Scholarlink

<p>Restricting cervical spine movement after a collision and reducing its initial impact may prevent serious spinal cord injuries. This study aimed to use computer simulations to compare the head and neck behavior and spinal cord loading patterns with and without a neck stabilizer. A computer-simulated human body model was used to investigate this neck behavior in three collision directions (frontal, rear, and lateral) using an adult male at the 50th and 95th percentiles and an adult female at the 5th percentile. The angles of motion in the sagittal and coronal planes were measured with and without the neck stabilizer. Following frontal collision with the head and neck, the anterior surface loads at the upper and middle cervical levels (C2 and C5) increased during head and neck extension, and the loads increased with increasing extension angle. The neck stabilizer restricted the head and neck within the normal range of motion even after a frontal or rear collision in the 50th and 95th percentile adult male and 5th percentile female models, respectively. Thus, neck stabilizers may be effective in reducing cervical spinal cord loading by restricting the movement of the head and neck during collisions in this simulation study.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Clinical efficacy of neck stabilizer for cervical spine injury

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月25日

查看全文
  • Hideyuki Arima,
  • Tomohiko Hasegawa,
  • Katsuhiro Imoto,
  • Masayuki Yamazaki,
  • Tatsuya Yuki,
  • Yusuke Hashimoto,
  • Yukihiro Matsuyama

摘要

Restricting cervical spine movement after a collision and reducing its initial impact may prevent serious spinal cord injuries. This study aimed to use computer simulations to compare the head and neck behavior and spinal cord loading patterns with and without a neck stabilizer. A computer-simulated human body model was used to investigate this neck behavior in three collision directions (frontal, rear, and lateral) using an adult male at the 50th and 95th percentiles and an adult female at the 5th percentile. The angles of motion in the sagittal and coronal planes were measured with and without the neck stabilizer. Following frontal collision with the head and neck, the anterior surface loads at the upper and middle cervical levels (C2 and C5) increased during head and neck extension, and the loads increased with increasing extension angle. The neck stabilizer restricted the head and neck within the normal range of motion even after a frontal or rear collision in the 50th and 95th percentile adult male and 5th percentile female models, respectively. Thus, neck stabilizers may be effective in reducing cervical spinal cord loading by restricting the movement of the head and neck during collisions in this simulation study.