Literature DB >> 9921740

Current practice in clinical cervical spinal clearance: implication for EMS.

D C Cone1, G C Wydro, C M Mininger.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine the practice of clinically "clearing" the cervical spine (c-spine) of trauma patients brought to the ED by EMS with cervical immobilization in place, and to examine developing trends in prehospital c-spine clearance.
METHODS: A 12-question survey form was mailed to the physician medical directors of 300 randomly selected EDs. Questions examined ED clinical clearance practices, EMS clearance protocols and research, and attitudes toward prehospital clearance. Estimated clinical clearance rates were requested.
RESULTS: A total of 173 surveys were returned (58%). At 21 hospitals (12%), c-spine films are obtained for all immobilized trauma patients; clinical clearance is never attempted. Of the remaining 151 hospitals, on average, clinical clearance is attempted for 65.5% of these patients (range 3-100%, interquartile range 50-100%) and is successful (films are not obtained) for 53.7% of attempts (range 0-100%, interquartile range 35-75%). No differences exist in either attempt rate or success rate between trauma centers and non-trauma centers, or between academic/university hospitals, community teaching hospitals, and community non-teaching hospitals (t-test or ANOVA, p > 0.05). Seventy-two respondents (42%) reported significant variation in clinical clearance practice patterns among their ED physicians. Seventy-three respondents (42%) feel that EMS providers should immobilize all trauma patients, while 99 (57%) feel it is reasonable for trained EMS providers to attempt clinical clearance on low-risk trauma patients.
CONCLUSIONS: There is tremendous variation in the ED practice of clinically clearing cervical spines. This, and a lack of support from many ED directors, may hinder attempts at development of research and standardized protocols for pre-hospital c-spine clearance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 9921740     DOI: 10.1080/10903129908958905

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care        ISSN: 1090-3127            Impact factor:   3.077


  2 in total

Review 1.  Factors which affect the application and implementation of a spinal motion restriction protocol by prehospital providers in a low resource setting: A scoping review.

Authors:  Charlene Geduld; Henra Muller; Colleen J Saunders
Journal:  Afr J Emerg Med       Date:  2022-09-15

2.  Comparison of three prehospital cervical spine protocols for missed injuries.

Authors:  Rick Hong; Molly Meenan; Erin Prince; Ronald Murphy; Caitlin Tambussi; Rick Rohrbach; Brigitte M Baumann
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2014-07
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.