141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9715199)
1. How effective is the Newport/Aspen collar? A prospective radiographic evaluation in healthy adult volunteers.
Hughes SJ
J Trauma; 1998 Aug; 45(2):374-8. PubMed ID: 9715199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Cervical collars are insufficient for immobilizing an unstable cervical spine injury.
Horodyski M; DiPaola CP; Conrad BP; Rechtine GR
J Emerg Med; 2011 Nov; 41(5):513-9. PubMed ID: 21397431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Do cervical collars and cervicothoracic orthoses effectively stabilize the injured cervical spine? A biomechanical investigation.
Ivancic PC
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2013 Jun; 38(13):E767-74. PubMed ID: 23486409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Evaluation of efficacy and 3D kinematic characteristics of cervical orthoses.
Zhang S; Wortley M; Clowers K; Krusenklaus JH
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2005 Mar; 20(3):264-9. PubMed ID: 15698698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of the effectiveness of different cervical immobilization collars.
McCabe JB; Nolan DJ
Ann Emerg Med; 1986 Jan; 15(1):50-3. PubMed ID: 3942357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Emergency cervical-spine immobilization.
Chandler DR; Nemejc C; Adkins RH; Waters RL
Ann Emerg Med; 1992 Oct; 21(10):1185-8. PubMed ID: 1416294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. Comparison of two new immobilization collars.
Rosen PB; McSwain NE; Arata M; Stahl S; Mercer D
Ann Emerg Med; 1992 Oct; 21(10):1189-95. PubMed ID: 1416295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. The yale cervical orthosis: an evaluation of its effectiveness in restricting cervical motion in normal subjects and a comparison with other cervical orthoses.
Johnson RM; Hart DL; Owen JR; Lerner E; Chapin W; Zeleznik R
Phys Ther; 1978 Jul; 58(7):865-71. PubMed ID: 662928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Motion within the unstable cervical spine during patient maneuvering: the neck pivot-shift phenomenon.
Lador R; Ben-Galim P; Hipp JA
J Trauma; 2011 Jan; 70(1):247-50; discussion 250-1. PubMed ID: 21217496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Value of a rigid collar in addition to head blocks: a proof of principle study.
Holla M
Emerg Med J; 2012 Feb; 29(2):104-7. PubMed ID: 21335583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
