Can nurses apply the Canadian C-Spine Rule? A pilot study

Does Every Patient Require Imaging after Cervical Spine Trauma? A Knowledge Translation Project to Support Evidence-Informed Practice for Physiotherapists

Purpose: This article evaluates, describes, and addresses a gap in British Columbia physiotherapists' knowledge of the decision making required for the diagnostic imaging of patients after traumatic neck injury. Method: An online survey of orthopaedic physiotherapists in British Columbia was undertaken to explore their awareness of, knowledge of, and attitudes toward the Canadian Cervical Spine Rule (C-Spine Rule) and decision making regarding the need for diagnostic imaging in managing patients with traumatic neck injury. The survey included questions about managing clinical scenarios; respondents' awareness, knowledge, and use of a specific clinical decision rule-the C-Spine Rule-and any perceived barriers to using clinical practice guidelines in general and the C-Spine Rule in specific. The survey also included questions about the facilitators of and barriers to using the C-Spine Rule. These data were used to guide development of a tool kit to facilitate use of the rule. Results: Of 889 physiotherapists, 467 (52.5%) completed the survey. Given a scenario in which imaging was indicated according to the C-Spine Rule, 95.2% of the respondents correctly recommended imaging. However, in a scenario in which imaging was not indicated, 42.7% incorrectly recommended it. The barriers to using the guidelines included their perceived rigidity, role limitation, and reliance on clinical judgment. The results indicated a need for, and guided development of, resources to facilitate the use of the C-Spine Rule by British Columbia physiotherapists. Conclusions: We identified a gap in the knowledge of British Columbia physiotherapists in identifying which patients were most likely to require imaging after sustaining a traumatic neck injury. We developed a tool kit to address these barriers. British Columbia physiotherapists have accessed this resource extensively. Evaluating its impact on clinical practice, although desirable, was not feasible.

Can emergency nurses safely and accurately remove cervical spine collars in low risk adult trauma patients: An integrative review

BACKGROUND

Well validated clinical decision rules exist to facilitate the safe removal of collars in the alert, orientated, low risk adult trauma patient, however this practice is traditionally conducted by medical staff. The aim of this review is to synthesise current evidence to determine the efficacy of emergency nurses in safely and accurately removing cervical spine collars using cervical spine rules, in alert, orientated, low risk trauma adult patients.

METHODS

A multi-method search strategy was used to find primary research studies followed by a rigorous screening and quality appraisal process. Data from included articles were extracted, grouped and synthesised.

RESULTS

Nine quantitative research articles resulted in four key findings: the inter-rater reliability between nurses and doctors clearing the cervical spine was high (kappa range (0.61-0.80)); nurses can safely implement the cervical spine clinical decision rule; use of a cervical spine clinical decision rule decreases the time patients are immobilised and; nurses felt confident applying a cervical spine clinical decision rule.

CONCLUSION

Appropriately trained emergency nurses can safely apply cervical spine rules to alert, orientated, low risk adult trauma patients. Implementation of nurses clearing cervical spines should include training and ongoing monitoring.

Perceived facilitators and barriers to clinical clearance of the cervical spine by emergency department nurses: A major step towards changing practice in the emergency department

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a validation study on use of the Canadian C-Spine Rule (CCR) by emergency department (ED) nurses to clear the c-spine in alert and stable trauma patients (N=3633). This survey sought to identify potential facilitators and barriers to an implementation policy that would allow nurses to clinically clear the c-spine of minor trauma patients.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective quantitative survey of ED nurses in six hospitals. Questions were developed from a previous qualitative survey at the same validation study EDs.

RESULTS

158 ED nurses were surveyed and 137 (86.7%) responded. Nurses strongly endorsed potential facilitators for nursing clearance of the c-spine, including 'Like to try new things at work' (96.4%) and 'Easy for me to take on new responsibilities' (96.4%). Most respondents were comfortable applying the rule (89.1%). Nurses endorsed potential barriers but at much lower rates, with the most common being 'Heavy workload makes it difficult to use the rule' (37.2%). Variation existed among hospitals for the facilitator 'Use of the rule would be useful to my practice', ranging from 81.8% to 100% endorsement (P=0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey was an important step towards the goal of empowering ED nurses to clinically clear the c-spine of alert and stable trauma patients. There was a high rate of endorsement of facilitators and a low rate of endorsement of barriers. We found variation between hospitals, emphasizing the importance of understanding local beliefs when seeking to change clinical practice. We are conducting an implementation trial based on this feedback.

Multicentre prospective validation of use of the Canadian C-Spine Rule by triage nurses in the emergency department

OBJECTIVES

The Canadian C-Spine Rule for imaging of the cervical spine was developed for use by physicians. We believe that nurses in the emergency department could use this rule to clinically clear the cervical spine. We prospectively evaluated the accuracy, reliability and acceptability of the Canadian C-Spine Rule when used by nurses.

