A T2 Translational Science Modified Delphi Study: Spinal Motion Restriction in a Resource-Scarce Environment.

INTRODUCTION: Emerging evidence is guiding changes in prehospital management of potential spinal injuries. The majority of settings related to current recommendations are in resource-rich environments (RREs), whereas there is a lack of guidance on the provision of spinal motion restriction (SMR) in resource-scarce environments (RSEs), such as: mass-casualty incidents (MCIs); low-middle income countries; complex humanitarian emergencies; conflict zones; and prolonged transport times. The application of Translational Science (TS) in the Disaster Medicine (DM) context was used to develop this study, leading to statements that can be used in the creation of evidence-based clinical guidelines (CGs). OBJECTIVE: What is appropriate SMR in RSEs? METHODS: The first round of this modified Delphi (mD) study was a structured focus group conducted at the World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine (WADEM) Congress in Brisbane Australia on May 9, 2019. The result of the focus group discussion of open-ended questions produced ten statements that were added to ten statements derived from Fischer (2018) to create the second mD round questionnaire.Academic researchers and educators, operational first responders, or first receivers of patients with suspected spinal injuries were identified to be mD experts. Experts rated their agreement with each statement on a seven-point linear numeric scale. Consensus amongst experts was defined as a standard deviation ≤1.0. Statements that were in agreement reaching consensus were included in the final report; those that were not in agreement but reached consensus were removed from further consideration. Those not reaching consensus advanced to the third mD round.For subsequent rounds, experts were shown the mean response and their own response for each of the remaining statements and asked to reconsider their rating. As above, those that did not reach consensus advanced to the next round until consensus was reached for each statement. RESULTS: Twenty-two experts agreed to participate with 19 completing the second mD round and 16 completing the third mD round. Eleven statements reached consensus. Nine statements did not reach consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Experts reached consensus offering 11 statements to be incorporated into the creation of SMR CGs in RSEs. The nine statements that did not reach consensus can be further studied and potentially modified to determine if these can be considered in SMR CGs in RSEs.

Retrospective chart review of minor tibial fractures in preschoolers: immobilisation and complications.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the treatment practices (immobilisation vs non-immobilisation) of toddler fractures and other minor tibial fractures (both proven and suspected) in preschoolers, aged 9 months-4 years, and examine rates of ED re-presentations and complications. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of presentations of minor tibial fractures, both proven (radiologically confirmed) or suspected (negative X-ray but clinical evidence of bony injury), in children aged 9 months-4 years presenting to a single tertiary level paediatric ED from May 2016 to April 2018. Data collected included treatment practices, subsequent unscheduled re-presentations (including reasons) and complications (defined as problems relating to the injury that required further active care). RESULTS: A search of medical records yielded 240 cases: 102 had proven fractures (spiral, buckle or Salter-Harris II) and 138 were diagnosed with a suspected fracture. 73.5% of proven fractures were immobilised, predominantly with backslabs. 79% of suspected fractures were treated with expectant observation without immobilisation. Patients treated with immobilisation were more likely to re-present to ED compared with non-immobilised patients (18/104, 17.3% vs 9/136, 6.6% RR 2.62, 95% CI 1.23 to 5.58). 21 complications were seen in 19/104 (18.3%) immobilised patients. There were eight skin complications (complication rate of 7.7%) and 11 cast issues (complication rate of 10.6%). Two (1.5%) of the 136 patients had complications related to pain or limp. Pain was uncommonly found, although follow-up was not universal. CONCLUSION: In our centre, proven minor tibial fractures were more likely to receive a backslab, whereas for suspected fractures, expectant observation without immobilisation was performed. Although there is potential bias in the identification of complications with immobilisation, the study suggests that non-immobilisation approach should be investigated.

Smile - Secure my intravenous line effectively: A pilot randomised controlled trial of peripheral intravenous catheter securement in paediatrics.

