200 likes | 444 Vues
An audit of cervical spine imaging in alert and stable trauma patients. Accident and Emergency Department, Whittington Hospital, London. Yenzhi Tang, Marianna Thomas, Mike Spiro Foundation Year 2 Doctors in Emergency Medicine. January 2007. Aim.
E N D
An audit of cervical spine imaging in alert and stable trauma patients Accident and Emergency Department, Whittington Hospital, London Yenzhi Tang, Marianna Thomas, Mike SpiroFoundation Year 2 Doctors in Emergency Medicine January 2007
Aim • To compare assessment and C spine radiography in alert stable patients with head/neck trauma presenting to Whittington Hospital Emergency Department, to Canadian C spine rules for radiography
Current Practice • No guidelines on the Whittington intranet • No NICE guidelines • No current proforma/standard for assessing pts at risk of C spine fracture
Standard • Target level 100%
Background • Canadian C spine rule developed from a prospective cohort of alert, stable patients with head/neck trauma. • Pts from 10 Canadian EDs between 1996-1999. (n=8924) • Developed in response to wide variation in indications for requesting C spine x rays
Background • Prospectively validated in a large multicentre trial (n=7017) • 99.3% sensitivity (95% CI 96-100) • Specificity 45.1% • Shown to be superior to NEXUS by prospective study by Stiell
Audit • Population • Adults presenting to ED with blunt trauma to head/neck, stable vital signs, GCS 15
Audit • Exclusions • Known vertebral disease • Pregnant women • <16 • >48 h after injury • Penetrating trauma • Acute paralysis
High risk group • >65 • Paraesthesia in extremities • Dangerous mechanism • Fall from >1 metre or stairs • Axial load to head • MVC at high speed >62mph • Motorized recreational vehicles • Bicycle collisions
Low Risk Group • Should have C spine ROM assessed if walking, sitting, nil c spine tenderness, nil paraesthesia • If less than 45 degrees rotation to each side then X ray • If full ROM then no radiography
Method • Retrospective audit • Pts selected from a 3 week period • Case note analysis • EDIS used to identify pts triaged with neck pain/head injury/neck strain/ RTA
Results • 36 pts over 3 weeks • 5 excluded • 4 not meeting criteria • 1 set of notes not found
Results • In the high risk group (total 8) 5 had x rays • No fractures imaged in all 5 x rays • None of the X rays were adequate views, none had C1 –T1. None were repeated or had subsequent CT spine
Results • Low Risk group • One pt had x ray • No fractures • Difficult to interpret ED performance b/c of lack of documentation
Conclusions • Poor documentation • 9/22 in low risk group did not document ROM • Poor knowledge and application of C spine rules • 3/10 ED doctors have heard of C spine rules • 1/10 have used it • 1/10 know the algorithm
Conclusions • Radiographers need to be informed of their inadequate views • -can present findings to radiographers • SHO competent in interpreting c spine x rays • Rules open to interpretation: low risk criteria?
PLAN • Present findings to ED doctors, emphasize need for better documentation • Put algorithm in majors and minors desk • Incorporate rules into Whittington ED head proforma • Re audit in 3-6 months
References • Stiell IG, Wells GA, Vandemheen KL, Clement CM, Lesiuk H, De Maio VJ, et al. The Canadian C-spine rule for radiography in alert and stable trauma patients. JAMA. 2001;286:1841–1848. • Stiell et al Acad Emerg Med 2002 Volume 9, Number 5 359-360 • Hoffman et al Ann Emerg Med 1992; 21 (12): 1454-60 • Stiell et al NEJM Vol 349: 2510-2518 (2003)