METHODS

We conducted this three-year prospective cohort study in six Canadian emergency departments. The study involved adult trauma patients who were alert and whose condition was stable. We provided two hours of training to 191 triage nurses. The nurses then assessed patients using the Canadian C-Spine Rule, including determination of neck tenderness and range of motion, reapplied immobilization and completed a data form.

RESULTS

Of the 3633 study patients, 42 (1.2%) had clinically important injuries of the cervical spine. The kappa value for interobserver assessments of 498 patients with the Canadian C-Spine Rule was 0.78. We calculated sensitivity of 100.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.0%-100.0%) and specificity of 43.4% (95% CI 42.0%-45.0%) for the Canadian C-Spine Rule as interpreted by the investigators. The nurses classified patients with a sensitivity of 90.2% (95% CI 76.0%-95.0%) and a specificity of 43.9% (95% CI 42.0%-46.0%). Early in the study, nurses failed to identify four cases of injury, despite the presence of clear high-risk factors. None of these patients suffered sequelae, and after retraining there were no further missed cases. We estimated that for 40.7% of patients, the cervical spine could be cleared clinically by nurses. Nurses reported discomfort in applying the Canadian C-Spine Rule in only 4.8% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Use of the Canadian C-Spine Rule by nurses was accurate, reliable and clinically acceptable. Widespread implementation by nurses throughout Canada and elsewhere would diminish patient discomfort and improve patient flow in overcrowded emergency departments.

`Clearing' the cervical spine in conscious trauma patients

This is a systematic review of published evidence regarding management of the cervical spine in conscious and co-operative trauma patients. We examine the literature in the following sections: clinical evaluation of the cervical spine; use of plain radiography; use of additional radiographic views; use of computed tomography; use of magnetic resonance imaging. Finally we consider the elderly and paediatric populations, particularly where there are significant differences compared to the general adult population. This paper also reviews the literature regarding non-medical assessment of the cervical spine. We conclude that there are well-validated decision rules available to guide the clinician, and that each imaging strategy has distinct advantages and disadvantages. Familiarity with these issues provides a sound basis for safe and effective decision-making.

The safety of nurse clearance of the cervical spine using the National Emergency X-radiography Utilization Study low-risk criteria

OBJECTIVES

To determine the level of agreement between trained ED nursing staff and senior ED medical staff in the application and interpretation of the National Emergency X-radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) low-risk criteria (NLC).

METHODS

A NEXUS training and accreditation package was developed. It was successfully undertaken by 22 senior ED nursing staff and 26 senior ED medical staff. A study nurse and doctor independently applied the NLC to a convenience sample of patients who had been placed in a hard cervical collar prior to arrival in the ED. The findings for each of the NLC and the overall decision regarding collar removal were recorded on specific case report forms. The primary endpoint was the level of agreement for the overall decision to leave the collar in place. Levels of agreement for the individual NLC were also examined.

RESULTS

In total, 183 patients were recruited. The level of 'safe agreement' where nursing and medical staff agreed that the collar should be left in place was 94.3% (95% CI: 89.5-97.2%). Agreement with regard to individual NLC varied from good to fair. The median times from patient arrival to completion of study nurse and doctor assessments were 14 min (interquartile ranges [IQR] 5-30) and 29 min (IQR 15-47), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrated a high level of agreement between nursing and medical staff for stable low-risk trauma patients.

Can emergency nurses use the Canadian cervical spine rule to reduce unnecessary patient immobilisation?

The Canadian c-spine rule (CCR) allows safe, reproducible use of radiography in alert, stable patients with potential c-spine injury in the emergency setting [Stiell, I., Clement, C., McKnight, R., Brison, R., Schull, M., Lowe, B., Worthington, J., Eisenhauer, M., Cass, D., Greenberg, G., MacPhail, I., Dreyer, J., Lee, J., Bandiera, G., Reardon, M., Holroyd, B., Lesiuk, H., G. Wells, 2003. The Canadian c-spine rule versus the nexus low-risk criteria in patients with trauma. The New England journal of medicine 349 (26), 2510-2518; Stiell, I., Wells, G., Vandemheen, K., Clement, C., 2001. The Canadian c-spine rule for radiography in alert and stable trauma patients. JAMA 286 (15), 1841]. This paper reports on a study of emergency nurses' ability to identify patients requiring immobilisation using the CCR. Emergency department triage nurses (N = 112) were trained in the use of the CCR and then asked to use the tool over the following 14 months in the assessment of 460 patients who presented with potential c-spine injury. Trained medical staff repeated 55% of the clinical assessments independently using the rule. The level of agreement between nurse and medical judgement was calculated. The inter-rater reliability using the kappa statistic was 0.6 (95% CI 0.50-0.62 N = 254) indicating a 'good' level of agreement. The majority of nurses indicated they were comfortable using the rule. The results suggest that UK emergency department nurses were able to use the Canadian c-spine rule to successfully guide selective immobilisation. A 25% reduction in immobilisation rates would have been achieved if the rule had been followed. Further studies are needed to test the reduction in levels of immobilisation that could be achieved in clinical practice.