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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background: Recent evidence suggests that long spine board (LSB) may do little to manage spinal motion, and pose increased risk. This project sought to measure cervical and thoracolumbar motion during ambulance transport. The hypothesis was transport on a mattress with the head elevated without the LSB would allow less spinal movement than transport on an LSB. Methods: A randomized healthy volunteer crossover trial measured spinal motion using biometric sensors. Positions analyzed included 0 and 10° on LSB. Stretcher alone with head elevated to 10°, 30°, 45° and 60°, with and without head blocks. Simulated ambulance transport was on city streets at or below posted speed limits. Results: Nine subjects were included, with 66% being male. For cervical movement, there was no difference in axial, flexion/extension, or rotation (0.2 ± 0.1 mm vs. 0.2 ± 0.1 mm, 24 ± 12 mm vs. 22 ± 10 mm, and 5.1 ± 19° vs. 5.8 ± 20°, respectively). There were significant differences in lateral (3.7 ± 7 mm LSB vs. 2.0 ± 5 mm no LSB) movement and volumetric movement of the head (120 ± 172 mm3 LSB vs. 77 ± 86 mm3 no LSB). Positions allowing the lowest mean cervical volume of head movement were bed elevated to 30° and 45° with head blocks, (20 ± 22 mm3 and 12 ± 6 mm3, respectively). For thoracolumbar movement, there was no statistical difference in threedimensional volumetric movement of the thoracolumbar spine (2 ± 0.6 mm3 LSB vs. 4.7 ± 5 mm3 no LSB). Conclusion: Spinal motion was small in all groups. The stretcher mattress without LSB allowed less cervical motion than the LSB. Subjects secured to a stretcher mattress with head of the bed elevated to 30° had the least spinal movement.

Biomechanical Motion Analysis of Cervical and Thoracolumbar Spine During Ambulance Transport: A Healthy Volunteer Study