Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-lmk9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-23T21:58:59.215Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Characteristics of vomiting as a predictor of intracranial injury in pediatric minor head injury

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 June 2020

Jessica A. Harper ,
Terry P. Klassen ,
Robert Balshaw ,
Justin Dyck ,
Martin H. Osmond  and
for the Pediatric Emergency Research Canada Head Injury Study Group
Jessica A. Harper*
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics and Child Health, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB
Terry P. Klassen
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics and Child Health, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB Children's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB Centre for Healthcare Innovation, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB
Robert Balshaw
Affiliation:
Centre for Healthcare Innovation, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB
Justin Dyck
Affiliation:
Centre for Healthcare Innovation, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB
Martin H. Osmond
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics and Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON
*
Correspondence to: Dr. Jessica Harper, 513–715 McDermot Avenue, John Buhler Research Centre, Winnipeg, MB, R3E 3P4; Email: jharper6@manitoba-physicians.ca

Abstract

Objectives

Vomiting is common in children after minor head injury. In previous research, isolated vomiting was not a significant predictor of intracranial injury after minor head injury; however, the significance of recurrent vomiting is unclear. This study aimed to determine the value of recurrent vomiting in predicting intracranial injury after pediatric minor head injury.

Methods

This secondary analysis of the CATCH2 prospective multicenter cohort study included participants (0–16 years) who presented to a pediatric emergency department (ED) within 24 hours of a minor head injury. ED physicians completed standardized clinical assessments. Recurrent vomiting was defined as ≥ four episodes. Intracranial injury was defined as acute intracranial injury on computed tomography scan. Predictors were examined using chi-squared tests and logistic regression models.

Results

A total of 855 (21.1%) of the 4,054 CATCH2 participants had recurrent vomiting, 197 (4.9%) had intracranial injury, and 23 (0.6%) required neurosurgical intervention. Children with recurrent vomiting were significantly more likely to have intracranial injury (odds ratio [OR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7–3.1), and require neurosurgical intervention (OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.5–7.9). Recurrent vomiting remained a significant predictor of intracranial injury (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.9–3.9) when controlling for other CATCH2 criteria. The probability of intracranial injury increased with number of vomiting episodes, especially when accompanied by other high-risk factors, including signs of a skull fracture, or irritability and Glasgow Coma Scale score < 15 at 2 hours postinjury. Timing of first vomiting episode, and age were not significant predictors.

Conclusions

Recurrent vomiting (≥ four episodes) was a significant risk factor for intracranial injury in children after minor head injury. The probability of intracranial injury increased with the number of vomiting episodes and if accompanied by other high-risk factors, such as signs of a skull fracture or altered level of consciousness.

Résumé

RésuméObjectifs

Les vomissements sont fréquents chez les enfants qui ont subi un trauma crânien léger. D'après des études antérieures, les vomissements isolés ne constituaient pas un facteur prévisionnel important de lésion intracrânienne à la suite d'un trauma crânien léger; toutefois, on ne connaît pas la portée clinique des vomissements répétés. L’étude visait donc à déterminer la valeur prévisionnelle des vomissements répétés quant à la présence de lésion intracrânienne après un trauma crânien léger chez les enfants.

Méthode

Il s'agit d'une analyse secondaire de l’étude prospective et multicentrique de cohortes CATCH2, réalisée chez des jeunes (0–16 ans) examinés à un service des urgences (SU) pédiatriques dans les 24 heures suivant un trauma crânien léger. Les urgentologues ont procédé aux évaluations cliniques courantes. Les vomissements répétés ont été définis comme la survenue de ≥ 4 expulsions. Quant aux lésions intracrâniennes, elles étaient définies comme la présence de lésions aiguës à la tomodensitométrie. Les facteurs prévisionnels ont été examinés à l'aide de tests du chi carré et de modèles de régression logistique.

