Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27635354›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2016

Effect of pillow height on the biomechanics of the head-neck complex: investigation of the cranio-cervical pressure and cervical spine alignment.

Sicong Ren, Duo Wai-Chi Wong, Hui Yang, Yan Zhou, Jin Lin, Ming Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. A Survey of Koreans on Sleep Habits and Sleeping Symptoms Relating to Pillow Comfort and Support.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  13. The Role of Head Elevation in Treatment of Vitreous Haemorrhage.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sicong Ren *Interdisciplinary Division of Biomedical Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.
Duo Wai-Chi Wong *Interdisciplinary Division of Biomedical Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.
Hui YangInfinitus (China) Company Ltd., China.
Yan ZhouInfinitus (China) Company Ltd., China.
Jin LinInfinitus (China) Company Ltd., China.
Ming ZhangInterdisciplinary Division of Biomedical Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile appropriate pillow height is crucial to maintaining the quality of sleep and overall health, there are no universal, evidence-based guidelines for pillow design or selection. We aimed to evaluate the effect of pillow height on cranio-cervical pressure and cervical spine alignment.

methodsTen healthy subjects (five males) aged 26 ± 3.6 years were recruited. The average height, weight, and neck length were 167 ± 9.3 cm, 59.6 ± 11.9 kg, and 12.9 ± 1.2 cm respectively. The subjects lay on pillows of four different heights (H0, 110 mm; H1, 130 mm; H2, 150 mm; and H3, 170 mm). The cranio-cervical pressure distribution over the pillow was recorded; the peak and average pressures for each pillow height were compared by one-way ANOVA with repeated measures. Cervical spine alignment was studied using a finite element model constructed based on data from the Visible Human Project. The coordinate of the center of each cervical vertebra were predicted for each pillow height. Three spine alignment parameters (cervical angle, lordosis distance and kyphosis distance) were identified.

resultsThe average cranial pressure at pillow height H3 was approximately 30% higher than that at H0, and significantly different from those at H1 and H2 (p < 0.05). The average cervical pressure at pillow height H0 was 65% lower than that at H3, and significantly different from those at H1 and H2 (p < 0.05). The peak cervical pressures at pillow heights H2 and H3 were significantly different from that at H0 (p < 0.05). With respect to cervical spine alignment, raising pillow height from H0 to H3 caused an increase of 66.4% and 25.1% in cervical angle and lordosis distance, respectively, and a reduction of 43.4% in kyphosis distance. DISCUSSION: Pillow height elevation significantly increased the average and peak pressures of the cranial and cervical regions, and increased the extension and lordosis of the cervical spine. The cranio-cervical pressures and cervical spine alignment were height-specific, and they were believed to reflect quality of sleep. Our results provide a quantitative and objective evaluation of the effect of pillow height on the biomechanics of the head-neck complex, and have application in pillow design and selection.

Indexed as

Cervical spine alignmentCranio-cervical pressureFinite element analysisPillow design

Identifiers

PMID27635354
PMCPMC5012320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.