References
Is full pre-hospital spinal immobilisation best for the patient? A review of current controversies
Abstract
Spinal immobilisation has long been an accepted part of pre-hospital care. There is, however, a lack of evidence that spinal immobilisation is effective in reducing spinal cord injury (SCI). The aim of this article is to review a broad range of literature in relation to spinal immobilisation and consider some of the current controversies.
Despite a lack of high-quality research, following a comprehensive literature search, 13 pieces of primary research and 4 pieces of secondary research were identified. The literature identified a number of potential controversies relating to the principal effectiveness of immobilisation, side effects of immobilisation and patient outcome in comparison to non-immobilised patients. Given these areas of controversy, many of which are of fundamental importance, it seems logical that further high-quality research is required to establish whether spinal immobilisation is effective or otherwise.
The Association of Ambulance Chief Executives (AACE) (2013)Clinical Practice Guidelines provide a clear algorithm for practitioners when considering whether spinal immobilisation of a patient is warranted. However, they further state that ‘suspicion of thoracic and lumbar injury despite a cleared cervical spine warrants full immobilisation.’ Consequently, the onus of any clinical decision made is firmly based on the individual practitioner's judgement. Additionally, Connor et al (2013) assert in a consensus statement on behalf of the Faculty of Pre-hospital Care that ‘a change is needed from a policy of immobilising necks, as much for the protection of the clinician as for that of the patient.’ They also state thatlong spinal boards should only be used as an extrication device and that a clear algorithm should be adopted for identifying spinal cord injury (SCI).
Both AACE (2013) and Connor et al (2013) recognise that spinal immobilisation has a basis in history of logical principles as opposed to evidence-based practice. Although there is some historical literature supportive of spinal immobilisation (Chiles and Cooper, 1996), a key review of current literature on spinal immobilisation (Kwan et al, 2001) stated that there was a lack of high-quality primary research in the area, and that the effects of spinal immobilisation were unclear in relation to both reducing SCI and reducing mortality.
Subscribe to get full access to the Journal of Paramedic Practice
Thank you for visiting the Journal of Paramedic Practice and reading our archive of expert clinical content. If you would like to read more from the only journal dedicated to those working in emergency care, you can start your subscription today for just £48.
What's included
-
CPD Focus
-
Develop your career
-
Stay informed