Should suspected cervical spinal cord injury be immobilised?: a systematic review

Cervical spine immobilisation following blunt trauma in pre-hospital and emergency care: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether different cervical spine immobilisation strategies (full immobilisation, movement minimisation or no immobilisation), impact neurological and/or other outcomes for patients with suspected cervical spinal injury in the pre-hospital and emergency department setting.

DESIGN

Systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and two research registers were searched until September 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All comparative studies (prospective or retrospective) that examined the potential benefits and/or harms of immobilisation practices during pre-hospital and emergency care of patients with a potential cervical spine injury (pre-imaging) following blunt trauma.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two authors independently selected and extracted data. Risk of bias was appraised using the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised studies. Data were synthesised without meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Six observational studies met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality was variable, with most studies having serious or critical risk of bias. The effect of cervical spine immobilisation practices such as full immobilisation or movement minimisation during pre-hospital and emergency care did not show clear evidence of benefit for the prevention of neurological deterioration, spinal injuries and death compared with no immobilisation. However, increased pain, discomfort and anatomical complications were associated with collar application during immobilisation.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the limited evidence, weak designs and limited generalisability, the available data suggest that pre-hospital cervical spine immobilisation (full immobilisation or movement minimisation) was of uncertain value due to the lack of demonstrable benefit and may lead to potential complications and adverse outcomes. High-quality randomised comparative studies are required to address this important question.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO REGISTRATION Fiona Lecky, Abdullah Pandor, Munira Essat, Anthea Sutton, Carl Marincowitz, Gordon Fuller, Stuart Reid, Jason Smith. A systematic review of cervical spine immobilisation following blunt trauma in pre-hospital and emergency care. PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022349600 Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022349600.

A Ten-Year Retrospective Cohort Study on Neck Collar Immobilization in Trauma Patients with Head and Neck Injuries

Background and Objectives: In the context of prehospital care, spinal immobilization is commonly employed to maintain cervical stability in head and neck injury patients. However, its use in cases of unclear consciousness or major trauma patients is often precautionary, pending the exclusion of unstable spinal injuries through appropriate diagnostic imaging. The impact of prehospital C-spinal immobilization in these specific patient populations remains uncertain. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital from January 2009 to May 2019, focusing on trauma patients suspected of head and neck injuries. The primary outcome assessed was in-hospital mortality. We employed multivariable logistic regression to investigate the relationship between prehospital C-spine immobilization and outcomes, while adjusting for various factors such as age, gender, type of traumatic brain injury, Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and activation of trauma team. Results: Our analysis encompassed 2733 patients. Among these, patients in the unclear consciousness group (GCS ≤ 8) who underwent C-spine immobilization exhibited a higher mortality rate than those without immobilization. However, there was no statistically significant difference in mortality among patients with alert consciousness (GCS > 8). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that advanced age (age ≥ 65), unclear consciousness (GCS ≤ 8), major traumatic injuries (ISS ≥ 16 and RTS ≤ 7), and the use of neck collars for immobilization (adjusted OR: 1.850, 95% CI: 1.240-2.760, p = 0.003) were significantly associated with an increased risk of mortality. Subgroup analysis indicated that C-spine immobilization was significantly linked to an elevated risk of mortality in older adults (age ≥ 65), patients with unclear consciousness (GCS ≤ 8), those with major traumatic injuries (ISS ≥ 16 and RTS ≤ 7), and individuals in shock (shock index > 1). Conclusions: While our findings do not advocate for the complete abandonment of neck collars in all suspected head and neck injury patients, our study suggests that prehospital cervical and spinal immobilization should be applied more selectively in certain head and neck injury populations. This approach is particularly relevant for older individuals (age ≥ 65), those with unclear consciousness (GCS ≤ 8), individuals experiencing major traumatic injuries (ISS ≥ 16 or RTS ≤ 7), and patients in a state of shock (shock index ≥ 1). Our study employs a retrospective cohort design, which may introduce selection bias. Therefore, in the future, there is a need for confirmation of our results through a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) arises, as this design is considered ideal for addressing this issue.

Patient outcomes before and after implementation of a selective pre-hospital spinal immobilization protocol: A comparative cohort pilot study in a level 2 trauma center

BACKGROUND

A new selective preventive spinal immobilization (PSI) protocol was introduced in the Netherlands. This may have led to an increase in non-immobilized spinal fractures (NISFs) and consequently adverse patient outcomes.

AIM

A pilot study was conducted to describe the adverse patient outcomes in NISF of the PSI protocol change and assess the feasibility of a larger effect study.

