Canadian CT Head Rule Research Articles

Mobile computed tomography at the Munich Oktoberfest : From idea to implementation.

The Munich Oktoberfest, the largest folk festival in the world, attracts around 6.2million visitors over 16-18days. Some of the visitors exhibit certain risky behaviors, leading to asignificantly increased number of medical emergencies during the festival. During Oktoberfest, the prehospital and clinical emergency services of the city are heavily strained, as one-third more ambulances are needed, and over 7000 patients must be treated on-site each year. Until 2022, there was no option for guideline-compliant radiological assessment on-site for patients with head or facial trauma and suspected serious trauma-related injuries. This required alarge number of emergency service admissions to hospitals, mostly for outpatient assessments. To relieve the overburdened medical system, amobile computed tomography (CT) scanner was set up on the Oktoberfest grounds in 2022 for the first time. Amobile CT scanner at the Munich Oktoberfest was utilized for diagnosing injuries to the face, cranium, and cervical spine. For an indication of cranial CT, we used acombination of the Canadian CT Head Rule and NEXUS criteria. Despite the complex structural conditions, this integration seamlessly fit into the structured processes of the on-site medical service. Since this deployment was, to our knowledge, the first of its kind globally, we had to develop and implement new clinical concepts and procedures tailored to the unique conditions of afolk festival. We demonstrated that aCT scanner could be effectively integrated into the preclinical processes of amedical service without direct hospital connection. On-site CT diagnostics proved to be ahighly effective means of avoiding unnecessary transportation to the hospital. Consequently, areduction in emergency medical service provision and stabilization of clinical emergency medicine during the Oktoberfest became feasible. From the authors' perspective, establishing amobile CT scanner at events with high or very high demands on preclinical and clinical emergency medicine is feasible and provides significant relief for the system. The primary goal of stabilizing prehospital and clinical emergency structures, as well as improving the detection and treatment of potentially life-threatening patients on-site, was successfully achieved. Careful integration into the overall process flow is essential.

Canadian CT head rule adherence in a rural hospital without in-house computed tomography.

We sought to determine the difference between Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR) indicated imaging rates and actual imaging rates for patients with mild traumatic brain injuries (mTBIs) at a rural emergency department (ED) without in-house computed tomography (CT). In addition, we compared CCHR adherence at a hospital without CT to previous publications from centres with CT to determine if rural populations receive less CT imaging for minor head traumas when indicated by the CCHR. This retrospective chart review explored individuals who presented to a rural ED (no in-house CT scanner) with a primary diagnosis of mild head injury or concussion between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2021. Information regarding CCHR criteria, transfer status and patient demographics was collected. Descriptive analyses were completed to determine the percentage of patients who received appropriate transfer for imaging, did not receive transfer for imaging when indicated and received unnecessary transfer. A total of 124 charts met our inclusion criteria (17 [12.1%] charts excluded), with 25.8% transferred to the nearest hospital for CT imaging. After applying the CCHR criteria to our charts, 62.1% were indicated for CT. Of the 62.1%, only 35.1% were transferred for imaging (51.2% of high-risk and 16.7% of medium-risk). By exploring CT rates for mTBIs in a rural Canadian ED, we found low transfer rates (35.1%) of CCHR-indicated patients for imaging needed to guide further healthcare decisions. This work highlights a discrepancy within the Canadian healthcare system between rural and urban centres and allows for opportunities to help narrow the gap in health care. Nous avons cherché à déterminer la différence entre les taux d'imagerie indiqués par le Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR, règlement canadien relatif à la tomodensitométrie de la tête) et les taux d'imagerie réels pour les patients souffrant de traumatismes craniocérébraux légers (TCCL) dans un service d'urgence rural ne disposant pas d'une tomographie par ordinateur interne. En outre, nous avons comparé l'adhésion au CCHR dans un hôpital sans tomographie par ordinateur à des publications antérieures provenant de centres avec tomographie par ordinateur afin de déterminer si les populations rurales reçoivent moins d'imagerie par tomodensitométrie pour les traumatismes crâniens mineurs lorsque le CCHR l'indique. Cette étude rétrospective des dossiers a exploré les personnes qui SE sont présentées à une urgence rurale (sans tomodensitomètre interne) avec un diagnostic primaire de traumatisme crânien léger ou de commotion cérébrale entre le 1er janvier 2017 et le 31 décembre 2021. Les informations concernant les critères du CCHR, l'état de transfert et les données démographiques des patients ont été recueillies. Des analyses descriptives ont été réalisées pour déterminer le pourcentage de patients ayant reçu un transfert approprié pour l'imagerie, n'ayant pas reçu de transfert pour l'imagerie quand c'était indiqué et ayant reçu un transfert inutile. Au total, 124 dossiers répondaient à nos critères d'inclusion [17 (12,1%) dossiers exclus], dont 25,8% ont été transférés à l'hôpital le plus proche pour une imagerie par tomodensitométrie. Après avoir appliqué les critères du CCHR à nos dossiers, 62,1% d'entre eux étaient indiqués pour une tomodensitométrie. Sur ces 62,1%, seuls 35,1% ont été transférés pour imagerie (51,2% de haut risque, 16,7% de risque moyen). En explorant les taux de tomodensitométrie pour les TCCL dans un service d'urgence rural canadien, nous avons constaté de faibles taux de transfert (35,1%) des patients recommandés par le CCRH pour une imagerie nécessaire dans le but de guider les décisions de soins de santé ultérieures. Ce travail met en évidence un écart dans le système de santé canadien entre les centres ruraux et urbains et offre des opportunités pour aider à réduire l'écart dans les soins de santé.

