...
【24h】

Canadian C-spine rule and the national emergency X-radiography utilization low-risk criteria for C-spine radiography in young trauma patients.

机译:加拿大C脊柱规则和国家急诊X射线照相在年轻创伤患者中进行C脊柱照相的低风险标准。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: The Canadian C-spine (cervical spine) Rule (CCR) and the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Low-Risk Criteria (NLC) are criteria designed to guide C-spine radiography in trauma patients. It is unclear how these 2 rules compare with young children. METHODS: This study retrospectively examined case-matched trauma patients 10 years or younger. Two cohorts were identified-cohort A where C-spine imaging was performed and cohort B where no imaging was conducted. The CCR and NLC criteria were then applied retrospectively to each cohort. RESULTS: Cohort A contained 125 cases and cohort B with 250 cases. Seven patients (3%) had significant C-spine injuries. In cohort A, NLC criteria could be applied in 108 (86.4%) of 125 and CCR in 109 (87.2%) of 125. National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Low-Risk Criteria suggested that 70 (58.3%) cases required C-spine imaging compared to 93 (76.2%) by CCR. National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Low-Risk Criteria missed 3 C-spine injuries, and CCR missed one. In cohort B, NLC criteria could be applied in 132 (88%) of 150 and CCR in 131 (87.3%) of 150. The NLC criteria identified 8 cases and CCR identified 13 cases that would need C-spine radiographs. Fisher's 2-sided Exact test demonstrated that CCR and NLC predictions were significantly different (P = .002) in both cohorts. The sensitivity of CCR was 86% and specificity was 94%, and the NLC had a sensitivity of 43% and a specificity of 96%. CONCLUSIONS: Although CCR and NLC criteria may reduce the need for C-spine imaging in children 10 years and younger; they are not sensitive or specific enough to be used as currently designed.
机译:目的:加拿大C型脊柱(颈椎)规则(CCR)和美国国家紧急X射线照相利用低风险标准(NLC)是旨在指导创伤患者进行C脊柱X线照相的标准。目前尚不清楚这两个规则与幼儿相比。方法:本研究回顾性研究了10岁以下的病例匹配创伤患者。确定了两个队列-队列A(执行C脊柱成像)和队列B(不进行成像)。然后将CCR和NLC标准追溯应用于每个队列。结果:队列A包括125例,队列B具有250例。 7名患者(3%)的C脊柱严重受伤。在队列A中,可以将NLC标准应用于125名患者中的108名(86.4%),将CCR用于125名患者中的109名(87.2%)。国家紧急X射线照相术使用低风险标准表明,有70名(58.3%)病例需要C型脊柱成像相比,CCR成像为93(76.2%)。国家紧急X射线照相利用低风险标准遗漏了3例C型脊柱受伤,而CCR遗漏了1例。在队列B中,NLC标准适用于150名患者中的132名(88%),CCR适用于150名患者中的131名(87.3%)。NLC标准确定了8例,CCR确定了13例需要C脊柱X线照片。 Fisher的2面精确测试表明,在两个队列中CCR和NLC的预测均存在显着差异(P = .002)。 CCR的敏感性为86%,特异性为94%,NLC的敏感性为43%,特异性为96%。结论:尽管CCR和NLC标准可能会减少10岁及以下儿童的C脊柱成像需求;它们不够敏感或不够具体,无法按当前设计使用。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号