Post-operative Use of Cervical Orthoses for Subaxial Cervical Spine Injuries – a Survey-based Analysis at German Spine Care Centres

Abstract

Introduction There are no evidence-based recommendations for the post-operative treatment and application of soft or rigid cervical collars after operative treatment of injuries of the subaxial cervical spine. Cervical collars can restrict peak range of motion and serve as a reminder to the patient. However, they can also cause pressure ulcers. The aim of this online-based survey among German spine centres was to gain an overview of post-operative treatment and the application of soft or rigid cervical collars after surgical treatment of injuries of the subaxial cervical spine.

Materials and Methods An online-based survey was conducted among 59 spine centres certified by the German Spine Society. It comprised seven items and the option of adding remarks in the form of open-ended responses.

Results The return rate was 63% (37 out of 59). Of the 37 analysed spine centres, 51% routinely apply a cervical collar post-operatively, 27% apply a soft and 16% a rigid cervical collar, 8% sequentially apply first a rigid and later a soft cervical collar. Less than half of the spine centres (43%) routinely use no cervical collar. Rigid collars are applied for more than 6 weeks and soft collars up to 6 weeks at some spine centres. Standardised post-operative treatment plans are common. The selection of the post-operative treatment plan depends primarily on the type of injury and method of operation and partly on patient age and bone quality. The satisfaction of German spine centres with the current handling of post-operative treatment of subaxial cervical spine injuries is high.

Discussion The post-operative treatment of injuries of the subaxial cervical spine at German spine centres is heterogeneous, and the evidence on advantages and disadvantages of the post-operative application of cervical collars is insufficient. Planning and implementation of randomised controlled clinical trials in subaxial cervical spine injuries is challenging.

Key words

subaxial cervical spine - post-operative treatment - cervical collar - spine centre

• References/Literatur

• 1 Schleicher P, Scholz M, Kandziora F. et al. [Subaxial Cervical Spine Injuries: Treatment Recommendations of the German Orthopedic and Trauma Society]. Z Orthop Unfall 2017; 155: 556-566
• 2 Sharif S, Ali MYJ, Sih IMY. et al. Subaxial Cervical Spine Injuries: WFNS Spine Committee Recommendations. Neurospine 2020; 17: 737-758
• 3 Walters BC, Hadley MN, Hurlbert RJ. et al. Guidelines for the management of acute cervical spine and spinal cord injuries: 2013 update. Neurosurgery 2013; 60: 82-91
• 4 Kiskamper A, Meyer C, Müller L. et al. Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury in the Elderly and Treatment-Related Mortality – Anterior or Posterior Approach. Z Orthop Unfall 2021; 159: 266-273
• 5 Lee S, Cho DC, Roh SW. et al. Cervical Alignment Following Posterior Cervical Fusion Surgery: Cervical Pedicle Screw Versus Lateral Mass Screw Fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2021; 46: E576-E583
• 6 Theodotou CB, Ghobrial GM, Middleton AL. et al. Anterior Reduction and Fusion of Cervical Facet Dislocations. Neurosurgery 2019; 84: 388-395
• 7 Yao R, McLachlin SD, Rasoulinejad P. et al. Influence of graft size on spinal instability with anterior cervical plate fixation following in vitro flexion-distraction injuries. Spine J 2016; 16: 523-529
• 8 Oberkircher L, Born S, Struewer J. et al. Biomechanical evaluation of the impact of various facet joint lesions on the primary stability of anterior plate fixation in cervical dislocation injuries: a cadaver study: Laboratory investigation. J Neurosurg Spine 2014; 21: 634-639
• 9 Dahdaleh NS, Nakamura S, Torner JC. et al. Biomechanical rigidity of cadaveric cervical spine with posterior versus combined posterior and anterior instrumentation. J Neurosurg Spine 2009; 10: 133-138
• 10 Bozkus H, Ames CP, Chamberlain RH. et al. Biomechanical analysis of rigid stabilization techniques for three-column injury in the lower cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30: 915-922
• 11 Pitzen T, Lane C, Goertzen D. et al. Anterior cervical plate fixation: biomechanical effectiveness as a function of posterior element injury. J Neurosurg 2003; 99: 84-90
• 12 Ito Z, Higashino K, Kato S. et al. Pedicle screws can be 4 times stronger than lateral mass screws for insertion in the midcervical spine: a biomechanical study on strength of fixation. J Spinal Disord Tech 2014; 27: 80-85
• 13 Whitcroft KL, Massouh L, Amirfeyz R. et al. A comparison of neck movement in the soft cervical collar and rigid cervical brace in healthy subjects. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2011; 34: 119-122
• 14 Totten VY, Sugarman DB. Respiratory effects of spinal immobilization. Prehosp Emerg Care 1999; 3: 347-352
• 15 Ham W, Schoonhoven L, Schuurmans MJ. et al. Pressure ulcers from spinal immobilization in trauma patients: a systematic review. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2014; 76: 1131-1141
• 16 Ham WH, Schoonhoven L, Schuurmans MJ. et al. Pressure ulcers, indentation marks and pain from cervical spine immobilization with extrication collars and headblocks: An observational study. Injury 2016; 47: 1924-1931
• 17 Webber-Jones JE, Thomas CA, Bordeaux jr. RE. The management and prevention of rigid cervical collar complications. Orthop Nurs 2002; 21: 19-25 quiz 25-27
• 18 Leiner DJ. SoSci Survey (Version 3.1.06; 2019). Im Internet (Stand: 20.01.2021): https://www.soscisurvey.de
• 19 Sampson EL, West E, Fischer T. Pain and delirium: mechanisms, assessment, and management. Eur Geriatr Med 2020; 11: 45-52
• 20 Kobayashi K, Imagama S, Ando K. et al. Risk Factors for Delirium After Spine Surgery in Extremely Elderly Patients Aged 80 Years or Older and Review of the Literature: Japan Association of Spine Surgeons with Ambition Multicenter Study. Global Spine J 2017; 7: 560-566
• 21 Stambolis V, Brady S, Klos D. et al. The effects of cervical bracing upon swallowing in young, normal, healthy volunteers. Dysphagia 2003; 18: 39-45
• 22 Brooks-Brunn JA. Postoperative atelectasis and pneumonia. Heart Lung 1995; 24: 94-115
• 23 Peck GE, Shipway DJH, Tsang K. et al. Cervical spine immobilisation in the elderly: a literature review. Br J Neurosurg 2018; 32: 286-290
• 24 Hadley MN, Walters BC. The case for the future role of evidence-based medicine in the management of cervical spine injuries, with or without fractures. J Neurosurg Spine 2019; 31: 457-463
• 25 Cheung JPY, Cheung PWH, Law K. et al. Postoperative Rigid Cervical Collar Leads to Less Axial Neck Pain in the Early Stage After Open-Door Laminoplasty-A Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial. Neurosurgery 2019; 85: 325-334
• 26 Hida T, Sakai Y, Ito K. et al. Collar Fixation Is Not Mandatory After Cervical Laminoplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2017; 42: E253-E259
• 27 Abbott A, Halvorsen M, Dedering A. Is there a need for cervical collar usage post anterior cervical decompression and fusion using interbody cages? A randomized controlled pilot trial. Physiother Theory Pract 2013; 29: 290-300
• 28 Camara R, Ajayi OO, Asgarzadie F. Are External Cervical Orthoses Necessary after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Review of the Literature. Cureus 2016; 8: e688
• 29 Karikari I, Ghogawala Z, Ropper AE. et al. Utility of Cervical Collars Following Cervical Fusion Surgery. Does It Improve Fusion Rates or Outcomes? A Systematic Review. World Neurosurg 2018;
• 30 Martin SC, Dabbous BO, Ridgeon EE. et al. Routine radiographs one day after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion are neither necessary nor cost-effective. Br J Neurosurg 2017; 31: 50-53
• 31 Grimm BD, Leas DP, Glaser JA. The utility of routine postoperative radiographs after cervical spine fusion. Spine J 2013; 13: 764-769