Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35978468›Full record

SynthesisDeutsches Arzteblatt international2022

The Immo Traffic Light System as a Decision-Making Tool for Prehospital Spinal Immobilization—A Systematic Review

David Häske, Gunnar Blumenstock, Björn Hossfeld, Christoph Wölfl, Uwe Schweigkofler, Jan-Philipp Stock

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

David HäskeCenter for Public Health and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Tübingen, and German Red Cross Emergency Services Reutlingen; Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biometry, University Hospital of Tübingen; Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Pain Therapy, Federal Armed Forces Hospital of Ulm; Department for Orthopedic Surgery, Trauma and Sports Traumatology - Hand and Plastic Surgery, Musculoskeletal Center Neuwied, Marienhaus Hospital Neuwied; Department of Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery, BG Trauma Center, Frankfurt am Main; Department for Anesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine, Pain Therapy and Palliative Care, am Steinenberg Hospital, Reutlingen.
Gunnar Blumenstock
Björn Hossfeld
Christoph Wölfl
Uwe Schweigkofler
Jan-Philipp Stock
Center for Orthopaedics · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpinal injuries are difficult injuries to assess yet can be associated with significant neurological damage. To avoid secondary damage, immobilization is considered state of the art trauma care. The indication for spinal immobilization must be assessed, however, for potential complications as well as its advantages and disadvantages.

methodsThis systematic review addressing the question of the correct indication for spinal immobilization in trauma patients was compiled on the basis of our previously published analysis of possible predictors from the Trauma Registry of the German Society for Trauma Surgery. A Delphi procedure was then used to develop suggestions for action regarding immobilization based on the results of this review.

resultsThe search of the literature yielded 576 publications. The 24 publications included in the qualitative analysis report of 2 228 076 patients. A decision tool for spinal immobilization in prehospital trauma care was developed (Immo traffic light system) based on the results of the Delphi procedure. According to this system, severely injured patients with blunt trauma, severe traumatic brain injury, peripheral neurological symptoms, or spinal pain requiring treatment should be immobilized. Patients with a statistically increased risk of spinal injury as a result of the four cardinal features (fall >3m, severe trunk injury, supra clavicular injury, seniority [age >65 years]) should only have their spinal motion restricted after weighing up the pros and cons. Isolated penetrating trunk injuries should not be immobilized.

conclusionHigh-quality studies demonstrating the benefit of prehospital spinal immobilization are still lacking. Decision tools such as the Immo traffic light system can help weigh up the pros and cons of immobilization.

Indexed as

Emergency Medical ServicesSpinal InjuriesWounds, NonpenetratingWounds, PenetratingAgedHumansImmobilization

Identifiers

PMID35978468
PMCPMC9853232
OpenAlexW4294991627

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.