These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

185 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17993960)

  • 1. Range-of-motion restriction and craniofacial tissue-interface pressure from four cervical collars.
    Tescher AN; Rindflesch AB; Youdas JW; Jacobson TM; Downer LL; Miers AG; Basford JR; Cullinane DC; Stevens SR; Pankratz VS; Decker PA
    J Trauma; 2007 Nov; 63(5):1120-6. PubMed ID: 17993960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of Cervical Range-of-Motion Restriction and Craniofacial Tissue-Interface Pressure With 2 Adjustable and 2 Standard Cervical Collars.
    Tescher AN; Rindflesch AB; Youdas JW; Terman RW; Jacobson TM; Douglas LL; Miers AG; Austin CM; Delgado AM; Zins SM; Lahr BD; Pichelmann MA; Heller SF; Huddleston PM
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2016 Mar; 41(6):E304-12. PubMed ID: 26536441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessing range of motion to evaluate the adverse effects of ill-fitting cervical orthoses.
    Bell KM; Frazier EC; Shively CM; Hartman RA; Ulibarri JC; Lee JY; Kang JD; Donaldson WF
    Spine J; 2009 Mar; 9(3):225-31. PubMed ID: 18504164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of efficacy and 3D kinematic characteristics of cervical orthoses.
    Zhang S; Wortley M; Clowers K; Krusenklaus JH
    Clin Biomech (Bristol); 2005 Mar; 20(3):264-9. PubMed ID: 15698698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effectiveness of extrication collars tested during the execution of spine-board transfer techniques.
    Del Rossi G; Heffernan TP; Horodyski M; Rechtine GR
    Spine J; 2004; 4(6):619-23. PubMed ID: 15541692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Soft and rigid collars provide similar restriction in cervical range of motion during fifteen activities of daily living.
    Miller CP; Bible JE; Jegede KA; Whang PG; Grauer JN
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Jun; 35(13):1271-8. PubMed ID: 20512025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Motion generated in the unstable cervical spine during the application and removal of cervical immobilization collars.
    Prasarn ML; Conrad B; Del Rossi G; Horodyski M; Rechtine GR
    J Trauma Acute Care Surg; 2012 Jun; 72(6):1609-13. PubMed ID: 22695429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Mastication causing segmental spinal motion in common cervical orthoses.
    Chin KR; Auerbach JD; Adams SB; Sodl JF; Riew KD
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Feb; 31(4):430-4. PubMed ID: 16481953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Prospective evaluation of craniofacial pressure in four different cervical orthoses.
    Plaisier B; Gabram SG; Schwartz RJ; Jacobs LM
    J Trauma; 1994 Nov; 37(5):714-20. PubMed ID: 7966467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of the Nebraska collar, a new prototype cervical immobilization collar, with three standard models.
    Alberts LR; Mahoney CR; Neff JR
    J Orthop Trauma; 1998 Aug; 12(6):425-30. PubMed ID: 9715451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of cervical motion restriction and interface pressure between two cervical collars.
    Araghi K; Jacofsky M; McCamley J
    Clin Biomech (Bristol); 2021 Oct; 89():105482. PubMed ID: 34537462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A 3D motion analysis study comparing the effectiveness of cervical spine orthoses at restricting spinal motion through physiological ranges.
    Evans NR; Hooper G; Edwards R; Whatling G; Sparkes V; Holt C; Ahuja S
    Eur Spine J; 2013 Mar; 22 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S10-5. PubMed ID: 23288458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Reproducibility and validity of digital inclinometry for measuring cervical range of motion in normal subjects.
    Prushansky T; Deryi O; Jabarreen B
    Physiother Res Int; 2010 Mar; 15(1):42-8. PubMed ID: 19554615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Biomechanical analysis of cervical orthoses in flexion and extension: a comparison of cervical collars and cervical thoracic orthoses.
    Gavin TM; Carandang G; Havey R; Flanagan P; Ghanayem A; Patwardhan AG
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 2003; 40(6):527-37. PubMed ID: 15077665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Open-Design Collar vs. Conventional Philadelphia Collar Regarding User Satisfaction and Cervical Range of Motion in Asymptomatic Adults.
    Ghorbani F; Kamyab M; Azadinia F; Hajiaghaei B
    Am J Phys Med Rehabil; 2016 Apr; 95(4):291-9. PubMed ID: 26390392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparison of three cervical immobilization devices.
    Hostler D; Colburn D; Seitz SR
    Prehosp Emerg Care; 2009; 13(2):256-60. PubMed ID: 19291567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Criterion validity study of the cervical range of motion (CROM) device for rotational range of motion on healthy adults.
    Tousignant M; Smeesters C; Breton AM; Breton E; Corriveau H
    J Orthop Sports Phys Ther; 2006 Apr; 36(4):242-8. PubMed ID: 16676874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Kinematic evaluation of 4 pediatric collars and distribution of cervical movement between primary and coupled angles.
    Assi A; Yazbeck P; Massaad A; Skalli W; Ghanem I
    J Pediatr Orthop; 2014; 34(5):496-502. PubMed ID: 24322631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Philadelphia versus Miami-J cervical collar's impact on pulmonary function.
    Ala A; Vahdati SS; Maroufi P; Hafezan S; Ansari N; Ghabousian A
    Am J Emerg Med; 2021 May; 43():59-61. PubMed ID: 33524684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Efficacy of five cervical orthoses in restricting cervical motion. A comparison study.
    Askins V; Eismont FJ
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1997 Jun; 22(11):1193-8. PubMed ID: 9201855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.