AIM: Evaluate the feasibility of an efficacy randomised control trial (RCT) of paediatric peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) securement to prevent failure without resultant skin damage. METHODS: A 3-arm, pilot RCT in an Australian paediatric hospital. Random assignment of 330 children to receive (i) bordered polyurethane dressing (BPU) + non-sterile foam (NSF), (ii) integrated securement dressing (ISD) + sterile foam (SF), or (iii) tissue adhesive (TA)+ NSF. Primary outcomes were feasibility and PIVC failure. Secondary outcomes included: skin/bloodstream infection; occlusion; infiltration; dislodgement; phlebitis; dwell; serious adverse events; acceptability and microbial colonisation of catheter tips, wound site, and foam. RESULTS: Most feasibility outcomes were confirmed; 98% of eligible patients consented, 96% received their allocated dressing and no patients were lost to follow up. Eligilbility feasibility (58%) was not met. 11 randomised patients did not require a PIVC. Of 319 patients receiving a PIVC (20,716 PIVC-hours), a significant reduction in PIVC failure was demonstrated with ISD, 31/107 (29%, p = 0.017) compared to BPU, 47/105 (45%). Although not statistically significant, compared to BPU, TA 34/107 (32%, p = 0.052) was associated with less PIVC failure. On Cox regression, no securement intervention significantly reduced PIVC failure. Older age (HR 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.96; p = <0.01), no infection at baseline (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.34-0.78) and insertion by vascular access specialist (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.26-0.64) were significantly associated with reduced failure (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: ISD and TA had reduced PIVC failure compared to BPU. A large efficacy trial to test statistical differences is feasible and needed.

Cervical Spine Motion During Tracheal Intubation Using an Optiscope Versus the McGrath Videolaryngoscope in Patients With Simulated Cervical Immobilization: A Prospective Randomized Crossover Study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with an unstable cervical spine, maintenance of cervical immobilization during tracheal intubation is important. In McGrath videolaryngoscopic intubation, lifting of the blade to raise the epiglottis is needed to visualize the glottis, but in patients with an unstable cervical spine, this can cause cervical spine movement. By contrast, the Optiscope, a rigid video-stylet, does not require raising of the epiglottis during tracheal intubation. We therefore hypothesized that the Optiscope would produce less cervical spine movement than the McGrath videolaryngoscope during tracheal intubation. The aim of this study was to compare the Optiscope with the McGrath videolaryngoscope with respect to cervical spine motion during intubation in patients with simulated cervical immobilization. METHODS: The primary outcome of the study was the extent of cervical spine motion at the occiput-C1, C1-C2, and C2-C5 segments. In this randomized crossover study, the cervical spine angle was measured before and during tracheal intubation using either the Optiscope or the McGrath videolaryngoscope in 21 patients with simulated cervical immobilization. Cervical spine motion was defined as the change in angle at each cervical segment during tracheal intubation. RESULTS: There was significantly less cervical spine motion at the occiput-C1 segment using the Optiscope rather than the McGrath videolaryngoscope (mean [98.33% CI]: 4.7° [2.4-7.0] vs 10.4° [8.1-12.7]; mean difference [98.33% CI]: -5.7° [-7.5 to -3.9]). There were also fewer cervical spinal motions at the C1-C2 and C2-C5 segments using the Optiscope (mean difference versus the McGrath videolaryngoscope [98.33% CI]: -2.4° [-3.7 to -1.2]) and -3.7° [-5.9 to -1.4], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The Optiscope produces less cervical spine motion than the McGrath videolaryngoscope during tracheal intubation of patients with simulated cervical immobilization.

Reducing Discomfort After Cesarean Birth Using Abdominal Binders.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate potential benefits of use of an abdominal binder after cesarean birth. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted at a Magnet-designated, academic medical center in the southwest United States. English- and Spanish-speaking adult women scheduled for an elective cesarean birth were randomized to the intervention or control group. Outcomes were measured for the first 48 hours postoperatively, including pain, medication use, and self-reported symptom distress. RESULTS: Randomization resulted in balanced groups. Women who used the abdominal binder after cesarean birth reported a decrease in pain after ambulation, whereas women in the control group reported an increase in pain after ambulation (p < .001). Women in the binder group reported less distress on the Breathe and Cough items of the Symptom Distress Scale than those in the control group. On postoperative day 2, women in the binder group used more ibuprofen (p = .002) and acetaminophen (p = .027) than the control group. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Use of an abdominal binder by women after cesarean birth can decrease pain, potentially enhancing speed of postoperative recovery. As a nursing intervention, abdominal binders may offer women a safe nonpharmacologic option to provide postoperative comfort.