Résultats

Sur les 4054 participants à l’étude CATCH2, 855 (21,1%) ont présenté des vomissements répétés, 197 (4,9%) avaient une lésion intracrânienne et 23 (0,6%) ont dû subir une intervention neurochirurgicale. Chez les enfants ayant vomi plusieurs fois, les risques de lésion intracrânienne (risque relatif approché [RRA] : 2,3; intervalle de confiance [IC] : 1,7–3,1) et les probabilités d'intervention neurochirurgicale (RRA : 3,5; IC : 1,5–7,9) étaient significativement plus élevés que chez les autres. Par ailleurs, les vomissements répétés sont restés un facteur prévisionnel important de lésion intracrânienne (RRA : 2,8; IC : 1,9–3,9) même après la neutralisation d'autres critères appliqués dans la CATCH2. Les probabilités de lésion intracrânienne augmentaient avec le nombre de vomissements, surtout lorsqu'ils étaient accompagnés d'autres facteurs de risque élevé, notamment de signes de fracture du crâne, d'irritabilité ou d'un score < 15 sur l’échelle de Glasgow (coma), 2 h après l'accident. Le temps écoulé avant les premiers vomissements et l’âge ne se sont pas révélés des facteurs prévisionnels importants.

Conclusion

Les vomissements répétés (≥ 4 expulsions) se sont montrés un facteur de risque important de lésion intracrânienne chez les enfants qui avaient subi un trauma crânien léger. Les probabilités de lésion intracrânienne augmentaient avec le nombre de vomissements, et surtout s'ils étaient accompagnés d'autres facteurs de risque élevé comme des signes de fracture du crâne ou une altération de l’état de conscience.

Keywords

Computed tomographyhead injurypediatricprospectivevomiting

Information

Type
Original Research
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 22 , Issue 6 , November 2020 , pp. 793 - 801
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2020

CLINICIAN'S CAPSULE

What is known about the topic?

Vomiting is common in children presenting to the emergency department after a minor head injury; however, the clinical importance is unclear.

What did this study ask?

What is the value of the number and timing of vomiting episodes after pediatric minor head injury in predicting intracranial injury?

What did this study find?

Probability of intracranial injury in children with vomiting increases with the number of vomiting episodes and the presence of other high-risk factors.

Why does this study matter to clinicians?

This information will help clinicians determine who requires a computed tomography scan after minor head injury.

INTRODUCTION

Minor head injury is a common reason for children to visit the emergency department (ED).Reference Taylor, Bell, Breiding and Xu1 Computed tomography (CT) scans are widely used to evaluate head injury and rule out intracranial injury in the ED; however, with this comes increased exposure to ionizing radiation and cost.Reference Klassen, Reed and Stiell2–Reference Menoch, Hirsh, Khan, Simon and Sturm4 Previous research has shown that, of the children who have a CT scan for minor head injury, approximately 4–7% have an intracranial injury on CT scan and only 0.5% require neurosurgical intervention.Reference Klassen, Reed and Stiell2,Reference Mitchell, Fallat, Raque, Hardwick, Groff and Nagaraj5–Reference Schunk, Rodgerson and Woodward9 In addition, the diagnosis of a small number of intracranial injuries has previously been reported to be delayed or missed.Reference Hamilton, Mrazik and Johnson10

The clinical importance of vomiting in predicting intracranial injury after minor head injury is unclear in children, and the role of recurrent episodes of vomiting is also not well understood. Children presenting to the ED with minor head injury commonly have a history of vomiting,Reference Osmond, Klassen and Wells8,Reference Borland, Cheek and Neutze11,Reference Dayan, Holmes and Atabaki12 and vomiting one or more times has been associated with increased risk for skull fractureReference Nee, Hadfield, Yates and Faragher13 and intracranial injury.Reference Oman, Cooper and Holmes14–Reference Stiell, Wells, Vandemheen, Clement, Lesiuk and Laupacis16 Vomiting ≥ two episodes after minor head injury is associated with increased risk of intracranial injury in adults (>16 years old), and is included in the Canadian CT Head Rule.Reference Stiell, Wells, Vandemheen, Clement, Lesiuk and Laupacis16 Conversely, other research has shown that vomiting is not a strong predictor of intracranial injury in children. Specifically, a meta-analysis of factors predicting intracranial injury after pediatric minor head injury found that, in general, vomiting was not a significant predictor; however, they were unable to comment on the association between recurrent vomiting and intracranial injury.Reference Dunning, Batchelor and Stratford-Smith17 As well, recent research has found that vomiting in isolation of other symptoms in the setting of a reported minor head injury did not predict clinically significant brain injury.Reference Borland, Cheek and Neutze11,Reference Dayan, Holmes and Atabaki12,Reference Kuppermann, Holmes, Dayan, Hoyle, Atabaki and Holubkov18

