English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective:  Cervical spine injuries in children under 10 frequently involve the craniocervical junction. In patients too small for conventional spinal instrumentation, treatment may involve placement of a halo orthotic, and these patients will frequently be discharged home in a halo orthotic. To date, little research has been done on the biomechanics of motor vehicle collisions involving young children in halo orthotics. To better understand possible safety concerns, we applied a halo orthotic to an appropriately sized anthropomorphic test device (ATD, or crash test dummy) on an acceleration sled to simulate a frontal motor vehicle collision. Methods:  For the tests, a Hybrid III 3-year-old ATD was instrumented with head and chest accelerometers, head angular rate sensors, a six-axis upper neck load cell, and a chest linear potentiometer. Four tests were conducted on an acceleration sled, and kinematics were recorded with high speed video. Testing variables included 1) with or without a halo orthotic and 2) with a standard booster seat or a commercially available harness vest. Results:  The halo orthotic reduced flexion and extension but was associated with increased rotation, especially in the condition of a halo orthotic with a standard booster seat. Increased cervical distraction was noted with the halo orthotic, and this was especially increased in the condition of a halo orthotic with the harness vest. Conclusions:  The biomechanics of a child involved in a motor vehicular collision may be dramatically altered with a halo orthotic, as modeled by an acceleration sled test. While cervical spine flexion and extension are reduced with the halo orthotic, rotation appears to increase. Immobilization from a halo orthotic also appears to increase cervical distraction, especially when used in conjunction with a harness vest. Further testing is needed to determine the safest restraints for this small, but at-risk, population.

Biomechanical effects of a halo orthotic on a pediatric anthropomorphic test device in a simulated frontal motor vehicle collision