Rescue of traumatized riders in world circuits: a comparison between Skidboard vs scoop Exl65 and aluminium scoop stretchers

Enrico Farabegoli; Alessro Bellati; Marco Forestan; Massimo Berardi; G. De Feo; Eraldo Berardi

摘要

Introduction:The medical rescue of traumatized riders recommends the spine board immobilization to avoid spine injury after trauma. There is no universal procedure to rescue the fallen rider on the track using a single type of spinal immobilization device. We compared three stretchers to identify the better and safer to immobilize a fallen rider on the track. Matherial and Methods: Simulate the rescue of a fallen rider in the Misano World Circuit. Perform rescue through lifting and transporting the patient using Exl65, scoop aluminium, and loading on the Skidboard and drag it for several reps. Transport the stretchers on a real path 25 meters long, including asphalt, curb, artificial turf, natural grass and gravel. Collect and compare data about stresses on the body of the rider, by means of sensors inserted into the suit and helmet, and on anatomical sites, representative of the vertebral column: chin, nape, C spine, sternum, iliac spine. The Dainese Company supplied suit and helmet with sensors. Dainese engineers processed data too. Performe risk analysis about a team physically frail. Results: Final data repetitions were: n. 34 Skidboard and n. 14 Exl65 and aluminum. On the Exl65, only the body of the patient was tied with the straps, it was not possible to tie the helmet because it is necessary to remove the helmet to tie the head. The aluminum scoop stretcher is not certified spine board on which it was not possible to tie the patient. The patient was tied to Skidboard from head to feet. Skidboard allows skidding on the ground to carry the traumatized patient properly strapped and with helmet on. The comparison with aluminum stretcher was quickly interrupted by the striking superiority of others. The average of the coefficients of Skidboard movements and Exl65 is between 0.25 and 0.84. The head anchoring on Skidboard restricts the rotation around three cartesian axes effectively. Exl65 is more excavated and allows a better housing of the hump, it limits the spine rotation. Skidboard is different because has a flat plate which creates a line of contact between support surface and hump, thus allowing the hump to rotate around the axis X. However the strain by Skidboard is less than Exl65. The chin and neck, data on X axis (rolling) was between 2% and 5% in favor of Skidboard. The chin and nape data on Y axis (pitching) was between 4% and 7% in favor of Skidboard. The various kinds of ground walked by rescuers with Exl 65, we noted a pronounced pitching stress of the patient's body especially on changing ground. The subtraction of signals between lumbar and neck on X axis, the spectra amplitude is higher in Exl65 than Skidboard. The same values on lumbar and chin. The rotation stress between lumbar, thoracic and cervical vertebrae is greater on Exl65 than Skidboard. The procedure time completed with Skidboard was on average 43". The Exl65 complete procedure with patient tied to stretcher, head excluded, lasted on average almost 60". Overall, Skidboard time was 17" less than Exl65. All operators reported they put more effort in raising the stretchers Exl65 scoop and aluminum than the Skidboard that they just dragged. Discussion:The aluminum scoop stretcher is inadequate to rescue the traumatized rider because is not a spine board and because creates more stress than other stretchers. In fact there is not a standard fixing system for the body and the head of the patient. Skidboard ensures the aligned immobilization of the cervical spine during the entire rescue process, including dragging, unlike Exl65 that does not immobilizes the cervical spine with helmet on and the head is in extension because the hump. This is not surprising when you consider that Exl65 does not fix the head with the helmet worn and has no headrest to align the spine. Exl 65 has open bottom and the concave shape which welcomes the suit hump and makes the spine more stable against the roll in the transport, so it is less unstable even for the neck.

机译：简介：受伤骑手的医疗救助建议固定脊椎板，以免受伤后脊椎受伤。没有通用的程序可以使用一种类型的脊柱固定装置来救助下落的骑手。我们比较了三种担架，以确定将下落的骑手固定在赛道上的更好，更安全的方法。资料和方法：模拟在Misano世界赛车场上摔倒的骑手的营救。通过使用Exl65，瓢铝将患者抬起和运输，然后将其加载到滑板上并拖动几次以进行救援。在25米长的真实路径上运输担架，包括沥青，路缘石，人造草皮，天然草和砾石。通过插入到衣服和头盔中的传感器，收集并比较有关骑车人身体上的压力的数据，并在代表脊柱的解剖部位上：下巴，后背，C型脊椎，胸骨，骨脊柱。 Dainese公司为西服和头盔提供了传感器。 Dainese的工程师也处理数据。进行有关团队身体虚弱的风险分析。结果：最终数据重复为：n。 34集材板和n。 14 Exl65和铝。在Exl65上，只有患者的身体被绑带绑住，无法系紧头盔，因为必须卸下头盔以系紧头部。铝制铲式担架不是经过认证的脊柱板，无法将患者绑在其上。病人从头到脚被绑在滑雪板上。滑板允许在地面上打滑，以正确地绑好受伤的患者并戴好头盔。与铝制担架的比较很快被其他人的惊人优势打断。滑板运动和Exl65的系数的平均值在0.25和0.84之间。锚定在Skidboard上的头部有效地限制了绕三个笛卡尔轴的旋转。 Exl65的挖掘更多，可以更好地容纳驼峰，它限制了脊柱的旋转。滑板的不同之处在于，滑板具有一个在支撑表面和驼峰之间形成一条接触线的平板，从而使驼峰可以绕X轴旋转。但是，滑板的应变小于Exl65。 X轴（滚动）的下巴和颈部数据在2％和5％之间，有利于Skidboard。 Y轴（俯仰）的下巴和项背数据在4％和7％之间，有利于Skidboard。救援人员通过Exl 65行走在各种地面上，我们注意到患者身体的明显俯仰应力，尤其是在不断变化的地面上。在X轴上减去腰部和颈部之间的信号，Exl65中的光谱幅度高于Skidboard。腰部和下巴的值相同。在Exl65上，腰椎，胸椎和颈椎椎骨之间的旋转应力大于Skidboard。用Skidboard完成的手术时间平均为43英寸。Exl65完整的手术过程是将患者绑在担架上，头部除外，平均持续时间近60英寸。总体而言，Skidboard时间比Exl65少17英寸。所有操作员均表示，他们在举起担架Exl65铲斗和铝制担架上付出的努力比他们刚刚拖拽的Skidboard要多。脊椎板比其他担架产生更大的压力实际上，没有针对患者身体和头部的标准固定系统橇板可确保在整个救援过程中（包括拖动）颈椎的固定固定，带有头盔的Exl65不能固定颈椎并且头部处于伸展状态，这是因为驼峰，当您认为Exl65不能在戴有头盔的头盔上固定头部并且没有用于对齐脊椎的头枕时，这并不奇怪。具有开放的底部和凹形形状，欢迎西装隆起，使脊柱在运输过程中更加稳定地抵御翻滚，因此即使在ck

Rescue of traumatized riders in world circuits: a comparison between Skidboard vs scoop Exl65 and aluminium scoop stretchers

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