A prospective evaluation of cervical spine immobilisation in low-risk trauma patients at a tertiary Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: In the Emergency Department cervical spine immobilisation precautions are frequently used. There is controversy in regard to the balance of risks and benefits of routine immobilisation in conscious patients. METHODS: A prospective multi-methods evaluation in a tertiary trauma referral centre. The objectives were to investigate current practices and rate of concordance with established international guidelines. A provider survey focused on current knowledge, skills and attitudes and was disseminated to nurses, doctors and paramedics treating trauma patients. Additionally, clinical data were collected on a cohort of immobilised trauma patients. Demographic data were analysed using SPSS and content analysis was completed by manifest coding. RESULTS: The response rate to the survey was 85.2%. Interdisciplinary providers included nurses (n=46), doctors (n=68) and paramedics (n=41). Content analysis revealed a range of themes for improving care. Themes identified included improved application of guidelines, tailored use of equipment in low-risk patients, improved access to radiology results, and staff education. The series of five case vignettes provided to participants revealed a high level of variance in intended approaches to immobilisation. In the cohort of trauma patients (n=54), the median age was 54 years and the most common mechanism of injury was falls (40.7%). Median time spent with immobilisation was 325min. Adherence to a recognised decision tool was 35/54 (64.8%). Precautions were initiated by paramedics in 42/54 (77.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread dissemination of guidelines, observed approaches to patient immobilisation appear to be highly variable in this trauma centre. Reducing variation for low-risk patients is likely to improve the patient journey and minimise the risk of prolonged immobilisation. Further assessment of the causes of variation could define goals for targeted translational change.

The Impact of Head of Bed Elevation on Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter in Cervical Collar Applied Healthy Volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend placing a cervical collar (c-collar) until spinal injury is excluded. Previous studies have shown that c-collar placement increases intracranial pressure (ICP), which can worsen outcomes for trauma patients who are at risk of increased ICP. Head of bed elevation (HBE) has been found to decrease ICP. However, there is no consensus in the literature for the optimal degree of HBE to decrease ICP. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to find an optimal HBE degree to decrease ICP to its baseline values in healthy volunteers with increased ICP caused by c-collar. METHODS: This is a randomized controlled and blinded study performed in healthy volunteers. Two sonographers measured the optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) of each subject's eyes separately for different time points. Then, we calculated a mean ONSD value for five time points: before c-collar placement (T0), 5 and 20 min in supine position after c-collar placement (T5 and T20), and 5 and 20 min after HBE (T25 and T40). We randomized the subjects into three groups of HBE: 15, 30, and 45°, and compared the mean ONSD values among groups. RESULTS: All groups were similar with regard to baseline demographics and ONSD measurements before HBE. We found significant increases in mean ONSD values at T5 and at T20 caused by the c-collar. Thirty and forty-five degrees of HBE for 20 min decreased ONSD to its baseline values. The inter-rater reliability of the sonographers was > 0.9. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that c-collar increases ONSD in healthy volunteers. Elevating the head of the bed 30 and 45° for 20 min decreased ONSD to baseline values.

Comparing the Efficacy of Methods for Immobilizing the Cervical Spine.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective simulator study with 16 healthy male subjects. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the relative efficacy of immobilization systems in limiting involuntary movements of the cervical spine using a dynamic simulation model. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Relatively few studies have tested the efficacy of immobilization methods for limiting involuntary cervical movement, and only one of these studies used a dynamic simulation system to do so. METHODS: Immobilization configurations tested were cot alone, cot with cervical collar, long spine board (LSB) with cervical collar and head blocks, and vacuum mattress (VM) with cervical collar. A motion platform reproduced shocks and vibrations from ambulance and helicopter field rides, as well as more severe shocks and vibrations that might be encountered on rougher terrain and in inclement weather (designated as an "augmented" ride). Motion capture technology quantitated involuntary cervical rotation, flexion/extension, and lateral bend. The mean and 95% confidence interval of the mean were calculated for the root mean square of angular changes from the starting position and for the maximum range of motion. RESULTS: All configurations tested decreased cervical rotation and flexion/extension relative to the cot alone. However, the LSB and VM were significantly more effective in decreasing cervical rotation than the cervical collar, and the LSB decreased rotation more than the VM in augmented rides. The LSB and VM, but not the cervical collar, significantly limited cervical lateral bend relative to the cot alone. CONCLUSION: Under the study conditions, the LSB and the VM were more effective in limiting cervical movement than the cervical collar. Under some conditions, the LSB decreased repetitive and acute movements more than the VM. Further studies using simulation and other approaches will be essential for determining the safest, most effective configuration should providers choose to immobilize patients with suspected spinal injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Cervical spine clearance in the adult obtunded blunt trauma patient: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A missed cervical spinal injury could have devastating consequences. Patients with a suspected cervical spinal injury are kept in rigid collars for cervical immobilisation. Prolonged collar use has important clinical implications. A well-defined guideline related to the removal of cervical collars from adult obtunded blunt trauma patients has not been developed. AIM: We sought to determine if Magnetic Resonance Imaging offered a definitive benefit over Computer Tomography with respect to patient management. METHOD: We searched Ovid Online, EBSCO, NICE Evidence Journals, Medline, PubMED, BNI, CINAHL and Google Scholar as well as the grey literature. Data extraction and synthesis were performed on studies that compared the radiologic findings and clinical outcomes of Computer Tomography scan and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in this patient group. RESULTS: There is evidence that supports the safe discontinuation of cervical collar use after a negative multidetector Computer Tomography scan result alone. Magnetic Resonance Imaging may detect a significant number of ligamentous injuries, but such injuries are rarely of clinical significance because they rarely alter clinical management. Its use should be limited to specific circumstances. CONCLUSION: It is important for institutions to re-examine the latest evidence regarding cervical spinal clearance in order to update their guidelines.

