Advertisement

CT Overuse for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

      Article-at-a-Glance

      Background

      Multiple, validated, evidence-based guidelines exist to inform the appropriate use of computed tomography (CT) to differentiate mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) from clinically important brain injury and to prevent the overuse of CT. Yet, CT use is growing rapidly, potentially exposing patients to unnecessary ionizing radiation risk and costs. A study was conducted to quantify the overuse of CT in MTBI on the basis of current guideline recommendations.

      Methods

      A retrospective analysis of secondary data from a prospective observational study was undertaken at an urban, Level I emergency department (ED) with more than 90,000 visits per year. For adult patients with minor head injury receiving CT imaging at the discretion of the treating physician, the proportion of cases meeting criteria for CT on the basis of the Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR), American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Clinical Policy, New Orleans Criteria (NOC), and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines was reported.

      Results

      All 346 patients enrolled in the original study were included in the analysis. The proportion of cases meeting criteria for CT for each of the guidelines was: CCHR 64.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60–0.70), ACEP 74.3% (95% CI, 0.70–0.79), NICE 86.7% (95% CI, 0.83–0.90), and NOC 90.5% (95% CI, 0.87–0.94). The odds ratio of the guidelines for predicting positive head CT findings were also reported.

      Discussion

      Some 10%–35% of CTs obtained in the ED for MTBI were not recommended according to the guidelines. Successful implementation of existing guidelines could decrease CT use in MTBI by up to 35%, leading to a significant reduction in radiation-induced cancers and health care costs.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Smith M.D.
        • et al.
        Committee on the Learning Health Care System in America, Institute of Medicine.
        Best Care at Lower Cost: The Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America. National Academies Press, Washington, DC2012
        • Korenstein D.
        • et al.
        Overuse of health care services in the United States: An understudied problem.
        Arch Intern Med. 2012 Jan 23; 172: 171-178
        • Brenner D.J.
        • Hall E.J.
        Computed tomography—An increasing source of radiation exposure.
        N Engl J Med. 2007 Nov 29; 357: 2277-2284
        • Broder J.
        • Warshauer D.M.
        Increasing utilization of computed tomography in the adult emergency department, 2000-2005.
        Emerg Radiol. 2006; 13: 25-30
        • Boone J.M.
        • Brunberg J.A.
        Computed tomography use in a tertiary care university hospital.
        J Am Coll Radiol. 2008; 5: 132-138
        • Smith-Bindman R.
        • et al.
        Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer.
        Arch Intern Med. 2009 Dec 14; 169: 2078-2086
        • Smith-Bindman R.
        • et al.
        Use of diagnostic imaging studies and associated radiation exposure for patients enrolled in large integrated health care systems, 1996-2010.
        JAMA. 2012 Jun 13; 307: 2400-2409
        • The Joint Commission
        Radiation Risks of Diagnostic Imaging.
        Sentinel Event Alert. Aug 24, 2011; (Accessed Sep 26, 2012)
        • Korley F.K.
        • Pham J.C.
        • Kirsch T.D.
        Use of advanced radiology during visits to US emergency departments for injury-related conditions, 1998-2007.
        JAMA. 2010 Oct 6; 304: 1465-1471
      1. US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Traumatic Brain injury in the United States: Emergency Department Visits, Hospitalizations and Deaths 2002–2006. Faul M. et al. Mar 2010. Accessed Sep 26, 2012. http://www.cdc.gov/traumaticbraininjury/pdf/blue_book.pdf.