Vomiting is currently included in the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN)Reference Kuppermann, Holmes, Dayan, Hoyle, Atabaki and Holubkov18 Head Injury Algorithm (any vomiting), and the Children's Head Injury Algorithm for the prediction of Important Clinical Events (CHALICE) (≥ 3 episodes)Reference Dunning, Daly, Lomas, Lecky, Batchelor and Mackway-Jones19; however, it was not included in the original seven-item Canadian Assessment of Tomography for Childhood Head Injury (CATCH) Rule.Reference Osmond, Klassen and Wells8 With further research in a second prospective cohort, the CATCH2 study,Reference Osmond, Klassen and Wells20 aiming to validate and refine the CATCH rule, identified that the addition of “≥4 episodes of vomiting” to the original rule increased the sensitivity of the tool to predict brain injury and need for neurosurgical intervention; therefore, it was included in the rule. Understanding the role of various characteristics of vomiting in the context of possible intracranial injury is important for clinicians as they are using CT decision rules and discussing risk of intracranial injury and need for CT scanning with patients and their families.Reference Hess, Homme and Kharbanda21

The primary objective of this secondary analysis of the CATCH2 study data was to determine the importance of recurrent vomiting in predicting the presence of intracranial injury on CT Head for children 0–16 years of age who present to the ED with minor head injury. Specifically, the study aimed to determine the value of the number and timing of vomiting episodes in predicting intracranial injury.

METHODS

Study design and time period

This was a secondary analysis using data from the CATCH2 study,Reference Osmond, Klassen and Wells20 which was a multicenter prospective cohort study conducted between April 2006 and December 2009. Research Ethics Board approval for the CATCH2 study was obtained from each participating institution, and informed consent was obtained from all participants and guardians. Approval for this secondary analysis was obtained from the University of Manitoba Health Research Ethics Board.

Study setting and population

Participants of the CATCH2 studyReference Osmond, Klassen and Wells20 were children 0 to 16 years old, who presented to one of nine Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) member hospitals participating in the study within 24 hours of a blunt head trauma resulting in a minor head injury. The full CATCH2 methodology with study patient flow diagram was previously published.20 In summary, participants were included if they had a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 13 to 15 after the injury and experienced either loss of consciousness, amnesia, disorientation, persistent vomiting (≥ two episodes, at least 15 minutes apart), or irritability. Children were excluded from the study if the injury was greater than 24 hours from the ED presentation, had previously presented to the ED for the same injury, had evidence of penetrating skull injury or obvious depressed skull fracture, acute focal neurological deficits, history of global developmental delay, or an injury secondary to child abuse.

Study protocol

Emergency staff physicians or senior residents, who underwent a 1-hour training session describing the study and standardized clinical assessments, completed an assessment form that included multiple variables shown in previous research to be associated with head injury, including the seven-item CATCH decision rule (GCS <15 2 hours after injury, suspected open/depressed skull fracture, history of worsening headache, irritability, signs of basal skull fracture, large boggy scalp hematoma, and dangerous mechanism of injury).20 Vomiting-specific variables collected were presence of vomiting, number of episodes of vomiting, length of time after injury to first vomiting episode, and time of vomiting episodes after physician assessment.

After the standardized clinical assessment, physicians ordered a CT scan of the head based on their clinical judgment. The CT scans were interpreted by blinded staff radiologists. Any child who did not undergo a head CT at initial presentation underwent a 14-day postinjury follow-up phone interview by a trained nurse blinded to the child's clinical details. At this time, if the participant was asymptomatic, with absent to mild headache, no memory or concentration problems, no seizure or focal motor findings, and had returned to normal daily activities, they were classified as having no clinically important brain injury. If they remained symptomatic, they were recalled to the ED for reassessment and CT scan. Patients could only be classified as having a brain injury based on their CT findings. Patients who did not undergo a CT scan and could not be reached for the follow-up interview were excluded from the final analysis.

Outcome measures

The primary outcome of intracranial injury was defined as any acute intracranial lesion on CT scan attributable to acute trauma, including closed depressed skull fracture, or pneumocephalus. Basilar and nondepressed skull fractures were excluded. Need for neurosurgical intervention was defined as either death secondary to the head injury within 7 days, or the need for craniotomy, skull fracture elevation, intracranial pressure monitoring, or intubation and ventilation for the purpose of treating head injury.

Data analysis

The demographic and clinical characteristics were examined using descriptive statistics. Chi-squared tests for significance were used to compare groups with presence or absence of recurrent vomiting. Recurrent vomiting was defined as ≥ four episodes of vomiting to remain consistent with CATCH 2 criteria.Reference Osmond, Klassen and Wells20 As well, multi-predictor logistic regression was used to determine if vomiting frequency, timing, duration, or isolated vomiting, or age were associated with increased risk for intracranial injury on CT. The multivariable regression included the other CATCH variables that have previously been shown to be associated with increased risk of intracranial injury,Reference Osmond, Klassen and Wells8,Reference Osmond, Klassen and Wells20 including dangerous mechanism of injury, GCS <15 at 2 hours, suspected open or depressed skull fracture, signs of basal skull fracture, worsening headache, irritability, and large boggy scalp hematoma. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported, and p-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Too few events were observed to permit multi-predictor logistic regression using need for neurosurgical intervention as the outcome. Analyses were performed using R version 3.5.1.22,Reference Wickham23

RESULTS

The CATCH2 study enrolled 4,060 participants, and 4,054 had complete demographic information and were included in this analysis. In total, of the 4,054 participants (mean age 9.19 years; SD 5.12 years), 1,415 (34.9%) underwent a CT head, and 2,643 (65.2%) participants were followed-up by telephone. A total of 464 (11.4%) were younger than 2 years. A total of 197 (4.9%) participants were diagnosed with an acute intracranial injury on CT, and 23 (0.6%) required neurosurgical intervention. Of the 4,054 participants, 2,441 (60.2%) participants had no episodes of vomiting, 85 (2.1%) had 1 episode, 346 (8.5%) had 2 episodes, 327 (8.1%) had 3 episodes, 260 (6.4%) had 4 episodes, 158 (3.9%) had 5 episodes, 159 (3.9%) had 6 episodes, and 278 (6.9%) had 7 to 25 episodes of vomiting. In total, 855(21.1%) experienced recurrent vomiting (i.e., with ≥ four episodes).

Children with recurrent vomiting were more likely to be younger (6.9 years v. 9.8 years; p < 0.001) and female (43.5% v. 33.4%; p < 0.001), and less likely to have witnessed loss of consciousness (9.7% v. 35.1%; p < 0.001) and amnesia (17.7% v. 48.4%), as shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Characteristics of 4,054 children with minor head injury with and without recurrent vomiting in the CATCH2 study

SD = standard deviation; GCS = Glasgow Coma Scale.

Note: Presented as n (% of total) unless otherwise stated, and p-values reported from chi-squared test or two-sample t-test. Recurrent vomiting is defined as ≥ four episodes of vomiting. Dangerous mechanism of injury is defined as motor vehicle crash, fall from elevation ≥ 3 ft or five stairs, or fall from bicycle with no helmet.

Table 2 shows children with recurrent vomiting were more likely to have a CT head (49.5% v. 31.0%; p < 0.001), more likely to have an intracranial injury on CT scan (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.7–3.1; p < 0.001), and more likely to require neurosurgical intervention (OR, 3.5; 95%CI, 1.5–7.9; p = 0.003.

Table 2.

Bivariate associations between those with recurrent vomiting and outcomes in 4,054 children with minor head injury in the CATCH2 study

CT = computed tomography.

Note: Presented as n (% of total) unless otherwise stated, and p-values obtained from chi-squared tests of the aggregated outcomes. Recurrent vomiting is defined as ≥ four episodes of vomiting.

* Some participants had more than one lesion.

† Some participants had more than one intervention.

Table 3a shows the multivariate logistic regression model for the CATCH2 variables in predicting intracranial injury on CT head, including the recurrent vomiting (≥ four episodes) variable. With all CATCH2 criteria included, vomiting ≥ four episodes remained a significant factor in predicting intracranial injury.

Table 3.

Adjusted odds ratios from the multivariate logistic regression model for CATCH2 criteria predicting intracranial injury on CT Head with vomiting represented as (a) binary and (b) numerical predictors

GCS = Glasgow Coma Scale; CT = computed tomography.

Table 3b shows a multivariate logistic regression model for the CATCH variables with the number of episodes of vomiting as a continuous variable. The odds of having an intracranial injury increased as the number of episodes of vomiting increased when controlling for the other CATCH variables. For each additional episode of vomiting, the odds of an intracranial injury increased by an OR of 1.2.

Figure 1 illustrates the predictions from this model in graphic form, showing that as the number of episodes of vomiting increase, the probability of intracranial injury increases; the risk also increases in the presence of the other CATCH2 variables, particularly when signs suggestive of a skull fracture, and altered level of consciousness were present.

Figure 1.

An illustration depicting predictions from the logistic regression model described in Table 3b, showing estimated probability of intracranial injury with increasing episodes of vomiting and other CATCH2 factors.

Note: Signs of skull fracture = suspected open or depressed skull fracture + signs basal skull fracture + boggy scalp hematoma, Altered level of consciousness = GCS < 15 at 2 hrs + irritability. The predictions are for hypothetical combinations of symptoms, not for particular groups of patients in the data.

The mean length of time to first episode of vomiting was 1.91 hours and median 1.0 hours (SD, 2.94; range, 0–23 hours). The timing of the first episode of vomiting was not a significant predictor of intracranial injury (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94–1.09; p = 0.489) when controlling for the CATCH2 variables.

Age of the child was also not found to be a significant predictor of intracranial injury when combined with vomiting and the other CATCH2 criteria in a multivariate logistic regression model (OR, 1.0; 95% CI, 1.0–1.1; p = 0.581).

Of the 855 children with recurrent vomiting, 459 (11.0%) had vomiting ≥ four episodes as the only CATCH2 symptom present, and of this group, seven (1.5%) had an intracranial injury.

DISCUSSION

Interpretation of findings

The result of this secondary analysis of the CATCH2 data showed that recurrent vomiting was a significant risk factor for intracranial injury in children presenting to the ED after minor head injury. Compared with children with no recurrent vomiting, children with recurrent vomiting were significantly more likely to have a CT head scan performed, have an intracranial injury on CT head scan, and require neurosurgical intervention. Any vomiting after minor head injury was found to significantly increase the risk of an intracranial injury with each additional episode of vomiting further increasing the risk.

The impact of vomiting on the probability of intracranial injury was also much stronger in the presence of other clinical factors. The probability of an intracranial injury increased progressively with the number of vomiting episodes, and the probability increases further with signs of a skull fracture (suspected open or depressed skull fracture, signs of basal skull fracture, and large boggy scalp hematoma), or altered level of consciousness (GCS at 2 hours < 15 and irritability). The probability of intracranial injury also increased, but to a lesser degree, with increasing episodes of vomiting and worsening headache, or dangerous mechanism of injury.

The study also found that both the timing of first vomiting episode and the child's age did not change the risk for intracranial injury. The group of children with recurrent vomiting were significantly younger; however, this was not associated with any change in risk of intracranial injury when controlling for all other CATCH2 factors.

Comparison to previous studies

The results of this study were consistent with findings in the literature. The overall rate of intracranial injury on CT head scan in this study was 4.9%, which is consistent with rates of intracranial injury in the literature.2,5–9 Similar to our findings, Kuppermann et al. also found that any vomiting in a child 2 years of age and older significantly increased the risk of an intracranial injury.Reference Kuppermann, Holmes, Dayan, Hoyle, Atabaki and Holubkov18 Previous research has also shown that the risk of intracranial injury increases when vomiting is combined with other high risk factors. The Australasian Paediatric Head Injury Rule Study found that children with vomiting and either signs of a skull fracture, altered level of consciousness, acting abnormally, or headache, are at an increased risk for a clinically important brain injury.Reference Borland, Cheek and Neutze11 As well, using the PECARN data,Reference Dayan, Holmes and Atabaki12,Reference Kuppermann, Holmes, Dayan, Hoyle, Atabaki and Holubkov18 vomiting accompanied by other concerning clinical findings was identified as putting children at increased risk for a clinically important brain injury. These consistent findings are important for clinicians, as the clinical suspicion for intracranial injury should be very high if the patient presents with multiple episodes of vomiting in the presence of other high-risk factors.

The recent secondary analysis of the PECARN data, found that a clinically important brain injury is uncommon in children with isolated vomiting, and not an independent predictor.Reference Dayan, Holmes and Atabaki12,Reference Kuppermann, Holmes, Dayan, Hoyle, Atabaki and Holubkov18 The Australasian Paediatric Head Injury Rule Study also concluded that isolated vomiting was not an independent predictor of intracranial injury after minor head injury, and suggested that if vomiting is the only symptom a clinically significant brain injury is less likely.Reference Borland, Cheek and Neutze11 Unfortunately, as our study included only symptomatic children with minor head injury, we were unable to comment on the predictive nature of vomiting in complete isolation of other symptoms.

Limitations

There are several potential limitations to this study. First, our study population included only symptomatic children after minor head injury, with vomiting being an inclusion criterion only if there were two or more episodes. As a result, vomiting as an isolated finding is relatively uncommon in our study. As well, CT scans were not performed on all children for ethical reasons of limiting unnecessary radiation. However, these children were all followed-up by a structured, validated phone interview at 14 days to determine if clinically significant brain injury might be present. In addition, the clinical significance of small intracranial injuries seen on CT scan is unclear. The more clinically significant outcome is the need for neurosurgical intervention; however, the sample size was not large enough to permit multi-predictor logistic regression.

Finally, there may be causes for vomiting that are outside of intracranial injury severity. Previous research has indicated that confounding variables, such as personal or family history of motion sickness or migraine, are relevant factors in whether a child will vomit after head trauma.Reference Jan, Camfield, Gordon and Camfield24–Reference Brown, Brown and Beattie26 Due to the use of a previously established data set, however, these variables were not available for analysis.

Clinical implications

This study adds information to the literature to help clinicians determine which patients are at higher risk for intracranial injury and neurosurgical intervention and will require close observation or a CT scan after minor head injury. Based on the study results, clinicians should have a high index of suspicion for an intracranial injury when a child presents with recurrent episodes of vomiting. Children with vomiting ≥ four episodes, particularly when associated with signs of a skull fracture or altered level of consciousness, are at a higher risk of having an intracranial injury on CT scan.

Research implications

Further research is needed to determine what confounding factors specifically put children at higher risk of vomiting after minor head injury, such as the history of motion sickness or migraine, and how these relate to the risk of intracranial injury. There is also limited research on the implications of the timing of the first episode of vomiting after injury, and specifically the risk of intracranial injury with late onset vomiting (> 24 hours). Our study suggests that the timing of the first episode of vomiting does not change the risk for intracranial injury; however, children were only enrolled if they presented in the first 24 hours after injury.

CONCLUSION

Recurrent vomiting (≥ four episodes) is a clinically significant risk factor for intracranial injury in children presenting to the emergency department after minor head injury. The probability of an intracranial injury increases with the number of vomiting episodes, and the risk is particularly high if vomiting is accompanied by other high-risk factors, such as signs of a skull fracture or altered level of consciousness.

Research Group Information

Additional members of the Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) Head Injury Research Group are: Kathy Boutis, MD (Department of Pediatrics and Child Health Evaluative Sciences Research Institute Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON); Gary Joubert, MD (Department of Pediatrics, Western University, London, ON); Serge Gouin, MD (Department of Pediatrics, CHU Sainte-Justine, Montreal, QC); Simi Khangura, MD (Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC); Troy Turner, MD (Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB) Francois Belanger, MD (Department of Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB); Norm Silver, MD (Department of Pediatrics, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB); Brett Taylor, MD (Department of Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS); Janet Curran PhD (Department of Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS); Jennifer Davidson, RN (Department of Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB); Rhonda Correll, RN (Clinical Research Unit, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, ON); George A Wells, PhD (Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON); and Ian G Stiell, MD (Department of Emergency Medicine and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON).

Acknowledgments

We thank the site research coordinators of PERC whose hard work and dedication made this study possible. We thank My-Linh Tran and Sheryl Domingo for data management. We also thank all the emergency physicians, nurses, and clerks at the study sites who voluntarily assisted with case identification and data collection, and all the site radiologists who interpreted the CT scan images.

Financial support

The CATCH2 study was funded by a peer-reviewed grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR Funding Reference Number: MOP-43911).

Competing interests

None to declare.

References

REFERENCES

Taylor, CA, Bell, JM, Breiding, MJ, Xu, L. Traumatic brain injury–related emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and deaths — United States, 2007 and 2013. MMWR Surveill Summ 2017;66(9):1–16.10.15585/mmwr.ss6609a1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klassen, TP, Reed, MH, Stiell, IG, et al. Variation in utilization of computed tomography scanning for the investigation of minor head trauma in children: a Canadian experience. Acad Emerg Med 2000;7(7):739–44.10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb02260.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berdahl, CT, Vermeulen, MJ, Larson, DB, Schull, MJ. Emergency department computed tomography utilization in the United States and Canada. Ann Emerg Med 2013;62(5):486–494.e3.10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.02.018CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Menoch, MJA, Hirsh, DA, Khan, NS, Simon, HK, Sturm, JJ. Trends in computed tomography utilization in the pediatric emergency department. Pediatrics 2012;129(3):e690–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitchell, KA, Fallat, ME, Raque, GH, Hardwick, VG, Groff, DB, Nagaraj, HS. Evaluation of minor head injury in children. JAMA 1994;29(7):851–4.Google ScholarPubMed
Quayle, KS, Jaffe, DM, Kuppermann, N, et al. Diagnostic testing for acute head injury in children: when are head computed tomography and skull radiographs indicated? Pediatrics 1997;99(5):E11.10.1542/peds.99.5.e11CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, RL, Hughes, M, Gubler, KD, Waller, PL, Rivara, FP. The use of cranial CT scans in the triage of pediatric patients with mild head injury. Pediatrics 1995;95(3):345–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Osmond, MH, Klassen, TP, Wells, GA, et al. CATCH: a clinical decision rule for the use of computed tomography in children with minor head injury. CMAJ 2010;182(4):341–8.10.1503/cmaj.091421CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schunk, JE, Rodgerson, JD, Woodward, GA. The utility of head computed tomography in patients with normal neurologic examination in the emergency department. Pediatr Emerg Care 1996;12(3):160–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamilton, M, Mrazik, M, Johnson, DW. Incidence of delayed intracranial hemorrhage in children after uncomplicated minor head injuries. Pediatrics 2010;126(1):e33–9.10.1542/peds.2009-0692CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borland, ML, Cheek, JA, Neutze, J, et al. Vomiting with head trauma and risk of traumatic brain injury. Pediatrics 2018;141(4):e20173123.10.1542/peds.2017-3123CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dayan, PS, Holmes, JF, Atabaki, S, et al. Association of traumatic brain injuries with vomiting in children with blunt head trauma. Ann Emerg Med 2014;63(6):657–65.10.1016/j.annemergmed.2014.01.009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nee, PA, Hadfield, JM, Yates, DW, Faragher, EB. Significance of vomiting after head injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1999;66(4):470–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oman, JA, Cooper, RJ, Holmes, JF, et al. Performance of a decision rule to predict need for computed tomography among children with blunt head trauma. Pediatrics 2006;117(2):e238–46.10.1542/peds.2005-1063CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chong, SL, Barbier, S, Liu, N, Ong, GY, Ng, KC, Ong, ME. Predictors for moderate to severe paediatric head injury derived from a surveillance registry in the emergency department. Injury 2015;46(7):1270–4.10.1016/j.injury.2015.04.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stiell, IG, Wells, GA, Vandemheen, K, Clement, C, Lesiuk, H, Laupacis, A. The Canadian CT Head Rule for patients with minor head injury. Lancet 2001;357:1391–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunning, J, Batchelor, J, Stratford-Smith, P, et al. A meta-analysis of variables that predict significant intracranial injury in minor head trauma. Arch Dis Child 2004;89(7):653–9.10.1136/adc.2003.027722CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuppermann, N, Holmes, JF, Dayan, PS, Hoyle, JD, Atabaki, SM, Holubkov, R. Identification of children at very low risk of clinically important brain injuries after head trauma: a prospective cohort study. Lancet 2009;374:1160–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunning, J, Daly, JP, Lomas, JP, Lecky, F, Batchelor, J, Mackway-Jones, K. Derivation of the children's head injury algorithm for the prediction of important clinical events decision rule for head injury in children. Arch Dis Child 2006;91(11):885–91.10.1136/adc.2005.083980CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osmond, MH, Klassen, TP, Wells, GA, et al. Validation and refinement of a clinical decision rule for the use of computed tomography in children with minor head injury in the emergency department. CMAJ 2018;190(27):E816–22.10.1503/cmaj.170406CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hess, EP, Homme, JL, Kharbanda, AB, et al. Effect of the head computed tomography choice decision aid in parents of children with minor head trauma: a cluster randomized trial. JAMA Netw Open 2018;1(5):e182430.10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.2430CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2018.Google Scholar
Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jan, MM, Camfield, PR, Gordon, K, Camfield, CS. Vomiting after mild head injury is related to migraine. J Pediatr 1997;130(1):134–7.10.1016/S0022-3476(97)70322-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Da Dalt, L, Andreola, B, Facchin, P, Gregolin, M, Vianello, A, Battistella, PA. Characteristics of children with vomiting after minor head trauma: a case-control study. J Pediatr 2007;150:274–8.10.1016/j.jpeds.2006.11.060CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, FD, Brown, J, Beattie, TF. Why do children vomit after head injury? J Accid Emerg Med 2000;17:268–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1. Characteristics of 4,054 children with minor head injury with and without recurrent vomiting in the CATCH2 study

Figure 1

Table 2. Bivariate associations between those with recurrent vomiting and outcomes in 4,054 children with minor head injury in the CATCH2 study

Figure 2

Table 3. Adjusted odds ratios from the multivariate logistic regression model for CATCH2 criteria predicting intracranial injury on CT Head with vomiting represented as (a) binary and (b) numerical predictors

Figure 3

Figure 1. An illustration depicting predictions from the logistic regression model described in Table 3b, showing estimated probability of intracranial injury with increasing episodes of vomiting and other CATCH2 factors.Note: Signs of skull fracture = suspected open or depressed skull fracture + signs basal skull fracture + boggy scalp hematoma, Altered level of consciousness = GCS < 15 at 2 hrs + irritability. The predictions are for hypothetical combinations of symptoms, not for particular groups of patients in the data.