Podolsky S, Baraff L J, Simon R R, Hoffman J R, Larmon B, Ablon W
J Trauma. 1983 Jun;23(6):461-5. doi: 10.1097/00005373-198306000-00003.
Cervical spine immobilization devices are widely used to stabilize the cervical spine and prevent neurologic deficits associated with unstable fractures. In order to quantitate their efficacy we measured controlled cervical spine motion in three axes, using six different immobilization methods in 25 volunteers instructed to actively move their necks as much as possible in the directions of flexion, extension, rotation, and lateral bending while lying supine. Control measurements were made with no device and measurements were repeated following immobilization with: soft collar (SC), hard collar (HC), extrication collar (EC), Philadelphia collar (PC), bilateral sandbags joined with 3-inch cloth tape across the forehead (ST), and the combination of sandbags, tape, and the Philadelphia collar (ST/PC). Neck movements were reported in degrees recorded on a hand-held goniometer. There were no significant differences between control and SC measurements except in rotary movement. PC was not significantly better than the other two types of hard collars, except in limiting extension. ST immobilization was significantly better than any of the other four methods used alone, for all four movements. The addition of PC to ST was significantly more effective in reducing extension only.
颈椎固定装置被广泛用于稳定颈椎，预防与不稳定骨折相关的神经功能缺损。为了量化其效果，我们在25名志愿者中使用六种不同的固定方法，测量了颈椎在三个轴向上的可控运动。这些志愿者被要求在仰卧位时尽可能主动地在屈伸、旋转和侧屈方向上活动颈部。在不使用装置的情况下进行对照测量，并在使用以下固定方法后重复测量：软颈托（SC）、硬颈托（HC）、解救颈托（EC）、费城颈托（PC）、用3英寸布带横跨前额连接的双侧沙袋（ST），以及沙袋、布带和费城颈托的组合（ST/PC）。颈部运动以手持量角器记录的度数报告。除旋转运动外，对照测量和SC测量之间没有显著差异。除了限制伸展外，PC并不比其他两种硬颈托显著更好。对于所有四种运动，ST固定单独使用时明显优于其他四种方法中的任何一种。仅在减少伸展方面，将PC添加到ST中显著更有效。
