Effects of prehospital spinal immobilization: a systematic review of randomized trials on healthy subjects

The relationship between acute pain and other types of suffering in pre-hospital trauma victims: An observational study

BACKGROUND

Acute pain is an important complaint reported by trauma victims, however, the relationship between it and other types of discomfort, such as discomfort caused by cold, discomfort caused by immobilization, and psychological distress such as fear, anxiety, and sadness is limitedly studied and documented.

AIM

To assess the relationship between acute trauma pain and other types of suffering in pre-hospital trauma victims.

METHODS

This is a prospective multicentre cohort study conducted in Immediate Life Support Ambulances in Portugal. All adult trauma victims with a mechanism of blunt and penetrating injuries, falls, road accidents and explosions, were included.

RESULTS

605 trauma victims were included, mainly male, with a mean age of 53.4 years. Before the intervention of the rescue teams, 90.5 % of the victims reported some level of pain, 39.0 % reported discomfort caused by cold, while 15.7 % felt fear, 8.4 % sadness, 49.8 % anxiety and 4.5 % apathy. Victims with high discomfort caused by cold tend to have higher pain levels. Significantly higher pain intensity were observed in victims with fear and anxiety. Univariate and multivariate analysis indicates that immobilization is associated with increased pain levels.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a statistically significant relationship between acute trauma pain, anxiety, fear, cold and immobilization.

Soft collar for acute cervical spine injury immobilisation -patient experiences and outcomes: A single centre mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Cervical collars are used as standard care for neck immobilisation after cervical spine injury. Although evidence for the most effective type of collar is lacking, there is evidence regarding adverse patient outcomes when managed in a semi or rigid collar. In response to the evidence of complications and adverse effects when using a hard collar, a large Australian adult trauma hospital that specializes in spinal care, changed its policy from hard to soft collars when managing acute cervical spine injury.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate patients' experiences and outcomes when wearing a soft collar for acute cervical spine injury management in hospital.

METHOD

A single centre mixed method sequential study design was used.

RESULTS

Medical records from 136 patients were examined and no adverse events resulting from collar use were recorded. Interviews with 20 patients revealed that they understood the value of wearing a soft collar. The soft collars were considered supportive and well tolerated, with good adherence to recommendations for use.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the patients' experiences informs better care management. This study suggests that soft collars are well tolerated, do not result in pressure injuries or other adverse events and are suitable for managing acute cervical spine injury.

Prehospital interventions to reduce discomfort caused by immobilization in adult trauma victims: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to identify the level of discomfort caused by immobilization as reported by trauma victims, and to map all the interventions in the prehospital context where they have been implemented and evaluated in order to reduce discomfort in adult victims of trauma.

INTRODUCTION

Immobilization is a cause of discomfort for trauma victims, which has important implications for the deterioration of vital signs and quality of life. However, discomfort caused by immobilization remains an under-explored topic by the scientific community.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review will consider studies of adult victims of trauma, aged 18 years or over, in prehospital emergency care. Studies that focus on interventions designed to reduce immobilization discomfort, implemented and evaluated by health professionals, of any form, duration, frequency, and dose will be considered.

METHODS

An initial search of PubMed and CINAHL will be undertaken, followed by a second search for published and unpublished studies without time restrictions, in major health care-related electronic databases. Studies in English, French, Spanish, and Portuguese will be included. Data extraction will be performed independently by 2 reviewers in a tabular format and will include details about the level of discomfort, interventions, populations, study methods, and outcomes of interest. A narrative synthesis will accompany the results and will describe how they relate to the review objectives.

REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

OSF https://osf.io/4scg5/.

Prehospital paramedic pleural decompression: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Tension pneumothorax (TPT) is a frequent life-threat following thoracic injury. Time-critical decompression of the pleural cavity improves survival. However, whilst paramedics utilise needle thoracostomy (NT) and/or finger thoracostomy (FT) in the prehospital setting, the superiority of one technique over the other remains unknown.

AIM

To determine and compare procedural success, complications and mortality between NT and FT for treatment of a suspected TPT when performed by paramedics.

METHODS

We searched four databases (Ovid Medline, PubMed, CINAHL and Embase) from their commencement until 25^th August 2020. Studies were included if they analysed patients suffering from a suspected TPT who were treated in the prehospital setting with a NT or FT by paramedics (or local equivalent nonphysicians).

RESULTS

The search yielded 293 articles after duplicates were removed of which 19 were included for final analysis. Seventeen studies were retrospective (8 cohort; 7 case series; 2 case control) and two were prospective cohort studies. Only one study was comparative, and none were randomised controlled trials. Most studies were conducted in the USA (n=13) and the remaining in Australia (n=4), Switzerland (n=1) and Canada (n=1). Mortality ranged from 12.5% to 79% for NT and 64.7% to 92.9% for FT patients. A higher proportion of complications were reported among patients managed with NT (13.7%) compared to FT (4.8%). We extracted three common themes from the papers of what constituted as a successful pleural decompression; vital signs improvement, successful pleural cavity access and absence of TPT at hospital arrival.

CONCLUSION

Evidence surrounding prehospital pleural decompression of a TPT by paramedics is limited. Available literature suggests that both FT and NT are safe for pleural decompression, however both procedures have associated complications. Additional high-quality evidence and comparative studies investigating the outcomes of interest is necessary to determine if and which procedure is superior in the prehospital setting.

Prehospital care for traumatic spinal cord injury by first responders in 8 sub-Saharan African countries and 6 other low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) constitutes a considerable portion of the global injury burden, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Prehospital care can address TSCI morbidity and mortality, but emergency medical services are lacking in LMICs. The current standard of prehospital care for TSCI in sub-Saharan Africa and other LMICs is unknown.

METHODS

This review sought to describe the state of training and resources for prehospital TSCI management in sub-Saharan Africa and other LMICs. Articles published between 1 January 1995 and 1 March 2020 were identified using PMC, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Inclusion criteria spanned first responder training programs delivering prehospital care for TSCI. Two reviewers assessed full texts meeting inclusion criteria for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and extracted relevant characteristics to assess trends in the state of prehospital TSCI care in sub-Saharan Africa and other LMICs.

