scholarly journals TF-7 Zero Waste Emergency Medicine: A Visual Aid for Clinical Decision Rules in Minor Head Trauma Injury Patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. S157-S158 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Sudario
2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 849-855 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ö. Bozan ◽  
G. Aksel ◽  
H. A. Kahraman ◽  
Ö. Giritli ◽  
S. E. Eroğlu

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 182-191
Author(s):  
Bo Sung Kwon ◽  
Hyung Jun Song ◽  
Jun Hee Lee

Objective Among the pediatric population with minor head trauma, it is difficult to determine an indication for the usage of brain computerized tomography (CT). Our study aims to compare the efficiency of the most commonly used clinical decision rules: the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) and Canadian Assessment of Tomography for Childhood Head Injury 2 (CATCH2).Methods This retrospective study investigated whether the PECARN and CATCH2 rules were applicable to Korean children with minor head trauma for reducing the use of brain CT imaging, while detecting intracranial pathology.Results Overall, 251 patients (0–5 years old) admitted to emergency rooms within 24 hours of injury were included between August 2015 to August 2018. The performance results are as follows: the PECARN and CATCH2 rules had a sensitivity of 80.00% (51.91%–95.67%) and 100% (78.20%–100.00%) with a specificity of 28.39% (22.73%–34.60%) and 15.25% (10.92%–20.49%), respectively; the negative predictive values were 98.58% and 100%, respectively. Overall, the CATCH2 rule was more successful than the PECARN rule in detecting intracranial pathology; however, there was no significant difference between them. Furthermore, the PECARN and CATCH2 rules lowered the rate of head CT imaging in our study group.Conclusion Both the rules significantly lowered the rate of indicated brain CT. However, since the CATCH2 rule had higher sensitivity and negative predictive value than the PECARN rule, it is more appropriate to be used in emergency rooms for detecting intracranial pathology in children with minor head trauma.


CJEM ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (S1) ◽  
pp. S118
Author(s):  
S. Upadhye ◽  
A. Chorley ◽  
N. Arora

Introduction: The 2007 SAEM Knowledge Translation consensus conference proposed areas of research in evidence-based clinical algorithms (EBCAs) using clinical decision rules (CDRs) and practice guidelines (CPGs). This project sought to explore the evidence awareness and utilization of various clinical decision rules (CDRs) in emergency medicine (EM) practice. This project sought to explore the evidence awareness and utilization of various clinical decision rules (CDRs) in emergency medicine (EM) practice. Methods: An international survey was administered via international EM organizations using modified Dillman methods. Categories of CDRs included imaging (7), infections (3), neurology (2), venous thromboembolism (VTE; 2), and other (2). Evidence levels were queried using JAMA User’s Guide CDR rating scales (Levels I-IV). Confidence with supporting evidence and utilization of CDRs in practice were assessed on 7-point Likert scales. Correlation of evidence understanding and practice utilization were calculated using Spearman rho methods. Results: The majority of respondents (n=378) were Canadian (72%), <15 years full practice (64%), residency trained (90%), and trained in CDR methods (73%). Evidence ratings were deemed high for all CDRs, although confidence in evidence ratings and practice utilization were more variable for specific rules. Comfort with evidence ranking and utilization in clinical practice were highly correlated (ρ<0.0002). Conclusion: Among Canadian residency CDR trained physicians, evidence ranking is strongly correlated with use in self-reported clinical practice. There is insufficient data from non-Canadian respondents to draw firm correlations. Their remains opportunity to fully disseminate high quality CDRs and encourage incorporation into EBCA practice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document