Head Injury Evaluation and Ambulance Diagnosis (HOME) Study protocol: a feasibility study assessing the implementation of the Canadian CT Head Rule in the prehospital setting

IntroductionTraumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common presentation in the prehospital environment. At present, paramedics do not routinely use tools to identify low-risk patients who could be left at scene...

Effectiveness of implementation strategies for increasing clinicians' use of five validated imaging decision rules for musculoskeletal injuries: a systematic review.

Strategies to enhance clinicians' adherence to validated imaging decision rules and increase the appropriateness of imaging remain unclear. To evaluate the effectiveness of various implementation strategies for increasing clinicians' use of five validated imaging decision rules (Ottawa Ankle Rules, Ottawa Knee Rule, Canadian C-Spine Rule, National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study and Canadian Computed Tomography Head Rule). Systematic review. The inclusion criteria were experimental, quasi-experimental study designs comprising randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials, and single-arm trials (i.e. prospective observational studies) of implementation interventions in any care setting. The search encompassed electronic databases up to March 11, 2024, including MEDLINE (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus. Two reviewers assessed the risk of bias of studies independently using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group (EPOC) risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was clinicians' use of decision rules. Secondary outcomes included imaging use (indicated, non-indicated and overall) and knowledge of the rules. We included 22 studies (5-RCTs, 1-non-RCT and 16-single-arm trials), conducted in emergency care settings in six countries (USA, Canada, UK, Australia, Ireland and France). One RCT suggested that reminders may be effective at increasing clinicians' use of Ottawa Ankle Rules but may also increase the use of ankle radiography. Two RCTs that combined multiple intervention strategies showed mixed results for ankle imaging and head CT use. One combining educational meetings and materials on Ottawa Ankle Rules reduced ankle injury imaging among ED physicians, while another, with similar efforts plus clinical practice guidelines and reminders for the Canadian CT Head Rule, increased CT imaging for head injuries. For knowledge, one RCT suggested that distributing guidelines had a limited short-term impact but improved clinicians' long-term knowledge of the Ottawa Ankle Rules. Interventions such as pop-up reminders, educational meetings, and posters may improve adherence to the Ottawa Ankle Rules, Ottawa Knee Rule, and Canadian CT Head Rule. Reminders may reduce non-indicated imaging for knee and ankle injuries. The uncertain quality of evidence indicates the need for well-conducted RCTs to establish effectiveness of implementation strategies.

Use of the Canadian CT head rule for patients on anticoagulant/anti-platelet therapy presenting with mild traumatic brain injury: prospective observational study.