Removal of the Long Spine Board From Clinical Practice: A Historical Perspective.

Since the early 1970s, initial management of patients with suspected spinal injuries has involved the use of a cervical collar and long spine board for full immobilization, which was thought to prevent additional injury to the cervical spine. Despite a growing body of literature demonstrating the detrimental effects and questionable efficacy of spinal immobilization, the practice continued until 2013, when the National Association of EMS Physicians issued a position statement calling for a reduction in the use of spinal immobilization and a shift to spinal-motion restriction. This article examines the literature that prompted the change in spinal-injury management and the virtual elimination of the long spine board as a tool for transport.

Errors in cervical spine immobilization during pediatric trauma evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to identify factors during trauma evaluation that increase the likelihood of errors in cervical spine immobilization ('lapses'). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multivariate analysis was used to identify the associations between patient characteristics, event features, and tasks performed in proximity to the head and neck and the occurrence and duration of a lapse in maintaining cervical spine immobilization during 56 pediatric trauma evaluations. RESULTS: Lapses in cervical spine immobilization occurred in 71.4% of patients (n = 40), with an average of 1.2 ± 1.3 lapses per patient. Head and neck tasks classified as oxygen manipulation occurred an average of 12.2 ± 9.7 times per patient, whereas those related to neck examination and cervical collar manipulation occurred an average of 2.7 ± 1.7 and 2.1 ± 1.2 times per patient, respectively. More oxygen-related tasks were performed among patients who had than those who did not have a lapse (27.3 ± 16.5 versus 11.5 ± 8.0 tasks, P = 0.001). Patients who had cervical collar placement or manipulation had a two-fold higher risk of a lapse than those who did not have these tasks performed (OR 1.92, 95% CI 0.56, 3.28, P = 0.006). More lapses occurred during evaluations on the weekend (P = 0.01), when more tasks related to supplemental oxygen manipulation were performed (P = 0.02) and when more tasks associated with cervical collar management were performed (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Errors in cervical spine immobilization were frequently observed during the initial evaluation of injured children. Strategies to reduce these errors should target approaches to head and neck management during the primary and secondary phases of trauma evaluation.

Routine cervical spine immobilisation is unnecessary in patients with isolated cerebral gunshot wounds: A South African experience.

OBJECTIVE: Routine immobilisation of the cervical spine in trauma has been a long established practice. Very little is known in regard to its appropriateness in the specific setting of isolated traumatic brain injury secondary to gunshot wounds (GSWs). METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted over a 5 year period (January 2010 to December 2014) at the Pietermaritzburg Metropolitan Trauma Service, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa in order to determine the actual incidence of concomitant cervical spine injury (CSI) in the setting of isolated cerebral GSWs. RESULTS: During the 5 year study period, 102 patients were included. Ninety-two per cent (94/102) were male and the mean age was 29 years. Ninety-eight per cent of the injuries were secondary to low velocity GSWs. Twenty-seven (26%) patients had cervical collar placed by the Emergency Medical Service. The remaining 75 patients had their cervical collar placed in the resuscitation room. Fifty-five (54%) patients had a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) of 15 and underwent plain radiography, all of which were normal. Clearance of cervical spine based on normal radiography combined with clinical assessment was achieved in all 55 (100%) patients. The remaining 47 patients whose GCS was <15 all underwent a computed tomography (CT) scan of their cervical spine and brain. All 47 CT scans of the cervical spine were normal and there was no detectable bone or soft tissue injury noted. CONCLUSION: Patients who sustain an isolated low velocity cerebral GSW are highly unlikely to have concomitant CSI. Routine cervical spine immobilisation is unnecessary, and efforts should be directed at management strategies aiming to prevent secondary brain injury. Further studies are required to address the issue in the setting of high velocity GSWs.

