1 Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Prehosp Disaster Med. 2013 Oct;28(5):462-5. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X13008637. Epub 2013 Jun 10.
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.
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.
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.
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.
在将患者转运至医疗机构的过程中，疑似脊柱损伤的患者必须得到妥善的固定。本研究旨在比较在急救医疗服务（EMS）系统转运的创伤患者中，使用长背板（LBB）和真空床垫夹板（VMS）进行脊柱固定的效果。
在这项随机临床试验中，将 60 名疑似脊柱创伤的创伤患者分为两组，每组分别使用这两种器械中的一种进行固定。记录应用速度和易用性、固定率以及患者舒适度。
在这项调查中，LBB 的应用速度更快：211.66（SD=28.53）秒比 654.00（SD=16.61）秒。LBB 在各种固定措施上的效果均优于 VMS。此外，对于疑似脊柱损伤的患者，LBB 在舒适度方面也显著优于 VMS。所有结果均具有统计学意义。
本研究结果表明，与 VMS 相比，使用 LBB 进行固定时，患者的操作更简单、速度更快、舒适度更高，并且能进一步减少脊柱运动。