Background and importanceMild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is a frequent presentation in Emergency Department (ED). There are standardised guidelines, the Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR), for CT scan in mTBI that rule out patients on either anticoagulant or anti-platelet therapy. All patients with these therapies undergo a CT scan irrespectively of other consideration.ObjectiveTo determine whether standard guidelines could be applied to patients on anticoagulants or anti-platelet drugs.Design, settings, and participants1,015 patients with mTBI and Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) of 15 were prospectively recruited, 509 either on anticoagulant or anti-platelet therapy and 506 on neither. All patients on neither therapy underwent CT scan following guidelines. All patients with mTBI on either therapy underwent CT scan irrespective of the guidelines.Outcome measure and analysisPrimary endpoint was the incidence of post-traumatic intracranial bleeding in patients either on anticoagulants or anti-platelet drugs and in patients who were not on these therapies. Bayesian statistical analysis with calculation of Confidence Intervals (CI) was then performed.Main resultsSixty scans were positive for bleeding: 59 patients fulfilled the criteria and 1 did not. Amongst patients with haemorrhage, 24 were on either therapy and only one did not meet the guidelines but in this patient the CT scan was performed before 2 h from the mTBI. Patients on either therapy did not have higher bleeding rates than patients on neither. There were higher bleeding rates in patients on anti-platelet therapy who met the guidelines vs. patients who did not. These rates overlapped with patients on neither therapy, meeting CCHR.ConclusionThe CCHR might be used for mTBI patients on either therapy. Anticoagulants and anti-platelet drugs should not be considered a risk factor for patients with mTBI and a GCS of 15. Multicentric studies are needed to confirm this result.

AI in the ED: Assessing the efficacy of GPT models vs. physicians in medical score calculation

Background and aimsArtificial Intelligence (AI) models like GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 have shown promise across various domains but remain underexplored in healthcare. Emergency Departments (ED) rely on established scoring systems, such as NIHSS and HEART score, to guide clinical decision-making. This study aims to evaluate the proficiency of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 against experienced ED physicians in calculating five commonly used medical scores. MethodsThis retrospective study analyzed data from 150 patients who visited the ED over one week. Both AI models and two human physicians were tasked with calculating scores for NIH Stroke Scale, Canadian Syncope Risk Score, Alvarado Score for Acute Appendicitis, Canadian CT Head Rule, and HEART Score. Cohen's Kappa statistic and AUC values were used to assess inter-rater agreement and predictive performance, respectively. ResultsThe highest level of agreement was observed between the human physicians (Kappa = 0.681), while GPT-4 also showed moderate to substantial agreement with them (Kappa values of 0.473 and 0.576). GPT-3.5 had the lowest agreement with human scorers. These results highlight the superior predictive performance of human expertise over the currently available automated systems for this specific medical outcome. Human physicians achieved a higher ROC-AUC on 3 of the 5 scores, but none of the differences were statistically significant. ConclusionsWhile AI models demonstrated some level of concordance with human expertise, they fell short in emulating the complex clinical judgments that physicians make. The study suggests that current AI models may serve as supplementary tools but are not ready to replace human expertise in high-stakes settings like the ED. Further research is needed to explore the capabilities and limitations of AI in emergency medicine.

Efficacy of the Canadian CT Head Rule in Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department with Minor Head Injury.

Approximately, one in three computed tomography (CT) scans performed for head injury may be avoidable. We evaluate the efficacy of the Canadian CT head rule (CCHR) on head CT imaging in minor head injury (MHI) and its association of Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and structural abnormality. We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study from May 2018 to October 2019 in the Department of Emergency Medicine, Pushpagiri Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Thiruvalla, Kerala. The CCHR is applied to patients with MHIs (GCS 13-15) after initial stabilization and it is ascertained, if they require a non-contrast CT head and imaging is done. For those who do not require CT head as per the CCHR are excluded from this study. After imaging the patients who have a positive finding on CT head are admitted and followed up if they underwent any neurosurgical intervention, those with no findings in CT head are discharged from the hospital. A total of 203 patients were included during study period. A total of 203 patients were included in study with mean age of 49.5 years. Approximately, 70% (142) were male. Sensitivity of CCHR for predicting positive CT finding in the present study sample was 68% and specificity was 42.5%. Canadian CT head rule is a useful tool in the Emergency Department for predicting the requirement of CT in patients with MHI. Canadian CT head rule can reduce the number of CT scans ordered following MHI in ED, thus improving the healthcare costs. Reddy A, Poonthottathil F, Jonnakuti R, Thomas R. Efficacy of the Canadian CT Head Rule in Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department with Minor Head Injury. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(2):148-151.