METHODS

Retrospective comparative cohort pilot study including records of trauma patients with a presumed spinal injury who were presented at the emergency department of a level 2 trauma center by the emergency medical service (EMS). The pre-period 2013-2014 (strict PSI protocol), was compared to the post-period 2017-2018 (selective PSI protocol). Primary outcomes were the percentage of records with a NISF who had an adverse patient outcome such as neurological injuries and mortality before and after the protocol change. Secondary outcomes were the sample size calculation for a larger study and the feasibility of data collection.

RESULTS

1,147 records were included; 442 pre-period, and 705 post-period. The NISF-prevalence was 10% (95% CI 7-16, n = 19) and 8% (95% CI 6-11, n = 33), respectively. In both periods, no neurological injuries or mortality due to NISF were found, by which calculating a sample size is impossible. Data collection showed to be feasible.

CONCLUSIONS

No neurological injuries or mortality due to NISF were found in a strict and a selective PSI protocol. Therefore, a larger study is discouraged. Future studies should focus on which patients really profit from PSI and which patients do not.

SOFTLY: Comparison of outcomes of rigid versus soft collar during emergency department investigation for potential cervical spine injury in low-risk blunt trauma patients - A pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Blunt trauma patients with potential cervical spine injury are traditionally immobilised in rigid collars. Recently, this has been challenged. The present study's objective was comparison of the rate of patient-oriented adverse events in stable, alert, low-risk patients with potential cervical spine injuries immobilised in rigid versus soft collars.

METHODS

Unblinded, prospective quasi-randomised clinical trial of neurologically intact, adult, blunt trauma patients assessed as having potential cervical spine injury. Patients were randomised to collar type. All other aspects of care were unchanged. Primary outcome was patient-reported discomfort related to neck immobilisation by collar type. Secondary outcomes included adverse neurological events, agitation and clinically important cervical spine injuries (clinical trial registration number: ACTRN12621000286842).

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients were enrolled: 59 patients allocated to a rigid collar and 78 to a soft collar. Most injuries were from a fall <1 m (54%) or a motor vehicle crash (21.9%). Median neck pain score of collar immobilisation was lower in the soft collar group (3.0 [interquartile range 0-6.1] vs 6.0 [interquartile range 3-8.8], P < 0.001). The proportion of patients with clinician-identified agitation was lower in the soft collar group (5% vs 17%, P = 0.04). There were four clinically important cervical spine injuries (two in each group). All were treated conservatively. There were no adverse neurological events.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of soft rather than rigid collar immobilisation for low-risk blunt trauma patients with potential cervical spine injury is significantly less painful for patients and results in less agitation. A larger study is needed to determine the safety of this approach or whether collars are required at all.

Implementation of the Modified Canadian C-Spine Rule by Paramedics

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The Canadian C-spine rule was modified and validated for use by the paramedics in a multicenter study where patients were assessed with the Canadian C-spine rule yet all transported with immobilization. This study evaluated the clinical impact of the modified Canadian C-spine rule when implemented by paramedics.

METHODS

This single-center prospective cohort implementation study took place in Ottawa, Canada (from 2011 to 2015). Advanced and primary care paramedics were trained to use the modified Canadian C-spine rule, collect data on a standardized study form, and selectively transport eligible patients without immobilization. We evaluated all consecutive low-risk adult patients (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] 15, stable vital signs) at risk for a neck injury. We followed all patients without initial radiologic evaluation for 30 days. Analyses included descriptive statistics with 95% confidence intervals (CI), sensitivity, specificity, and kappa coefficients.

RESULTS

The 4,034 enrolled patients had a mean age of 43 (range 16 to 99), and 53.4% were female. Motor vehicle collisions were the most common mechanism of injury (55.1%), followed by falls (23.9%). There were 11 clinically important injuries. The paramedics classified these injuries with a sensitivity of 90.9% (95% CI, 58.7 to 99.8) and specificity of 66.5% (95% CI, 65.1 to 68.0). There was no adverse event or resulting spinal cord injury. The kappa agreement between paramedics and investigators was 0.94. A total of 2,583 (64.0%) immobilizations were avoided using the modified Canadian C-spine rule.

CONCLUSION

Paramedics could accurately apply the modified Canadian C-spine rule to low-risk trauma patients and significantly reduce the need for spinal immobilization during transport. This resulted in no adverse event or any spinal cord injury.

Intubation during spinal motion restriction using the LuboTM cervical collar - a manikin simulation study

Introduction

The Lubo^TM collar is a cervical motion restriction device featuring a unique external jaw-thrust mechanism designed to provide non-invasive airway patency. In addition, tracheal intubation is facilitated by releasing an anterior chin strap; this allows better mouth opening than the previous generation of semi-rigid cervical collars. This study aimed to compare tracheal intubation using the Lubo^TM collar combined with manual in-line stabilization (MILS) to intubation with MILS alone. The primary outcome was the time to successful intubation. Secondary outcomes compared intubation success rate, Cormack-Lehane grade, ease of intubation and dental trauma.

