Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35033160›Full record

ArticleScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2022

Assessing spinal movement during four extrication methods: a biomechanical study using healthy volunteers.

Tim Nutbeam, Rob Fenwick, Barbara May, Willem Stassen, Jason E Smith, Jono Bowdler, Lee Wallis, James Shippen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Optimising the care of the trapped patient following a motor vehicle collision: A UK-Based Delphi consensus study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  4. Vehicle extrication in road traffic crashes: a descriptive analysis of an advanced medical rescue service in South Africa.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Tim NutbeamEmergency Department, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK. timnutbeam@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0814-9240
Rob FenwickUniversity Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Barbara MayInstitute for Future Transport and Cities, University of Coventry, Coventry, UK.
Willem StassenDivision of Emergency Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Jason E SmithEmergency Department, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK.
Jono BowdlerFire and Rescue Service Trainer, Severn Park Fire and Rescue Centre, Bristol, UK.
Lee WallisDivision of Emergency Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
James ShippenInstitute for Future Transport and Cities, University of Coventry, Coventry, UK.
University of Cape Town · ZACoventry University · GBNIHR Surgical Reconstruction and Microbiology Research Centre · GBRoyal Navy · GBSevern Trent (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMotor vehicle collisions are a common cause of death and serious injury. Many casualties will remain in their vehicle following a collision. Trapped patients have more injuries and are more likely to die than their untrapped counterparts. Current extrication methods are time consuming and have a focus on movement minimisation and mitigation. The optimal extrication strategy and the effect this extrication method has on spinal movement is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the movement at the cervical and lumbar spine for four commonly utilised extrication techniques.

methodsBiomechanical data was collected using inertial Measurement Units on 6 healthy volunteers. The extrication types examined were: roof removal, b-post rip, rapid removal and self-extrication. Measurements were recorded at the cervical and lumbar spine, and in the anteroposterior (AP) and lateral (LAT) planes. Total movement (travel), maximal movement, mean, standard deviation and confidence intervals are reported for each extrication type.

resultsData from a total of 230 extrications were collected for analysis. The smallest maximal and total movement (travel) were seen when the volunteer self-extricated (AP max = 2.6 mm, travel 4.9 mm). The largest maximal movement and travel were seen in rapid extrication extricated (AP max = 6.21 mm, travel 20.51 mm). The differences between self-extrication and all other methods were significant (p < 0.001), small non-significant differences existed between roof removal, b-post rip and rapid removal. Self-extrication was significantly quicker than the other extrication methods (mean 6.4 s).

conclusionsIn healthy volunteers, self-extrication is associated with the smallest spinal movement and the fastest time to complete extrication. Rapid, B-post rip and roof off extrication types are all associated with similar movements and time to extrication in prepared vehicles.

Indexed as

Accidents, TrafficCervical VertebraeHealthy VolunteersHumans

Identifiers

PMID35033160
PMCPMC8760816
OpenAlexW4225248952

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.