A comparative analysis of ENP’s and SHO’s in the application of the Ottawa ankle rules

Awareness and use of five imaging decision rules for musculoskeletal injuries: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Several validated decision rules are available for clinicians to guide the appropriate use of imaging for patients with musculoskeletal injuries, including the Canadian CT Head Rule, Canadian C-Spine Rule, National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) guideline, Ottawa Ankle Rules and Ottawa Knee Rules. However, it is unclear to what extent clinicians are aware of the rules and are using these five rules in practice.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the proportion of clinicians that are aware of five imaging decision rules and the proportion that use them in practice.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

This was a systematic review conducted in accordance with the 'Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses' (PRISMA) statement. We performed searches in MEDLINE (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science and Scopus databases to identify observational and experimental studies with data on the following outcomes among clinicians related to five validated imaging decision rules: awareness, use, attitudes, knowledge, and barriers and facilitators to implementation. Where possible, we pooled data using medians to summarise these outcomes.

RESULTS

We included 39 studies. Studies were conducted in 15 countries (e.g. the USA, Canada, the UK, Australasia, New Zealand) and included various clinician types (e.g. emergency physicians, emergency nurses and nurse practitioners). Among the five decision rules, clinicians' awareness was highest for the Canadian C-Spine Rule (84%, n = 3 studies) and lowest for the Ottawa Knee Rules (18%, n = 2). Clinicians' use was highest for NEXUS (median percentage ranging from 7 to 77%, n = 4) followed by Canadian C-Spine Rule (56-71%, n = 7 studies) and lowest for the Ottawa Knee Rules which ranged from 18 to 58% (n = 4).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that awareness of the five imaging decision rules is low. Changing clinicians' attitudes and knowledge towards these decision rules and addressing barriers to their implementation could increase use.

Review article: Best practice management of common ankle and foot injuries in the emergency department (part 2 of the musculoskeletal injuries rapid review series)

Ankle and foot injuries are the most common musculoskeletal injuries presenting to Australian EDs and are associated with a large societal and economic impact. The quality of ED care provided to patients with ankle and foot fractures or soft tissue injuries is critical to ensure the best possible outcomes for the patient. This rapid review investigated best practice for the assessment and management of common ankle and foot injuries in the ED. Databases including PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, TRIP and the grey literature, including relevant organisational websites, were searched in 2017. Primary studies, systematic reviews and guidelines were considered for inclusion. English language articles published in the last 12 years that addressed the acute assessment, management or prognosis in the ED were included. Data extraction of included articles was conducted, followed by quality appraisal to rate the level of evidence where possible. The search revealed 1242 articles, of which 71 were included in the review (n = 22 primary articles, n = 35 systematic reviews and n = 14 guidelines). This rapid review provides clinicians managing fractures and soft tissue injuries of the ankle and foot in the ED a summary of the best available evidence to enhance the quality of care for optimal patient outcomes. Following a thorough history and physical examination, including the application of the Ottawa ankle rules, ED clinicians should not only provide a diagnosis, but rate the severity of soft tissue injuries, or stability of fractures and dislocations, which are the pivotal decision points in guiding ED treatment, specialist referral and the follow-up plan.

Effect of Triage Nurse Initiated Radiography Using the Ottawa Ankle Rules on Emergency Department Length of Stay at a Tertiary Centre

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of triage nurse initiated radiographs using the Ottawa Ankle Rules (OAR) on emergency department (ED) throughput. We hypothesized OAR use would reduce median ED length of stay (LOS) by 25 minutes or more.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary centre ED with an annual census of over 90,000 patients. Adult patients presenting within 10 days of isolated blunt ankle trauma were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned to standard triage or OAR application by 15 explicitly trained triage nurses. Our primary outcome was ED LOS. Secondary outcomes included triage nurses' and patients' satisfaction. A power calculation indicated 142 patients were required. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the medians between the two groups.

RESULTS

Of 176 patients with blunt ankle injury screened, 146 were enrolled (83.0%); baseline characteristics in the two groups were similar. The median/mean ED LOS in the control and OAR groups were 128/143 minutes and 108/115 minutes respectively (median difference 20 minutes; p=0.003). Agreement in OAR use between emergency physicians and nurses was moderate (kappa 0.46/0.77 for foot/ankle rule components), and satisfaction of both nurses and participants was high.

CONCLUSION

Triage nurse initiated radiography using OAR leads to a statistically significant decrease of 20 minutes in the median ED LOS at a tertiary care centre. The overall impact of implementing such a process is likely site-specific, and the decision to do so should involve consideration of the local context.