ArticleHeliyon2024
Cervical misalignment in motorcyclists in relation to new helmet removal recommendations shown with augmented reality resources: A biomechanical analysis.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study is to determine the best technique and position for helmet removal in injured motorcyclists by comparing cervical misalignment produced in the supine position and prone position. Method: Comparative cross-sectional clinical simulation study to quantify CM using biomechanical analysis with the use of inertial systems. The main variable was determined for the flexion-extension motion. The extraction was tested for both positions (prone position and supine position), which were repeated 3 times for each of the 30 volunteers included, and the movement from the initial neutral position was also determined, resulting in a total of 270 biomechanical studies. Results: A flexion was observed when moving the patient from the neutral position to the SP, due to the size of the helmet, of 1.29° ± 5.12°. Helmet removal in the supine position resulted in an average flexion-extension range of 17.51° ± 6.49°, while the same extraction in prone position recorded an average range of 10.82° ± 8.05°. For the main variable, statistically significant differences were found when comparing prone position and supine position (p = 0.0087). Conclusions: The main conclusion of the study is that the helmet removal should be done in the position in which we find the patient, whether in prone position or supine position. Additionally, the new technique described for the prone position causes less movement of the cervical spine than the usual supine position.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.