Overuse of computed tomography for mild head injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Computed tomography (CT) scan is a common imaging technique used to evaluate the severity of a head injury. The overuse of diagnostic interventions in the health system is a growing concern worldwide. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the rate of CT scan overuse in cases of mild head injury. Eligibility criteria: We encompassed observational studies-either designed as cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional investigations-that reported on CT scan overuse rates for mild head injuries. Studies had to be published in peer-reviewed, English-language sources and provide full content access Information sources: Web of Sciences, Scopus, Medline via PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase were searched from inception until April 1, 2023. Studies were included if reporting the overuse of CT scans for mild head injuries using validated criteria. Risk of bias: We used the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool to evaluate the risk bias assessment of included studies. Two independent reviewers evaluated the eligibility of studies, extracted data, and assessed study quality by using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Synthesis of results: Overuse estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate any sources of heterogeneity. Point rate of overuse of CT scans for mild head injuries was the main outcome measured as percentage point estimates with corresponding 95% CIs. Included studies: Of the 913 potentially relevant studies identified, eight studies were selected for the final analysis. Synthesis of results: The pooled rate of CT scan overuse in patients with mild head injury was found to be 27% [95% CI: 16-43; I2 = 99%]. The rate of CT scan overuse in mild head injury cases varied depending on the criteria used. The rate of CT scan overuse was 37% [95% CI: 32-42; I2 = 0%] with the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), 30% [95% CI: 16-49; I2 = 99%] with the Canadian computed tomography head rule, and 10% [95% CI: 8-14; I2 = 0%] with the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network criterion (PERCAN). Based on subgroup analyses, the rate of CT scan overuse in mild head injury cases was observed to be 30% with the Canadian computed tomography head rule criterion, 43% with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence criterion, and 18% with the New Orleans criterion. Limitations of evidence: The restricted number of included studies may impact generalizability. High heterogeneity was observed, leading to subgroup analyses based on age, assessment criteria, and study region. Absent data on overuse causes hinders drawing conclusions on contributing factors. Furthermore, this study solely addressed overuse rates, not associated harm or benefits. Interpretation: The overuse of CT scans in mild head injury patients is concerning, as it can result in unnecessary radiation exposure and higher healthcare costs. Clinicians and policymakers should prioritize the implementation of guidelines to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure, healthcare costs, and potential harm to patients. The study protocol of this review was registered in PROSPERO under the identification code CRD42023416080. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023416080.

Awareness and use of five imaging decision rules for musculoskeletal injuries: a systematic review.

Several validated decision rules are available for clinicians to guide the appropriate use of imaging for patients with musculoskeletal injuries, including the Canadian CT Head Rule, Canadian C-Spine Rule, National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) guideline, Ottawa Ankle Rules and Ottawa Knee Rules. However, it is unclear to what extent clinicians are aware of the rules and are using these five rules in practice. To determine the proportion of clinicians that are aware of five imaging decision rules and the proportion that use them in practice. Systematic review. This was a systematic review conducted in accordance with the 'Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses' (PRISMA) statement. We performed searches in MEDLINE (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science and Scopus databases to identify observational and experimental studies with data on the following outcomes among clinicians related to five validated imaging decision rules: awareness, use, attitudes, knowledge, and barriers and facilitators to implementation. Where possible, we pooled data using medians to summarise these outcomes. We included 39 studies. Studies were conducted in 15 countries (e.g. the USA, Canada, the UK, Australasia, New Zealand) and included various clinician types (e.g. emergency physicians, emergency nurses and nurse practitioners). Among the five decision rules, clinicians' awareness was highest for the Canadian C-Spine Rule (84%, n = 3 studies) and lowest for the Ottawa Knee Rules (18%, n = 2). Clinicians' use was highest for NEXUS (median percentage ranging from 7 to 77%, n = 4) followed by Canadian C-Spine Rule (56-71%, n = 7 studies) and lowest for the Ottawa Knee Rules which ranged from 18 to 58% (n = 4). Our results suggest that awareness of the five imaging decision rules is low. Changing clinicians' attitudes and knowledge towards these decision rules and addressing barriers to their implementation could increase use.

Improving the Management of Adults With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: An Initiative to Reduce Unnecessary Computed Tomographic Scans in the Emergency Department.

