Influence of Anthropometry on the Kinematics of the Cervical Spine in Frontal Sled Tests

Author(s): Christoph Dehner MD, Wolfram Hell MD, Michael Kraus MD, Götz Röderer MD, Michael Kramer MD

Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of anthropometric factors on the kinematics of the cervical spine during in-vivo frontal collisions. Methods: Therefore a frontal collision with a mean velocity change (delta-V) of 10.2 km/h was simulated in a sled test with ten healthy volunteers (seven men and three women). A high-speed camera was used to document motion data. Acceleration data were recorded using accelerometers. The study analyzed the association of anthropometric factors with defined kinematical characteristics.Results: A smaller neck circumference led to an earlier peak of the dorsal horizontal head acceleration (r=0.602), an earlier beginning of the ventral head translation (r=0.742) and a greater maximal head flexion (r=-0.717). A smaller body weight led to a later beginning of the head flexion acceleration (r=-0.713) and a greater maximal head flexion (r=-0.620). With a smaller thorax circumference the beginning of the dorsal horizontal head acceleration (r=0.623), the peak of the head flexion acceleration (r=0.756) and the peak of the head extension acceleration (r=0.679) were reached earlier. Conclusions: The main findings of the present study consist in the identification of relevant anthropometric parameters (neck and thorax circumference and body weight) on the cervical spine kinematics. Specific anthropometric factors increasing the risk of injury could not be identified. The head movement is mainly associated with the neck circumference and the body weight. The onset and occurrence of the acceleration parameter is mainly associated with the thorax circumference.

frontal impact, anthropometric factors, head-neck kinematics, volunteer sled tests, whiplash

1. Watanabe Y, Ichikawa H, Kayama O, Ono K, Kaneoka K, Inami S (2000) Influence of seat characteristics on occupant motion in low-speed rear impacts. Accid Anal Prev 32 (2):243-250
2. Blouin JS, Descarreaux M, Belanger-Gravel A, Simoneau M, Teasdale N (2003) Attenuation of human neck muscle activity following repeated imposed trunk-forward linear acceleration. Exp Brain Res 150 (4):458-464
3. Kaneoka K, Ono K, Inami S, Hayashi K (1999) Motion analysis of cervical vertebrae during whiplash loading. Spine 24 (8):763-769
4. Mühlbauer M, Eichberger A, Geigl B, Steffan H (1999) Analysis of Kinematics and acceleration behavior of the head and neck in experimental rear-impact collisions. Neuro-Orthopedics 25 (1):1-17
5. Siegmund GP, Heinrichs BE, Chimich DD, DeMarco AL, Brault JR (2005) The effect of collision pulse properties on seven proposed whiplash injury criteria. Accid Anal Prev 37 (2):275-285
6. Bostrom O, Fredriksson R, Haland Y, Jakobsson L, Krafft M, Lovsund P, Muser MH, Svensson MY (2000) Comparison of car seats in low speed rear-end impacts using the BioRID dummy and the new neck injury criterion (NIC). Accid Anal Prev 32 (2):321-328
7. Brell E, Veidt M, Daniel W (2001) Influence of deceleration profiles on occupant velocity differential and injury potential. Int J Crashworthiness 6 (4):605-620
8. Jakobsson L, Lundell B, Norin H, Isaksson-Hellman I (2000) WHIPS--Volvo's Whiplash Protection Study. Accid Anal Prev 32 (2):307-319
9. Farmer CM, Wells JK, Werner JV (1999) Relationship of head restraint positioning to driver neck injury in rear-end crashes. Accid Anal Prev 31 (6):719-728
10. Siegmund GP, Heinrichs BE, Wheeler JB (1999) The influence of head restraint and occupant factors on peak head/neck kinematics in low-speed rear-end collisions. Accid Anal Prev 31 (4):393-407
11. Matsushita T, Sato TB, Hirabayashi K, Fujimura S, Asazuma T, Takatori T X-Ray study of the human neck motiondue to head inertia loading. In: SAE technical paper series SoAE (ed) 37th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Fort Lauderdale, USA, 1994. pp 55-64
12. Kumar S, Narayan Y, Amell T (2003) Analysis of low velocity frontal impacts. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 18 (8):694-703
13. Dehner C, Schick S, Kraus M, Scola A, Hell W, Kramer M (2012) Muscle Activity Influence on the Kinematics of the Cervical Spine in Frontal Tests. Traffic Injury Prevention (accepted for publication). doi:DOI:10.1080/15389588.2012.734937
14. Knox JJ, Beilstein DJ, Charles SD, Aarseth GA, Rayar S, Treleaven J (2006) Changes in head and neck position have a greater effect on elbow joint position sense in people with whiplash-associated disorders. Clin J Pain 22 (6):512-518
15. Armstrong B, McNair P, Taylor D (2008) Head and neck position sense. Sports Med 38 (2):101-117
16. Clauser CE, Mc Conville JT, Young JM (1969) Weight, volume, and centre of mass of segments of the human body. Technical Report AMRL-TR edn
17. Mc Conville JT, Churchill TD, Kaleps I, Clauser CE, Cuzzi J (1980) Anthropometric Relationships of Body and Body Segment Moments of Inertia., Technical Report AMRL-TR edn
18. Kullgren A, Krafft M, Nygren A, Tingvall C (2000) Neck injuries in frontal impacts: influence of crash pulse characteristics on injury risk. Accid Anal Prev 32 (2):197-205
19. Larder DR, Twiss MK, Mackay GM Neck injury to car occupants using seat belts. In: 29th Ann Proc Am Assoc Auto Med, Washington, USA, 1995. pp 153-165
20. Riemann BL, Myers JB, Lephart SM (2002) Sensorimotor system measurement techniques. J Athl Train 37 (1):85-98
21. Walz F (1994) Biomechanical aspects of injuries of the cervical vertebrae. Orthopade 23 (4):262-267
22. Siegmund GP, Chimich DD, Heinrichs BE, DeMarco AL, Brault JR (2005) Variations in occupant response with seat belt slack and anchor location during moderate frontal impacts. Traffic Inj Prev 6 (1):38-43