RESULTS

Of an initial 482 articles identified, 23 met inclusion criteria, of which ten were set in Africa, representing eight countries. C-spine immobilization precautions for suspected TSCI patients is the most prevalent prehospital TSCI intervention for and is in every LMIC first responder program reviewed, except one. Numerous first responder programs providing TSCI care operate without C-collar access (n = 13) and few teach full spinal immobilization (n = 5). Rapid transport is most frequently reported as the key mortality-reducing factor (n = 11). Despite more studies conducted in the Southeast Asia/Middle East (n = 13), prehospital TSCI studies in Africa are more geographically diverse, but responder courses are shorter, produce fewer professional responders, and have limited C-collar availability.

DISCUSSION

Deficits in training and resources to manage TSCI highlights the need for large prospective trials evaluating alternative C-spine immobilization methods for TCSI that are more readily available across diverse LMIC environments and the importance of understanding resource variability to sustainably improve prehospital TSCI care.

Evidence for the use of spinal collars in stabilising spinal injuries in the pre-hospital setting in trauma patients: a systematic review

Purpose

Spinal collars were introduced in 1967 into the management of spinal trauma care as it was thought that this technique of immobilisation would prevent any further neurological or spinal damage in high-risk patients. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether the use of spinal collars in the pre-hospital trauma patient was recommended by published literature.

Methods

A systematic search of the literature was conducted between 1990 and 2020, screening PubMed, Medline, Science Direct and Google Scholar. The consequent findings were then qualitatively synthesised with the aim of effectively evaluating the evidence to resolve the discrepancy between current practice and literature.

Results

Of the nine eligible studies, six deemed that spinal collars should not be used in pre-hospital trauma patients with the remaining three reporting uncertainty if spinal collars were best practice. Our results suggest that there is a discrepancy between current guidance and practice in that although the guidelines recommend the use of spinal collars in the pre-hospital setting the majority of the studies were against the use of spinal collars. Importantly, none of the studies reported any benefits of spinal collars.

Conclusion

Our study shows a disparity between current guidelines and the published literature and warrants further direct research to obtain a more comprehensive view of the use of spinal collars in a pre-hospital setting.

Multiple trauma management in mountain environments - a scoping review : Evidence based guidelines of the International Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MedCom). Intended for physicians and other advanced life support personnel

Background

Multiple trauma in mountain environments may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared to urban environments.

Objective

To provide evidence based guidance to assist rescuers in multiple trauma management in mountain environments.

Eligibility criteria

All articles published on or before September 30th 2019, in all languages, were included. Articles were searched with predefined search terms.

Sources of evidence

PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and hand searching of relevant studies from the reference list of included articles.

Charting methods

Evidence was searched according to clinically relevant topics and PICO questions.

Results

Two-hundred forty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. Recommendations were developed and graded according to the evidence-grading system of the American College of Chest Physicians. The manuscript was initially written and discussed by the coauthors. Then it was presented to ICAR MedCom in draft and again in final form for discussion and internal peer review. Finally, in a face-to-face discussion within ICAR MedCom consensus was reached on October 11th 2019, at the ICAR fall meeting in Zakopane, Poland.

Conclusions

Multiple trauma management in mountain environments can be demanding. Safety of the rescuers and the victim has priority. A crABCDE approach, with haemorrhage control first, is central, followed by basic first aid, splinting, immobilisation, analgesia, and insulation. Time for on-site medical treatment must be balanced against the need for rapid transfer to a trauma centre and should be as short as possible. Reduced on-scene times may be achieved with helicopter rescue. Advanced diagnostics (e.g. ultrasound) may be used and treatment continued during transport.

The Effects of Positional Change on Hemodynamic Parameters in Spinal Immobilization

INTRODUCTION

The use of a long backboard and cervical collar are commonly recommended by international guidelines for spinal immobilization, but both devices may cause several side effects. In a recent study, it was reported that spinal immobilization at 20° eliminated the decrease in pulmonary function secondary to spinal immobilization performed at 0°. Spinal immobilization at 20° is a new recommendation, but other potential effects need to be explored before it can be implemented in clinical use.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Hemodynamic observation is important in the management of trauma patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of spinal immobilization at a 20° position instead of 0° on hemodynamic parameters.

METHODS

This study included 53 healthy volunteers who underwent spinal immobilization in the supine position (00) and in an elevated position (200). Systolic arterial pressure (SAP), diastolic arterial pressure (DAP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral (LVOT-VTI), left ventricular stroke volume (LVSV), cardiac output (CO), inferior vena cava diameter inspiration (IVC diameter insp), IVC diameter expiration (IVC diameter exp), and inferior vena cava collapsibility index (IVC-CI) were measured at the 0th and 30th minutes of spinal immobilization in both positions. The data were compared for demonstrating the efficiency of both positions in spinal immobilization.

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference was found in the parameters of the IVC diameter (exp), IVC diameter (insp), LVOT-VTI, LVSV, and CO through the measurements starting in the 0th minute of the transition from 0° to 20° (P <.001). Delta values (∆) of hemodynamic parameters (∆IVC diameter [exp], ∆IVC diameter [insp], ∆LVOT-VTI, ∆SV, ∆CO, ∆IVC-CI, ∆MAP, ∆SAP, ∆DAP, and ∆HR) were similar in spinal immobilization at 0° and 20°.

CONCLUSION

The findings obtained from this study illustrate that spinal immobilization at 20° does not cause clinically significant hemodynamic changes in healthy subjects compared to spinal immobilization at 0°.

A T2 Translational Science Modified Delphi Study: Spinal Motion Restriction in a Resource-Scarce Environment

INTRODUCTION

Emerging evidence is guiding changes in prehospital management of potential spinal injuries. The majority of settings related to current recommendations are in resource-rich environments (RREs), whereas there is a lack of guidance on the provision of spinal motion restriction (SMR) in resource-scarce environments (RSEs), such as: mass-casualty incidents (MCIs); low-middle income countries; complex humanitarian emergencies; conflict zones; and prolonged transport times. The application of Translational Science (TS) in the Disaster Medicine (DM) context was used to develop this study, leading to statements that can be used in the creation of evidence-based clinical guidelines (CGs).

OBJECTIVE

What is appropriate SMR in RSEs?

METHODS

The first round of this modified Delphi (mD) study was a structured focus group conducted at the World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine (WADEM) Congress in Brisbane Australia on May 9, 2019. The result of the focus group discussion of open-ended questions produced ten statements that were added to ten statements derived from Fischer (2018) to create the second mD round questionnaire.Academic researchers and educators, operational first responders, or first receivers of patients with suspected spinal injuries were identified to be mD experts. Experts rated their agreement with each statement on a seven-point linear numeric scale. Consensus amongst experts was defined as a standard deviation ≤1.0. Statements that were in agreement reaching consensus were included in the final report; those that were not in agreement but reached consensus were removed from further consideration. Those not reaching consensus advanced to the third mD round.For subsequent rounds, experts were shown the mean response and their own response for each of the remaining statements and asked to reconsider their rating. As above, those that did not reach consensus advanced to the next round until consensus was reached for each statement.

RESULTS

Twenty-two experts agreed to participate with 19 completing the second mD round and 16 completing the third mD round. Eleven statements reached consensus. Nine statements did not reach consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

Experts reached consensus offering 11 statements to be incorporated into the creation of SMR CGs in RSEs. The nine statements that did not reach consensus can be further studied and potentially modified to determine if these can be considered in SMR CGs in RSEs.

Prehospital Protocols Reducing Long Spinal Board Use Are Not Associated with a Change in Incidence of Spinal Cord Injury

Introduction: Many emergency medical services (EMS) agencies have de-emphasized or eliminated the use of long spinal boards (LSB) for patients with possible spinal injury. We sought to determine if implementation of spinal motion restriction (SMR) protocols, which reduce LSB use, was associated with an increase in spinal cord injury (SCI). Methods: This retrospective observational study includes EMS encounters from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2015 submitted by SMR-adopting ground-based agencies to a state EMS database with hospital discharge data. Encounters were excluded if SMR implementation date was unknown, occurred during a 3-month run-in period, or were duplicates. Study samples include patients with traumatic injury (TI), possible spinal trauma (P-ST), and verified spinal trauma (V-ST) using hospital discharge ICD-9/10 diagnosis codes. The incidence of SCI before and after implementation of SMR was compared using Chi-squared and logistic regression. Results: From 1,005,978 linked encounters, 104,315 unique encounters with traumatic injury and known SMR implementation date were identified with 51,199 cases of P-ST and 5,178 V-ST cases. The incidence of SCI in the pre-SMR and post-SMR interval for each group was: TI, 0.20% vs. 0.22% (p = 0.390); P-ST, 0.40% vs. 0.45% (p = 0.436); and V-ST, 4.04% vs. 4.37% (p = 0.561). Age and injury severity adjusted odds ratio of SCI in the highest risk cohort of patients with V-ST was 1.097 after SMR implementation (95% CI 0.818-1.472). Conclusion: In this limited study, no change in the incidence of SCI was identified following implementation of SMR protocols. Prospective evaluation of this question is necessary to evaluate the safety of SMR protocols.

Effects of spinal immobilization at 20° on end-tidal carbon dioxide

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to determine the effect on end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO₂) of spinal immobilization (SI) at a conventional 0° angle and to investigate the usefulness of immobilization at a 20° angle for preventing possible hypoventilation.

METHODS

The study included 80 healthy volunteers, randomly divided into two groups. Spinal backboards and cervical collars were applied in Group 1 using a 0° angle and in Group 2 using a 20° angle, with the head up. SI was continued for 1 h, and ETCO₂ values were measured at the 0th, 30th and 60th minute.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the groups in 0th and 30th minute ETCO₂. However, after 60th minute, results showed a statistically significant increase in ETCO₂ in Group 1 (35.5 mmHg [IQR 25-75:35-38]) compared to Group 2 (34 mmHg [IQR 25-75:33-36]) (p < 0.001). During SI, there was a statistically significant increase in ETCO₂ in Group 1 (35 mmHg [IQR 25-75:34-36], 35.5 mmHg [IQR 25-75:34-37] and 36 mmHg [IQR 25-75:35-38] respectively at the 0th, 30th and 60th minute after SI) (p < 0.001) and no change in Group 2. Also, we found statistically significant differences between ΔETCO₂ levels in Groups 1 and 2 at all 3 time intervals.

CONCLUSION

Conventional SI with an angle of 0° led to an increase in ETCO₂ while subjects immobilization at a 20° angle maintained their initial ETCO₂ values. Immobilization at 20° may prevent decompensation in patients who have thoracic trauma or lung diseases or those who are elderly, pregnant, or obese.

New clinical guidelines on the spinal stabilisation of adult trauma patients - consensus and evidence based

Traumatic spinal cord injury is a relatively rare injury in Denmark but may result in serious neurological consequences. For decades, prehospital spinal stabilisation with a rigid cervical collar and a hard backboard has been considered to be the most appropriate procedure to prevent secondary spinal cord injuries during patient transportation. However, the procedure has been questioned in recent years, due to the lack of high-quality studies supporting its efficacy. A national interdisciplinary task force was therefore established to provide updated clinical guidelines on prehospital procedures for spinal stabilisation of adult trauma patients in Denmark. The guidelines are based on a systematic review of the literature and grading of the evidence, in addition to a standardised consensus process.This process yielded five main recommendations:A strong recommendation against spinal stabilisation of patients with isolated penetrating trauma; a weak recommendation against the prehospital use of a rigid cervical collar and a hard backboard for ABCDE-stable patients; and a weak recommendation for the use of a vacuum mattress for patient transportation. Finally, our group recommends the use of our clinical algorithm to ensure good clinical practice.

Prehospital care of spinal injuries: a historical quest for reasoning and evidence

PURPOSE

The practice of prehospital immobilization is coming under increasing scrutiny. Unravelling the historical sequence of prehospital immobilization might shed more light on this matter and help resolve the situation. Main purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the development and reasoning behind the implementation of prehospital spine immobilization.

METHODS

An extensive search throughout historical literature and recent evidence based studies was conducted.

RESULTS

The history of treating spinal injuries dates back to prehistoric times. Descriptions of prehospital spinal immobilization are more recent and span two distinct periods. First documentation of its use comes from the early 19th century, when prehospital trauma care was introduced on the battlefields of the Napoleonic wars. The advent of radiology gradually helped to clarify the underlying pathology. In recent decades, adoption of advanced trauma life support has elevated in-hospital trauma-care to an high standard. Practice of in-hospital spine immobilization in case of suspected injury has also been implemented as standard-care in prehospital setting. Evidence for and against prehospital immobilization is equally divided in recent evidence-based studies. In addition, recent studies have shown negative side-effects of immobilisation in penetrating injuries.