Prehospital spine immobilization/spinal motion restriction in penetrating trauma: A practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST).

BACKGROUND: Spine immobilization in trauma has remained an integral part of most emergency medical services protocols despite a lack of evidence for efficacy and concern for associated complications, especially in penetrating trauma patients. We reviewed the published evidence on the topic of prehospital spine immobilization or spinal motion restriction in adult patients with penetrating trauma to structure a practice management guideline. METHODS: We conducted a Cochrane style systematic review and meta-analysis and applied Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to construct recommendations. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were used to evaluate the literature on the critical outcomes of mortality, neurologic deficit, and potentially reversible neurologic deficit. RESULTS: A total of 24 studies met inclusion criteria, with qualitative review conducted for all studies. We used five studies for the quantitative review (meta-analysis). No study showed benefit to spine immobilization with regard to mortality and neurologic injury, even for patients with direct neck injury. Increased mortality was associated with spine immobilization, with risk ratio [RR], 2.4 (confidence interval [CI], 1.07-5.41). The rate of neurologic injury or potentially reversible injury was very low, ranging from 0.002 to 0.076 and 0.00034 to 0.055, with no statistically significant difference for neurologic deficit or potentially reversible deficit, RR, 4.16 (CI, 0.56-30.89), and RR, 1.19 (CI, 0.83-1.70), although the point estimates favored no immobilization. CONCLUSION: Spine immobilization in penetrating trauma is associated with increased mortality and has not been shown to have a beneficial effect on mitigating neurologic deficits, even potentially reversible neurologic deficits. We recommend that spine immobilization not be used routinely for adult patients with penetrating trauma. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review with meta-analysis study, level III.

Immobilization versus immediate mobilization after intrauterine insemination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate a possible association between immobilization and pregnancy rate in patients undergoing intrauterine insemination. MATERIAL AND METHODS: To ensure the quality of the methodology, the PRISMA criteria were met at all stages of the development of this meta-analysis. We searched the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed MEDLINE, ScienceDirect and reference lists of eligible studies from inception to March 2017, without any restriction. We also interviewed the ClinicalTrials.gov database for unpublished articles. Finally, we sought potentially eligible studies in meeting abstracts. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and outcome data. Estimates were pooled using random effects models and sensitivity analyses. We selected studies that compared bed rest to immediate mobilization after intrauterine insemination. The primary outcome was the ongoing pregnancy rate per couple. RESULTS: Of 176 identified abstracts, four primary studies, all of them randomized controlled trials, met the inclusion criteria, including 1361 couples. The overall relative risk of ongoing pregnancy rate in bed rest versus immediate immobilization was 1.67 95% CI [0.86; 3.22]. The overall relative risk of the live birth rate was 1.11 95% CI [0.56; 2.20]. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis was not able to demonstrate that bed rest after intrauterine insemination effectively increases in pregnancy rate. For everyday practice, no specific strategy, bed rest or immediate mobilization, can be recommended at this time.

The Norwegian guidelines for the prehospital management of adult trauma patients with potential spinal injury.

The traditional prehospital management of trauma victims with potential spinal injury has become increasingly questioned as authors and clinicians have raised concerns about over-triage and harm. In order to address these concerns, the Norwegian National Competence Service for Traumatology commissioned a faculty to provide a national guideline for pre-hospital spinal stabilisation. This work is based on a systematic review of available literature and a standardised consensus process. The faculty recommends a selective approach to spinal stabilisation as well as the implementation of triaging tools based on clinical findings. A strategy of minimal handling should be observed.

[Evidence-based physical therapy of rheumatic diseases]. / Evidenzbasierte physikalische Therapie bei rheumatischen Krankheiten.

New studies increase the evidence, that different applications of physical therapy are effective. In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) physiotherapy of the hands improve strength, joint mobility and activity without increased risk of pain nor inflammation. A theory-based physiotherapy of the hands shows clinical effectiveness and cost-utility. In patients with spondyloarthritides supervised group exercise training is more effective than home exercise programs. Compared with biologics only combined exercise training and tumour necrosis factor alpha inhibitor therapy improve mobility and disease activity more effectively. Aerobic exercise training reduces fatigue in RA. Working wrist splints and static resting splints improve pain and grip strength. Static resting splints reduce the risk of hand deformities. Local and whole body cryotherapy show short term improvement of pain and inflammatory activity. German S3-guidelines recommend enhanced utilisation of physical therapy as well as coordinated multiprofessional team care and rehabilitation.

