Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Experiment Videos

Cervical orthoses.

A Beavis1

  • 1Oxford Orthopaedic Engineering Centre.

Prosthetics and Orthotics International
|April 1, 1989
PubMed
Summary

This study compared cervical orthoses, finding both off-the-shelf and custom collars restrict neck motion effectively. Custom collars, however, offer superior comfort, which is crucial for patient compliance.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

WE-G-BRA-06: Calibrating an Ionisation Chamber: Gaining Experience Using a Dosimetry 'flight Simulator'.

Medical physics·2017
Same author

WE-G-BRA-04: The Development of a Virtual Reality Dosimetry Training Platform for Physics Training.

Medical physics·2017
Same author

Current perspectives in the interpretation of gunshot residues in forensic science: A review.

Forensic science international·2016
Same author

Host innate inflammatory factors and staphylococcal protein A influence the duration of human Staphylococcus aureus nasal carriage.

Mucosal immunology·2016
Same author

Complementation of Myc-dependent cell proliferation by cDNA expression library screening.

Oncogene·2000
Same author

Implementation of enhanced dynamic wedge in the focus rtp system.

Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists·2000
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Area of Science:

  • Biomechanics
  • Orthopedics
  • Rehabilitation Engineering

Background:

  • Cervical orthoses are used to limit motion in the cervical spine.
  • Effectiveness and comfort of off-the-shelf versus custom-fit cervical collars are not well-established.
  • High rejection rates for cervical orthoses necessitate research into improved designs and fit.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To biomechanically compare the motion restriction capabilities of three off-the-shelf cervical orthoses and one custom-fit collar.
  • To assess interface pressures and thermal effects of different cervical collar types.
  • To provide data for improving the prescription and selection of cervical orthoses.

Main Methods:

  • 10 healthy subjects participated in the study.
  • Cervical spine motion (flexion, extension, lateral flexion, axial rotation) was measured.
  • Interface pressures at the chin and occiput were recorded.
  • Warming effect of collars was evaluated.

Main Results:

  • All tested cervical orthoses restricted cervical spine motion, with no significant difference between off-the-shelf Plastazote and custom-fit collars.
  • Plastazote collars reduced flexion and extension by approximately 50%.
  • High interface pressures were noted at the chin for hard and Plastazote orthoses.
  • Soft collars provided a warming effect comparable to a wool scarf.

Conclusions:

  • Off-the-shelf cervical orthoses can be as effective as custom-fit collars in restricting cervical spine motion.
  • Comfort is a significant factor, with custom-fit collars perceived as more comfortable by subjects.
  • Addressing comfort and interface pressures is vital for improving patient adherence and reducing rejection rates of cervical orthoses.

Related Experiment Videos