CONCLUSION

Although widely implementation of spinal immobilization to prevent spinal cord injury in both penetrating and blunt injury, it cannot be explained historically. Furthermore, there is no high-level scientific evidence to support or reject immobilisation in blunt injury. Since evidence in favour and against prehospital immobilization is equally divided, the present situation appears to have reached something of a deadlock. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Compulsory Use of the Backboard is Associated with Increased Frequency of Thoracolumbar Imaging

BACKGROUND

Backboards have been shown to cause pain in uninjured patients. This may alter physical exam findings, leading emergency department (ED) providers to suspect a spinal injury when none exists resulting in additional imaging of the thoracolumbar spine. New York had previously employed a "Spinal Immobilization" protocol that included compulsory backboard application for all patients with suspected spinal injuries. In 2015, New York instituted a new "Spinal Motion Restriction" protocol that made backboard use optional for these patients. The objective of this study was to determine if this protocol change was associated with decreased backboard utilization and ED thoracolumbar spine imaging.

METHODS

This was a retrospective before-and-after chart review of subjects transported by a single emergency medical services (EMS) agency to one of four EDs for emergency calls dispatched as motor vehicle collisions (MVC). EMS and ED data were included for all calls within a 6-month interval before and after the protocol change. The protocol change was implemented in the second half of 2015. Subject demographics, backboard use, and spine imaging were reviewed for the intervals January-June 2015 and January-June 2016.

RESULTS

There were 818 subjects in the before period and 796 subjects in the after period. Subjects were similar in terms of gender, age and type of MVC in both periods. A backboard was utilized for 440 (54%) subjects in the before period and 92 (12%) subjects in the after period (p < 0.001). ED thoracic spine imaging was performed on 285 (35%) subjects in the before period, and 235 (30%) subjects in the after period (p = 0.02). ED lumbar spine imaging was performed for 335 (41%) subjects in the before period, and 281 (35%) subjects in the after period (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

A shift from a spinal immobilization protocol to a spinal motion restriction protocol was associated with a decrease in backboard utilization by EMS providers and a decrease in thoracolumbar spine imaging by ED providers.

Prehospital Extrication Techniques: Neurological Outcomes Associated with the Rapid Extrication Method and the Kendrick Extrication Device

Most emergency medical service personnel rely on one of two techniques to extricate motor vehicle crash victims; the Rapid Extrication Maneuver (REM) or the Kendrick Extrication Device (KED). The purpose of this study was to compare pre- and postextrication neurological outcomes between these two techniques. A retrospective review was conducted of all adult patients with a vertebral column injury resulting from motor vehicle collision and admitted to a Level I trauma center between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2010. Standardized pre- and postextrication neurological examinations were reviewed for all patients. More than half of patients (N = 81) were extricated using the KED (53.1%, n = 43) and 46.9 per cent (n = 38) were extricated with the REM. Except for the thoracic Abbreviated Injury Score, no differences between groups emerged related to the Glasgow Coma Scale score, Injury Severity Score or Abbreviated Injury Score. There were no pre- and postextrication changes for motor to all extremities and sensation to all extremities using either method. The results of this study suggest that the REM and the KED are equivalent in protecting the patient from neurologic injury after motor vehicle collision.

The characteristics and pre-hospital management of blunt trauma patients with suspected spinal column injuries: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Pre-hospital spinal immobilisation by emergency medical services (EMS) staff is currently the standard of care in cases of suspected spinal column injuries. There is, however, a lack of data on the characteristics of patients who received spinal immobilisation during the pre-hospital phase and on the adverse effects of immobilisation. The objectives of this study were threefold. First, we determined the pre-hospital characteristics of blunt trauma patients with suspected spinal column injuries who were immobilised by EMS staff. Second, we assessed the choices made by EMS staff regarding spinal immobilisation techniques and reasons for immobilisation. Third, we researched the possible adverse effects of immobilisation.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational study in a cohort of blunt trauma patients.

STUDY METHOD

Data of blunt trauma patients with suspected spinal column injuries were collected from one EMS organisation between January 2008 and January 2013. Coded data and free text notes were analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 1082 patients were included in this study. Spinal immobilisation was applied in 96.3 % of the patients based on valid pre-hospital criteria. In 2.1 % of the patients immobilisation was not based on valid criteria. Data of 1.6 % patients were missing. Main reasons for spinal immobilisation were posterior midline spinal tenderness (37.2 % of patients) and painful distracting injuries (13.5 % of patients). Spinal cord injury (SCI) was suspected in 5.7 % of the patients with posterior midline spinal tenderness. A total of 15.8 % patients were immobilised using non-standard methods. The reason for departure from the standard method was explained for 3 % of these patients. Reported adverse effects included pain (n = 10, 0.9 %,); shortness of breath (n = 3, 0.3 %); combativeness or anxiety (n = 6, 0.6 %); and worsening of pain when supine (n = 1, 0.1 %).

CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION

Spinal immobilisation was applied in 96.3 % of all included patients based on pre-hospital criteria. We found that consensus among EMS staff on how to interpret the criterion 'distracting injury' was lacking. Furthermore, the adverse effects of spinal immobilisation were incompletely documented in pre-hospital care reports. To provide validated information on potential symptoms of SCI, a uniform EMS scoring system for motoric assessment should be developed.

The Norwegian guidelines for the prehospital management of adult trauma patients with potential spinal injury

The traditional prehospital management of trauma victims with potential spinal injury has become increasingly questioned as authors and clinicians have raised concerns about over-triage and harm. In order to address these concerns, the Norwegian National Competence Service for Traumatology commissioned a faculty to provide a national guideline for pre-hospital spinal stabilisation. This work is based on a systematic review of available literature and a standardised consensus process. The faculty recommends a selective approach to spinal stabilisation as well as the implementation of triaging tools based on clinical findings. A strategy of minimal handling should be observed.

