SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi / 2011 / Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 2

Sağlıklı gönüllü kişilerde spinal immobilizasyon cihazlarının pulmoner fonksiyonlara etkisi

Effects of spinal immobilization devices on pulmonary function in healthy volunteer individuals

Didem AY
CAN AKTAŞ
Sabiha YEŞİLYURT
SEZGİN SARIKAYA
Aslı ÇETİN
Emine Sevda ÖZDOĞAN
Pages
103–107
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

After application of the long spinal backboard, a comparison of baseline levels and levels at the 5th and 30th minutes demonstrated statistically significant decreases in FEV1 (p=0.000) and FVC levels (p=0.000), but no significant difference in FEV1/FVC levels.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:BACKGROUND We aimed to investigate the effects of spinal immobilization devices on pulmonary functions.
📊
Key Findings & Data:METHODS This study was a cross-over trial in healthy volunteer subjects; 60 volunteers were included.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:After application of the long spinal backboard, a comparison of baseline levels and levels at the 5th and 30th minutes demonstrated statistically significant decreases in FEV1 (p=0.000) and FVC levels (p=0.000), but no significant difference in FEV1/FVC levels.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

BACKGROUND We aimed to investigate the effects of spinal immobilization devices on pulmonary functions. METHODS This study was a cross-over trial in healthy volunteer subjects; 60 volunteers were included. We performed a full spirometry in the supine position, and forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and FEV1/FVC were recorded in all subjects. Then, Philadelphia type cervical collar (Philly) and Kendrick extrication device (KED) were applied to all subjects. We measured FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC in all subjects in the supine position at the 5th and 30th minutes after application of cervical collar and KED. After a one-hour relaxation period, Philly and long spinal backboard with straps were applied to all subjects. FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC were measured again in all subjects at the 5th and 30th minutes after application of cervical collar and long spinal backboard. RESULTS After application of KED, baseline levels were compared with levels at the 5th and 30th minutes. Statistically significant decreases were determined in FEV1 (p=0.000) and FVC levels (p=0.000) after application of KED, but there were no significant differences in FEV1/FVC levels. After application of the long spinal backboard, a comparison of baseline levels and levels at the 5th and 30th minutes demonstrated statistically significant decreases in FEV1 (p=0.000) and FVC levels (p=0.000), but no significant difference in FEV1/FVC levels.

Özet

AMAÇ Spinal immobilizasyon cihazlarının solunum fonksiyonları üzerindeki etkileri araştırıldı. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM Bu çalışma, sağlıklı gönüllü kişilerde yapılan kesitsel bir çalışmadır, 60 gönüllü dahil edildi. Yatar pozisyondayken tam spirometre uygulandı ve tüm deneklerde zorlu vital kapasite (FVC), zorlu birinci saniye ekspiratuvar hacim (FEV1) ve FEV1/FVC kaydedildi. Sonra, Philadelphia tipi boyunluk (Philly) ve travma yeleği (Kendrick extrication device=KED) tüm deneklere uygulandı. Boyunluk ve KED uygulamasından sonra 5. ve 30. dakikada tüm deneklerde FVC, FEV1 ve FEV1/FVC ölçüldü. Bir saat dinlenme zamanından sonra, tüm deneklere Philly ve uzun omurga tahtası tekrar uygulandı. Boyunluk ve uzun omurga tahtası uygulandıktan sonra tüm deneklerde 5. ve 30. dakikada FVC, FEV1 ve FEV1/FVC ölçüldü. BULGULAR Bazal değerler KED uygulandıktan sonra ölçülen 5. ve 30. dakika değerleri ile karşılaştırıldı. KED uygulandıktan sonra FEV1 (p=0,000) ve FVC değerlerinde (p=0,000) önemli derecede istatiksel anlamlı düşme bulundu, ama FEV1/ FVC değerlerinde belirgin değişiklik yoktu. Uzun omurga tahtası uygulandıktan sonra 5. ve 30. dakikada ölçülen değerleri bazal değerlerle karşılaştırıldı. Uzun omurga tahtası uygulandıktan sonra FEV1 (p=0,000) ve FVC değerlerinde (p=0,000) önemli derecede istatiksel anlamlı düşme bulundu, fakat FEV1/FVC değerlerinde belirgin değişiklik yoktu.

🔖

Cite This Article

AY, D., AKTAŞ, C., YEŞİLYURT, S., SARIKAYA, S., ÇETİN, A., ÖZDOĞAN, E. S. (2011). Sağlıklı gönüllü kişilerde spinal immobilizasyon cihazlarının pulmoner fonksiyonlara etkisi. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 2, 103–107. https://ajindex.com/articles/324269

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Taviloğlu K, Ertekin C. Current status and future options for trauma and emergency surgery in Turkey. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 2008;14:10-3
  2. Peden M, Scurfield R, Sleet D, Mohan D, Hyder AA, Mathers EJ, et al. World Report on Road Traffic Injury Prevention. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004
  3. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. CDC Injury Fact Book. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2006
  4. Dorothy P. Rice, Ellen J. MacKenzie, and Associates. Cost of Injury in the United States: A Report to Congress. San Francisco, CA: Institute for Health & Aging, University of California and Injury Prevention Center, The Johns Hopkins University, 1989
  5. Baron BJ, Scalea TM. Spinal cord injuries. In: Tintinalli JE, Kelen GD, Stapzynski JS, editors. Emergency medicine: a comprehensive study guide. 6th ed. New York: McGraw Hill; 2004. p. 1569-82
  6. American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons Committee on Injuries, Fractures and dislocations of the spine. Emergency Care and Transportation of the Sick and Injured. Chicago, IL: American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons; 1971. p. 111-5
  7. Domeier RM. Indications for prehospital spinal immobilization. National Association of EMS Physicians Standards and Clinical Practice Committee. Prehosp Emerg Care 1999;3:251-3
  8. Kwan I, Bunn F, Roberts I. Spinal immobilisation for trauma patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001;2:CD002803
  9. Bernhard M, Helm M, Aul A, Gries A. Preclinic management of multiple trauma, Anaesthesist 2004;53:887-904 10. The Section on Disorders of the spine and peripheral nerves of the american association of neurologic surgeons and the congress of neurologic surgeons. Prehospital cervical spinal immobilization following trauma. September, 2001
  10. Vickery D. The use of the spinal board after the pre-hospital phase of trauma management. Emerg Med J 2001;18:51-4
  11. American College of Surgeons. Advanced Trauma Life Support Program for doctors. 6th ed. Chicago: American College of Surgeons; 1997
  12. Ziegenfuss T. Emergency management of polytrauma patients. Zentralbl Chir 1996;121:924-42. [Abstract] 14. Bauer D, Kowalski R. Effect of spinal immobilization devices on pulmonary function in the healthy, nonsmoking man. Ann Emerg Med 1988;17:915-8
  13. Totten VY, Sugarman DB. Respiratory effects of spinal immobilization. Prehosp Emerg Care 1999;3:347-52
  14. Schafermeyer RW, Ribbeck BM, Gaskins J, Thomason S, Harlan M, Attkisson A. Respiratory effects of