Spinal Backboard—Necessity or Hazard? The IDF Clinical Practice Guidelines and Policy

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction Prehospital spinal immobilization using a cervical collar and a backboard has been standard practice for suspected spinal cord injuries (SCIs) since the 1960s. Multiple studies have shown that the disadvantages of the spinal backboard outweigh its advantages. This report aims to present a review of the current literature along with the revised IDF protocol regarding patients with suspected SCI. Methods In 2019, the IDF Medical Corps (IDFMC) convened a multidisciplinary expert committee to revise the IDFMC protocols regarding the use of spinal backboards. Prior to convening the committee, a review of the pertinent literature was done by conducting a thorough clinical evaluation in “PubMed” and “Google Scholar” databases to identify recent studies investigating traumatic SCI and the prehospital military use of spinal backboards. Results There were no documented studies that have managed to prove the efficacy of spinal backboards to prevent exacerbation of spinal injuries during mobilization. Despite being a good tool for extraction from vehicles and combat arenas, more than 11 studies have shown that backboards may even result in adverse outcomes such as pain due to the contact between board and skin, the formation of decubitus ulcers, hypothermia, and inadequate ventilation. Conclusion In light of the evidence showing the potential harmful effects of the routine use of spinal backboards, the IDF guidelines have been revised and now recommends avoiding the routine use of spinal backboards and using a standard stretcher for transporting potential SCI patients. Current IDF guidelines recommend using a backboard for the extraction of an entrapped patient and for obtunded or unconscious patients with obvious deformity or mechanism for spinal trauma.