Bauer D, Kowalski R
Department of Emergency Medicine, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan 48072.
Ann Emerg Med. 1988 Sep;17(9):915-8. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(88)80671-1.
In the prehospital management of trauma, a variety of devices are used for immobilization of the spinal column during extrication and transport. Two of these commonly used immobilizers, the Zee Extrication Device and the long spinal board, use crisscrossing straps over the thorax to affix the patient to the device. Our study was designed to determine if these two devices alter pulmonary function in the healthy, nonsmoking man. We took 15 healthy, nonsmoking male volunteers and tested four pulmonary function parameters: forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), the ratio FEV1:FVC, and forced mid-expiratory flow (FEF 25%-75%). A Breon spirometer was used to test these functions both before and after the volunteers were strapped into the two devices. Three separate trials were given for each parameter and the best scores were used for data computation. Strap tension was controlled by placing a sphygmomanometer beneath each strap and adding tension to produce 10 mm Hg pressure. We found a significant difference (P less than .05) between prestrapping and poststrapping values for three of the four functions tested using the long spinal board: FVC (P = .0079), FEV1 (P = .0001), and FEF 25%-75% (P = .0252). Similarly significant differences were found for three of the four parameters using the Zee Extrication Device: FVC (P = .004), FEV1 (P = .0022), and FEF 25%-75% (P = .008). These differences reflect a marked pulmonary restrictive effect. The ratio FEV1:FVC can be normal or even slightly elevated with restrictive airway disease due to proportional reductions of each parameter. Correspondingly, we found no significant difference between prestrapping and poststrapping FEV1:FVC values (P greater than .05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
在创伤的院前管理中,在解救和转运过程中使用了多种装置来固定脊柱。其中两种常用的固定器,即Zee解救装置和长脊柱板,通过在胸部交叉捆绑带子将患者固定在装置上。我们的研究旨在确定这两种装置是否会改变健康、不吸烟男性的肺功能。我们选取了15名健康、不吸烟的男性志愿者,测试了四项肺功能参数:用力肺活量(FVC)、一秒用力呼气量(FEV1)、FEV1:FVC比值以及用力呼气中期流速(FEF 25%-75%)。在志愿者被捆绑到这两种装置之前和之后,使用Breon肺活量计测试这些功能。每个参数进行三次独立试验,并使用最佳分数进行数据计算。通过在每条带子下方放置血压计并增加张力以产生10毫米汞柱的压力来控制带子的张力。我们发现,使用长脊柱板测试的四项功能中的三项,捆绑前和捆绑后的值存在显著差异(P小于0.05):FVC(P = 0.0079)、FEV1(P = 0.0001)和FEF 25%-75%(P = 0.0252)。同样,使用Zee解救装置时,四项参数中的三项也发现了显著差异:FVC(P = 0.004)、FEV1(P = 0.0022)和FEF 25%-75%(P = 0.008)。这些差异反映了明显的肺限制性效应。由于每个参数成比例降低,FEV1:FVC比值在限制性气道疾病中可能正常甚至略有升高。相应地,我们发现捆绑前和捆绑后FEV1:FVC值之间没有显著差异(P大于0.05)。(摘要截选至250字)