Quantifying the Risk of Spinal Injury in Motor Vehicle Collisions According to Ambulatory Status: A Prospective Analytical Study

BACKGROUND

The association between ambulation at the scene of a motor vehicle collision (MVC) and spinal injury has never been quantified.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between ambulation and spinal injury in patients involved in a MVC.

METHODS

Prospective analytical-observational cohort study. Inclusion: patients sustaining traumatic injury in a MVC. Exclusion: < 18 years old, pregnancy.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

spinal injury defined as injury to the cervical, thoracic, or lumbar spinal cord, bones, or ligaments. Secondary outcome: Injury resulting in neurological deficit, need for surgery, or death. A generalized linear model was used to evaluate the association between outcome and predictor variables. Risk ratios [RR] were reported with a point estimate and 95% confidence interval (CI). A two-tailed alpha of < 0.05 was the threshold for statistical significance.

RESULTS

There were 704 patients analyzed. Nonambulatory patients were 2.29 times more likely to sustain a spinal injury, compared to ambulatory patients (RR 2.29, 95% CI 1.34-3.91). Patients ≥ 65 years of age were 3.27 times more likely to sustain a spinal injury (RR 3.27, 95% CI 1.66-6.45). Patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤ 8 were 4.93 times more likely to sustain a spinal injury (RR 4.93, 95% CI 1.86-13.10).

CONCLUSION

In this prospective analytical-observational study evaluating the association between ambulatory status and spinal injury in patients involved in MVCs, we observed that those patients who were nonambulatory were more than two times as likely to have a spinal injury compared to those patients who were ambulatory at the scene.

Ergonomics intervention on an alternative design of a spinal board

A spinal board is the evacuation tool of first aid to help the injured spinal cord. The existing spinal board has several weaknesses, both in terms of user comfort and the effectiveness and efficiency of the evacuation process. This study designs an ergonomic spinal board using the quality function deployment approach. A preliminary survey was conducted through direct observation and interviews with volunteers from the Indonesian Red Cross. Data gathered were translated into a questionnaire and answered by 47 participants in West Sumatra. The results indicate that the selection of materials, the application of strap systems as well as the addition of features are very important in designing an ergonomic spinal board. The data were used in designing an ergonomic spinal board. The use of anthropometric data ensures that this product can accommodate safety and comfort when immobilized, as well as the flexibility and speed of the rescue evacuation process.

Comparison of three prehospital cervical spine protocols for missed injuries

Introduction

We wanted to compare 3 existing emergency medical services (EMS) immobilization protocols: the Prehospital Trauma Life Support (PHTLS, mechanism-based); the Domeier protocol (parallels the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study [NEXUS] criteria); and the Hankins’ criteria (immobilization for patients <12 or >65 years, those with altered consciousness, focal neurologic deficit, distracting injury, or midline or paraspinal tenderness).To determine the proportion of patients who would require cervical immobilization per protocol and the number of missed cervical spine injuries, had each protocol been followed with 100% compliance.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study of patients ≥18 years transported by EMS post-traumatic mechanism to an inner city emergency department. Demographic and clinical/historical data obtained by physicians were recorded prior to radiologic imaging. Medical record review ascertained cervical spine injuries. Both physicians and EMS were blinded to the objective of the study.

Results

Of 498 participants, 58% were male and mean age was 48 years. The following participants would have required cervical spine immobilization based on the respective protocol: PHTLS, 95.4% (95% CI: 93.1–96.9%); Domeier, 68.7% (95% CI: 64.5–72.6%); Hankins, 81.5% (95% CI: 77.9–84.7%). There were 18 cervical spine injuries: 12 vertebral fractures, 2 subluxations/dislocations and 4 spinal cord injuries. Compliance with each of the 3 protocols would have led to appropriate cervical spine immobilization of all injured patients. In practice, 2 injuries were missed when the PHTLS criteria were mis-applied.

Conclusion

Although physician-determined presence of cervical spine immobilization criteria cannot be generalized to the findings obtained by EMS personnel, our findings suggest that the mechanism-based PHTLS criteria may result in unnecessary cervical spine immobilization without apparent benefit to injured patients. PHTLS criteria may also be more difficult to implement due to the subjective interpretation of the severity of the mechanism, leading to non-compliance and missed injury.

Confirmation of suboptimal protocols in spinal immobilisation?

Background

Spinal immobilisation during extrication of patients in road traffic collisions is routinely used despite the lack of evidence for this practice. In a previous proof of concept study (n=1), we recorded up to four times more cervical spine movement during extrication using conventional techniques than self-controlled extrication.

Objective

The objective of this study was to establish, using biomechanical analysis which technique provides the minimal deviation of the cervical spine from the neutral in-line position during extrication from a vehicle in a larger sample of variable age, height and mass.

Methods

A crew of two paramedics and four fire-fighters extricated 16 immobilised participants from a vehicle using six techniques for each participant. Participants were marked with biomechanical sensors and relative movement between the sensors was captured via high-speed infrared motion analysis cameras. A three-dimensional mathematical model was developed and a repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare movement across extrication techniques.

Results

Controlled self-extrication without a collar resulted in a mean movement of 13.33° from the neutral in-line position of the cervical spine compared to a mean movement of 18.84° during one of the equipment-aided extrications. Two equipment-aided techniques had significantly higher movement (p<0.05) than other techniques. Both height (p=0.003) and mass (p=0.02) of the participants were significant independent predictors of movement.

Conclusions

These data support the findings of the proof of concept study, for haemodynamically stable patients controlled self-extrication causes less movement of the cervical spine than extrications performed using traditional prehospital rescue equipment.

Spinal immobilisaton in pre-hospital and emergency care: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Spinal immobilisation has been a mainstay of trauma care for decades and is based on the premise that immobilisation will prevent further neurological compromise in patients with a spinal column injury. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the evidence related to spinal immobilisation in pre-hospital and emergency care settings.

METHODS

In February 2015, we performed a systematic literature review of English language publications from 1966 to January 2015 indexed in MEDLINE and Cochrane library using the following search terms: 'spinal injuries' OR 'spinal cord injuries' AND 'emergency treatment' OR 'emergency care' OR 'first aid' AND immobilisation. EMBASE was searched for keywords 'spinal injury OR 'spinal cord injury' OR 'spine fracture AND 'emergency care' OR 'prehospital care'.

