The incidence of cervical spine injuries associated with facial fractures varies from study to study. The presence or absence of a cervical spine injury has important implications in trauma patients, influencing airway management techniques, choice of diagnostic imaging studies, surgical approach and timing for repair of concomitant facial fractures. There is general agreement that immediate management of cervical spine injuries is mandatory to prevent further neurological injury. Nevertheless, disagreement exists as to the actual incidence of cervical spinal trauma in conjunction with various facial fracture patterns. The purpose of this study was to review the incidence of cervical spine injury associated with various upper, middle and lower one-third facial fractures presenting to St. Michael's Hospital Regional Trauma Centre. A retrospective chart review was performed of patients presenting to the Trauma Service at St. Michael's Hospital from 1 January 1993 to 31 December 2003 inclusive. The data from this 10 year time span revealed a total of 124 patients with cervical spine injuries drawn from a cohort of 3,356 patients with craniomaxillofacial fractures. The overall incidence of cervical spine injury was 3.7%. Isolated upper 1/3 facial and skull fractures accounted for 1,711 of the patients and were associated with cervical spine injury in .53% of cases, while isolated middle 1/3 facial fractures were seen in 1,154 patients and were associated with a 1.13% rate of cervical injuries. The largest rate of association for cervical spine injury and isolated fractures was seen with lower 1/3 facial fractures at 1.51%. In contrast, combined facial fracture patterns involving two or more facial thirds accounted for the great majority of cervical spine injuries occurring at an incidence of 7.1%. The implications for trauma assessment, diagnosis and treatment of these injuries are reviewed

Introduction. Mode of non-operative management of thoracolumbar spine fracture continues to remain controversial with the most common modality hinging on bracing. TLSO is the device with a relative extension locked position, and many authors suggest they may have a role in the healing process, diminishing the load transferred via the anterior column, limiting segmental motion, and helping in pain control. However, several studies have shown prolonged use of brace may lead to skin breakdown, diminished pulmonary capacity, weakness of paraspinal musculature with no difference in pain and functional outcomes between patients treated with or without brace. Aims. To identify number of spinal braces used for spinal injury and cost implications (in a DGH), to identify the impact on length of stay, to ascertain patient compliance and quality of patient information provided for brace usage, reflect whether we need to change our practice on TLSO brace use. Methods. Data collected over 18-month period (from Jan.2020 to July 2021). Patients were identified from the TLSO brace issue list of the orthotic department, imaging (X-rays, CT, MRI scans) reviewed to confirm fracture and records reviewed to confirm neurology and non-operative management. Patient feedback was obtained via post or telephone consultation. Inclusion criteria- patients with single or multi -level thoracolumbar osteoporotic or traumatic fractures with no neurological involvement treated in a TLSO brace. Exclusion criteria- neurological involvement, cervical spine injuries, decision to treat surgically, concomitant bony injuries. Results. 72 braces were issued in the time frame with 42 patients remaining in the study based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Patient feedback reflected that 62% patients did not receive adequate advice for brace usage, 73% came off the brace earlier than advised, and 60% would prefer to be treated without a brace if given a choice. The average increase in length of stay was 3 days awaiting brace fitting and delivery. The average total cost burden on the NHS was £127,500 (lower estimate) due to brace usage. Conclusion. If there is equivalence between treatment with/without a brace, there is a need to rethink the practice of prescribing brace for all non-operatively treated fractures and a case-by-case approach may prove more beneficial