The overuse of computed tomographic (CT) scans for patients who present to the emergency department (ED) after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) has been well-documented. The Canadian Computed Tomography Head Rule (CCHR) is a validated tool to guide ED providers in determining the need for emergent CT of mTBI patients. The purpose of this project was to reduce radiation exposure and ED length of stay by using the CCHR to decrease unnecessary CT scans in adults with TBI. Cost of care was also estimated. The CCHR implementation strategy included an education program for ED staff. The use of the CCHR was promoted throughout the intervention period. The outcomes measured were the number of CT scans ordered, ED length of stay, and the cost of avoidable CT scans. Data were collected through medical record reviews completed by the project leader and were evaluated using the independent samples t test. A total of 600 medical records were reviewed. There was a significant difference between adherence to the CCHR before (M = 64.6%) and after provider education (M = 74.3%). The percentage of CT scans that could have been avoided significantly decreased from baseline (M = 0.63) after provider education (M = 0.46). Length of stay for mTBI patients who were managed based on the CCHR (M = 184.9) was significantly less than the length of stay for those who were not (M = 260.1). The cost of avoidable scans was decreased by 37% over the course of the project. There were no incidents of missed diagnosis found. By increasing awareness of the CCHR and promoting its use, the number of head CT scans ordered, cost of care, and ED length of stay for patients who present after mTBI were significantly improved.

Clinical decision rules in predicting computed tomography scan findings and need for neurosurgical intervention in mild traumatic brain injury: a prospective observational study.

In this study, we will compare the diagnostic values of head CT decision rules in predicting the findings of CT scans in a prospective multicenter study in university emergency departments in Iran. The primary outcome was any traumatic lesion findings in brain CT scans, and the secondary outcomes were death, the need for mechanical ventilation, and neurosurgical intervention. Decision rules including the Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR), New Orleans Criteria (NOC), National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS), and Neurotraumatology Committee of the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (NCWFNS) were compared for the main outcomes. In total, 434 mild TBI patients were enrolled in the study. The NCWFNS had the highest sensitivity (91.14%) and the lowest specificity (39.42%) for predicting abnormal finding in CT scan compared to other models. While the NICE obtained the lowest sensitivity (79.75%), it was associated with the highest specificity (66.67%). All model performances were improved when administered to predict neurosurgical intervention among patients with GCS 13-15. NEXUS (AUC 0.862, 95% CI 0.799-0.924) and NCWFNS (AUC 0.813, 95% CI 0.723-0.903) had the best performance among all evaluated models. The NCWFNS and the NEXUS decision rules performed better than the CCHR and NICE guidelines for predicting any lesion in the CT imaging and neurosurgical intervention among patients with mTBI with GCS 13-15. For a subset of mTBI patients with GCS 15, the NOC criteria havehigher sensitivity for abnormal CT imaging, but lower specificity and more requested CTs.

Adherence to the Canadian CT Head Rule in a Nova Scotian Emergency and Trauma Center.

Background and aims Choosing Wisely Nova Scotia (CWNS), an affiliate of Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC), aims to address unnecessary care and tests through literature-informed lists developed by various disciplines. CWC has identified unnecessary head CTs among the top five tests, procedures, and treatments to question within the emergency department setting. The Canadian CT-scan Head Rule (CCHR) has been found to be the most effective clinical decision rule in adults with minor head injuries. This study aimed to better understand the current status of CCHR use in Nova Scotia, we conducted a retrospective audit of patient charts at the Charles V. Keating Emergency and Trauma Center in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Materials and methods Our mixed methods design included a narrative literature review, a retrospective chart audit, and a qualitative audit-feedback component with physicians who work in the emergency department (ED). The chart audit applied the guidelines for adherence to the CCHR and reported on the level of compliance within the ED. Results Analysis of qualitative data is included here, in parallel with in-depth analysis to contextualize findings from the chart audit. A total of 302 charts of patients presenting to the surveyed site were retrospectively reviewed for this study. Of the 37 cases where the CT head was indicated as per the CCHR, a CT was ordered 32 (86.5%) times. Of the 176 cases where a CT head was not indicated as per the CCHR, a CT was not ordered 155 (88.1%) times. Therefore, the CCHR was followed in 187 (87.8%) of the total 213 cases where the CCHR should be applied. Conclusions Our review revealed that the CCHR was adhered in 87.8% of cases at the surveyed ED. Identifying contextual factors that facilitate or hinder the application of CCHR in practice is critical to achieving the goal of reducing unnecessary CTs. This work will be presented to the physician group to engage and understand factors that are enablers in the process of ED minor head injury care.

