↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Investigating the effects of cervical collar design and fit on the biomechanical and biomarker reaction at the skin

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Investigating the effects of cervical collar design and fit on the biomechanical and biomarker reaction at the skin
Published in
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, March 2018
DOI 10.2147/mder.s149419
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter R Worsley, Nathan D Stanger, Aran K Horrell, Dan L Bader

Abstract

Research has shown that up to 33% of pressure ulcers (PUs) acquired in hospitals result from the application of a medical device. Cervical collars (C-collars) have been implicated in causing PUs, due to the mechanical force they apply to the skin. In order to improve our understanding of collar-related PUs, the present study aimed to assess the biomechanical, biochemical, and microclimate effects of C-collar design and fitting tension. A cohort of 15 healthy volunteers was fit with two different C-collars according to the manufacturer guidelines. Two further collar tensions were also defined as loose and tight for each device. Each collar condition was applied for 15 minutes, with a 10 minute refractory period. Measurements at the device-skin interface included interface pressures, inflammatory biomarkers, microclimate, range of cervical motion, and comfort scores. The interface pressures at each tissue site increased monotonically with greater collar tension (p<0.01), irrespective of collar design. Biomarker analysis revealed that inflammatory cytokines (IL-1a) were elevated during collar application, with the highest increase during the tight fit condition, representing over a fourfold increase from unloaded conditions. Regardless of collar tension or type, there was an increase in temperature 1.5°C ±0.8°C compared to baseline values. Range of motion significantly decreased with greater strap tension (p<0.05), with an associated increase in discomfort. The present findings revealed that increasing C-collar tensions caused elevated contact pressures at the device-skin interface, with a corresponding inflammatory response at the skin. These peak contact pressures were highest at the occiput, corresponding with reported PU locations. Devices should be designed to uniformly distribute pressures, and appropriate guidance is needed for their application.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 23 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 13 25%
Engineering 5 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 8%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 24 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,350,971
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#193
of 314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,289
of 345,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,064 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.