INTRODUCTION: To identify clinical symptoms and signs that exclude the presence of mandibular fracture in patients presenting with mandibular trauma and thus devise a clinical decision rule that will rule out the need for radiography in some patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted of consecutive patients with a possible diagnosis of mandibular fracture who attended a city-centre emergency department between July 2000 and December 2001. Clinical symptoms and signs were recorded for each patient using a predesigned proforma. Radiographic evaluation of a suspected mandibular fracture consisted of lateral-oblique and postero-anterior mandibular views. The presence of a fracture was based on the interpretation of the X-rays by a radiologist who was blinded to the clinical probability of a fracture. Data were initially analysed using the chi-square test. Recursive partitioning was then performed to create a maximally sensitive decision tree. RESULTS: 280 patients were included in the study, 65 of whom had a mandibular fracture. A maximally sensitive decision rule was found that identified 5 parameters (malocclusion, trismus, broken teeth, pain with mouth closed, step deformity) whose absence excluded mandibular fracture. This rule has a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 39% in identifying patients with mandibular fracture. If applied to our patient cohort, this rule would have saved 83 radiographs without missing any fractures. CONCLUSIONS: A simple decision rule is presented that can be used to exclude the need for radiography in a subset of patients with mandibular trauma.
INTRODUCTION: To identify clinical symptoms and signs that exclude the presence of mandibular fracture in patients presenting with mandibular trauma and thus devise a clinical decision rule that will rule out the need for radiography in some patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted of consecutive patients with a possible diagnosis of mandibular fracture who attended a city-centre emergency department between July 2000 and December 2001. Clinical symptoms and signs were recorded for each patient using a predesigned proforma. Radiographic evaluation of a suspected mandibular fracture consisted of lateral-oblique and postero-anterior mandibular views. The presence of a fracture was based on the interpretation of the X-rays by a radiologist who was blinded to the clinical probability of a fracture. Data were initially analysed using the chi-square test. Recursive partitioning was then performed to create a maximally sensitive decision tree. RESULTS: 280 patients were included in the study, 65 of whom had a mandibular fracture. A maximally sensitive decision rule was found that identified 5 parameters (malocclusion, trismus, broken teeth, pain with mouth closed, step deformity) whose absence excluded mandibular fracture. This rule has a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 39% in identifying patients with mandibular fracture. If applied to our patient cohort, this rule would have saved 83 radiographs without missing any fractures. CONCLUSIONS: A simple decision rule is presented that can be used to exclude the need for radiography in a subset of patients with mandibular trauma.
Authors: Romke Rozema; Mostafa El Moumni; Gysbert T de Vries; Frederik K L Spijkervet; René Verbeek; Jurrijn Y J Kleinbergen; Bas W J Bens; Michiel H J Doff; Baucke van Minnen Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2022-04-16 Impact factor: 2.374