{"id":5449,"date":"2011-07-14T20:26:37","date_gmt":"2011-07-15T00:26:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/crashtext.org\/misc\/trauma-imaging.htm\/"},"modified":"2013-07-26T21:26:42","modified_gmt":"2013-07-27T01:26:42","slug":"trauma-imaging","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/crashingpatient.com\/imaging\/trauma-imaging.htm\/","title":{"rendered":"Trauma Imaging"},"content":{"rendered":"
Article including Hoffman shows that 27% of scans deemed unnecessary, but this would have missed 17% of injuries (J Trauma 2009;67:779)<\/p>\n
And another where surgery wanted to scan much more than em attendings. There were many missed injuries, but the ED folks in the study did not beleive they were clinically important injuries. (Ann Emerg Med 2011;58:5:407)<\/p>\n
One clin prediction rule (Ann Emerg Med 2009;54:575)<\/p>\n
have none:GCS<14<\/p>\n
costal margin tenderness<\/p>\n
abd tenderness<\/p>\n
femur fx<\/p>\n
hematuria > or equal 25 rbc\/hpf<\/p>\n
hct<30<\/p>\n
pneumo or rib fx on cxr<\/p>\n
sens 95.8 (91-98) spec 29.9 (27.5-32.3)<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n