RESULTS

There were 47 studies meeting inclusion criteria for further review. Ten studies were case series (level of evidence IV) and there were 37 studies from which data were extrapolated from healthy volunteers, cadavers or multiple trauma patients. There were 15 studies that were supportive, 13 studies that were neutral, and 19 studies opposing spinal immobilisation.

CONCLUSION

There are no published high-level studies that assess the efficacy of spinal immobilisation in pre-hospital and emergency care settings. Almost all of the current evidence is related to spinal immobilisation is extrapolated data, mostly from healthy volunteers.

Effects of unconsciousness during spinal immobilization on tissue-interface pressures: A randomized controlled trial comparing a standard rigid spineboard with a newly developed soft-layered long spineboard

BACKGROUND

Immobilization of the spine of patients with trauma at risk of spinal damage is usually performed using a rigid long spineboard or vacuum mattress, both during prehospital and in-hospital care. However, disadvantages of these immobilization devices in terms of discomfort and tissue-interface pressures have guided the development of soft-layered long spineboards. We compared tissue-interface pressures between awake and anaesthetized (unconscious) patients during immobilization on a rigid spineboard and a soft-layered long spineboard.

METHODS

In this comparative study, 30 anaesthetized patients were randomized to immobilization on either the rigid spineboard or the soft-layered spineboard for the duration of their elective surgery. Tissue-interface pressures measured using an Xsensor pressure-mapping device were compared with those of 30 healthy volunteers who were immobilized sequentially on the rigid spineboard and the soft-layered spineboard. Redness of the sacrum was also recorded for the anaesthetized patients immediately after the surgery.

RESULTS

For both anaesthetized patients and awake volunteers, tissue-interface pressures were significantly lower on the soft-layered spineboard than on the rigid spineboard, both at start and after 15min. On the soft-layered spineboard, tissue interface pressure and peak pressure index (PPI) for the sacrum were significantly lower for anaesthetized patients than for awake volunteers. Peak pressures and PPI on the rigid spineboard were equal for both groups. Tissue-interface pressures did not change significantly over time. Redness of the sacrum was significantly more pronounced on the rigid spineboard than on the soft-layered spineboard.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective randomized controlled trial shows that using a soft-layered spineboard compared to a rigid spineboard for spinal immobilization resulted in lower tissue-interface pressures in both awake volunteers and anaesthetized patients. Moreover, tissue-interface pressures on the soft-layered spineboard were lower in anaesthetized patients than in awake volunteers. These findings show the importance of using a soft-layered spineboard to reduce tissue-interface pressure, especially for patients who cannot relieve pressure themselves by changing position.

Radiation exposure as a consequence of spinal immobilization and extrication

BACKGROUND

Extrication and spinal immobilization in the trauma patient with unknown injuries is a common practice of emergency medical services. High-speed crashes occurring in open-wheel racing seldom result in extrication or spinal immobilization.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety of self-extrication in IndyCar® (Indianapolis, IN) by comparing drivers self extricated with full spinal immobilization and subsequent radiation exposure.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected de-identified IndyCar® crash and drivers' medical records was performed at treating Level I trauma centers. One hundred thirty-five crash incidents involving drivers evaluated by a medical team were included. Any driver with severe multiple trauma was excluded due to distracting injuries. Drivers underwent standard protocol for postcrash injury. Diagnostic and treatment outcomes including spinal and neurologic injury, need for surgery, and radiation exposure were collected for review.

RESULTS

Self-extrication occurred in 121 (90%) crashes, and overall cumulative radiation exposure ranged from 100 to 250 mSv, or 0.82-2.06 mSv per driver. Extrication with full spinal immobilization occurred in 14 (10%) drivers, with overall cumulative radiation exposure ranging from 140 to 350 mSv, or 10-25 mSv per driver. A total of 29 injuries were identified, nine of which (31%) were spinal. In these, six were emergency medical services extricated and three self extricated. None were unstable spinal fractures resulting in surgical care, surgical disease, or neurologic deficit.

CONCLUSION

In our IndyCar® racing experience, a protocol-led self-extrication system resulted in neither a mismanagement of an unstable spinal fracture nor neurological deficit, and reduced radiation exposure.

Spinal trauma

The practice of spinal immobilization has existed since the 1960s under the premise that trauma victims with cervical spine injuries may suffer neurologic injury if moved without stabilization consisting of a rigid cervical collar and long spine board. Because of this assumption, it is of particular importance to assess for movement of the cervical spine with and without spinal immobilization. Over time, the on-field management of athletes with a mechanism consistent with spinal cord injury (SCI) has evolved and produced protocols that can be considered standard of care. Attempts to find evidencebased research to verify the necessity of a rigid collar and long spine board as the only option in athletic medicine for suspected SCI is difficult. As changes occur in the Emergency Medical Services standards, there will be opportunities to see how their processes relate to athletes and the rationale for immobilization on the field of play. Going forward, there could very well be a significant change in the approach to and management of the athlete down on the field of play with a suspected spinal cord injury.

Evaluation of clinical efficacy and safety of cervical trauma collars: differences in immobilization, effect on jugular venous pressure and patient comfort

BACKGROUND

Concern has been raised that cervical collars may increase intracranial pressure in traumatic brain injury. The purpose of this study was to compare four types of cervical collars regarding efficacy of immobilizing the neck, effect on jugular venous pressure (JVP), as a surrogate for possible effect on intracranial pressure, and patient comfort in healthy volunteers.

METHODS

The characteristics of four widely used cervical collars (Laerdal Stifneck(®) (SN), Vista(®) (VI), Miami J Advanced(®) (MJ), Philadelphia(®) (PH)) were studied in ten volunteers. Neck movement was measured with goniometry, JVP was measured directly through an endovascular catheter and participants graded the collars according to comfort on a scale 1-5.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 27 ± 5 yr and BMI 26 ± 5. The mean neck movement (53 ± 9°) decreased significantly with all the collars (p < 0.001) from 18 ± 7° to 25 ± 9° (SN < MJ < PH < VI). There was a significant increase in mean JVP (9.4 ± 1.4 mmHg) with three of the collars, but not with SN, from 10.5 ± 2.1 mmHg to 16.3 ± 3.3 mmHg (SN < MJ < VI < PH). The grade of comfort between collars varied from 4.2 ± 0.8 to 2.2 ± 0.8 (VI > MJ > SN > PH).