Methods

A randomized, cross-over, equivalence study was performed. Eighty full-time physician anaesthesia providers were recruited. Participants performed tracheal intubation using direct laryngoscopy on a manikin under two different scenarios: with the Lubo^TM collar and MILS applied, and with MILS and no cervical collar. The time to successful intubation was measured and compared using two-one-sided and paired t-tests.

Results

Intubation times fell well within the a priori equivalence limits of 10 seconds, with a mean difference (95% CI) of 0.52 seconds (-1.30 to 2.56). There was no significant difference in intubation time with the Lubo^TM collar (mean [SD] 19.2 [4.5] seconds) compared to the MILS alone group (19.7 [5.2] seconds). The overall success rate was 98.7% in the Lubo group and 100% in the MILS group. Adequate laryngoscopy views (Cormack-Lehane grades I to IIb) were equivalent between groups (Lubo 92.5% versus MILS alone 93.7%).

Conclusion

In this manikin-based study, the time to intubation with the Lubo^TM collar and MILS applied was equivalent to time to intubation with MILS alone, with similar intubating conditions. Thus, the Lubo^TM collar and MILS may simplify airway management by reducing the number of steps required to perform intubation in patients requiring cervical motion restriction.

Recommendation for changes to the guidelines of trauma patients with potential spinal injury within a regional UK ambulance trust

BACKGROUND

Spinal assessment and immobilisation has been a topic of debate for many years where, despite an emerging evidence base and the delivery of new guidance overseas, little has changed within UK pre-hospital practice. Since 2018, South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust has spent time working with local trauma networks and expertise from within the region and international colleagues to develop a set of C-spine assessment and immobilisation guidelines that reflect the current best available international evidence and significant changes in international pre-hospital practice from settings such as Scandinavia and Australasia.

METHODS

A specialist group was commissioned to review the topic of pre-hospital spinal immobilisation and explore potential for evidence-based improvement. In conjunction with local trauma networks, subject matter experts and a thorough review of recent literature, a series of recommendations were made in order to improve spinal care within the authoring trust.

RESULTS

Seven recommendations were made, and an updated set of guidelines produced. These included the removal of semi-rigid collars from pre-hospital spinal immobilisation; the creation of two tiers of patients to ensure that the high-risk and low-risk populations are considered separately and an accompanying decision tool to safeguard both cohorts; an increased emphasis on the risk of spinal injury in the frail and older patient; an emphasis on spinal motion restriction rather than rigid immobilisation; an increased emphasis on self-extrication; and the use of a marker for emergency departments.

SUMMARY

An updated set of guidance has been produced using a combination of specialist and expert opinion alongside a literature review with close involvement of key stakeholders, both public and professional. The new guidance helps to ensure a patient-centred approach where each person is considered an individual with their risk of injury and management measures tailored to their specific needs.

The Immo Traffic Light System as a Decision-Making Tool for Prehospital Spinal Immobilization

BACKGROUND

Spinal injuries are difficult injuries to assess yet can be associated with significant neurological damage. To avoid secondary damage, immobilization is considered state of the art trauma care. The indication for spinal immobilization must be assessed, however, for potential complications as well as its advantages and disadvantages.

METHODS

This systematic review addressing the question of the correct indication for spinal immobilization in trauma patients was compiled on the basis of our previously published analysis of possible predictors from the Trauma Registry of the German Society for Trauma Surgery. A Delphi procedure was then used to develop suggestions for action regarding immobilization based on the results of this review.

RESULTS

The search of the literature yielded 576 publications. The 24 publications included in the qualitative analysis report of 2 228 076 patients. A decision tool for spinal immobilization in prehospital trauma care was developed (Immo traffic light system) based on the results of the Delphi procedure. According to this system, severely injured patients with blunt trauma, severe traumatic brain injury, peripheral neurological symptoms, or spinal pain requiring treatment should be immobilized. Patients with a statistically increased risk of spinal injury as a result of the four cardinal features (fall >3m, severe trunk injury, supra clavicular injury, seniority [age >65 years]) should only have their spinal motion restricted after weighing up the pros and cons. Isolated penetrating trunk injuries should not be immobilized.

CONCLUSION

High-quality studies demonstrating the benefit of prehospital spinal immobilization are still lacking. Decision tools such as the Immo traffic light system can help weigh up the pros and cons of immobilization.

A Delphi study of rescue and clinical subject matter experts on the extrication of patients following a motor vehicle collision

BACKGROUND

Approximately 1.3 million people die each year globally as a direct result of motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). Following an MVC some patients will remain trapped in their vehicle; these patients have worse outcomes and may require extrication. Following new evidence, updated multidisciplinary guidance for extrication is needed.

