Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 87, Issue 11 , Pages 1423-1427 , November 2006

Comparison of the Relative Benefits of 2 Versus 10 Days of Soft Collar Cervical Immobilization After Acute Whiplash Injury

  • Christoph Dehner, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department for Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to Christoph Dehner, Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie Universität Ulm, Steinhövelstr 9, D-89075 Ulm, Germany
    • ,
  • Erich Hartwig, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department for Trauma Surgery, Deaconesses Hospital, Karlsruhe-Rüpurr, Germany
    • ,
  • Philipp Strobel

      Affiliations

    • Department for Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
    • ,
  • Matthias Scheich

      Affiliations

    • Department for Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
    • ,
  • Florian Schneider

      Affiliations

    • Ulmkolleg School for Physiotherapists and Masseurs, Ulm, Germany.
    • ,
  • Martin Elbel, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department for Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
    • ,
  • Lothar Kinzl, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department for Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
    • ,
  • Michael Kramer, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department for Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany

  • Image Result

    CONSORT flow diagram of study participants. *Distance too great to therapy sessions. †Patients not prepared to report for follow-up (investigation after 6mo). ‡Patients did not receive the minimum nec

    CONSORT flow diagram of study participants. *Distance too great to therapy sessions. †Patients not prepared to report for follow-up (investigation after 6mo). ‡Patients did not receive the minimum necessary PT sessions (14 times in 8wk).

  • Image Result
    Pain score after injury, 2 months and 6 months—comparison of 2 days’ and 10 days’ immobilization. Evaluation was made within 24 hours after injury and after 2 and 6 months. Legend: box, 1st quartile a

    Pain score after injury, 2 months and 6 months—comparison of 2 days’ and 10 days’ immobilization. Evaluation was made within 24 hours after injury and after 2 and 6 months. Legend: box, 1st quartile and 3rd quartile; horizontal bar, median; vertical bars, maximum and minimum.

  • Image Result
    Disability score after injury, 2 months and 6 months—comparison of 2 days’ and 10 days’ immobilization. Evaluation was made within 24 hours after injury and after 2 and 6 months. Legend: box, 1st quar

    Disability score after injury, 2 months and 6 months—comparison of 2 days’ and 10 days’ immobilization. Evaluation was made within 24 hours after injury and after 2 and 6 months. Legend: box, 1st quartile and 3rd quartile; horizontal bar, median; vertical bars, maximum and minimum.

  • Image Result
    Restriction in ROM after injury, 2 months and 6 months—comparison of 2 days’ and 10 days’ immobilization. Evaluation was made within 24 hours after injury and after 2 and 6 months. Legend: box, 1st qu

    Restriction in ROM after injury, 2 months and 6 months—comparison of 2 days’ and 10 days’ immobilization. Evaluation was made within 24 hours after injury and after 2 and 6 months. Legend: box, 1st quartile and 3rd quartile; horizontal bar, median; vertical bars, maximum and minimum.

 Supported by the Research Institute for Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Ulm, Germany.No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the authors or upon any organization with which the authors are associated.

PII: S0003-9993(06)00971-3

doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.07.268

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 87, Issue 11 , Pages 1423-1427 , November 2006

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution