Objectives. Loss of motion following spine segment fusion results in increased strain in the adjacent motion segments. However, to date, studies on the biomechanics of the cervical spine have not assessed the role of coupled motions in the lumbar spine. Accordingly, we investigated the biomechanics of the cervical spine following cervical fusion and lumbar fusion during simulated whiplash using a whole-human finite element (FE) model to simulate coupled motions of the spine. Methods. A previously validated FE model of the human body in the driver-occupant position was used to investigate cervical hyperextension injury. The cervical spine was subjected to simulated whiplash exposure in accordance with Euro NCAP (the European New Car Assessment Programme) testing using the whole human FE model. The coupled motions between the cervical spine and lumbar spine were assessed by evaluating the biomechanical effects of simulated cervical fusion and lumbar fusion. Results. Peak anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) strain ranged from 0.106 to 0.382 in a normal spine, and from 0.116 to 0.399 in a fused cervical spine. Strain increased from cranial to caudal levels. The mean strain increase in the motion segment immediately adjacent to the site of fusion from C2-C3 through C5-C6 was 26.1% and 50.8% following single- and two-level cervical fusion, respectively (p = 0.03, unpaired two-way t-test). Peak cervical strains following various lumbar-fusion procedures were 1.0% less than those seen in a healthy spine (p = 0.61, two-way ANOVA). Conclusion. Cervical arthrodesis increases peak ALL strain in the adjacent motion segments. C3-4 experiences greater changes in strain than C6-7. Lumbar fusion did not have a significant effect on cervical spine strain. Cite this article: H. Huang, R. W. Nightingale, A. B. C. Dang. Biomechanics of coupled motion in the cervical spine during simulated whiplash in patients with pre-existing cervical or lumbar spinal fusion: A Finite Element Study. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:28–35. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.71.BJR-2017-0100.R1

Whiplash injury is surrounded by controversy in both the medical and legal world. The debate on whether it is either a potentially serious medical condition or a social problem is ongoing. This paper briefly examines a selection of studies on low velocity whiplash injury (LVWI) and whiplash associated disorder (WAD) and touches upon the pathophysiological and epidemiological considerations, cultural and geographical differences and the effect of litigation on chronicity. The study concludes that the evidence for significant physical injury after LVWI is poor, and if significant disability is present after such injury, it will have to be explained in terms of psychosocial factors

The April 2012 Trauma Roundup. 360 . looks at fibula-pro-tibia plating, galeazzi fractures, distal radial fractures in the over 65s, transverse sacral fractures, acute dislocation of the knee, posterior malleolar fractures, immobilising the broken scaphoid, the terrible triad, lower limb amputation after trauma, and whiplash injuries