Current recommendations for managing cervical spine injuries suggest leaving football equipment in place to minimize spine motion. Novel equipment designs (eg, RipKord; Riddell, Rosemont, IL) may ...warrant a change in current recommendations. Thirty-two certified athletic trainers were initially trained in three removal techniques. Participant pairs completed two testing sessions 4 weeks apart. They were randomly assigned to control (no additional training) or reinforced training (repeated training from first session) groups for the second session. Removing RipKord shoulder pads was more than 10 seconds faster than both traditional shoulder pad removal techniques (Current recommendations for managing cervical spine injuries suggest leaving football equipment in place to minimize spine motion. Novel equipment designs (eg, RipKord; Riddell, Rosemont, IL) may warrant a change in current recommendations. Thirty-two certified athletic trainers were initially trained in three removal techniques. Participant pairs completed two testing sessions 4 weeks apart. They were randomly assigned to control (no additional training) or reinforced training (repeated training from first session) groups for the second session. Removing RipKord shoulder pads was more than 10 seconds faster than both traditional shoulder pad removal techniques (
P
< .001). Less cervical spine range of motion (approximately 1.5°) with the flat torso technique was observed in the sagittal and frontal planes (
P
< .05) during Session II in the reinforced training group. Reinforced training reduced spine motion in the flat torso technique. Sports medicine programs should frequently practice equipment removal.
Athletic Training & Sports Health Care.
2015;7(6):232–241.
The time and difficulty associated with football equipment removal in exertional heat stroke (EHS) scenarios has not been previously reported. Therefore, the primary purpose of this study was to ...investigate the overall time to prepare a football athlete for cold water immersion (CWI) in an EHS scenario. Secondarily, we compared the time and difficulty of equipment removal of 2 shoulder pad styles (quick release versus traditional). The overall time to prepare an athlete experiencing EHS for CWI was found to be 162 ± 27.77 seconds. No significant difference was found between the quick release and traditional shoulder pad style for removal time (162.37 ± 24.48 sec, 162.87 ± 19.77 sec, respectively) or difficulty of removal (2.12 ± 0.94 sec, 2.22 ± 0.81 sec, respectively). Our results provide evidence for clinicians to consider when establishing protocols for fully preparing an athlete for CWI in an EHS scenario. Data do not reflect time for medical assessment or athlete transfer to the CWI tub. Athletic Training & Sports Health Care. 2014;6(5):213-219. PUBLICATION ABSTRACT
An effective approach to emergency removal of the face mask (FM) from a football helmet should include successful removal of the FM and limitation of both the time required and the movement created ...during the process. Current recommendations and practice are to use a cutting tool to remove the FM. Researchers recently have suggested an alternate approach that combines the use of a cordless screwdriver and a cutting tool. This combined tool approach has not been studied, and FM removal has not been studied in a practical setting.
To investigate the effectiveness and speed of using a combined tool approach to remove the FMs from football helmets during on-field conditions throughout the course of a football season.
Randomized multigroup design.
Practice field of 1 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division II football college.
Eighty-four members of 1 football team.
We used a battery-operated screwdriver for FM removal and resorted to using a cutting tool as needed.
We tracked FM removal success and failure and trial time and compared results based on helmet characteristics, weather variables, and the seasonal timing of the removal trial.
Of the 84 players, 76 were available for data-collection trials. Overall, 98.6% (75/76) of FM removal trials were successful and resulted in a mean removal time of 40.09 +/- 15.1 seconds. We found no differences in FM removal time throughout the course of the season. No differences in effectiveness or trial time were found among helmet characteristics, weather variables, or the timing of the trial.
Combining the cordless screwdriver and cutting tool provided a fast and reliable means of on-field FM removal in this Division II setting. Despite the excellent overall result, 1 FM was not removed in a timely manner. Therefore, we recommend that athletic trainers practice helmet removal to be prepared should FM removal fail.
To compare effectiveness of two techniques for removing football face masks: cutting loop straps cutting tool: FMXtractor (FMX) or removing screws with a cordless screwdriver and using the FMXtractor ...as needed for failed removals combined tool (CT). Null hypotheses: no differences in face mask removal success, removal time or difficulty between techniques or helmet characteristics.
Retrospective, cross-sectional.
NOCSAE-certified helmet reconditioning plants.
600 used high school helmets.
Face mask removal attempted with two techniques.
Success, removal time, rating of perceived exertion (RPE).
Both techniques were effective CT 100% (300/300); FMX 99.4% (298/300). Use of the backup FMXtractor in CT trials was required in 19% of trials. There was significantly (P<0.001) less call for the backup tool in helmets with silver screws (6%) than in helmets with other screws (31%). Mean removal time was 44.51+/-18.79s (CT: 37.84+/-15.37s, FMX: 51.21+/-19.54s; P<0.001). RPE was different between techniques (CT: 1.83+/-1.20, FMX: 3.11+/-1.27; P<0.001). Removal from helmets with silver screws was faster (Silver=33.38+/-11.03, Others=42.18+/-17.64; P<0.001) and easier (Silver=1.42+/-0.89, Other=2.23+/-1.33; P<0.001).