        • Shackford S.R.
        • et al.
        The clinical utility of computed tomographic scanning and neurologic examination in the management of patients with minor head injuries.
        J Trauma. 1992; 33: 3853-3894
        • Marshall L.F.
        • Toole B.M.
        • Bowers S.A.
        The National Traumatic Coma Data Bank. Part 2: Patients who talk and deteriorate: Implications for treatment.
        J Neurosurg. 1983; 59: 285-288
        • Baerlocher M.O.
        • Detsky A.S.
        Discussing radiation risks associated with CT scans with patients.
        JAMA. 2010 Nov 17; 304: 2170-2171
        • Tavender E.J.
        • et al.
        Quality and consistency of guidelines for the management of mild traumatic brain injury in the emergency department.
        Acad Emerg Med. 2011; 18: 880-889
        • Stiell I.G.
        • et al.
        The Canadian CT Head Rule for patients with minor head injury.
        Lancet. 2001 May 5; 357: 1391-1396
        • Jagoda A.S.
        • et al.
        Clinical policy: Neuroimaging and decisionmaking in adult mild traumatic brain injury in the acute setting.
        Ann Emerg Med. 2008; 52: 714-748
        • Haydel M.J.
        • et al.
        Indications for computed tomography in patients with minor head injury.
        N Engl J Med. 2000 Jul 13; 343: 100-105
      2. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Head Injury: Triage, Assessment, Investigation and Early Management of Head Injury in Infants, Children and Adults. Sep 2007. Accessed Sep 26, 2012. http://www.nice.org.uk/CG056.

        • Stiell I.G.
        • et al.
        Comparison of the Canadian CT Head Rule and the New Orleans Criteria in patients with minor head injury.
        JAMA. 2005 Sep 28; 294: 1511-1518
        • Papa L.
        • et al.
        Performance of the Canadian CT Head Rule and the New Orleans Criteria for predicting any traumatic intracranial injury on computed tomography in a United States Level I trauma center.
        Acad Emerg Med. 2012; 19: 2-10
        • Smits M.
        • et al.
        External validation of the Canadian CT Head Rule and the New Orleans Criteria for CT scanning in patients with minor head injury.
        JAMA. 2005 Sep 28; 294: 1519-1525
      3. Bentley S, et al. Emergency physicians’ clinical practice regarding the ACEP/CDC Adult Traumatic Brain Injury Clinical Policy. Paper presented at ACEP Scientific Assembly, Boston, 2009 (Abstract).

        • Stiell I.G.
        • et al.
        A prospective cluster-randomized trial to implement the Canadian CT Head Rule in emergency departments.
        CMAJ. 2010 Oct 5; 182: 1527-1532
        • Stiell I.G.
        • Wells G.A.
        Methodologic standards for the development of clinical decision rules in emergency medicine.
        Ann Emerg Med. 1999; 33: 437-447
        • Stiell I.G.
        • et al.
        Implementation of the Canadian C-Spine Rule: Prospective 12 centre cluster randomised trial.
        BMJ. 2009 Oct 29; 339: b4146https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b4146
        • Stiell I.G.
        • et al.
        Variation in ED use of computed tomography for patients with minor head injury.
        Ann Emerg Med. 1997; 30: 14-22
        • Elesber A.A.
        • et al.
        Impact of the application of the American College of Emergency Physicians recommendations for the admission of patients with syncope on a retrospectively studied population presenting to the emergency department.
        Am Heart J. 2005; 149: 826-831
        • Lehrmann J.F.
        • et al.
        Knowledge translation of the American College of Emergency Physicians clinical policy on hypertension.
        Acad Emerg Med. 2007; 14: 1090-1096
        • Melnick E.R.
        • et al.
        Knowledge translation of the American College of Emergency Physicians’ clinical policy on syncope using computerized clinical decision support.
        Int J Emerg Med. 2010 Jun 1; 3: 97-104
        • Melnick E.R.
        • et al.
        Delphi consensus on the feasibility of translating the ACEP clinical policies into computerized clinical decision support.
        Ann Emerg Med. 2010; 56: 317-320
        • Kotlyar S.
        • et al.
        S100B Immunoassay: An assessment of diagnostic utility in minor head trauma.
        J Emerg Med. 2011; 41: 285-293
      4. Bovbjerg RR, Berenson RA. Urban Institute/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation: The Value of Clinical Practice Guidelines as Malpractice “Safe Harbors”. Apr 2012. Accessed Sep 20, 2012. http://www.rwjf.org/content/rwjf/en/research-publications/find-rwjf-research/2012/04/the-value-of-clinical-practiceguidelines-as-malpractice—safe-h.html.