METHODS

This Delphi study has been developed, conducted and reported to CREDES standards. A literature review identified areas of expertise and appropriate individuals were recruited to a Steering Group. The Steering Group formulated initial statements for consideration. Stakeholder organisations were invited to identify subject matter experts (SMEs) from a rescue and clinical background (total 60). SMEs participated over three rounds via an online platform. Consensus for agreement / disagreement was set at 70%. At each stage SMEs could offer feedback on, or modification to the statements considered which was reviewed and incorporated into new statements or new supporting information for the following rounds. Stakeholders agreed a set of principles based on the consensus statements on which future guidance should be based.

RESULTS

Sixty SMEs completed Round 1, 53 Round 2 (88%) and 49 Round 3 (82%). Consensus was reached on 91 statements (89 agree, 2 disagree) covering a broad range of domains related to: extrication terminology, extrication goals and approach, self-extrication, disentanglement, clinical care, immobilisation, patient-focused extrication, emergency services call and triage, and audit and research standards. Thirty-three statements did not reach consensus.

CONCLUSION

This study has demonstrated consensus across a large panel of multidisciplinary SMEs on many key areas of extrication and related practice that will provide a key foundation in the development of evidence-based guidance for this subject area.

Evaluating prehospital care of patients with potential traumatic spinal cord injury: scoping review

PURPOSE

To gain insight into current research regarding prehospital care (PHC) in patients with potential traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) and to disseminate the findings to the research community.

METHODS

In March 2019, we performed a literature search of publications from January 1990 to March 2019 indexed in PubMed, gray literature including professional websites; and reference sections of selected articles for other relevant literature. This review was performed according to Arksey and O'Malley's framework.

RESULTS

There were 42 studies selected based on the inclusion criteria for review; 18 articles regarding immobilization; 12 articles regarding movement, positioning and transport; four for spinal clearance; three for airway protection; and two for the role of PHC providers. There were some articles that covered two topics: one article was regarding movement, positioning and transport and airway protection, and two were regarding spinal clearance and the role of PHC providers.

CONCLUSION

There was no uniform opinion about spinal immobilization of patients with suspected TSCI. The novel lateral trauma position and one of two High Arm IN Endangered Spine (HAINES) methods are preferred methods for unconscious patients. Controlled self-extrication for patients with stable hemodynamic status is recommended. Early and proper identifying of potential TSCI by PHC providers can significantly improve patients' outcomes and can result in avoiding unwanted spinal immobilization. Future prospective studies with a large sample size in real-life settings are needed to provide clear and evidence-based data in PHC of patients with suspected TSCI.

Emergency management of older people with cervical spine injuries: an expert practice review

Spinal fractures are the third most common traumatic injury in older people, of which cervical spine injuries make up around 15%. They are predominantly seen in people living with frailty who fall from standing height. Spinal fractures in this patient group are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality (over 40% at 1 year). For many older people who survive, their injuries will be life changing. Practice between EDs varies significantly, with no universally accepted guidelines on either assessment, investigation or management specific to older people experiencing trauma. This expert practice review examines the current evidence and emergency management options in this patient group through clinical scenarios, with the aim of providing a more unified approach to management.

The role of cervical collars and verbal instructions in minimising spinal movement during self-extrication following a motor vehicle collision - a biomechanical study using healthy volunteers

Background

Motor vehicle collisions account for 1.3 million deaths and 50 million serious injuries worldwide each year. However, the majority of people involved in such incidents are uninjured or have injuries which do not prevent them exiting the vehicle. Self-extrication is the process by which a casualty is instructed to leave their vehicle and completes this with minimal or no assistance. Self-extrication may offer a number of patient and system-wide benefits. The efficacy of routine cervical collar application for this group is unclear and previous studies have demonstrated inconsistent results. It is unknown whether scripted instructions given to casualties on how to exit the vehicle would offer any additional utility.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of cervical collars and instructions on spinal movements during self-extrication from a vehicle, using novel motion tracking technology.

Methods

Biomechanical data on extrications were collected using Inertial Measurement Units on 10 healthy volunteers. The different extrication types examined were: i) No instructions and no cervical collar, ii) No instructions, with cervical collar, iii) With instructions and no collar, and iv) With instructions and with collar. Measurements were recorded at the cervical and lumbar spine, and in the anteroposterior (AP) and lateral (LAT) planes. Total movement, mean, standard deviation and confidence intervals are reported for each extrication type.

Results

Data were recorded for 392 extrications. The smallest cervical spine movements were recorded when a collar was applied and no instructions were given: mean 6.9 mm AP and 4.4 mm LAT. This also produced the smallest movements at the lumbar spine with a mean of 122 mm AP and 72.5 mm LAT.

