Evaluation of the efficiency of Minerva collar on cervical spine motions

Pegah Saddat Hosseini, Mohammad Taghi Karimi, Fatemeh Abnavi, Marzieh Golabbakhsh

Abstract


Background:  Various types of cervical collars have being used to immobilize the cervical spine. There was no information regarding the effectiveness of Cervicothoracic collars (Minerva) on restriction of motions in cervical spine. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the immobilization achieved follow the use of Minerva collar in cervical and Cervicothoracic spine.

Methods: Twenty healthy subjects (10 females and 10 males) were recruited in the study with no history of pain, deformity and surgery in spine. A motion analysis system was used to record the motions of cervical, upper thoracic and cervicothoracic in flexion, extension, lateral bending and rotation with and without Minerva collar.

Results: The motion restriction of the upper cervical spine obtained with Minerva collar varied between 86.32 and 90%. The range of flexion/extension of cervical and cervicothoracic parts decreased by 27.35 and 56.32%, respectively follow the use of Minerva collar. The flexion/ extension range of motion of this segment decreased by 77.85 and 63.25%, respectively between occiput and T12.

Conclusion: The maximum restriction of motion with Minerva collar was achieved in cervical spine. Due to the efficiency of Minerva collar to restrict the motions of cervical, especially in the upper part.


Keywords


Minerva collar, Motion restriction, Cervical and Cervicothoracic spine

Full Text:

PDF

References


Johnson, R.M., et al., Cervical orthoses. A study comparing their

effectiveness in restricting cervical motion in normal subjects. J

Bone Joint Surg Am, 1977. 59(3): p. 332-339.

White, A.A. and M.M. Panjabi, The problem of clinical instability

in the human spine: a systematic approach. Clinical biomechanics

of the spine, 1990. 2: p. 277-378.

Askins, V. and F.J. Eismont, Efficacy of five cervical orthoses

in restricting cervical motion: a comparison study. Spine, 1997.

(11): p. 1193-1198.

Richter, D., et al., The stabilizing effects of different orthoses in the

intact and unstable upper cervical spine: a cadaver study. Journal

of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 2001. 50(5): p. 848-854.

Barati K, A.M., Vameghi R, Abdoli A, Farmani F., The Effect of

Soft and Rigid Cervical Collars on Head and Neck Immobilization

in Healthy Subjects.11(3):390-395. doi:10.4184/asj.2017.11.3.390.

Asian Spine Journal.11 (3):390-395. doi:10.4184/asj.2017.11.3.390.,

Carter, V.M., et al., The effect of a soft collar, used as normally

recommended or reversed, on three planes of cervical range of

motion. . Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy,

(3): p. 209-215., 1996. .

Chan, R.C., J.F. Schweigel, and G.B. Thompson, Halo-thoracic

brace immobilization in 188 patients with acute cervical spine

injuries. Journal of neurosurgery, 58(4): p. 508-515. , 1983.

Hughes, S.J., How effective is the Newport/Aspen collar? A

prospective radiographic evaluation in healthy adult volunteers.

Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 45(2): p. 374-378.,

Kaufman, W.A., et al.,, Comparison of three prefabricated

cervical collars. Orthotics and Prosthetics, 39(4): p. 21-28., 1986.

Sandler, A.J., et al., , The effectiveness of various cervical

orthoses: an in vivo comparison of the mechanical stability

provided by several widely used models. . Spine, 21(14): p. 1624-

, 1996. .

Sawers, A., C.P. DiPaola, and G.R. Rechtine, , Suitability of the

noninvasive halo for cervical spine injuries: a retrospective

analysis of outcomes. . The Spine Journal, 9(3): p. 216-220., 2009.

Whitcroft KL, M.L., Amirfeyz R, Bannister GC. , A Comparison

of Neck Movement in the Soft Cervical Collar and Rigid Cervical

Brace in Healthy Subjects. . Journal of Manipulative and

Physiological Therapeutics. 34(2):119-22., 2011;.

Askins, V.a.F.J.E., Efficacy of five cervical orthoses in restricting

cervical motion: a comparison study. . Spine. 22(11): p. 1193-

, , 1997.

James CY, R.B., Munkasy BA, Joyner AB. , Comparison of

Cervical Spine Motion During Application Among 4 Rigid

Immobilization Collars. . Journal of Athletic Training.39 (2):138-

, 2004;.

Chan, R.C., J.F. Schweigel, and G.B. Thompson, Halo-thoracic

brace immobilization in 188 patients with acute cervical spine

injuries. Journal of neurosurgery, 1983. 58(4): p. 508-515.

Kirshblum, S., et al., Predictors of dysphagia after spinal cord

injury. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 1999.

(9): p. 1101-1105.

Lind, B., H. Sihlbom, and A. Nordwall, Halo-vest treatment of

unstable traumatic cervical spine injuries. Spine, 1988. 13(4):

p. 425-432.

Morishima, N., K. Ohota, and Y. Miura, The influences of Halovest

fixation and cervical hyperextension on swallowing in healthy

volunteers. Spine, 2005. 30(7): p. E179-E182.

Sawers, A., C.P. DiPaola, and G.R. Rechtine, Suitability of the

noninvasive halo for cervical spine injuries: a retrospective

analysis of outcomes. The Spine Journal, 2009. 9(3): p. 216-220.

Stambolis, V., et al., The effects of cervical bracing upon

swallowing in young, normal, healthy volunteers. Dysphagia,

18(1): p. 39-45.

Goldberg, B. and J.D. Hsu, Atlas of orthoses and assistive devices.

: Mosby Incorporated.

Hashimoto, Y., et al., Intracerebral pneumocephalus and

hemiparesis as a complication of a halo vest in a patient with

multiple myeloma: case report. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine,

100(4): p. 367-371.

Park, P., et al., Pin-site myiasis: a rare complication of halo

orthosis. Spinal cord, 2005. 43(11): p. 684-686.

Carter, V.M., et al., The effect of a soft collar, used as normally

recommended or reversed, on three planes of cervical range

of motion. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy,

23(3): p. 209-215.

Kaufman, W.A., et al., Comparison of three prefabricated cervical

collars. Orthotics and Prosthetics, 1986. 39(4): p. 21-28.

Sandler, A.J., et al., The effectiveness of various cervical orthoses:

an in vivo comparison of the mechanical stability provided by

several widely used models. Spine, 1996. 21(14): p. 1624-1629.

Whitcroft, K.L., et al., A comparison of neck movement in the

soft cervical collar and rigid cervical brace in healthy subjects.

Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics. 34(2):

p. 119-122.

Lauweryns, P., Role of conservative treatment of cervical spine

injuries. European Spine Journal. 19(1): p. 23-26.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

pISSN: 2345-6167        eISSN: 2345-6159