Validation of the Canadian CT Head Rule and the New Orleans Criteria for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury in Ethiopia

Traumatic brain injury is a major public health problem worldwide. While computed tomography (CT) scans are often used for TBI workup, clinicians in low-income countries are limited by fewer radiographic resources. The Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR) and the New Orleans Criteria (NOC) are widely used screening tools to rule out clinically important brain injury without CT imaging. While these are well-validated in studies from upper-and-middle-income countries, it is important to study these tools in LICs. This study sought to validate the CCHR and NOC in a tertiary teaching hospital population in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients older than 13-years of age presenting with a head injury and a Glasgow Coma Score of 13-15 from December 2018 to July 2021. Retrospective chart review collected demographic, clinical, radiographic, and hospital course variables. Proportion tables were constructed to determine the sensitivity and specificity of these tools. A total of 193 patients were included. Both rules demonstrated 100% sensitivity for identifying patients requiring neurosurgical intervention and abnormal CT scans. The specificity for the CCHR was 41.5% and 26.5% for the NOC. Male gender, falling accidents, and headaches had the strongest association with abnormal CT findings. The NOC and the CCHR are highly sensitive screening tools that can help rule out clinically important brain injury in mild TBI patients without a head CT in an urban Ethiopian population. Their implementation in this low-resource setting may help spare a significant number of CT scans.

Prevalence of Computed Tomography Overuse for Mild Head Injury in Adults.

The Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR) is one of many established guidelines for assessing the need for computed tomography (CT) imaging in patients with minor head injuries. Adhering to such criteria would promote the appropriate use of CT imaging, lower healthcare expenses, and prevent harmful radiation exposure. There is no current literature assessing the overuse of CT imaging for minor head injuries in the Kingdom of Bahrain. This study aims to evaluate CT overuse in adult patients with minor head trauma. Methods: The study was conducted at the Bahrain Defense Force Hospital over 12 months from January to December 2021. All adult patients (>14 years) who sustained a minor head injury and were referred to the emergency department for CT brain imaging were included in the study. Patients presenting for other reasons or suffering from moderate to severe head injuries were excluded. CT reports were retrieved for analysis. The CCHR was used as a reference. Results: A total of 486 CT scans were performed. Loss of consciousness was the most commonsymptom on presentation (n = 74 cases). Only 12.1% of CT scans reported positive findings. The prevalence of CT overuse was highest in patients aged 21-30 years. Patients presenting with loss of consciousness showed a high overuse of CT imaging, accounting for 20.3% of all cases. Only 77.4% of cases met the CCHR criteria and 22.6% were defined as overuse, with 95% confidence interval (0.189, 0.266). Conclusion: When referring to the CCHR, CT imaging for a minor head injury in adults was overused in 22.6% of cases. Further research will be required to reveal the underlying reasons for these findings along with interventions to reduce future overuse.

We should stop using the Canadian CT head rule

We should stop using the Canadian CT head rule

Evaluation of Clinical Characteristics and CT Decision Rules in Elderly Patients with Minor Head Injury: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study.

Age is variably described as a minor or major risk factor for traumatic intracranial lesions after head injury. However, at present, no specific CT decision rule is available for elderly patients with minor head injury (MHI). The aims of this prospective multicenter cohort study were to assess the performance of existing CT decision rules for elderly MHI patients and to compare the clinical and CT characteristics of elderly patients with the younger MHI population. Thirty-day mortality between two age groups (cutoff ≥ 60 years), along with clinical and CT characteristics, was evaluated with four CT decision rules: the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline, the Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR), the New Orleans Criteria (NOC), and the CT Head Injury Patients (CHIP) rule. Of the 5517 MHI patients included, 2310 were aged ≥ 60 years. Elderly patients experienced loss of consciousness (17% vs. 32%) and posttraumatic amnesia (23% vs. 31%) less often, but intracranial lesions (13% vs. 10%), neurological deterioration (1.8% vs. 0.2%), and 30-day mortality (2.0% vs. 0.1%) were more frequent than in younger patients (all p < 0.001). Elderly patients with age as their only risk factor showed intracranial lesions in 5% (NOC and CHIP) to 8% (CCHR and NICE) of cases. The sensitivity of decision rules in the elderly patients was 60% (CCHR) to 97% (NOC) when age was excluded as a risk factor. Current risk factors considered when evaluating elderly patients show lower sensitivity to identify intracranial abnormalities, despite more frequent intracranial lesions. Until age-specific CT decision rules are developed, it is advisable to scan every elderly patient with an MHI.

