SynthesisPloS one2024
Cervical spine immobilisation following blunt trauma in pre-hospital and emergency care: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cervical spine immobilisation following blunt trauma in pre-hospital and emergency care: A systematic review.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Trauma as a critical condition in the very old: assessment, care pathways and outcome differences.European geriatric medicine · 2026Review
- Inertial Sensor-Based Analysis of Cervical and Upper-Thoracic Motion During Extrication: SNAIDSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Compliance With NICE Guidance for Cervical Spine Trauma Imaging: A Single Centre Retrospective Evaluation.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2026Article
- Effectiveness and safety of techniques for cervical spine immobilization in mountain rescue.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Immobilization of trauma patients and in-hospital clinical progression.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2026Article
- Cervical Collar in Adult Trauma: Evidence, Controversies, and Clinical Decision-Making.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2026Review
- Spinal Motion Restriction for Possible Traumatic Cervical Spine Injury: A Scoping Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Extrication following a motor vehicle collision: a consensus statement on behalf of The Faculty of Pre-hospital Care, Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Development and validation of assessment instruments for cervical collar and spinal board placement in simulated environments for nursing students in the care of polytrauma patients.BMC medical education · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess whether different cervical spine immobilisation strategies (full immobilisation, movement minimisation or no immobilisation), impact neurological and/or other outcomes for patients with suspected cervical spinal injury in the pre-hospital and emergency department setting.
designSystematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and two research registers were searched until September 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All comparative studies (prospective or retrospective) that examined the potential benefits and/or harms of immobilisation practices during pre-hospital and emergency care of patients with a potential cervical spine injury (pre-imaging) following blunt trauma. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two authors independently selected and extracted data. Risk of bias was appraised using the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised studies. Data were synthesised without meta-analysis.
resultsSix observational studies met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality was variable, with most studies having serious or critical risk of bias. The effect of cervical spine immobilisation practices such as full immobilisation or movement minimisation during pre-hospital and emergency care did not show clear evidence of benefit for the prevention of neurological deterioration, spinal injuries and death compared with no immobilisation. However, increased pain, discomfort and anatomical complications were associated with collar application during immobilisation.
conclusionsDespite the limited evidence, weak designs and limited generalisability, the available data suggest that pre-hospital cervical spine immobilisation (full immobilisation or movement minimisation) was of uncertain value due to the lack of demonstrable benefit and may lead to potential complications and adverse outcomes. High-quality randomised comparative studies are required to address this important question.
trial registrationPROSPERO REGISTRATION Fiona Lecky, Abdullah Pandor, Munira Essat, Anthea Sutton, Carl Marincowitz, Gordon Fuller, Stuart Reid, Jason Smith. A systematic review of cervical spine immobilisation following blunt trauma in pre-hospital and emergency care. PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022349600 Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022349600.
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.