The largest overall movements were seen in the cervical spine AP when no instructions and no collar were used (28.3 mm). For cervical spine lateral movements, no collar but with instructions produced the greatest movement (18.5 mm). For the lumbar spine, the greatest movement was recorded when instructions were given and no collar was used (153.5 mm AP, 101.1 mm LAT).

Conclusions

Across all participants, the most frequently occurring extrication method associated with the least movement was no instructions, with a cervical collar in situ.

Philadelphia versus Miami-J cervical collar's impact on pulmonary function

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of two types of cervical collars (Philadelphia and Miami-J) on pulmonary function and ventilation in healthy volunteers through spirometry, peak flow meter, and capnograph.

METHOD

Initially, subjects were randomized into two groups in which the sequence of collars' fixation was reversed. Afterward, we assessed the pulmonary parameters without a cervical collar in all participants. Each group underwent two additional test conditions, including measurements after wearing a Philadelphia and Miami-J cervical collar. In any case, we took the measurements half an hour after the collar fixation.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 48.34 ± 1.35 years. Following either type of collars application, there was a statistically significant decrease in FEV1, FEV1/FVC, FEF25-75%, and PEF (p < .001). However, FVC was not significantly changed (p = .157).

CONCLUSION

In summary, we noted a statistically significant expiratory flow obstruction after both the Philadelphia and Miami-J cervical collar. These changes were not clinically significant in healthy volunteers, albeit may have ramifications in patients with pre-existing respiratory compromise.

Evidence-Based Nursing Care for Spinal Nursing Immobilization: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

A high degree of suspicion for spinal injury after trauma is commonplace in an emergency department, and spinal immobilization is considered an accepted intervention to prevent the progression of a potential injury. This systematic review was conducted to gain insight into the best research evidence related to nursing interventions for patients with trauma presenting with a suspected spinal injury.

METHODS

A systematic search of online databases was conducted in April 2019 for relevant research using specific search terms. The studies were selected on the basis of pre-established eligibility criteria, and the quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool.

RESULTS

Nineteen included articles were synthesized thematically on the basis of the outcomes from interventions directed at a suspected spinal injury. The main findings were that spinal immobilization may compromise pulmonary function and airway management, cause pain and pressure ulcers, and be inappropriate with penetrating trauma. Furthermore, there was insufficient evidence to support the safety and efficacy of the hard neck collar and long backboard.

DISCUSSION

Patients would benefit from a more selective and cautious approach to spinal immobilization. Emergency nurses should use the evidence to facilitate informed decision-making in balancing the benefits of spinal immobilization against harm when considering the needs and values of the patient.

Indentation marks, skin temperature and comfort of two cervical collars: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial in healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND

Collar-related pressure ulcers (CRPU) are a problem in trauma patients with a suspicion of cervical cord injury patients. Indentation marks (IM), skin temperature (T_sk) and comfort could play a role in the development of CRPU. Two comparable cervical collars are the Stifneck® and Philadelphia®. However, the differences between them remain unclear.

AIM

To determine and compare occurrence and severity of IM, T_sk and comfort of the Stifneck® and Philadelphia® in immobilized healthy adults.

METHODS

This single-blinded randomized controlled trial compared two groups of immobilized participants in supine position for 20 min.

RESULTS

All participants (n = 60) generated IM in at least one location in the observed area. Total occurrence was higher in the Stifneck®-group (n = 95 versus n = 69; p = .002). T_sk increased significantly with 1.0  °C in the Stifneck®-group and 1.3 °C in the Philadelphia®-group (p = .024). Comfort was rated 3 on a scale of 5 (p = .506).

CONCLUSION

The occurrence of IM in both groups was high. In comparison to the Stifneck®, fewer and less severe IM were observed from the Philadelphia®. The T_sk increased significantly with both collars; however, no clinical difference in increase of T_sk between them was found. The results emphasize the need for a better design of cervical collars regarding CRPU.

Contribution of injured posterior ligamentous complex and intervertebral disc on post-traumatic instability at the cervical spine

Posterior ligamentous complex (PLC) and intervertebral disc (IVD) injuries are common cervical spine flexion-distraction injuries, but the residual stability following their disruption is misknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of PLC and IVD disruption on post-traumatic cervical spine stability under low flexion moment (2 Nm) using a finite element (FE) model of C2-T1. The PLC was removed first and a progressive disc rupture (one third, two thirds and complete rupture) was modeled to simulate IVD disruption at C2-C3, C4-C5 and C6-C7. At each step, a non-traumatic flexion moment was applied and the change in stability was evaluated. PLC removal had little impact at C2-C3 but increased local range of motion (ROM) at the injured level by 77.2% and 190.7% at C4-C5 and C6-C7, respectively. Complete IVD rupture had the largest impact on C2-C3, increasing C2-C3 ROM by 181% and creating a large antero-posterior displacement of the C2-C3 segment. The FE analysis showed PLC and disc injuries create spinal instability. However, the PLC played a bigger role in the stability of the middle and lower cervical spine while the IVD was more important at the upper cervical spine. Stabilization appears important when managing patients with soft tissue injuries.

