The effect of occupant position in volunteers subjected to whiplash-type rear impacts

Abstract The purpose of this study was to examining electromyographically the effects of trunk flexion to the left and right on the cervical muscle response to increasing low-velocity posterolateral impacts. Twenty healthy volunteers were subjected to rear impacts of 4.5, 8.2, 10.6, and 13.9 m/s2 acceleration, offset by 45 degrees to the subject's right with trunk flexed to right and left. At a peak acceleration of 13.9 m/s2, with the trunk flexed to the right, the right trapezius generated 26% and left trapezius 29% of the maximal voluntary contraction electromyogram, while all other muscles generated 20% or less of this variable. When the trunk is flexed to the left, under these same conditions, the right trapezius generated 25% of its maximal voluntary contraction electromyogram, with 30% of the maximal voluntary contraction for the right trapezius, and less than 12% for the remaining muscles. Electromyographic and kinematic variables were significantly affected by the levels of acceleration (P < 0.05). The time to onset and time to peak electromyogram for all muscles progressively decreased with increasing levels of acceleration, for both trunk flexion conditions. Being ȁout-of-positionȁ at the time of impact greatly reduces the EMG response of the cervical muscles compared to what is the known response for impacts with neutral posture. Muscle injury seems less likely under these conditions in low-velocity impacts.

[2]  A. D. Ruedemann,et al.  Automobile safety device-headrest to prevent whiplash injury. , 1957, Journal of the American Medical Association.

[3]  Yogesh Narayan,et al.  Electromyography of superficial cervical muscles with exertion in the sagittal, coronal and oblique planes , 2002, European Spine Journal.

[4]  Heinz Hoschopf,et al.  Reconstruction of occupant kinematics and kinetics for real world accidents , 2003 .

[5]  S Kumar,et al.  Cervical strength of young adults in sagittal, coronal, and intermediate planes. , 2001, Clinical biomechanics.

[6]  Yogesh Narayan,et al.  An Electromyographic Study of Low-Velocity Rear-End Impacts , 2002, Spine.

[7]  L Jakobsson,et al.  WHIPS--Volvo's Whiplash Protection Study. , 2000, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[8]  P. Eng,et al.  Acceleration Perturbations of Daily Living: A Comparison to ‘Whiplash’ , 1994, Spine.

[9]  S. Meyer,et al.  Do "whiplash injuries" occur in low-speed rear impacts? , 1997, European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society.

[10]  J. R. Ferrari,et al.  The Whiplash Encyclopedia: The Facts and Myths of Whiplash , 1999 .

[11]  C. Kalkman,et al.  Neurologic Injury After Insertion of Laminar Hooks During Cotrel‐Dubousset Instrumentation , 1994, Spine.