Effect of a cervical collar on head and neck acceleration profiles during emergency spinal immobilisation and extrication procedures in elite football (soccer) players: protocol for a randomised, controlled cross-over trial

When immobilisation after a cervical spine or head injury is required, the role of the rigid cervical collar is unclear and controversial. There is a need for further studies investigating the use of a rigid cervical collar when head and neck trauma occurs in sport. This study will compare present practice (immobilisation with a cervical collar) to the same procedure without a collar during a simulated spinal immobilisation and extraction scenario from the field of play to the side-line in football (soccer). It will use a prospective cohort within-subjects cross over randomised, controlled trial design. Healthy participants will assume the role of players with a head or neck injury. Clinical practitioners will perform the immobilisation and extrication procedure according to current clinical guidelines. Three dimensional linear and angular acceleration profiles of the head and torso will be measured and the time taken to complete the procedure. The interventions will be a ‘cervical collar’ or ‘no collar’ in random order. Data from the IMUs will be transferred wirelessly to a computer for analysis. Accordingly, within-subject differences between each condition (collar vs no collar) will be assessed with parametric or non-parametric inferential statistics. Statistical significance will be set at p<0.05.Trial registration number:ISRCTN16515969

Self-extrication and selective spinal immobilisation in a polytrauma patient with spinal injuries

Methods of extrication and spinal immobilisation following trauma remains controversial. There is a consensus shift towards encouraging patients to self-extricate from vehicles after collisions and reduced use of hard cervical collars. Difficulties in conducting randomised controlled trials in this area means that case reports are important in adding to the existing evidence base. This case of an 81-year-old female polytrauma patient suggests that self-extrication, and not using hard cervical collars is safe practice, even in the context of significant multi-level spinal injuries.

LO027: Cervical spine injury in trauma patients 65 years and older immobilised in the prehospital setting

Introduction: Following a protocol derived from the Canadian C-spine Rule (CCR), patients 65 years and older transported by ambulance after trauma require full spinal immobilisation. Immobilisation complicates the transport and the evaluation; potential side effects have been recognized. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of mechanism of trauma and age on the rate of cervical injury in a geriatric population. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study on patients 65 years and older transported by ambulance to a level-one trauma center from March 2008 to October 2013. The outcome was the rate of clinically important cervical spine injury (CICSI), defined as any fracture, dislocation or ligamentous injury needing treatment or specialised follow up. The rate was calculated in the geriatric population and in the subgroup of patients with minor trauma, defined as a fall from a standing height, a chair or a bed. We then looked at the rate of CICSI based on age to define a subgroup at lower risk of lesion. Results: We included 1221 patients with a mean age of 80 y.o. (SD = 8), 739 women (61%). CICSI was found in 53 patients (4.3%, 95% CI 3.2-5.4). This is similar to the rate found in patients 65 years and older in the NEXUS population (4.6%) and the CCR population (6.0%). The mechanism of injury was a minor trauma for 716 patients (59%). Of those, 24 patients (3.4%, 95% CI 2.1-4.7) had CICSI. The rate increased after 85 y.o in both the overall population (3.4% vs 6.4%) and the minor trauma subgroup (2.6% vs 4.4%). Conclusion: The subgroup of patients 65-84 y.o. with a minor trauma had the lower rate of cervical spine injury (2.6%). In a lot of prehospital systems, those patients are not systematically immobilised for transport. It will be interesting to review the files of all patients with CICSI to identify any possible case that would have been missed without the age criteria.