CT was faster and easier than FMX. Most CT trials were completed with the screwdriver alone; helmets with silver screws had 94% screwdriver success. Clinically, these findings are important because this and other research shows that compared to removal with cutting tools, screwdriver removal decreases time, difficulty and helmet movement (reducing potential for iatrogenic injury). The combined-tool approach captures benefits of the screwdriver while offering a contingency for screw removal failure. Teams should use degradation-resistant screws.
Sports medicine professionals must be prepared with appropriate tools and techniques to efficiently remove the face mask from an injured football player's helmet.
Abstract
Objective. To compare the Eject Helmet Removal (EHR) System with manual football helmet removal. Methods. This quasiexperimental counterbalanced study was conducted in a controlled ...laboratory setting. Thirty certified athletic trainers (17 men and 13 women; mean ± standard deviation age: 33.03 ± 10.02 years; height: 174.53 ± 12.04 cm; mass: 85.19 ± 19.84 kg) participated after providing informed consent. Participants removed a Riddell Revolution IQ football helmet from a healthy model two times each under two conditions: manual helmet removal (MHR) and removal with the EHR system. A six-camera, three-dimensional motion capture system was used to record range of motion (ROM) of the head. A digital stopwatch was used to time trials and to record a split time associated with EHR system bladder insertion. A modified Borg CR10 scale was used to measure the rating of perceived exertion (RPE). Mean values were created for each variable. Three pairwise t-tests with Bonferroni-corrected alpha levels tested for differences between time for removal, split time, and RPE. A 2 × 3 (condition × plane) totally within-subjects repeated-measures design analysis of variance (ANOVA) tested for differences in head ROM between the sagittal, frontal, and transverse planes. Analyses were performed using SPSS (version 18.0) (alpha = 0.05). Results. There was no statistically significant difference in perceived difficulty between EHR (RPE = 2.73) and MHR (RPE = 2.55) (t29 = 0.76; p = 0.45; d = 0.20). Manual helmet removal was, on average, 28.95 seconds faster than EHR (t29 = 11.44; p < 0.001). Head ROM was greater during EHR compared with MHR in the sagittal (t29 = 4.57; p < 0.001), frontal (t29 = 5.90; p < 0.001), and transverse (t29 = 8.34; p < 0.001) planes. Head ROM was also greater during the helmet-removal portion of EHR in the frontal (t29 = 4.44; p < 0.001) and transverse (t29 = 5.99; p < 0.001) planes, compared with MHR. Regardless of technique, sagittal-plane head ROM was greater than frontal- and transverse-plane movements (F2,58 = 241.47; p < 0.001). Conclusions. Removing a helmet manually is faster and creates slightly less motion than removing a helmet using the Eject system. Both techniques were equally easy to use. Future research should analyze the performance of the Eject system in other styles of football helmets and in helmets used in other sports such as lacrosse, motorsports, and ice hockey.
Most research on face mask removal has been performed on unused equipment.
To identify and compare factors that influence the condition of helmet components and their relationship to face mask ...removal.
A cross-sectional, retrospective study.
Five athletic equipment reconditioning/recertification facilities.
2584 helmets from 46 high school football teams representing 5 geographic regions.
Helmet characteristics (brand, model, hardware components) were recorded. Helmets were mounted and face mask removal was attempted using a cordless screwdriver. The 2004 season profiles and weather histories were obtained for each high school.
Success and failure (including reason) for removal of 4 screws from the face mask were noted. Failure rates among regions, teams, reconditioning year, and screw color (type) were compared. Weather histories were compared. We conducted a discriminant analysis to determine if weather variables, region, helmet brand and model, reconditioning year, and screw color could predict successful face mask removal. Metallurgic analysis of screw samples was performed.
All screws were successfully removed from 2165 (84%) helmets. At least 1 screw could not be removed from 419 (16%) helmets. Significant differences were found for mean screw failure per helmet among the 5 regions, with the Midwest having the lowest failure rate (0.08 +/- 0.38) and the Southern (0.33 +/- 0.72), the highest. Differences were found in screw failure rates among the 46 teams (F(1,45) = 9.4, P < .01). Helmets with the longest interval since last reconditioning (3 years) had the highest failure rate, 0.47 +/- 0.93. Differences in success rates were found among 4 screw types (chi(2) (1,4) = 647, P < .01), with silver screws having the lowest percentage of failures (3.4%). A discriminant analysis (Lambda = .932, chi(2) (14,n=2584) = 175.34, P < .001) revealed screw type to be the strongest predictor of successful removal.
Helmets with stainless steel or nickel-plated carbon steel screws reconditioned in the previous year had the most favorable combination of factors for successful screw removal. T-nut spinning at the side screw locations was the most common reason and location for failure.
PDF
