• Todd McGrath and Crystal Murphy.
• Drexel University College of Medicine, Department of Emergency Mecicine, Hahnemann University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA. tmcgrath@drexelmed.edu
• Wilderness Environ Med. 2009 Jan 1;20(2):166-8.

ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of a SAM splint molded into a cervical collar with that of a Philadelphia cervical collar at limiting movement of the cervical spine in 5 different movements.MethodsThis study was prospectively carried out in 13 healthy volunteer subjects. A hand-held goniometer was then used to measure degrees of maximal extension (starting in a maximally flexed position), rotation (left and right), and lateral flexion (left and right) with each collar. The results were then analyzed for the 5 independent movements using the paired t test to determine the effectiveness of the SAM splint compared with that of the Philadelphia collar.ResultsThere was no statistically significant difference between the Philadelphia collar and the SAM splint at limiting movement of the cervical spine in any of the measured movements or in total allowed degrees of movement.ConclusionThe results of this study suggest that the SAM splint, when molded into a cervical collar, is as effective as the Philadelphia collar at limiting movement of the cervical spine.

15 keywords...

hide…