Pressure injury development in critically ill patients with a cervical collar in situ: A retrospective longitudinal study

Trauma patients with a serious injury to the head or neck can remain immobilised with a cervical collar (C-collar) device in situ and are subsequently exposed to device-related skin integrity threats. This study aimed to determine the incidence and risk factors associated with the development of C-collar-related pressure injures (CRPIs) in an intensive care unit. This retrospective longitudinal cohort study was conducted in an Australian metropolitan intensive care unit. Following ethical approval, data from patients over 18 years, who received a C-collar were retrieved over a 9-year period. Chi square and t-tests were used to identify variables associated with CRPI development. A logistic regression model was employed to analyse the risk factors. Data from 906 patients were analysed. Nine-year pressure injury incidence was 16.9% (n = 154/906). Pressure injury development directly associated with a C-collar increased by 33% with each repositioning episode (odds ratio 1.328, 95% confidence interval 1.024-1.723, P = .033). Time in the C-collar (10.4 to 2.5 days, P = .002) and length of stay in intensive care unit (ICU) (20.1 to 16.1 days, P < .001) were associated with pressure injury development. Patients with C-collar devices are a vulnerable group at risk for pressure injury development because of their immobility and length of ICU stay.

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.

Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article provides an update on the acute and subacute management and prognostication of patients with traumatic spinal cord injury.

RECENT FINDINGS

Immobilization of the spine and spine clearance should be individualized depending on the ability to perform a reliable neurologic examination, the presence of neck pain, and the imaging findings. Early surgery (within 24 hours) to achieve definitive cord decompression and spine stabilization may be beneficial. Ensuring adequate oxygenation and perfusion and avoiding secondary systemic complications remain the goals of the critical care of these patients. No neuroprotective treatment has been shown to improve outcomes. In fact, the use of high-dose methylprednisolone is now generally discouraged because of its major systemic adverse effects. Survivors of severe cervical traumatic spinal cord injury typically sustain substantial long-term functional impairment. Advances in our understanding of neuroregenerative strategies, especially stem cell transplantation, can offer the future hope of functional improvement to the many patients currently living with the consequences of traumatic spinal cord injury. Yet, at present, these therapies remain strictly investigational.

SUMMARY

The treatment of traumatic spinal cord injury remains supportive, and prognosis is still poor for patients who are severely affected. While much remains to be learned about how to optimize the acute management of these patients, future efforts would be most useful if focused on injury prevention and the development of effective neuroregenerative therapies.

Patient experience of spinal immobilisation after trauma

Background

Spinal immobilisation of blunt trauma victims with potential spinal cord injury is considered standard of care. The traditional management has, however, been increasingly questioned and concerns about harm have been raised. Few studies have described the perspective of the trauma patient regarding the spinal immobilisation.

The objective of this study was therefore to evaluate the patient experience of immobilisation after trauma.

Methods

We prospectively screened adult trauma patients admitted to a level 1 trauma centre for eligibility. We included adult trauma patients who had been, and remembered being, immobilised for spinal protection with a cervical collar and a spine board prehospitally or upon arrival at the trauma centre. A semi-structured interview was conducted 2 to 72 h after admission either in person or by telephone.

Results

One hundred and fourteen patients were eligible for inclusion based on the patient charts. Out of 98 patients assessed for participation, 48 (49%) had no memory of being immobilised.

We thus included 50 patients with a median age of 37 years (IQR: 26–60) of whom 38 (76%) were men. The median injury severity score was 9 (IQR: 3–15) and the median time with a cervical collar from initial application to in-hospital removal or until the interview was given was 91 min (IQR: 72–136).

Nineteen patients (38%) reported discomfort and 12 patients (24%) experienced pain related to the immobilisation. Forty patients (80%) reported a sense of protection related to the immobilisation.

Conclusion

Discomfort related to spinal immobilisation was reported in 38% of trauma patients. However, a sense of protection was a recurring theme in 80% of the trauma patients, who recalled being immobilised. Nearly half of the awake trauma patients had no memory of being immobilised.

Increase in intracranial pressure by application of a rigid cervical collar: a pilot study in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVES

Rigid cervical collars are known to increase intracranial pressure (ICP) in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Cerebral blood flow might decrease according to the Kellie Monroe doctrine. For this reason, the use of the collar in patients with severe TBI has been abandoned from several trauma protocols in the Netherlands. There is no evidence on the effect of a rigid collar on ICP in patients with mild or moderate TBI or indeed patients with no TBI. As a first step we tested the effect in healthy volunteers with normal ICPs and intact autoregulation of the brain.

