Lauren Strait1, Rebecca Sussman1, Ashar Ata1, Mary J Edwards2. 1. Department of Surgery, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY. 2. Department of Surgery, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY. Electronic address: Edwardm2@amc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Liberal use of CT scanning in children with blunt trauma risks unnecessary radiation exposure and cost. Recent literature questions the utility of whole-body CT in stable children without clinical evidence of significant injury, but this is often done based on injury mechanism. The purpose of this study is to quantify the utilization of CT scans of the head, chest, abdomen, and pelvis based on injury severity in these body regions and to assess the impact of American College of Surgeons (ACS) pediatric trauma center designation on CT utilization in children with minor or no injuries. METHODS: We queried the National Trauma Databank for 2014, 2015, and 2016 to identify all patients 14 years and younger. Using Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score as a proxy for injury severity, we analyzed the number of head, thoracic, and abdominal CT scans done for patients at low levels of injury severity (AIS 0-2) in each of these body regions and according to trauma center level designation (ACS I, II, III, standalone pediatric I or II, and non ACS accredited). RESULTS: Of 257,661 children who were entered into the database for any reason, overall CT utilization was 20% for head, 5% for the chest and 9% for the abdomen and pelvis. Children with no injuries or minimal injury to the head were scanned 7% and 46% of the time, respectively, for the chest 3% and 13% and for the abdomen 6% and 30%. For all body regions and all levels of injury severity, level 1 stand-alone pediatric centers displayed significantly lower CT utilization rates than others. CONCLUSION: CT scan rates for children with minimal or no injuries to the head, chest, abdomen and pelvis are significant. Level 1 stand-alone pediatric trauma centers are least likely to perform these studies. Widespread education and acceptance of clinical guidelines for imaging in stable patients throughout trauma systems could alleviate this disparity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III retrospective comparative study.
BACKGROUND: Liberal use of CT scanning in children with blunt trauma risks unnecessary radiation exposure and cost. Recent literature questions the utility of whole-body CT in stable children without clinical evidence of significant injury, but this is often done based on injury mechanism. The purpose of this study is to quantify the utilization of CT scans of the head, chest, abdomen, and pelvis based on injury severity in these body regions and to assess the impact of American College of Surgeons (ACS) pediatric trauma center designation on CT utilization in children with minor or no injuries. METHODS: We queried the National Trauma Databank for 2014, 2015, and 2016 to identify all patients 14 years and younger. Using Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score as a proxy for injury severity, we analyzed the number of head, thoracic, and abdominal CT scans done for patients at low levels of injury severity (AIS 0-2) in each of these body regions and according to trauma center level designation (ACS I, II, III, standalone pediatric I or II, and non ACS accredited). RESULTS: Of 257,661 children who were entered into the database for any reason, overall CT utilization was 20% for head, 5% for the chest and 9% for the abdomen and pelvis. Children with no injuries or minimal injury to the head were scanned 7% and 46% of the time, respectively, for the chest 3% and 13% and for the abdomen 6% and 30%. For all body regions and all levels of injury severity, level 1 stand-alone pediatric centers displayed significantly lower CT utilization rates than others. CONCLUSION: CT scan rates for children with minimal or no injuries to the head, chest, abdomen and pelvis are significant. Level 1 stand-alone pediatric trauma centers are least likely to perform these studies. Widespread education and acceptance of clinical guidelines for imaging in stable patients throughout trauma systems could alleviate this disparity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III retrospective comparative study.