Scanning the aged to minimize missed injury: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter study

CT pan-scanning versus targeted imaging among older adults after ground level falls

Background

Ground level falls (GLFs) among older adults are responsible for millions of injuries. Routine pan-scanning (CT imaging of the head, chest, abdomen and pelvis) is commonly employed; however, we lack robust evidence of its benefit. We investigated whether pan-scanning identifies a larger proportion of patients with significant injury or injury requiring procedural intervention and hypothesized resuscitation area findings-including radiographs, ultrasound, and external signs of injury-would detect these injuries.

Methods

We queried our institutional trauma registry data for patients ≥65 years presenting to our level 1 trauma center after GLFs. Our primary outcome was injury requiring procedural intervention. LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) regression models were fit using cross-validation to identify predictors of significant injury to the head, chest, and pelvis/lower extremity from patient characteristics and resuscitation area findings.

Results

598 patients were included, among whom 17% underwent pan-scan. External signs of injury were associated with increased odds of significant injury in the head (OR 1.12; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.16), chest (OR 1.50; 95% CI 1.45 to 1.46), and extremity/pelvis (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.10). Chest (OR 1.18; 95% CI 1.14 to 1.23) and pelvic X-ray (OR 1.36; 95% CI 1.33 to 1.40) were also associated with increased odds of significant injury. 17 patients required procedural interventions for head injuries and 2 for the chest. No patients had a significant injury requiring any procedures for the abdomen.

Conclusions

Our study suggests resuscitation area findings may direct targeted imaging in the chest and abdomen/pelvis, but whether individual risk and institutional burden associated with pan-scanning is outweighed by its ease requires further study.

Level of evidence study type

Prognostic and Epidemiological, Level IV.

CT Utilisation in Emergency Department (ED) Assessment of Patients With Suspected Polytrauma: Impact of a Dedicated Trauma Surgical Team

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to assess the impact of introduction of a dedicated trauma surgical unit (TSU) on CT utilisation for polytrauma in the Emergency Department (ED).

METHODS

Single centre retrospective cohort study comparing adult patients undergoing CT for polytrauma following TSU introduction (Intervention group, n = 617) to a historical Baseline group (n = 257) over a matched time period. Patient impact, including initial clinical assessment, injuries, radiation exposure, incidental findings, ED disposition, and impact on radiology services were compared with Mann-Whitney and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

Intervention patients were more likely to be examined by ED physicians (96.7% vs. 91.1%, p = 0.001) prior to CT. There was greater documented clinical suspicion for chest and abdominal injuries, with increased WBCT utilisation for Intervention (Baseline 17.1% vs. 47.8%, p < 0.05), with no significant increase in positive scans by region. More CT chest (Intervention 38.4% vs. Baseline 14.8%, p < 0.05), CT abdomen (42.6% vs. 12.6%, p < 0.005) and CT pelvis (46.1% vs. 16%, p < 0.001) was performed even with low documented clinical suspicion, with no significant increase in positive findings. The intervention group returned for more additional scans (12.48% vs. Baseline 5.45%), had more incidental findings (23.66% vs. 15.18%), and were more likely to be admitted for observation (21.7% vs. 14%), all p < 0.05. Time to scan and total CT reporting time were significantly longer for Intervention.

CONCLUSION

Introduction of a TSU was associated in a shift towards increased CT utilisation, with no increase in scan yield, increased incidental findings and impacts on Radiology workflow.