Article

Cervical orthoses are often prescribed for both extrication stabilization of trauma patients and a treatment option of injuries to the cervical spine. The objective of this study was to compare effectiveness of two new and two established cervical ortboses in restricting 3D range of motion in the cervical spine. Methods. Twenty healthy males and females (ten each) participated in the study. Two new cervical collars, C-Breeze and XTW and two established collars, Miami J and Aspen, were examined. A 3-camera Vicon system was used to collect 3D kinematic data. Subjects performed three trials in each of the 15 test conditions wearing no collar and the four cervical collars and performing three different head movements: flexion-extension, left-right lateral flexion, and left-right axial rotation. Findings. The results comparing with the unbraced movements indicated that the Miami J and C-Breeze collars had significantly greater percent reduction on range of motion in flexion than the XTW collar. For both extension and lateral bending, all three collars showed greater percent reduction than the Miami J. The XTW also showed greater reduction than the C-Breeze and Aspen in extension. Finally, the C-Breeze collar showed a significantly more reduction in axial rotation than the Miami J collar. Interpretation. The results suggested that C-Breeze and XTW along with the Miami J and Aspen collars are effective in restricting range of motion in the cervical spine. The two new cervical orthoses also performed either comparably as or better than the two established cervical orthoses. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS