Impact of Cervical Collar and Patient Position on the Cerebral Blood Flow

D. Wampler, B. Eastridge, R. Summers, Preston Love, A. Dharia, A. Seifi
{"title":"Impact of Cervical Collar and Patient Position on the Cerebral Blood Flow","authors":"D. Wampler, B. Eastridge, R. Summers, Preston Love, A. Dharia, A. Seifi","doi":"10.14740/jnr611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Spinal protection during emergency medical service (EMS) transport after trauma has become a focus of debate. Historically, patients at risk for spine injury are transported in a rigid collar, long spineboard and headblocks. The cervical collar (c-collar) is hypothesized to provide stabilization for the cervical spine. However, little is known how the c-collar affects cervical blood flow. Methods: Cerebral blood flow was measured in multiple conditions using a non-invasive cerebral blood flow monitor to establish cerebral blood flow index (CBFI). The CBFI data were collected at: standing, sitting, 45°, 30°, 10° or 15°, and supine, with and without c-collar. Descriptive statistics were used for CBFI in each condition, and parametric statistical methods were utilized to determine the significance of changes in CBFI. Results: Five volunteers were recruited, and each tested in six positions with and without c-collar. Mean age was 49 (standard deviation (SD) 15) years and 60% were male. The CBFI mean of means was 71.0 with and 69.4 without the c-collar. Only one subject demonstrated a statistically significant difference in CBFI with c-collar. The CBFI mean of means for position was 72.6 for head of bed less than 30° and 68.1 for greater than 30°. All subjects demonstrated > 99% confidence for a statistically significant difference in CBFI when dichotomized using head of bed at 30°. Conclusions: Head of the bed position has greater influence on CBFI than the c-collar . Clinical significance in healthy volunteers is unknown but this change in cerebral blood flow may have clinical significance in traumatic brain injury or neurologic conditions that compromise autoregulation. J Neurol Res. 2020;10(5):177-182 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jnr611","PeriodicalId":16489,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurology Research","volume":"106 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurology Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14740/jnr611","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Spinal protection during emergency medical service (EMS) transport after trauma has become a focus of debate. Historically, patients at risk for spine injury are transported in a rigid collar, long spineboard and headblocks. The cervical collar (c-collar) is hypothesized to provide stabilization for the cervical spine. However, little is known how the c-collar affects cervical blood flow. Methods: Cerebral blood flow was measured in multiple conditions using a non-invasive cerebral blood flow monitor to establish cerebral blood flow index (CBFI). The CBFI data were collected at: standing, sitting, 45°, 30°, 10° or 15°, and supine, with and without c-collar. Descriptive statistics were used for CBFI in each condition, and parametric statistical methods were utilized to determine the significance of changes in CBFI. Results: Five volunteers were recruited, and each tested in six positions with and without c-collar. Mean age was 49 (standard deviation (SD) 15) years and 60% were male. The CBFI mean of means was 71.0 with and 69.4 without the c-collar. Only one subject demonstrated a statistically significant difference in CBFI with c-collar. The CBFI mean of means for position was 72.6 for head of bed less than 30° and 68.1 for greater than 30°. All subjects demonstrated > 99% confidence for a statistically significant difference in CBFI when dichotomized using head of bed at 30°. Conclusions: Head of the bed position has greater influence on CBFI than the c-collar . Clinical significance in healthy volunteers is unknown but this change in cerebral blood flow may have clinical significance in traumatic brain injury or neurologic conditions that compromise autoregulation. J Neurol Res. 2020;10(5):177-182 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jnr611
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
颈领及体位对脑血流的影响
背景:创伤后紧急医疗服务(EMS)转运中的脊柱保护已成为争论的焦点。从历史上看,有脊柱损伤风险的患者是在硬颈圈、长脊柱板和头块中运输的。颈项圈(c型项圈)被假设为颈椎提供稳定。然而,人们对c型领如何影响颈部血液流动知之甚少。方法:采用无创脑血流监测仪测量多种情况下的脑血流,建立脑血流指数(CBFI)。CBFI数据收集于:站立、坐着、45°、30°、10°或15°以及仰卧、有无c型领。每种情况下CBFI采用描述性统计,并采用参数统计方法确定CBFI变化的显著性。结果:招募了5名志愿者,分别在有c领和没有c领的6个位置进行测试。平均年龄49岁(标准差15),男性占60%。有c型领的CBFI平均值为71.0,没有c型领的CBFI平均值为69.4。只有一名受试者的CBFI与c型领有统计学差异。当床头小于30°时,位置的CBFI平均值为72.6,大于30°时为68.1。当使用30°床头进行二分类时,所有受试者对CBFI有统计学上显著差异的置信度均为bbbb99 %。结论:床头位置对CBFI的影响大于c型颈圈。在健康志愿者中的临床意义尚不清楚,但这种脑血流的变化可能在创伤性脑损伤或损害自我调节的神经系统疾病中具有临床意义。中华神经科学杂志,2020;10(5):177-182 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jnr611
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Non-Invasive Neuromodulation for Episodic and Chronic Migraine Headache: Preliminary Findings on Feasibility of At-Home Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation With Remote Supervision Effectiveness of Relaxation and Respiratory Exercise on Sleep Quality, Depression and Spasticity in Hemiplegic Stroke Patients: Preliminary Findings Neuro-Abilities and a Good Life Small Number of Coils With Extended Length in the Endovascular Treatment of Cerebral Aneurysm: Experience of 108 Cases in a Single-Center Motor Neuron Disease-Frontotemporal Dementia Spectrum Disorder: A Different Phenotype Related With a Novel TBK1 Gene Variant
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1