Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35194169›Full record

ArticleSpinal cord2022

Evaluating a novel, low-cost technique for cervical-spine immobilization for application in resource-limited LMICs: a non-inferiority trial.

Zachary J Eisner, Peter G Delaney, Haleigh Pine, Kenneth Yeh, Ilyas S Aleem, Krishnan Raghavendran, Patricia Widder

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Spinal cord, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Advanced responder training priorities in Kenya: A Delphi study with implications for low- and middle- income countries.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2026
    Article
  2. Comparison of the immobilizing effect of soft, semi-rigid and rigid neck orthoses.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zachary J EisnerDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. zeisner@wustl.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-8512-7294
Peter G DelaneyLFR International, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Haleigh PineDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Kenneth YehDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Ilyas S AleemDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Krishnan RaghavendranDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Patricia WidderDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Washington University in St. Louis · USUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designNon-inferiority trial.

objectiveLimited cervical spinal (c-spine) immobilization in resource-limited settings of LMICs suggests alternatives are necessary for patients with traumatic injuries. We propose a novel method of c-spine immobilization using folded towels.

settingWashington University in St. Louis.

methodsUsing non-inferiority trial design, thirty healthy patients (median age = 22) were enrolled to test the efficacy of folded towels in comparison with rigid cervical collars, foam neck braces, and no immobilization. We measured cervical range of motion (CROM) in six cardinal directions in seated and supine positions. A weighted composite score (CS) was generated to compare immobilization methods. A preserved fraction of 75% was determined for non-inferiority, corresponding to the difference between the median values for CROM between control (no immobilization) and c-collar states.

resultsC-collars reduce median CROM in six cardinal directions in seated and supine positions by an average of -36.83° seated (-17.75° supine) vs. no immobilization. Folded towels and foam neck braces reduced CROM by -27° seated (-16.75° supine) and -14.25° seated (-9.5° supine), respectively. Compared to a 25% non-inferiority margin (permitting an average 9.21° of cervical movement across six cardinal directions), the CS determined folded towels are non-inferior (CS

conclusionsFolded towels are a non-inferior means of immobilizing c-spine in extension and rotation, but not flexion, vs. c-collars. We propose folded towels could be trialed in combination with backboards to deliver affordable and effective prehospital TSCI management in resource-limited settings.

Indexed as

Cervical VertebraeSpinal Cord InjuriesAdultDeveloping CountriesHumansOrthotic DevicesRange of Motion, ArticularYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID35194169
OpenAlexW4213299958

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.