The difference of Use of CT in the general versus pediatric emergency departments for adolescent patients in the same tertiary hospital

The use of a pediatric appendicitis pathway in a large integrated health system reduced computed tomography imaging in the ED

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis is the most common cause of an acute surgical abdomen in children. Diagnosis is often challenging as few pediatric patients present with classic symptoms. Clinicians are thus dependent on imaging to reach an accurate diagnosis. Although computerized tomography (CT) has high sensitivity and specificity, it has the disadvantage of imparting ionizing radiation. Ultrasound (US) is readily available and has comparable accuracy to CT when performed by experienced sonographers. We sought to examine the impact of a system-wide process improvement plan on CT use and other metrics in pediatric patients who presented to the Emergency Department (ED) with suspected appendicitis.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of the impact of a Pediatric Appendicitis Pathway (PAP) within a large integrated hospital system with 12 EDs including 3 designated hub EDs. Patients were placed in an initial risk category utilizing the Pediatric Appendicitis Score (PAS), and received US of the appendix at a hub ED if indicated by the PAS. Patients presenting to community EDs who required US appendix were transferred to hub EDs for imaging. Patients presenting in the 6-month pre-implementation period were compared to patients presenting in a 14-month post-implementation period on CT and US utilization, negative and missed appendectomy rates, and ED length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

1874 patients (401 pre-PAP and 1473 post-PAP) were included in the study. At the hub EDs the rate of CT imaging for suspected appendicitis was reduced from 31% to 17% with a resultant increase in US utilization from 83% (333/401) to 90% (1331/1473) (p < 0.001). At community general EDs (404 pre-PAP and 449 post-PAP), the rate of CT was decreased from 45% (181/404) to 32%(144/449) (p < 0.001)) There was no significant change in the negative appendectomy rate pre-PAP (1/59 = 1.7%) and post-PAP (4/168 = 2.4%) (p = 0.99) at the hub EDs. There were no missed appendicitis cases after PAP implementation compared to 1 case in the pre-PAP period. Overall LOS was similar pre and post-PAP, however LOS was longer in patients that required transfer from community general EDs to hub EDs (median 264 vs 342 min, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A PAP that stratified patients into risk groups using the PAS and encouraged the use of US as a first line imaging modality, reduced the number of CT performed in a large integrated health system without significant changes to clinical outcomes. Furthermore, transferring select patients for an US as opposed to obtaining an initial CT in community general EDs was feasible and reduced CT use in the pediatric population.

The Value of Cranial CT Imaging in Patients With Headache at the Emergency Department

Background: Headache is among the most prevalent complaints in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). Clinicians are faced with the difficult task to differentiate primary (benign) from secondary headache disorders, since no international guidelines currently exist of clinical indicators for neuroimaging in headache patients.

Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 501 patients who presented at the ED with headache as a primary complaint between April 2018 and December 2018. Primary outcomes included the amount of diagnostic imaging, the different conclusions provided by diagnostic imaging, and the clinical factors associated with abnormal imaging results.

Results: About half of the patients were diagnosed with a primary headache disorder. Cranial CT imaging at the ED was performed regularly (61% of the patients) and led to the diagnosis of underlying pathology in 1 in 7.6 patients. In a multivariate model, factors significantly associated with abnormal cranial CT results were age 50 years or older, presentation within 1 h after headache onset, clinical history of aphasia, and focal neurological deficit at examination.

Conclusions: As separate clinical characteristics have limited value in detecting severe underlying headache disorders, cranial imaging is regularly performed in the ED. Clinical prediction model tools applied to headache patients may identify patients at risk of intracranial pathology prior to diagnostic imaging and reduce cranial imaging in the future.