Evolving the SCAT5 for Ruling Out Higher-Severity Traumatic Brain Injuries-Can Decision Rules Developed for Emergency Settings Help?

BACKGROUND: Decision rules (eg, Canadian computed tomography head rule [CCHR] for adults and Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network [PECARN] rule for children/adolescents) are used in emergency settings (emergency room [ER] rules) to assess traumatic brain injuries (TBIs). The rules have a high-sensitivity and near-perfect negative predictive value that help to rule out more severe TBI. CLINICAL QUESTION: Which criteria should be added to the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 5 (SCAT5) to reach the sensitivity of the ER rules and improve the utility of the SCAT5 for screening for higher-severity head and brain injuries? KEY RESULTS: We performed a comparative analysis of the SCAT5 with the CCHR and PECARN rules. We compared the presence (yes or no) and comparative "face value" sensitivity (lower, identical, or higher) of the SCAT5 criteria to the ER rules criteria. Loss of consciousness, vomiting, severe/increasing headache, and seizure are SCAT "red flags" with similar or higher sensitivity compared to ER rules criteria. Five criteria had lower sensitivity or were absent from the SCAT. Emergency room rules include any abnormality on the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS<15), but only a "deterioration of the state of consciousness" is considered a "red flag" in the SCAT5. Persistent retrograde amnesia for more than 30 minutes, age>65, severity of the mechanism of injury, and signs of skull fractures are not mentioned in the SCAT5. CLINICAL APPLICATION: We identified 5 criteria that could inform the evolution the SCAT5 to improve its ability to rule out more severe TBI in a sideline assessment context. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(3):113-119. Epub: 9 December 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11301.

Impact of the Canadian CT head rule supplemented by the original published minimum inclusion criteria to assist emergency department clinicians’ assessment of patients presenting post fall from residential aged care: a retrospective audit

BackgroundA large number of CT brain (CTB) scans are ordered in the ED for older patients with a confirmed or possible head strike but no ongoing symptoms of a head injury. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the Canadian CT head rule supplemented by the original published minimum inclusion criteria to assist clinician assessment of the need for CTB following minimal trauma fall in patients presenting from residential aged care facilities to a major metropolitan emergency department (ED).MethodsThis study was conducted as a pre- and post-intervention retrospective audit. The intervention involved implementation of a decision support tool to help clinicians assess patients presenting to the ED following a fall. The tool integrated the Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR) in conjunction with a simplified set of inclusion criteria to help clinicians define a minimum threshold for a “minor head injury”. Outcome data pertaining to CT brain ordering practices and results were compared over symmetrical 3-month time periods pre- and post-intervention in 2 consecutive years.ResultsThe study included 233 patients in the pre-intervention arm and 241 in the post-intervention arm. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were similar in both groups. There was a 20% reduction in the total number of CTB scans ordered following tool implementation, with 134 (57.0%) scans in the pre-intervention group and 90 (37.3%) in the post-intervention group (p < 0.01). The diagnostic yield in the pre- and post-intervention groups was 3.7 and 5.6% respectively (p = 0.52). No variation was observed in medical management between groups, and no patients in either group underwent neurosurgical intervention.ConclusionsUse of the CCHR supplemented by the original published minimum inclusion criteria appeared to safely reduce the number of CTB scans performed in residential aged care facility residents presenting to an ED after a fall, with no associated adverse outcomes. A larger study across multiple centres is required to determine widespread efficacy and safety of this tool.

