Browse > Article

Kinematical Characteristics of the Translational and Pendular Movements of each Cervical Vertebra at the Flexion and Extension Motion  

Park, Sung Hyuk (Department of Emergency Medicine, Kyung Hee University Medical Center, School of Medicine, Kyung Hee University)
Choi, Han Sung (Department of Emergency Medicine, Kyung Hee University Medical Center, School of Medicine, Kyung Hee University)
Hong, Hoon Pyo (Department of Emergency Medicine, Kyung Hee University Medical Center, School of Medicine, Kyung Hee University)
Ko, Young Gwan (Department of Emergency Medicine, Kyung Hee University Medical Center, School of Medicine, Kyung Hee University)
Publication Information
Journal of Trauma and Injury / v.19, no.2, 2006 , pp. 126-134 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the kinematical characteristics of the pendular and the translational movements of each cervical vertebra at flexion and extension for understanding the mechanism of injury to the cervical spine. Methods: Twenty volunteers, young men (24~37 years), with clinically and radiographically normal cervical spines were studied. We induced two directional passive movements and then took X-ray pictures. The range of pendular movement could be measured by measuring the variation of the distance between the center point of two contiguous cervical vertebrae, and the range of translational movement could be measured by measuring the variation of the shortest distance between the center point of a vertebra and an imaginary line connecting the center points of two lower contiguous cervical vertebrae. The measurements were done by using a picture archiving and communicating system (PACS). Results: The total length of all cervical vertebrae in the neutral position was, on average, 133.66 mm, but in both flexion and extension, the lengths were widened to 134.83 mm and 134.79 mm, respectively. The directions of both the pendular and the translational movements changed at the $2^{nd}$ cervical vertebra, and the ranges of both movements were significantly larger from the $5^{th}$ cervical vertebra to the $7^{th}$ cervical vertebra for flexion and combined flexion and extension motion (p<0.05). Conclusion: The kinematical characteristics for flexion and extension motions were variable at each level of cervical vertebrae. The $1^{st}$ and the $2^{nd}$ cervical vertebrae and from the $5^{th}$ to the $7^{th}$ cervical vertebrae were the main areas of cervical spinal injury. This shows, according to "Hook's law," that the tissues supporting this area could be weak, and that this area is sensitive to injury.
Keywords
Kinematics; Cervical spine; Injury mechanism;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Robertson A, Branfoot T, Barlow IF, Giannoudis PV. Spinal injury patterns resulting from car and motorcycle accidents. Spine 2002;27:2825-30   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Fukushima M, Kaneoka K, Ono K, Sakane M, Ujihashi S, Ochiai N. Neck injury mechanisms during direct face impact. Spine 2006;31:903-8   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Panjabi MM. Three-dimensional mathematical model of the human spine structure. J Biomech 1973;6:761-7
4 Roaf R. A study of the mechanics of spinal injuries. J Bone Joint Surg 1960;42:810-23
5 Ordway NR, Seymour RJ, Donelson RG, Hojnowski LS, Edwards WT. Cervical flexion, extension, protrusion, and retraction: A radiological segmental analysis. Spine 1999;24:240-7   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Reuber M, Schultz A, Dennis F, Spencer D. Bulging of lumbar intervertebral discs. J Biomech Eng 1982;104:187-92   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Lee CK, Yeom JS, Chang BS. Fractures and dislocations of the cervical spine. In: Kim YM, Chung MS, Seong SC eds. Fracture. 2nd ed. Seoul: Koonja;2001:559-600
8 Choi HS, Ko YG, Kim MC, Hong HP. The sliding phenomenon in men with cervical orthoses in the extensive motion. Journal of the Korean Society of Traumatology 2004;17:163-73
9 Siegmund GP, Myers BS, Davis MB, Bohnet HF, Winkelstein BA. Mechanical evidence of cervical facet capsule injury during whiplash: a cadaveric study using combined shear, compression and extension loading. Spine 2001;26:2063-4   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Alberts LR, Mahoney CR, and Neff JR. Comparison of the Nebraska collar, a new prototype cervical immobilization collar, with three standard models. J Orthopaedic Trauma 1998;12:425-30   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Ehara S, Shimamura T. Cervical spine injury in the elderly: Imaging features. Skeletal Radiol 2001; 30:1-7   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Schmitt H, Gerner HJ. Paralysis from sport and diving accidents. Clin J Sport Med 2001;11:17-22   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Fredrickson BE, Yuan HA. Nonoperative treatment of the spine: external immobilization. In: Browner BD, Jupiter JB, Levine AM, Trafton PG eds. Skeletal trauma. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1998:807-35
14 Kim YE. Biomechanical analysis of the spine. In: Suk SI ed. Spinal surgery. 2nd ed. Seoul: Newest Medical Publishing Company;2004:39-54
15 Choi HS, Park HK, Hong HP, Kim MC, Ko YG. A comparison of efficacy of two cervical orthoses in Koreans. Journal of the Korean society of emergency medicine. 2004;15:213-21
16 Mimura M, Moriya H, Watanabe T, Takahashi K, Yamagata M, Tamaki Tl. Three-dimensional motion analysis of the cervical spine with special reference to the axial rotation. Spine 1989;14:1135-9   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Northrup BE. Evaluation and early treatment of acute injuries to the spine and spinal cord. In: Clark CR ed. The cervical spine. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lipponcott-Raven;1998:541-9
18 Andersson GBJ, Schultz AB. Effects of fluid injection on mechanical properties of intervertebral discs. J Biomech 1982;12:453-8   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Yang KH, King AI. Mechanism of facet load transmission as a hypothesis for low back pain. Spine 1984;9:557-65   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Roberts JR, Hedges JR. Clinical procedures in emergency medicine. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1998:772-5
21 Penning L. Normal movements of the cervical spine. Am J Roentgenol 1978;130:317-26   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Chamman JR, Anderson PA. Cervical trauma. In: Frymoyer JW ed. The adult spine. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Lippincott-Raven;1997:1245-96
23 Allen BL, Fergusson RL, Lehmann TR and O'Bren RP. A mechanistic classification of closed, indirect fractrues and dislocations of the lower cervical spine. Spine 1982:7:1-27   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Bogduk N, Mercer S. Biomechanics of the cervical spine. I: normal Kinematics. Clin Biomech 2000;15: 633-48   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Marar BC, Orth MC. Hyperextension injuries of the cervical spine. The pathogenesis of damage to the spinal cord. J Bone Joint Surg 1974;56:1655-62   DOI
26 Askins V, Eismont FJ. Efficacy of five cervical orthoses in restricting cervical motion. Spine 1997; 22:1193-8   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Ishii T, Mukai Y, Hosono N, Sakaura H, Fujii R, Nakajima Y, et al. Kinematics of the cervical spine in lateral bending. Spine 2006;31:155-60   DOI   ScienceOn
28 DalCanto RA, Lieberman I, Inceoglu S, Kayanja M, Ferrara L. Biomechanical comparison of transarticular facet screws to lateral mass plates in two-level instrumentations of the cervical spine. Spine 2005;30:897-902   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Molsa JJ, Tegner Y, Alaranta H, Myllynen P, Kujala UM. Spinal cord injuries in ice hockey in Finland and Sweden from 1980 to 1996. Int J Sports Med 1999;20:64-7   DOI   ScienceOn