The aim of the study was to highlight the absence of an important pitfall in the Advanced Trauma Life Support protocol in application of rigid collar to patients with potentially unstable cervical spine injury. We present a case series of two patients with ankylosed cervical spines who developed neurological complications following application of rigid collar for cervical spine injuries as per the ATLS protocol. This has been followed up with a survey of A&E and T&O doctors who regularly apply cervical collars for suspected unstable cervical spine injuries. The survey was conducted telephonically using a standard questionnaire. 75 doctors completed the questionnaire. A&E doctors = 42, T&O = 33. Junior grade = 38, middle grade = 37. Trauma management frontline experience >1yr = 50, <1yr = 25. Of the 75 respondents 68/75 (90.6%) would follow the ATLS protocol in applying rigid collar in potentially unstable cervical spine injuries. 58/75 (77.3%) would clinically assess the patient prior to applying collar. Only 43/75 (57.3%) thought the patients relevant past medical history would influence collar application. Respondents were asked whether they were aware of any pitfalls to rigid collar application in suspected neck injuries. 34/75 (45.3%) stated that they were NOT aware of pitfalls. The lack of awareness was even higher 17/25 (68%) amongst doctors with less that 12 months frontline experience. When directly asked whether ankylosing spondylitis should be regarded as a pitfall then only 43/75 (57.3%) answered in the affirmative. We would like to emphasise the disastrous consequences of applying a rigid collar in patients with ankylosed cervical spine. The survey demonstrates the lack of awareness (∼ 50%) amongst A&E and T&O doctors regarding pitfalls to collar application. We recommend the ATLS manual highlight a pitfall for application of rigid collars in patients with ankylosed spines and suspected cervical spine injuries

Background. A cautious outlook towards neck injuries is the norm to avoid missing cervical spine injuries. Consequently there has been an increased use of cervical spine radiography. The Canadian Cervical Spine rule was proposed to reduce the unnecessary use of cervical spine radiography in alert and stable patients. Our aim was to see whether applying the Canadian Cervical Spine rule reduced the need for cervical spine radiography without missing significant cervical spine injuries. Methods. This was a retrospective study conducted in 2 hospitals. 114 alert and stable patients who had cervical spine radiographs done for suspected neck injuries were included in the study. Data on patient demographics, Canadian Cervical Spine rule, cervical spine radiography results and further visits after discharge were recorded. Results. 14 patients were included in the high risk category according to the Canadian Cervical Spine rule. 100 patients were assessed according to the low risk category. If the Canadian Cervical Spine rule was applied, there was a significant reduction in cervical spine radiographs (p<0.001) as 86/100 patients (86%) in the low risk category would not have needed cervical spine radiograph. 2/100 patients who had significant cervical spine injuries would have been identified when the Canadian Cervical Spine rule was applied. Conclusion. Applying the Canadian Cervical Spine rule for neck injuries in alert and stable patients reduced the use of cervical spine radiographs without missing out significant cervical spine injuries. This relates to reduction in radiation exposure to patients and cost benefits

We analysed the morbidity, mortality and outcome of cervical spine injuries in patients over the age of 65 years in a retrospective review of 107 elderly patients admitted to our tertiary referral spinal injuries unit with cervical spine injuries between 1994 and 2002. The data were acquired by analysis of the national spinal unit database, hospital inpatient enquiry (HIPE) system, chart and radiographic review. Mean age was 74 years (range 66-93yrs). The male to female ratio was 2.1: 1(M=72, F=35). The mean follow-up was 4.4 years (1-9 years) and mean in-hospital stay was 10 days. The mechanism of injury was a fall in 75 and a road traffic accident (RTA) in the remaining 32 patients. The overall complication rate was 18.6% with an associated in-hospital mortality of 11.2%. Outcome was assessed using the Cervical Spine Outcomes Questionnaire (CSOQ) from Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. Functional outcome scores approached pre-morbid level in almost all patients. Functional disability was more marked in the patients with neurological deficit at the time of injury. Outcome of the injury is related to the increasing age, co-morbidity and the severity of the neurological deficit. Injuries of the cervical spine are a not infrequent occurrence in the elderly and occur with relatively minor trauma. Neck pain in the elderly patient should be thoroughly evaluated to exclude C2 injuries. Most patients can be managed in an orthosis but unstable injuries require rigid external immobilisation