        • Venkatesh A.K.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of pulmonary embolism in the emergency department and consistency with a national quality measure: Quantifying the opportunity for improvement.
        Arch Intern Med. 2012 Jul 9; 172: 1028-1032
        • Smits M.
        • et al.
        Minor head injury: CT-based strategies for management—A cost-effectiveness analysis.
        Radiology. 2010; 254: 532-540
        • Smith-Bindman R.
        • et al.
        Diagnostic imaging rates for head injury in the ED and states’ medical malpractice tort reforms.
        Am J Emerg Med. 2011; 29: 656-664
        • Kline J.A.
        • Walthall J.D.
        Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010: Summary, analysis, and opportunities for advocacy for the academic emergency physician.
        Acad Emerg Med. 2010; 17: e69-e74
        • Elstein A.S.
        On the origins and development of evidence-based medicine and medical decision making.
        Inflamm Res. 2004; 53: S184-S189
        • Formoso G.
        • Liberati A.
        • Magrini N.
        Practice guidelines: Useful and “participative” method? Survey of Italian physicians by professional setting.
        Arch Intern Med. 2001 Sep 10; 161: 2037-2042
        • McGlynn E.A.
        • et al.
        The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States.
        N Engl J Med. 2003 Jun 26; 348: 2635-2645
        • Pham J.C.
        • Kelen G.D.
        • Pronovost P.J.
        National study on the quality of emergency department care in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction and pneumonia.
        Acad Emerg Med. 2007; 14: 856-863
        • Cabana M.D.
        • et al.
        Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement.
        JAMA. 1999 Oct 20; 282: 1458-1465
        • Grol R.
        • Grimshaw J.
        From best evidence to best practice: Effective implementation of change in patients’ care.
        Lancet. 2003 Oct 11; 362: 1225-1230
        • Glasziou P.
        • Haynes B.
        The paths from research to improved health outcomes.
        ACP J Club. 2005; 142: A8-A10
        • Lang E.S.
        • Wyer P.C.
        • Haynes R.B.
        Knowledge translation: closing the evidence-to-practice gap.
        Ann Emerg Med. 2007; 49: 355-363
        • Burgers J.S.
        • et al.
        Characteristics of effective clinical guidelines for general practice.
        Br J Gen Pract. 2003; 53: 15-19
        • Grimshaw J.M.
        • et al.
        Changing provider behavior: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions.
        Med Care. 2001; 39: II2-II45
        • Bates D.W.
        • et al.
        Ten commandments for effective clinical decision support: Making the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality.
        J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2003; 10: 523-530
        • Baumann B.M.
        • et al.
        Patient perceptions of computed tomographic imaging and their understanding of radiation risk and exposure.
        Ann Emerg Med. 2011; 58: 1-7
      5. ABC News. Was Richardson’s Death Avoidable? Childs D. Markiar S. Mar 19, 2009. Accessed Sep 26, 2012. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMood-News/story?id=7116273&page=1.

      6. New York Post. Canadacare May Have Killed Natasha. Franklin C. Mar 26, 2009. Accessed Sep 26, 2012. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/item_GCJDJyjiBPnoXPOkTu1x8L;jsessionid=25EF4E24421A03DA751B55701AE85890.

        • Wears R.L.
        Risk, radiation, and rationality.
        Ann Emerg Med. 2011; 58: 9-11
        • Deyo R.A.
        Imaging idolatry: The uneasy intersection of patient satisfaction, quality of care, and overuse.
        Arch Intern Med. 2009 May 25; 169: 921-923
        • Deyo R.A.
        • Diehl A.K.
        Patient satisfaction with medical care for low-back pain.
        Spine. 1986; 11 (Phila Pa 1976): 28-30
        • Deyo R.A.
        • Diehl A.K.
        • Rosenthal M.
        Reducing roentgenography use. Can patient expectations be altered?.
        Arch Intern Med. 1987; 147: 141-145
        • Kline J.A.
        • et al.
        Randomized trial of computerized quantitative pretest probability in low-risk chest pain patients: Effect on safety and resource use.
        Ann Emerg Med. 2009; 53: 727-735