 1783370651211399168
author Stanton, D.
Hardcastle, T.
Muhlbauer, D.
van Zyl, D.
author_facet Stanton, D.
Hardcastle, T.
Muhlbauer, D.
van Zyl, D.
author_sort Stanton, D.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The consequences of spinal injury as a result of trauma can be devastating. Spinal immobilisation using hard trauma boards and rigid cervical collars has traditionally been the standard response to suspected spinal injury patients even though the risk may be extremely low. Recently, adverse events due to the method of immobilisation have challenged the need for motion restriction in all trauma patients. International guidelines have been published for protection of the spine during transport and this article brings those guidelines into the South African context. RECOMMENDATIONS: Trauma patients need to be properly assessed using both an approved list of high and low risk factors, as well as a thorough examination. They should then be managed accordingly. Internationally validated assessment strategies have been developed, and should be used as part of the patient assessment. The method of motion restriction should be selected to suit the situation. The use of a vacuum mattress is the preferable technique, with the use of a trauma board being the least desirable. CONCLUSION: The need for motion restriction in suspected spinal injury should be properly evaluated and appropriate action taken. Not all trauma patients require spinal motion restriction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6234176
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher African Federation for Emergency Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62341762018-11-19 Cervical collars and immobilisation: A South African best practice recommendation Stanton, D. Hardcastle, T. Muhlbauer, D. van Zyl, D. Afr J Emerg Med Commentary INTRODUCTION: The consequences of spinal injury as a result of trauma can be devastating. Spinal immobilisation using hard trauma boards and rigid cervical collars has traditionally been the standard response to suspected spinal injury patients even though the risk may be extremely low. Recently, adverse events due to the method of immobilisation have challenged the need for motion restriction in all trauma patients. International guidelines have been published for protection of the spine during transport and this article brings those guidelines into the South African context. RECOMMENDATIONS: Trauma patients need to be properly assessed using both an approved list of high and low risk factors, as well as a thorough examination. They should then be managed accordingly. Internationally validated assessment strategies have been developed, and should be used as part of the patient assessment. The method of motion restriction should be selected to suit the situation. The use of a vacuum mattress is the preferable technique, with the use of a trauma board being the least desirable. CONCLUSION: The need for motion restriction in suspected spinal injury should be properly evaluated and appropriate action taken. Not all trauma patients require spinal motion restriction. African Federation for Emergency Medicine 2017-03 2017-01-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6234176/ /pubmed/30456099 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2017.01.007 Text en © 2017 African Federation for Emergency Medicine. Publishing services provided by Elsevier B.V. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Commentary
Stanton, D.
Hardcastle, T.
Muhlbauer, D.
van Zyl, D.
Cervical collars and immobilisation: A South African best practice recommendation
title Cervical collars and immobilisation: A South African best practice recommendation
title_full Cervical collars and immobilisation: A South African best practice recommendation
title_fullStr Cervical collars and immobilisation: A South African best practice recommendation
title_full_unstemmed Cervical collars and immobilisation: A South African best practice recommendation
title_short Cervical collars and immobilisation: A South African best practice recommendation
title_sort cervical collars and immobilisation: a south african best practice recommendation
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6234176/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30456099
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2017.01.007
work_keys_str_mv AT stantond cervicalcollarsandimmobilisationasouthafricanbestpracticerecommendation
AT hardcastlet cervicalcollarsandimmobilisationasouthafricanbestpracticerecommendation
AT muhlbauerd cervicalcollarsandimmobilisationasouthafricanbestpracticerecommendation
AT vanzyld cervicalcollarsandimmobilisationasouthafricanbestpracticerecommendation