CONCLUSION

Stifneck and Miami J collars offered the most efficient immobilization of the neck with the least effect on JVP. Vista and Miami J were the most comfortable ones. The methodology used in this study may offer a new approach to evaluate clinical efficacy and safety of neck collars and aid their continued development.

Spinal motion restriction: an educational and implementation program to redefine prehospital spinal assessment and care

INTRODUCTION

Prehospital spine immobilization has long been applied to victims of trauma in the United States and up to 5 million patients per year are immobilized mostly with a cervical collar and a backboard.

OBJECTIVE

The training of paramedics and emergency medical technicians on the principals of spine motion restriction (SMR) will decrease the use of backboards.

METHODS

The training for SMR emphasized the need to immobilize those patients with a significant potential for an unstable cervical spine fracture and to use alternative methods of maintaining spine precautions for those with lower risk. The training addressed the potential complications of the use of the unpadded backboard and education was provided about the mechanics of spine injuries. Emergency medical services (EMS} personnel were taught to differentiate between the critical multisystem trauma patients from the more common moderate, low kinetic energy trauma patients. A comprehensive education and outreach program that included all of the EMS providers (fire and private), hospitals, and EMS educational institutions was developed.

RESULTS

Within 4 months of the policy implementation, prehospital care practitioners reduced the use of the backboard by 58%. This was accomplished by a decrease in the number of patients considered for SMR with low kinetic energy and the use of other methods, such as the cervical collar only.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of a SMR training program significantly decreases the use of backboards and allows alternative methods of maintaining spine precautions.

Long backboard versus vacuum mattress splint to immobilize whole spine in trauma victims in the field: a randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Patients with possible spinal injury must be immobilized properly during transport to medical facilities. The aim of this research was comparing spinal immobilization using a long backboard (LBB) with using a vacuum mattress splint (VMS) in trauma victims transported by an Emergency Medical Services (EMS) system.

METHODS

In this randomized clinical trial, 60 trauma victims with possible spinal trauma were divided to two groups, each group immobilized with one of the two instruments. Speed and ease of application, immobilization rate, and the patients' comfort were recorded.

RESULTS

In this survey, LBB was faster to apply: 211.66 (SD = 28.53) seconds vs 654.00 (SD = 16.61) seconds. Various measures of immobilization were better by LBB. Also, LBB offered a significant improvement in comfort over a VMS for the patient with possible spinal injury. All of the results were statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study showed that immobilization using LBB was easier, faster, and more comfortable for the patient, and provided additional decrease in spinal movement when compared with a VMS.

Effect of spinal immobilization on heart rate, blood pressure and respiratory rate

INTRODUCTION

Vital signs remain important clinical indicators in the management of trauma. Tissue injury and ischemia cause tachycardia and hypertension, which are mediated via the sympathetic nervous system (SNS). Spinal immobilization is known to cause discomfort, and it is not known how this might influence the SNS and contribute to abnormal vital signs. Hypothesis This study aimed to establish whether the pain and discomfort associated with spinal immobilization and the maneuvers commonly used in injured patients (eg, log roll) affect the Heart rate (HR), Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Respiratory rate (RR). The null hypothesis was that there are no effects.

METHODS

A prospective, unblinded, repeated-measure study of 53 healthy subjects was used to test the null hypothesis. Heart rate, BP and RR were measured at rest (five minutes), after spinal immobilization (10 minutes), following log roll, with partial immobilization (10 minutes) and again at rest (five minutes). A visual analog scale (VAS) for both pain and discomfort were also collected at each stage. Results were statistically compared.

RESULTS

Pain VAS increased significantly during spinal immobilization (3.8 mm, P < .01). Discomfort VAS increased significantly during spinal immobilization, after log roll and during partial immobilization (17.7 mm, 5.8 mm and 8.9 mm, respectively; P < .001). Vital signs however, showed no clinically relevant changes. Discussion Spinal immobilization does not cause a change in vital signs despite a significant increase in pain and discomfort. Since no relationship appears to exist between immobilization and abnormal vital signs, abnormal vital signs in a clinical situation should not be considered to be the result of immobilization. Likewise, pain and discomfort in immobilized patients should not be disregarded due to lack of changes in vital signs.

A re-conceptualisation of acute spinal care

The emergency care of patients who may have spinal injuries has become highly ritualised. There is little scientific support for many of the recommended interventions and there is evidence that at least some methods now used in the field and emergency department are harmful. Since prospective clinical trials are not likely to resolve these issues I propose a reconceptualisation of spinal trauma to allow a more rational approach to treatment. To do this I analyse the basic physics, biomechanics and physiology involved. I then develop a list of recommended treatment variations that are more in keeping with the actual causes of post impact neurological deterioration than are current methods. Discarding the fundamentally flawed emphasis on decreasing post injury motion and concentrating on efforts to minimise energy deposition to the injured site, while minimising treatment delays, can simplify and streamline care without subjecting patients to procedures that are not useful and potentially harmful. Specific treatments that are irrational and which can be safely discarded include the use of backboards for transportation, cervical collar use except in specific injury types, immobilisation of ambulatory patients on backboards, prolonged attempts to stabilise the spine during extrication, mechanical immobilisation of uncooperative or seizing patients and forceful in line stabilisation during airway management.

A novel first aid stretcher for immobilization and transportation of spine injured patients

Effective immobilization and transportation are vital to the life-saving acute medical care needed when treating critically injured people. However, the most common types of stretchers used today are wrought with problems that can lead to further medical complications, difficulty in employment and rescue, and ineffective transitions to hospital treatment. Here we report a novel first aid stretcher called the “emergency carpet”, which solves these problems with a unique design for spine injured patients. Polyurethane composite material, obtained by a novel process of manually mixing isocyanate and additives, can be poured into a specially designed fabric bag and allowed to harden to form a rigid human-shaped stretcher. The effectiveness of the emergency carpet was examined in the pre-hospital management of victims with spinal fractures. Additionally, it was tested on flat ground and complex terrain as well as in the sea and air. We demonstrated that the emergency carpet can be assembled and solidified on the scene in 5 minutes, providing effective immobilization to the entire injured body. With the protection of the emergency carpet, none of the 20 patients, who were finally confirmed to have spinal column fracture or dislocation, had any neurological deterioration during transportation. Furthermore, the carpet can be handled and transported by multiple means under differing conditions, without compromising immobilization. Finally, the emergency carpet allows the critically injured patient to receive multiple examinations such as X-ray, CT, and MRI without being removed from the carpet. Our results demonstrate that the emergency carpet has ideal capabilities for immobilization, extrication, and transportation of the spine injured patients. Compared with other stretchers, it allows for better mobility, effective immobilization, remarkable conformity to the body, and various means for transportation. The emergency carpet is promising for its intrinsic advantages in the pre-hospital management of accident victims.