METHODS

In this prospective blinded cross-over study, we evaluated the effect of application of a rigid cervical collar in 45 healthy volunteers by measuring their optical nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) by transocular sonography. Sonographic measurement of the ONSD behind the eye is an indirect noninvasive method to estimate ICP and pressure changes.

RESULTS

We included 22 male and 23 female volunteers. In total 360 ONSD measurements were performed in these 45 volunteers. Application of a collar resulted in a significant increase in ONSD in both the left (β=0.06, 95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.07, P<0.001) and the right eye (β=0.01, 95% confidence interval: 0.00-0.02, P=0.027) CONCLUSION: Application of a rigid cervical collar significantly increases the ONSD in healthy volunteers with intact cerebral autoregulation. This suggests that ICP may increase after application of a collar. In healthy volunteers, this seems to be of minor importance. On the basis of our findings the effect of a collar on ONSD and ICP in patients with mild and moderate TBI needs to be determined.

Management of a Steel Bar Injury Penetrating the Head and Neck: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Nonmissile penetrating injuries to the head and neck caused by a steel bar are rare, and a standard management strategy is lacking.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 42-year-old woman sustained a steel bar injury with penetration of the head and neck. Computed tomography and three-dimensional reconstruction were performed for preoperative evaluation. Digital subtraction angiography was performed to confirm potential vascular injury. The steel bar was successfully removed through an open surgical procedure by a multidisciplinary team.

CONCLUSIONS

Relevant literature regarding nonmissile penetrating injuries involving a steel bar was reviewed to propose appropriate management strategies. Comprehensive imaging evaluation and prompt surgery by a multidisciplinary team contributed to the successful removal of the steel bar.

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.

Research Gaps in Wilderness Medicine

INTRODUCTION

Wilderness medicine involves the treatment of individuals in remote, austere environments. Given the high potential for injuries as well as the unique treatment modalities required in wilderness medicine, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are necessary to provide optimal care. In this study, we identify evidence gaps from low-quality recommendations in wilderness medicine clinical practice guidelines and identify new/ongoing research addressing them.

METHODS

We included relevant clinical practice guidelines from the Wilderness Medical Society and obtained all 1C or 2C level recommendations. Patient/Problem/Population, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) questions were created to address each recommendation. Using 24 search strings, we extracted titles, clinical trial registry number, and recruitment status for 8899 articles. We categorized the articles by trial design to infer the effect they may have on future recommendations.

RESULTS

Twelve clinical practice guidelines met inclusion criteria. From these we located 275 low-quality recommendations and used them to create 275 PICO questions. Thirty-three articles were relevant to the PICO questions. Heat-related illness had the highest number of relevant articles (n=9), but acute pain and altitude sickness had the most randomized clinical trials (n=6).

CONCLUSION

Overall, few studies were being conducted to address research gaps in wilderness medicine. Heat-related illness had the most new or ongoing research, whereas no studies were being conducted to address gaps in eye injuries, basic wound management, or spine immobilization. Animals, cadavers, and mannequin research are useful in cases in which human evidence is difficult to obtain. Establishing research priorities is recommended for addressing research gaps identified by guideline panels.

Cervical spine immobilisation in the elderly: a literature review

Developed populations are ageing rapidly and by 2040, approximately 1 in 4 adults will be over 65 years of age. This is resulting in higher incidence of traumatic injury in older patients. Cognitive and physical comorbidities in this group can pose significant challenges. Due to mechanisms of injury and pre-existing degenerative spinal disease, cervical spine fractures are particularly prevalent in elderly patients. These are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In this literature review we examine current evidence surrounding the use of cervical spine immobilisation in elderly patients in the pre-hospital and emergency department setting and also as a treatment option for cervical spine fractures. We explore evidence surrounding the complications that can arise from cervical spine immobilisation, including the development of pressure sores, raised intracranial pressure, dysphagia, breathing difficulties, delirium, compliance issues, mobility and functional outcome.

Validation of a field spinal motion restriction protocol in a level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

Spinal motion restriction (SMR) after traumatic injury has been a mainstay of prehospital trauma care for more than 3 decades. Recent guidelines recommend a selective approach with cervical spine clearance in the field when criteria are met.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In January 2014, the Department of Health Services of the City of Los Angeles, California, implemented revised guidelines for cervical SMR after blunt mechanism trauma. Adult patients (aged ≥18 y) with an initial Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of ≥13 presented to a single level I trauma center after blunt mechanism trauma over the following 1-y period were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, injury data, and prehospital data were collected. Cervical spine injury (CSI) was identified by International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, codes.

