Comparison of Cervical Motion Restriction Between Soft and Rigid Collars

Anissa Septiani; Atika Febri Anggriani; Esti Dwi Yulianti

doi:10.30787/gaster.v24i1.1920

Authors

Anissa Septiani Department of Orthotic Prosthetic, Poltekkes Kemenkes Surakarta, Surakarta
Atika Febri Anggriani Department of Orthotic Prosthetic, Poltekkes Kemenkes Surakarta, Surakarta
Esti Dwi Yulianti Department of Orthotic Prosthetic, Poltekkes Kemenkes Surakarta, Surakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30787/gaster.v24i1.1920

Keywords:

Neck Motion, Soft Collar, Rigid Collar, Restriction Angle

Abstract

Background: Cervical collars are commonly used to provide comfort and restrict cervical motion in post-operative and pain management patients, with an average usage rate of 80.8% in cervical injury cases. Different collar types offer varying degrees of motion restriction, which is critical in patient recovery. Purpose: This study aims to compare the degree of neck movement restriction between soft cervical collars and rigid cervical collars. Methods: This quantitative research used a cross-sectional study design. A purposive sampling technique was applied to select 20 respondents from a population of 212, based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Respondents were divided into two intervention groups: 10 participants wore soft collars, and 10 wore rigid collars. Neck movement restriction angles were measured using the Angulus application, focusing on six directions of movement: flexion, extension, right and left lateral flexion, and right and left rotation. Results: The results showed significant differences in restriction angles between the two collar types. Rigid collars demonstrated greater restriction than soft collars, with mean differences as follows: 29,35(flexion), 15,10 (extension), 17,72 (right lateral flexion), 17,78 (left lateral flexion), 21,93 (right rotation), and 24,02 (left rotation). Conclusion: There is a statistically significant difference in neck movement restriction between soft and rigid collars. Rigid collars are more effective in limiting cervical motion across all measured directions. These findings highlight the importance of selecting the appropriate collar type based on the desired level of immobilization for optimal clinical outcomes.

References

Araghi, K., Jacofsky, M., & McCamley, J. (2021). Comparison of cervical motion restriction and interface pressure between two cervical collars. Clinical Biomechanics, 89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2021.105482

Asha, S. E., Curtis, K., Healy, G., Neuhaus, L., Tzannes, A., & Wright, K. (2021). Neurologic outcomes following the introduction of a policy for using soft cervical collars in suspected traumatic cervical spine injury: A retrospective chart review. Emergency Medicine Australasia, 33(1), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.13646

Bäcker, H.C., Elias, P., Braun, K.F., Johnson, M.A., Turner, P., & Cunningham, J. (2022). Cervical immobilization in trauma patients: soft collars better than rigid collars? A systematic review and meta-analysis. European Spine Journal, 31(12), 3378–3391. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00586-022-07405-6/METRICS

Barati, K., Arazpour, M., Vameghi, R., Abdoli, A., & Farmani, F. (2017). The Effect of Soft and Rigid Cervical Collars on Head and Neck Immobilization in Healthy Subjects. Asian Spine Journal, 11(3), 390–395. https://doi.org/10.4184/ASJ.2017.11.3.390

Callaghan, M.J., Hughes, T., Davin, J., Hayes, R., Hough, N., Torpey, D., Perry, D., Dawson, S., Murray, E., & Jones, R.K. (2021). Effect of a cervical collar on head and neck acceleration profiles during emergency spinal immobilization and extrication procedures in elite football (soccer) players: protocol for a randomised, controlled cross-over trial. BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, 7(4), 1157. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJSEM-2021-001157

Fisk, J.R., Lonstein, J.E., & Lazy, B.S. (2017). The Atlas Of Spinal Orthotics. www.exceed-worldwide.org/atlas-of-spinal-orthotics

Kreinest, M., Goller, S., Rauch, G., Frank, C., Gliwitzky, B., Wölfl, C.G., Matschke, S., & Münzberg, M. (2015). Application of Cervical Collars – An Analysis of Practical Skills of Professional Emergency Medical Care Providers. PLOS ONE, 10(11), e0143409. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0143409