Management of the trauma airway

A priority for all trauma patients is rapid assessment and appropriate, prompt and effective management of the airway. Adequate ventilation and tissue oxygenation can prevent hypoxic injury, particularly within the central nervous system. Failure to secure the airway soon enough is a major cause of preventable death following significant injury (Ivatury and Guilford, 2008). Many controversial issues surround the management of the trauma airway including the effect of early tracheal intubation on morbidity and mortality, the variation in failed intubation rates for paramedics compared with physicians, and the use of manual in-line stabilisation and cricoid pressure during tracheal intubation. Studies have attempted to address these and other questions related to airway management in trauma patients. Unfortunately, many variables within the studies make interpretation of the results difficult. This review aims to summarise the key issues in relation to all of these controversies.

Effectiveness of cervical spine stabilization techniques

OBJECTIVE

To compare head motions that occur when trained professionals perform the head squeeze (HS) and trap squeeze (TS) C-spine stabilization techniques.

DESIGN

Cross-over design.

PARTICIPANTS

Twelve experienced lead rescuers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Peak head motion with respect to initial conditions using inertial measurement units attached to the forehead and trunk of the simulated patient. We compared both HS and TS during lift-and-slide (L&S) and log-roll (LR) placement on spinal board, and agitated patient trying to sit up (AGIT-Sit) or rotate his head (AGIT-Rot). The a priori minimal important difference (MID) was 5 degrees for flexion or extension and 3 degrees for rotation or lateral flexion.

RESULTS

The L&S technique was statistically superior to the LR technique. The only differences to exceed the MID were extension and rotation during LR (HS > TS). In the AGIT-Sit test scenario, differences in motion exceeded MID (HS > TS) for flexion, rotation, and lateral flexion. In the AGIT-Rot scenario, differences in motion exceeded MID for rotation only (HS >TS). There was similar intertrial variability of motion for HS and TS during L&S and LR but significantly more variability with HS compared with TS in the agitated patient.

CONCLUSIONS

The L&S is preferable to the LR when possible for minimizing unwanted C-spine motion. There is little overall difference between HS and TS in a cooperative patient. When a patient is confused, the HS is much worse than the TS at minimizing C-spine motion.

National athletic trainers' association position statement: acute management of the cervical spine-injured athlete

OBJECTIVE

To provide certified athletic trainers, team physicians, emergency responders, and other health care professionals with recommendations on how to best manage a catastrophic cervical spine injury in the athlete.

BACKGROUND

The relative incidence of catastrophic cervical spine injury in sports is low compared with other injuries. However, cervical spine injuries necessitate delicate and precise management, often involving the combined efforts of a variety of health care providers. The outcome of a catastrophic cervical spine injury depends on the efficiency of this management process and the timeliness of transfer to a controlled environment for diagnosis and treatment.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations are based on current evidence pertaining to prevention strategies to reduce the incidence of cervical spine injuries in sport; emergency planning and preparation to increase management efficiency; maintaining or creating neutral alignment in the cervical spine; accessing and maintaining the airway; stabilizing and transferring the athlete with a suspected cervical spine injury; managing the athlete participating in an equipment-laden sport, such as football, hockey, or lacrosse; and considerations in the emergency department.

[Emergency room management of severely injured patients]

BACKGROUND

In cases involving major trauma life-threatening situations should be immediately diagnosed and treated. Clinical algorithms can potentially decrease the rate of complications and errors. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of deviations from a multislice computed tomography based trauma room algorithm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During a primary trauma survey an independent study monitor observed the on site treatment sequence step by step. Time intervals between admission and start of each procedure were recorded. Deviations from the algorithm and delays were analyzed.

RESULTS

In 57 trauma patients a total of 49 deviations were documented. Median time between admission and transfer to the adjacent MSCT room was 9 min. Of the patients 11 were bypassed to the MSCT suite without a primary survey (19.3%). In 2 cases an absence of non-invasive blood pressure monitoring was recorded (3.5%) and 3 patients with potential cervical spine trauma were not immobilized at the scene or during primary survey (5.3%). In 8 cases focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) was not performed (14%). Contrary to the algorithm 10 patients received an arterial or central venous line during initial treatment (18%) resulting in a median delay of 8 min. The deviations from the algorithm resulted in no adverse effects on complications or mortality.

CONCLUSION

Self-critical analysis of trauma resuscitation can increase the quality of treatment by revealing constantly recurring faults.

Acquiring and maintaining competence in the application of extrication cervical collars by a group of first responders

INTRODUCTION

Research on skill acquisition and retention in the prehospital setting has focused primarily on resuscitation and defibrillation. Investigation into other first aid skills is required in order to validate practices and support training regimes. No studies have investigated competency using an extrication cervical collar for cervical spine immobilization.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to confirm that a group of first responders could acquire and maintain competency in the application of an extrication cervical collar over a 12-month period.

METHODS

Participants attended a standardized training session that addressed the theory of application of an extrication cervical collar followed by hands-on practice. The training was presented by the same instructor and covered the nine key elements necessary in order to be deemed competent in extraction cervical collar application. Following the practical session, the competency of the participants was assessed. Participants were requested not to practice the skill during the 12-month period. Following the 12-month period, their skills were re-assessed by the same assessor.

RESULTS

Of the 64 subjects who participated in the study, 100% were competent after the initial first assessment. Forty-one participants (64%) were available for the second assessment (12 months later); of these, 25 (61%) maintained competence.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the sample size was small, this research demonstrates that first responders are able to acquire competence in applying an extrication cervical collar. However, skill retention in the absence of usage or re-training is poor. Larger studies should be conducted to validate these results. In addition, there is a need for research on the clinical practice and outcomes associated with spinal immobilization in the prehospital setting.