Open-Design Collar vs. Conventional Philadelphia Collar Regarding User Satisfaction and Cervical Range of Motion in Asymptomatic Adults.
cross_sectional · Level IV
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 26390392.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000374.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The current study aimed to compare the Philadelphia collar and an open-design cervical collar with regard to user satisfaction and cervical range of motion in asymptomatic adults. Seventy-two healthy subjects (36 women, 36 men) aged 18 to 29 yrs were recruited for this study. Neck movements, including active flexion, extension, right/left lateral flexion, and right/left axial rotation, were assessed in each subject under three conditions--without wearing a collar and while wearing two different cervical collars--using a dual digital inclinometer. Subject satisfaction was assessed using a five-item self-administered questionnaire. Both Philadelphia and open-design collars significantly reduced cervical motions (P < 0.05). Compared with the Philadelphia collar, the open-design collar more greatly reduced cervical motions in three planes and the differences were statistically significant except for limiting flexion. Satisfaction scores for Philadelphia and open-design collars were 15.89 (3.87) and 19.94 (3.11), respectively. Based on the data of the 72 subjects presented in this study, the open-design collar adequately immobilized the cervical spine as a semirigid collar and was considered cosmetically acceptable, at least for subjects aged younger than 30 yrs.
Medical subject headings
- Braces
- Movement
- Neck
- Patient Satisfaction
- Rotation