Experimental investigation of applying segmented scoop stretcher (S 3 ) for full-body immobilization of the injured patient

Abstract

The work presents an experimental investigation of a novel segmented scoop stretcher (S³) to examine full-body immobilization during patient transfer. The designed stretcher aids to provide head, vertebral column, and pelvis immobilization during segmented scooping of corresponding body parts. Scooping experiments on nine participants were performed on fabricated S³ and one of the commercially available scoop stretcher (CSS) to compare the mean range of motion (ROM) of various body parts employing full body scissor and segmented scissor techniques. The angular motion along the spinous process and the nasion (forehead) were recorded through motion sensors (six-dimensional electromagnetic tracking system) placed at various anatomical positions while scooping. Experimental results showed a significant reduction in movement of corresponding body parts in scooping with S³ as compared to existing CSS. A higher immobilization of approximately 2º–5º in the sagittal, lateral, and axial planes were observed while applying S³ as compared to CSS (p < 0.002). Achieving improvement in immobilization of the injured patient with S³ can reduce the risk of further injury during pre-hospital care.

Keywords

Segmented scoop stretcher segmented scissor technique full body immobilization six-dimensional ETS mean ROM

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Swartz

Tucker

Nowak

, et al. Prehospital cervical spine motion: immobilization versus spine motion restriction. Prehosp Emerg Care 2018; 22(5): 630–636.

Pirouzmand

. Epidemiological trends of spine and spinal cord injuries in the largest Canadian adult trauma center from 1986 to 2006. J Neurosurg Spine 2010; 12(2): 131–140.

Mustard

Burns

. Epidemiology of incident spinal fracture in a complete population. Spine 1996; 21(4): 492–499.

Dryden

Saunders

Rowe

, et al. The epidemiology of traumatic spinal cord injury in Alberta, Canada. Can J Neurol Sci 2003; 30(2): 113–121.

Jackson

Dijkers

DeVivo

, et al. A demographic profile of new traumatic spinal cord injuries: change and stability over 30 years. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85(11): 1740–1748.

Pickett

Simpson

Walker

, et al. Traumatic spinal cord injury in Ontario, Canada. J Trauma 2003; 55(6): 1070–1076.

Podolsky

Hoffman

Pietrafesa

. Neurologic complications following immobilization of cervical spine fracture in a patient with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Emerg Med 1983; 12: 578–580.

Reid

Henderson

Saboe

, et al. Etiology and clinical course of missed spine fractures. J Trauma 1987; 27(9): 980–986.

De Lorenzo

. A review of spinal immobilization techniques. J Emerg Med 1996; 14(5): 603–613.

10.

Krell

McCoy

Sparto

, et al. Comparison of the Ferno Scoop Stretcher with the long backboard for spinal immobilization. Prehosp Emerg Care 2006; 10(1): 46–51.

11.

McGuire

Neville

Green

, et al. Spinal instability and the log-rolling maneuver. J Trauma 1987; 27(5): 525–531.

12.

Dixon

O’Halloran

Cummins

. Biomechanical analysis of spinal immobilisation during prehospital extrication: a proof of concept study. Emerg Med J 2014; 31(9): 745–749.

13.

Johnson

Hauswald

Stockhoff

. Comparison of a vacuum splint device to a rigid backboard for spinal immobilization. Am J Emerg Med 1996; 14: 369–372.

14.

Prasarn

Hyldmo

Zdziarski

, et al. Comparison of the vacuum mattress versus the spine board alone for immobilization of the cervical spine injured patient: a biomechanical cadaveric study. Spine 2017; 42(24): E1398–E1402.

15.

Del Rossi

Horodyski

Conrad

, et al. The 6-plus–person lift transfer technique compared with other methods of spine boarding. J Athl Train 2008; 43(1): 6–13.

16.

Del Rossi

Rechtine

Conrad

, et al. Are scoop stretchers suitable for use on spine-injured patients? Am J Emerg Med 2010; 28(7): 751–756.

17.

Toscano

. Prevention of neurological deterioration before admission to a spinal cord injury unit. Paraplegia 1988; 26(3): 143–150.

18.

Hauswald

Ong

Tandberg

, et al. Out-of-hospital spinal immobilization: its effect on neurologic injury. Acad Emerg Med 1998; 5(3): 214–219.

19.

Abram

Bulstrode

. Routine spinal immobilization in trauma patients: what are the advantages and disadvantages? Surgeon 2010; 8(4): 218–222.

20.

Burton

Dunn

Harmon

, et al. A statewide, prehospital emergency medical service selective patient spine immobilization protocol. J Trauma 2006; 61(1): 161–167.

21.

Boissy

Shrier

Brière

, et al. Effectiveness of cervical spine stabilization techniques. Clin J Sport Med 2011; 21(2): 80–88.

22.

Chakrabarti

. Indian anthropometric dimensions for ergonomic design practice. National Institute of Design, 1997, Ahmedabad, India.

23.

Khan

Giri

Palarapu

. Redesign and ergonomic analysis of scoop stretcher for full body immobilization during casualties. In: ICoRD’15–research into design across boundaries volume 1. New Delhi: Springer, 2015, pp.411–420.

24.

Ebraheim

Ahmad

, et al. The effect of anterior translation of the vertebra on the canal size in the lower cervical spine: a computer-assisted anatomic study. J Spinal Disord 1997; 10(2): 162–166.