[Achilles tendon rupture : Current diagnostic and therapeutic standards]. / Achillessehnenruptur : Aktuelle Standards in Diagnostik und Therapie.

A superior life expectancy and an increased activity in the population result in an increase in degenerative diseases, such as Achilles tendon ruptures. The medical history and physical examinations are the methods of choice to diagnose Achilles tendon ruptures. Ultrasound and radiography represent reasonable extended diagnostic procedures. In order to decide on the medical indications for the therapy concept, the advantages and disadvantages of conservative and surgical treatment options have to be weighed up on an indivdual basis. There are explicit contraindications for both treatment options. For the surgical treatment concept open suture techniques, minimally invasive methods and reconstructive procedures are available. The postoperative management of the patient is as important as the choice of surgical technique. With the correct medical indications and supervision of the patient it is possible to achieve extremely satisfying results for the patient with both conservative and surgical treatment options.

Community Implementation of a Prehospital Spinal Immobilization Guideline.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to qualitatively describe the underpinnings of the successful implementation of a collaborative prehospital spinal immobilization guideline throughout the emergency medical services (EMS) community in two counties in Colorado. We also describe lessons learned that may be beneficial to other communities considering similar initiatives. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected from key informants who were directly involved in the implementation of a new prehospital spinal immobilization guideline among four community hospitals in two different hospital systems and the associated EMS providers within the two counties. We interviewed a purposively selected sample of emergency department (ED) physicians and other ED staff, hospital decision makers, EMS educators as well as fire department and EMS medical directors. Data were collected and reviewed until saturation was achieved. We conducted qualitative analysis to summarize and synthesize themes. RESULTS: Ten key informants were interviewed, at which point saturation was achieved and several clear themes emerged. Participants described successful community-wide guideline implementation despite a history of competition, isolation, and conflict between the various EMS organizations and hospitals on past EMS and trauma initiatives. Factors related to success included the nearly universal perception that the initiative was "cutting edge" and thus an important paradigm shift in care for the community, as a whole. Participants reported the ability of community stakeholders to jointly assure a collaborative approach, characterized by intensive education for EMS personnel and others involved, and the ability of the community to together secure the new equipment required for success. CONCLUSIONS: Key informants described a convergence of factors as leading to the successful implementation of a prehospital spinal immobilization guideline. Lessons learned regarding how to overcome a tradition of competition and isolation to allow for success may be useful to other communities considering similar initiatives.

[Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis : Guideline for practical application]. / Adoleszente idiopathische Skoliose : Leitfaden für die praktische Anwendung.

Juvenile or adolescent idiopathic scoliosis is a relatively common spinal deformity, with an incidence of more than 1 %. Early diagnosis can lead to successful therapy. In the case of pathological clinical findings, the anteroposterior X­ray of the whole spine leads the way to the correct grading, according to Cobb angle measurement. Depending on the individual risk of progression, brace treatment will be started with a Cobb angle range of 20-25°. Important predictors of therapeutic success are sufficient primary corrective power and patient compliance. COBB angles of 40-50° usually lead to the recommendation for surgery, which is performed as either anterior or posterior spinal fusion in skeletally mature adolescents, depending on the grade of the deformity according to Lenke's classification. To achieve the best possible results, it is recommended that both conservative and surgical treatments are carried out by scoliosis specialists.

[Spinaltrauma : Clinical diagnosis and initial care]. / Wirbelsäulentraumata : Klinische Diagnostik und Erstversorgung.

DIAGNOSTIC WORK-UP: The rescue, treatment and transport of patients with an injured spine require a systematic scheme with the subsequent rating of the findings and suspected diagnoses. In addition to the assessment of temporal urgency, the available resources and personnel, the duration and complexity of any possible technical measures that might be anticipated, the rational selection of immobilisation tools also plays a significant role. The most important medical rescue aids are the scoop stretcher and the spine board; the spine board, vacuum mattress and cervical collar are used to immobilise the patient. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: This article is focused on the diagnosis and initial treatment of isolated spinal injuries. The prehospital care of polytraumatised patients and/or those with multiple injuries differs significantly and has different priorities.