BACKGROUND: Multiple, validated, evidence-based guidelines exist to inform the appropriate use of computed tomography (CT) to differentiate mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) from clinically important brain injury and to prevent the overuse of CT. Yet, CT use is growing rapidly, potentially exposing patients to unnecessary ionizing radiation risk and costs. A study was conducted to quantify the overuse of CT in MTBI on the basis of current guideline recommendations. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of secondary data from a prospective observational study was undertaken at an urban, Level I emergency department (ED) with more than 90,000 visits per year. For adult patients with minor head injury receiving CT imaging at the discretion of the treating physician, the proportion of cases meeting criteria for CT on the basis of the Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR), American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Clinical Policy, New Orleans Criteria (NOC), and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines was reported. RESULTS: All 346 patients enrolled in the original study were included in the analysis. The proportion of cases meeting criteria for CT for each of the guidelines was: CCHR 64.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.70), ACEP 74.3% (95% CI, 0.70-0.79), NICE 86.7% (95% CI, 0.83-0.90), and NOC 90.5% (95% CI, 0.87-0.94). The odds ratio of the guidelines for predicting positive head CT findings were also reported. DISCUSSION: Some 10%-35% of CTs obtained in the ED for MTBI were not recommended according to the guidelines. Successful implementation of existing guidelines could decrease CT use in MTBI by up to 35%, leading to a significant reduction in radiation-induced cancers and health care costs.
BACKGROUND: Multiple, validated, evidence-based guidelines exist to inform the appropriate use of computed tomography (CT) to differentiate mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) from clinically important brain injury and to prevent the overuse of CT. Yet, CT use is growing rapidly, potentially exposing patients to unnecessary ionizing radiation risk and costs. A study was conducted to quantify the overuse of CT in MTBI on the basis of current guideline recommendations. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of secondary data from a prospective observational study was undertaken at an urban, Level I emergency department (ED) with more than 90,000 visits per year. For adult patients with minor head injury receiving CT imaging at the discretion of the treating physician, the proportion of cases meeting criteria for CT on the basis of the Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR), American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Clinical Policy, New Orleans Criteria (NOC), and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines was reported. RESULTS: All 346 patients enrolled in the original study were included in the analysis. The proportion of cases meeting criteria for CT for each of the guidelines was: CCHR 64.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.70), ACEP 74.3% (95% CI, 0.70-0.79), NICE 86.7% (95% CI, 0.83-0.90), and NOC 90.5% (95% CI, 0.87-0.94). The odds ratio of the guidelines for predicting positive head CT findings were also reported. DISCUSSION: Some 10%-35% of CTs obtained in the ED for MTBI were not recommended according to the guidelines. Successful implementation of existing guidelines could decrease CT use in MTBI by up to 35%, leading to a significant reduction in radiation-induced cancers and health care costs.
Authors: Adam L Sharp; Brian Z Huang; Tania Tang; Ernest Shen; Edward R Melnick; Arjun K Venkatesh; Michael H Kanter; Michael K Gould Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2017-07-21 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Adam de Havenon; Chelsea Meyer; J Scott McNally; Matthew Alexander; Lee Chung Journal: Curr Atheroscler Rep Date: 2019-07-27 Impact factor: 5.113
Authors: Lukas Lambert; Ondrej Foltan; Jan Briza; Alena Lambertova; Pavel Harsa; Rohan Banerjee; Jan Danes Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2016-06-20 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Michaela Cellina; Marta Panzeri; Chiara Floridi; Carlo Maria Andrea Martinenghi; Giulio Clesceri; Giancarlo Oliva Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2018-03-07 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Desmond Wei Tan; Annabelle Mei En Lim; Daniel Yuxuan Ong; Li Lee Peng; Yiong Huak Chan; Irwani Ibrahim; Win Sen Kuan Journal: Singapore Med J Date: 2017-05-25 Impact factor: 1.858
Authors: Benjamin J Miller; Raffi S Avedian; Rajiv Rajani; Lee Leddy; Jeremy R White; Judd Cummings; Tessa Balach; Kevin MacDonald Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Frederick K Korley; Gabor D Kelen; Courtney M Jones; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia Journal: J Head Trauma Rehabil Date: 2016 Nov/Dec Impact factor: 2.710
Authors: Harsh Goel; Joshua Melot; Matthew D Krinock; Ashish Kumar; Sunil K Nadar; Gregory Y H Lip Journal: Ann Med Date: 2020-08-04 Impact factor: 4.709
Authors: Liza Victoria S Escobedo; Joseph Habboushe; Haytham Kaafarani; George Velmahos; Kaushal Shah; Jarone Lee Journal: World J Emerg Med Date: 2013