Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2006 Jan-Mar;10(1):46-51.

Comparison of the Ferno Scoop Stretcher with the long backboard for spinal immobilization.

Author information

1
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Julie.Krell@hotmail.com

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

Spinal immobilization is essential in reducing risk of further spinal injuries in trauma patients. The authors compared the traditional long backboard (LBB) with the Ferno Scoop Stretcher (FSS) (Model 65-EXL). They hypothesized no difference in movement during application and immobilization between the FSS and the LBB.

METHODS:

Thirty-one adult subjects had electromagnetic sensors secured over the nasion (forehead) and the C3 and T12 spinous processes and were placed in a rigid cervical collar, with movement recorded by a goniometer (a motion analysis system). Subjects were tested on both the FSS and the LBB. The sagittal flexion, lateral flexion, and axial rotation were recorded during each of four phases: 1) baseline, 2) application (logroll onto the LBB or placement of the FSS around the patient), 3) secured logroll, and 4) lifting. Comfort and perceived security also were assessed on a visual analog scale.

RESULTS:

There was approximately 6-8 degrees greater motion in the sagittal, lateral, and axial planes during the application of the LBB compared with the FSS (both p < 0.001). No difference was found during a secured logroll maneuver. The FSS induced more sagittal flexion during the lift than the LBB (p < 0.001). The FSS demonstrated superior comfort and perceived security.

CONCLUSION:

The FSS caused significantly less movement on application and increased comfort levels. Decreased movement using the FSS may reduce the risk of further spinal cord injury.

PMID:
16418091
DOI:
10.1080/10903120500366375
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Taylor & Francis
Loading ...
Support Center