RESULTS

Emergency medical services transported 1111 patients to the emergency department who sustained blunt trauma. Patients were excluded if they refused c-collar placement or if documentation was incomplete. A total of 997 patients were included in our analysis with 172 (17.2%) who were selective cleared of SMR per protocol. The rate of Spinal Cord Injury was 2.2% (22/997) overall and 1.2% (2/172) in patients without SMR. The sensitivity and specificity of the protocol are 90.9% (95% confidence interval: 69.4-98.4) and 17.4% (95% confidence interval: 15.1-20.0), respectively, for CSI. Patients with CSI who arrived without immobilization having met field clearance guidelines, were managed without intervention, and had no neurologic compromise.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidelines for cervical SMR have high sensitivity and low specificity to identify CSI. When patients with injuries were not placed on motion restrictions, there were no negative clinical outcomes.

Prehospital Predictors of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury in Victoria, Australia

OBJECTIVES

To identify the predictors of traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) and describe the differences between confirmed and potential TSCI cases in the prehospital setting.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study including all adult patients over a six-year period (2007-12) with potential TSCI who were attended and transported by Ambulance Victoria (AV). We extracted potential TSCI cases from the AV data warehouse and linked with the Victorian State Trauma Registry to compare with final hospital diagnosis.

RESULTS

We included a total of 106,059 patients with potential TSCI in the study, with 257 having a spinal cord injury confirmed at hospital (0.2%). The median [First and third Quartiles] age of confirmed TSCI cases was 49 [32-69] years, with males comprising 84.1%. Confirmed TSCI were mainly due to falls (44.8%) and traffic incidents (40.5%). AV spinal care guidelines had a sensitivity of 100% to detect confirmed TSCI. There were several factors associated with a diagnosis of TSCI. These were meeting AV Potential Major Trauma criteria, male gender, presence of neurological deficit, presence of an altered state of consciousness, high falls (> 3 meters), diving, or motorcycle or bicycle collisions.

CONCLUSION

This study identified several predictors of TSCI including meeting AV Potential Major Trauma criteria, male gender, presence of neurological deficit, presence of an altered state of consciousness, high falls (> 3 meters), diving, or motorcycle or bicycle collisions. Most of these predictors are included in NEXUS and/or CCR criteria, however, Potential Major Trauma criteria have not previously been linked to the presence of TSCI. Therefore, Emergency Medical Systems are encouraged to integrate similar Potential Major Trauma criteria into their guidelines and protocols to further improve the provider's accuracy in identifying TSCI and to be more selective in their spinal immobilization, thereby reducing unwarranted adverse effects of this practice.

Update on traumatic acute spinal cord injury. Part 1

Traumatic spinal cord injury requires a multidisciplinary approach both for specialized treatment of the acute phase and for dealing with the secondary complications. A suspicion or diagnosis of spinal cord injury is the first step for a correct management. A review is made of the prehospital management and characteristics of the acute phase of spinal cord injury. Respiratory monitoring for early selective intubation, proper identification and treatment of neurogenic shock are essential for the prevention of secondary spinal cord injury. The use of corticosteroids is currently not a standard practice in neuroprotective treatment, and hemodynamic monitoring and early surgical decompression constitute the cornerstones of adequate management. Traumatic spinal cord injury usually occurs as part of multiple trauma, and this can make diagnosis difficult. Neurological examination and correct selection of radiological exams prevent delayed diagnosis of spinal cord injuries, and help to establish the prognosis.

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.

Can emergency nurses safely and accurately remove cervical spine collars in low risk adult trauma patients: An integrative review

BACKGROUND

Well validated clinical decision rules exist to facilitate the safe removal of collars in the alert, orientated, low risk adult trauma patient, however this practice is traditionally conducted by medical staff. The aim of this review is to synthesise current evidence to determine the efficacy of emergency nurses in safely and accurately removing cervical spine collars using cervical spine rules, in alert, orientated, low risk trauma adult patients.

METHODS

A multi-method search strategy was used to find primary research studies followed by a rigorous screening and quality appraisal process. Data from included articles were extracted, grouped and synthesised.

RESULTS

Nine quantitative research articles resulted in four key findings: the inter-rater reliability between nurses and doctors clearing the cervical spine was high (kappa range (0.61-0.80)); nurses can safely implement the cervical spine clinical decision rule; use of a cervical spine clinical decision rule decreases the time patients are immobilised and; nurses felt confident applying a cervical spine clinical decision rule.

CONCLUSION

Appropriately trained emergency nurses can safely apply cervical spine rules to alert, orientated, low risk adult trauma patients. Implementation of nurses clearing cervical spines should include training and ongoing monitoring.