Maschmann, C., Jeppesen, E., Rubin, M. A., & Barfod, C. (2019). New clinical guidelines on the spinal stabilization of adult trauma patients - Consensus and evidence based. Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, 27(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13049-019-0655-X/FIGURES/2

McDonald, N., Kriellaars, D., Weldon, E., & Pryce, R. (2021). Head-Neck Motion in Prehospital Trauma Patients under Spinal Motion Restriction: A Pilot Study. Prehospital Emergency Care, 25(1), 117–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/10903127.2020.1727591

McKeon, J.F., Alvarez, P.M., Castaneda, D.M., Emili, U., Kirven, J., Belmonte, A.D., & Singh, V. (2024). Cervical Collar Use Following Cervical Spine Surgery. JBJS Reviews, 12(9). https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00114

Meadows, J., Armijo-Olivo, S. L., & Magee, D. J. (2016). Cervical Spine. Pathology and Intervention in Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, 63–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-31072-7.00003-8

Nelson, F.R.T., & Blauvelt, C.T. (2015). Prosthetics and Orthotics. A Manual of Orthopedic Terminology, 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-22158-0.00007-X

Oosterwold, J.T., Sagel, D.C., van Grunsven, P.M., Holla, M., de Man-van Ginkel, J., & Berben, S. (2017). The characteristics and pre-hospital management of blunt trauma patients with suspected spinal column injuries: a retrospective observational study. European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery : Official Publication of the European Trauma Society, 43(4), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00068-016-0688-Z

Oyekan, A.A., Levasseur, C.M., Chen, S.R., Padmanabhan, A., Makowicz, N., Donaldson, W.F., Lee, J.Y., Shaw, J.D., & Anderst, W.J. (2023). The Effects of Cervical Orthoses on Head and Intervertebral Range of Motion. Spine, 48(22), 1561–1567. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000004755

Rey-Matias, R.R., Bundoc, J.R., & Montes, J.B. (2018). Wheelchair and Assistive Device Considerations for Remote Settings. Atlas of Orthoses and Assistive Devices, Fifth Edition, 398-402.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-48323-0.00039-1

Spears, S.D.J., Abdulle, Y.F., Korovilas, D., Torii, R., Kalaskar, D.M., & Sharma, N. (2023). Neck Collar Assessment for People Living With Motor Neuron Disease: Are Current Outcome Measures Suitable? Interactive Journal of Medical Research, 12(1), e43274. https://doi.org/10.2196/43274

Sukari, AAA, Singh, S., Bohari, M.H., Idris, Z., Ghani, ARI, & Abdullah, J.M. (2021). Examining the Range of Motion of the Cervical Spine: Utilizing Different Bedside Instruments. The Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences : MJMS, 28(2), 100–105. https://doi.org/10.21315/MJMS2021.28.2.9

Sun, F., Zhu, Y., Jia, C., Wen, Y., Zhang, Y., Chu, L., Zhao, T., Liu, B., & Mao, Y. (2024). Deep-Learning-Assisted Neck Motion Monitoring System Self-Powered Through Biodegradable Triboelectric Sensors. Advanced Functional Materials, 34(13), 2310742. https://doi.org/10.1002/ADFM.202310742

Swinkels, RAHM, & Swinkels-Meewisse, IEJCM (2014). Normal values for cervical range of motion. Spine, 39(5), 362–367. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000158

Taneja, C. (2017). A study of range of motion of neck in adult population of Western Rajasthan. Indian Journal of Clinical Anatomy and Physiology, 4(2), 152–155. https://doi.org/10.18231/2394-2126.2017.0038

Worsley, P.R., Stanger, N.D., Horrell, A.K., & Bader, D.L. (2018). Investigating the effects of cervical collar design and fit on the biomechanical and biomarker reaction at the skin. Medical Devices: Evidence and Research, 11, 87–94. https://doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S149419