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 *

135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2351802)

  • 21. Extrication collars can result in abnormal separation between vertebrae in the presence of a dissociative injury.
    Ben-Galim P; Dreiangel N; Mattox KL; Reitman CA; Kalantar SB; Hipp JA
    J Trauma; 2010 Aug; 69(2):447-50. PubMed ID: 20093981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Pressure ulcers, indentation marks and pain from cervical spine immobilization with extrication collars and headblocks: An observational study.
    Ham WH; Schoonhoven L; Schuurmans MJ; Leenen LP
    Injury; 2016 Sep; 47(9):1924-31. PubMed ID: 27158006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. Cervical bracing after trauma.
    Wagner FC; Johnson RM
    Med Instrum; 1982; 16(6):287-8. PubMed ID: 7155018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Efficacy of cervical spine immobilization methods.
    Podolsky S; Baraff LJ; Simon RR; Hoffman JR; Larmon B; Ablon W
    J Trauma; 1983 Jun; 23(6):461-5. PubMed ID: 6864837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Effectiveness of Adjustable Cervical Orthoses and Modular Cervical Thoracic Orthoses in Restricting Neck Motion: A Comparative In vivo Biomechanical Study.
    Gao F
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2015 Oct; 40(19):E1046-51. PubMed ID: 26076435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Factors predicting cervical collar-related decubitus ulceration in major trauma patients.
    Ackland HM; Cooper DJ; Malham GM; Kossmann T
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Feb; 32(4):423-8. PubMed ID: 17304132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Cervical orthoses.
    Beavis A
    Prosthet Orthot Int; 1989 Apr; 13(1):6-13. PubMed ID: 2717386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Comparing cervical spine motion with different halo devices in a cadaveric cervical instability model.
    DiPaola CP; Sawers A; Conrad BP; Horodyski M; DiPaola MJ; Del Rossi G; Rechtine GR
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Jan; 34(2):149-55. PubMed ID: 19139664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comparison of a SAM splint-molded cervical collar with a Philadelphia cervical collar.
    McGrath T; Murphy C
    Wilderness Environ Med; 2009; 20(2):166-8. PubMed ID: 19594206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Biomechanical comparison of single- and two-level cervical arthroplasty versus arthrodesis: effect on adjacent-level spinal kinematics.
    Cunningham BW; Hu N; Zorn CM; McAfee PC
    Spine J; 2010 Apr; 10(4):341-9. PubMed ID: 20362252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Clinical significance of cervical vertebral flexion and extension spatial alignment changes.
    Xu-hui Z; Jia-hu F; Lian-shun J; Zhi-yong C; Yong Z; Xiong-sheng C; Wei-ping W
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Jan; 34(1):E21-6. PubMed ID: 19127144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Cervical spine movements during laryngoscopy. Comparison of the Macintosh and McCoy laryngoscope blades.
    MacIntyre PA; McLeod AD; Hurley R; Peacock C
    Anaesthesia; 1999 May; 54(5):413-8. PubMed ID: 10995135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. Maximum movement and cumulative movement (travel) to inform our understanding of secondary spinal cord injury and its application to collar use in self-extrication.
    Nutbeam T; Fenwick R; May B; Stassen W; Smith J; Shippen J
    Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med; 2022 Jan; 30(1):4. PubMed ID: 35033151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Cervical spine stabilization in pediatric patients: evaluation of current techniques.
    Huerta C; Griffith R; Joyce SM
    Ann Emerg Med; 1987 Oct; 16(10):1121-6. PubMed ID: 3662157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Analysis of segmental cervical spine vertebral motion after prodisc-C cervical disc replacement.
    Park JJ; Quirno M; Cunningham MR; Schwarzkopf R; Bendo JA; Spivak JM; Goldstein JA
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Apr; 35(8):E285-9. PubMed ID: 20354472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the Minerva cervicothoracic orthosis.
    Sharpe KP; Rao S; Ziogas A
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1995 Jul; 20(13):1475-9. PubMed ID: 8623066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.