Evaluation of Glial and Neuronal Blood Biomarkers Compared With Clinical Decision Rules in Assessing the Need for Computed Tomography in Patients With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

In 2018, the combination of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase (UCH-L1) levels became the first US Food and Drug Administration-approved blood test to detect intracranial lesions after mild to moderate traumatic brain injury (MTBI). How this blood test compares with validated clinical decision rules remains unknown. To compare the performance of GFAP and UCH-L1 levels vs 3 validated clinical decision rules for detecting traumatic intracranial lesions on computed tomography (CT) in patients with MTBI and to evaluate combining biomarkers with clinical decision rules. This prospective cohort study from a level I trauma center enrolled adults with suspected MTBI presenting within 4 hours of injury. The clinical decision rules included the Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR), New Orleans Criteria (NOC), and National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study II (NEXUS II) criteria. Emergency physicians prospectively completed data forms for each clinical decision rule before the patients' CT scans. Blood samples for measuring GFAP and UCH-L1 levels were drawn, but laboratory personnel were blinded to clinical results. Of 2274 potential patients screened, 697 met eligibility criteria, 320 declined to participate, and 377 were enrolled. Data were collected from March 16, 2010, to March 5, 2014, and analyzed on August 11, 2021. The presence of acute traumatic intracranial lesions on head CT scan (positive CT finding). Among enrolled patients, 349 (93%) had a CT scan performed and were included in the analysis. The mean (SD) age was 40 (16) years; 230 patients (66%) were men, 314 (90%) had a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15, and 23 (7%) had positive CT findings. For the CCHR, sensitivity was 100% (95% CI, 82%-100%), specificity was 33% (95% CI, 28%-39%), and negative predictive value (NPV) was 100% (95% CI, 96%-100%). For the NOC, sensitivity was 100% (95% CI, 82%-100%), specificity was 16% (95% CI, 12%-20%), and NPV was 100% (95% CI, 91%-100%). For NEXUS II, sensitivity was 83% (95% CI, 60%-94%), specificity was 52% (95% CI, 47%-58%), and NPV was 98% (95% CI, 94%-99%). For GFAP and UCH-L1 levels combined with cutoffs at 67 and 189 pg/mL, respectively, sensitivity was 100% (95% CI, 82%-100%), specificity was 25% (95% CI, 20%-30%), and NPV was 100%; with cutoffs at 30 and 327 pg/mL, respectively, sensitivity was 91% (95% CI, 70%-98%), specificity was 20% (95% CI, 16%-24%), and NPV was 97%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for GFAP alone was 0.83; for GFAP plus NEXUS II, 0.83; for GFAP plus NOC, 0.85; and for GFAP plus CCHR, 0.88. The AUROC for UCH-L1 alone was 0.72; for UCH-L1 plus NEXUS II, 0.77; for UCH-L1 plus NOC, 0.77; and for UCH-L1 plus CCHR, 0.79. The GFAP biomarker alone (without UCH-L1) contributed the most improvement to the clinical decision rules. In this cohort study, the CCHR, the NOC, and GFAP plus UCH-L1 biomarkers had equally high sensitivities, and the CCHR had the highest specificity. However, using different cutoff values reduced both sensitivity and specificity of GFAP plus UCH-L1. Use of GFAP significantly improved the performance of the clinical decision rules, independently of UCH-L1. Together, the CCHR and GFAP had the highest diagnostic performance.

Role of the Maxillofacial Surgeon in Identifying the Correlation Between Facial Bone Fractures and Traumatic Brain Injury - A Prospective Study.

Maxillofacial trauma accounts for a high percentage of patients reporting to the emergency medicine department and being admitted in the hospital. The purpose of this study was to form a direct association between maxillofacial fractures and traumatic brain injury (TBI). Ninety patients with maxillofacial fractures that reported to/were referred to the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery were observed for features indicative of TBI based on clinical presentation and radiological interpretations. Parameters such as loss of consciousness, vomiting, dizziness, headache, seizures and the requirement for intubation, cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhoea and otorrhoea were also assessed. Appropriate radiographs for the diagnosis of the fracture were taken followed by a computed tomography (CT) scan when indicated in accordance to the Canadian CT Head Rule. These scans were then assessed for contusion, extradural haemorrhage, subdural haemorrhage, subarachnoid haemorrhage, pneumocephalus and cranial bone fracture. A total of 90 patients were evaluated, of which 91.1% were males and 8.9% were females. Association between the occurrence of head injury and different maxillofacial bone fractures using the Chi-square test showed a statistical significance of <0.001 in patients with naso-orbito-ethmoid as well as frontal bone fractures. There was a clear association between fractures present in the upper as well as the middle third of the face and traumatic head injury (P ≤ 0.001). Patients with the frontal bone and zygomatic bone fractures have a high prevalence of TBI. Patients with the upper and middle third of the face injury are more prone to traumatic head injury and importance should be given to patients with the same and prevent poor prognosis.