This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Cervical Range of Motion and Dynamic Response and Strength of Cervical Muscles
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published February 01, 1973 by SAE International in United States
Annotation ability available
Basic physical characteristics of the neck have been defined which have application to the design of biomechanical models, anthropometric dummies, and occupant crash protection devices. The study was performed using a group of 180 volunteers chosen on the basis of sex, age (18-74 years), and stature. Measurements from each subject included anthropometry, cervical range-of-motion (observed with both x-rays and photographs), the dynamic response of the cervical flexor and extensor muscles to a controlled jerk, and the maximum voluntary strength of the cervical muscles. Data are presented in tabular and graphic form for total range-of-motion, cervical muscle reflex time, decelerations of the head, muscle activation time, and cervical muscle strength.
The range-of-motion of females was found to average 1-12 deg greater than that of males, depending upon age, and a definite degradation in range-of-motion was observed with increasing age. Average neck muscle reflex times range from 56-92 ms for flexors and 54-87 ms for extensors, with males being generally slower-reacting. This finding means that the cervical muscles generally cannot be activated in sufficient time to mitigate the hyperextension effects of a surprise rearend collision. Reflex time becomes significantly longer after middle age. On the average, the stretch reflex was elicited with head accelerations at the c.g. of approximately 0.25 g. The time required to stop the head after initial detection of the muscle reflex was slightly longer for neck extensors. Strength tests revealed that males are on the average stronger than females in both flexor and extensor strengths; that males and females exhibit different aging characteristics, and that a slight stature effect was present in the younger and shorter portions of the population.
Age and sex were found to be important factors in cervical flexibility and response characteristics, and they should be included whenever accurate representation of neck parameters is desired.
- David R. Foust - Highway Safety Research Institute, The University of Michigan
- Don B. Chaffin - Highway Safety Research Institute, The University of Michigan
- Richard G. Snyder - Highway Safety Research Institute, The University of Michigan
- Janet K. Baum - Highway Safety Research Institute, The University of Michigan
CitationFoust, D., Chaffin, D., Snyder, R., and Baum, J., "Cervical Range of Motion and Dynamic Response and Strength of Cervical Muscles," SAE Technical Paper 730975, 1973, https://doi.org/10.4271/730975.
- National Safety Council, “Accident Facts.” 1972 Edition, Chicago.
- Van Eck P., Chaffin D. B., Foust D. R., Baum J., and Snyder R.G., “A Bibliography of Whiplash and Cervical Kinematic Measurement.” Highway Safety Research Institute, The University of Michigan (2326 references).
- Ferlic D., “The Range of Motion of the ‘Normal’ Cervical Spine.” Johns Hopkins Hosp. Bulletin, Vol. 110 (1962), pp. 59-65.
- Delahaye R. P., et al., “Dynamic Radiology of the Cervical Spine of Flying Military Personnel; the Special Case of Jet Pilots.” Rev. Corps Sante Armes, Vol. 9 (1968), pp. 593-614.
- Defibaugh J. J., “Measurement of Head Motion. Part I: A Review of Methods of Measuring Joint Motion. Part II; An Experimental Study of Head Motion in Adult Males.” Physical Therapy, Vol. 44 (1964), pp. 157-168.
- Leighton J. R., “Flexibility Characteristics of Four Specialized Skill Groups of College Athletes.” Arch. Phys. Med., Vol. 38 (1957), pp. 24-28.
- Sigerseth P. O. and Haliski C. C., “The Flexibility of Football Players.” Res. Quart., Vol. 21 (1950), pp. 394-398.
- Buck C. A., Dameron F. B., Dow M. J., and Skowlund H. V., “Study of Normal Range of Motion in the Neck Utilizing a Bubble Goniometer.” Arch. Phys. Med., Vol. 40 (1959), pp. 390-392.
- Bennett J. G., Bergmanis L. E., Carpenter J. K., and Skowlund H. V., “Range of Motion of the Neck.” Jrl. Amer. Phys. Ther. Assn., Vol. 43 (1963), pp. 45-47.
- Mertz H. J. Jr., and Patrick L. M., “Investigation of the Kinematics and Kinetics of Whiplash.” SAE Transactions, Vol. 76, paper 670919.
- Marotzky H. J., “Isometric Energy Measurements on the Head-Neck System in Younger and Older People.” Arch. Orthop. Unfallchir., Vol. 74 (1972), pp. 42-62.
- O'Neill B., Haddon W. Jr., Kelley A. B., and Sorenson W., “Automobile Head Restraints-Frequency of Neck Injury Claims in Relation to the Presence of Head Restraints.” Amer. Jrl. Pub. Health, Vol. 62, March 1972, pp. 399-406.
- “Weight, Height and Selected Body Dimensions of Adults: United States, 1960-62.” Public Health Service, 1963.
- Ewing C. L. and Thomas D. J., “Human Head and Neck Response to Impact Acceleration.” NAMRL Monograph 21 (1972), p. 84.
- Davis J. F., “Manual of Surface Electromyography.” WADC Technical Report 59-184 (1959), pp. 18-23.
- Robbins D. H., Snyder R. G., Chaffin D. B. and Foust D. R., “A Mathematical Study of the Effect of Neck Physical Parameters on Injury Susceptibility.” Paper 740274 presented at SAE Automotive Engineering Congress, Detroit, February 1974.
- Chaffin D. B. and Baker W. H., “A Biomechanical Model for Analysis of Symmetric Sagittal Plane Lifting.” AIIE Transactions (March 1970), pp. 16-27.
- Houk J. and Henneman E., “Feedback Control of Skeletal Muscles.” Brain Research, Vol. 5 (1967), pp. 433-451.