Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T05:36:05.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can emergency physicians accurately rule out clinically important cervical spine injuries by using computed tomography?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2015

Hendrik P. Van Zyl ,
James Bilbey ,
Alan Vukusic ,
Todd Ring ,
Jennifer Oakes ,
Lykke D. Williamson  and
Ian V. Mitchell
Hendrik P. Van Zyl*
Affiliation:
Emergency Department, Royal Inland Hospital, Kamloops, BC
James Bilbey
Affiliation:
Diagnostic Imaging Department, the Royal Inland Hospital, Kamloops, BC
Alan Vukusic
Affiliation:
Emergency Department, Royal Inland Hospital, Kamloops, BC
Todd Ring
Affiliation:
Emergency Department, Royal Inland Hospital, Kamloops, BC
Jennifer Oakes
Affiliation:
Emergency Department, Royal Inland Hospital, Kamloops, BC
Lykke D. Williamson
Affiliation:
Emergency Department, Royal Inland Hospital, Kamloops, BC
Ian V. Mitchell
Affiliation:
Emergency Department, Royal Inland Hospital, Kamloops, BC
*
Emergency Department, Royal Inland Hospital, 311 Columbia Street, Kamloops, BC V2C 2T1; hpvanzyl@hotmail.com

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

Emergency physicians are expected to rule out clinically important cervical spine injuries using clinical skills and imaging. Our objective was to determine whether emergency physicians could accurately rule out clinically important cervical spine injuries using computed tomographic (CT) imaging of the cervical spine.

Method:

Fifteen emergency physicians were enrolled to interpret a sample of 50 cervical spine CT scans in a nonclinical setting. The sample contained a 30% incidence of cervical spine injury. After a 2-hour review session, the participants interpreted the CT scans and categorized them into either a suspected cervical spine injury or no cervical spine injury. Participants were asked to specify the location and type of injury. The gold standard interpretation was the combined opinion of two staff radiologists.

Results:

Emergency physicians correctly identified 182 of the 210 abnormal cases with cervical spine injury. The sensitivity of emergency physicians was 87% (95% confidence interval [CI] 82–91), and the specificity was 76% (95% CI 74–77). The negative likelihood ratio was 0.18 (95% CI 0.12–0.25).

Conclusion:

Experienced emergency physicians successfully identified a large proportion of cervical spine injuries on CT; however, they were not sufficiently sensitive to accurately exclude clinically important injuries. Emergency physicians should rely on a radiologist review of cervical spine CT scans prior to discontinuing cervical spine precautions.

Keywords

cervical spine injurycomputed tomographyemergency physiciansensitivitytrauma
Type
Original Research • Recherche originale
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , March 2014 , pp. 131 - 135
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2014

References

REFERENCES

1. Greenbaum, J, Walters, N, Levy, PD. An evidence-based approach to radiographic assessment of cervical spine injuries in the emergency department. J Emerg Med 2009;36:64–71, doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.01.014.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Grossman, MD, Reilly, PM, Reilly, PM, et al. National survey of the incidence of cervical spine clearance in the U.S. trauma centres. J Trauma 1999;47:684, doi:10.1097/00005373-199910000-00012.Google Scholar
3. Steill, IG, Wells, GA, Vandemheen, KL, et al. The Canadian C-Spine Rule for Radiography in Alert and Stable Trauma Patients. JAMA 2001;286:1841–8, doi:10.1001/jama.286.15.1841.Google Scholar
4. Hoffman, JR, Mower, WR, Wolfson, AB, et al. Validity of a set of clinical criteria to rule out injury to the cervical spine in patients with blunt trauma. National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study Group. N Engl J Med 2000;343:94–9, doi:10.1056/NEJM200007133430203.Google Scholar
5. Daffner, RH. Controversies in cervical spine imaging in trauma patients. Emerg Radiol 2004;11:2–8, doi:10.1007/s10140-004-0360-5.Google Scholar
6. Holmes, JF, Akkinepalli, R. Computed tomography versus plain radiography to screen for cervical spine injury: a meta analysis. J Trauma 2005;58:902–5, doi:10.1097/01.TA.0000162138.36519.2A.Google Scholar
7. Kortbeek, JB, Al Turki, SA, Ali, J, et al. Advanced Trauma Life Support 8th edition: the evidence for change. J Trauma 2008;64:1638–50, doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e3181744b03.Google Scholar
8. Como, JJ, Diaz, JJ, Dunham, CM, et al. Practice management guidelines of the identification of cervical spine injuries following trauma: update for the Eastern Association of the Surgery of Trauma Practice Management Guidelines Committee. J Trauma 2009;67:651–9, doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e3181ae583b.Google Scholar
9. Thomas, J, Rideau, AM, Paulson, EK, et al. Emergency department imaging: current practice. J AmColl Radiol 2008;5:811–6, doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2008.02.027.Google Scholar
10. Stelfox, HT, Velmahos, GC, Gettings, E, et al. Computed tomography for early and safe discontinuation of the cervical spine immobilization in the obtunded multiply injured patients. J Trauma 2007;63:630–6, doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e318076b537.Google Scholar
11. Harding, J, Craig, M, Jakeman, N, et al. Emergency physician interpretation of head CT in trauma and suspected subarachnoid haemorrhage — is it viable? An audit of current practice. Emerg Med J 2010;27:116–20, doi:10.1136/emj.2008.071688.Google Scholar
12. Stengel, D, Ottersbach, C, Matthes, G, et al. Accuracy of single-pass whole-body computed tomography for detection of injuries in patients with major blunt trauma. CMAJ 2012;184:869–75, doi:10.1503/cmaj.111420.Google Scholar