open access

Vol 6, No 2 (2021)
Research paper
Published online: 2021-06-28
Get Citation

Comparison of the efficiency of the paediatric brain CTs with trauma and non-trauma related indications in the paediatric emergency department

Gulec Mert Dogan
DOI: 10.5603/DEMJ.a2021.0014
·
Disaster Emerg Med J 2021;6(2):80-84.

open access

Vol 6, No 2 (2021)
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Published online: 2021-06-28

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the appropriateness of the examinations by evaluating the pre-diagnosis of the patients who underwent brain Computed Tomography (CT) in the paediatric emergency departments and the existing pathologies in the brain CTs. In addition, a comparison of the efficiency of the brain CT examinations performed for trauma and non-traumatic reasons was made.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: CT’s were examined by dividing into 2 groups according to the indications as trauma (group 1) and non-trauma related (group 2). The 2 groups were compared statistically according to the number of pathologies, distribution of pathologies by gender and age.

RESULTS: Pathologies were detected in 9.3% (n = 30) of the patients in the first group and 21.2% (n = 14) of the patients in the second group. A statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of whether pathology was detected (p = 0.023). The rate of pathology detection in the group that underwent CT for non-traumatic reasons was statistically significantly higher than the other group.

CONCLUSION: Precautions should be taken especially with trauma patients to prevent unnecessary CT scans in the paediatric emergency department. In addition, if a CT scan is planned in the paediatric emergency department with the approval of the paediatrician and radiologist, the CT examinations can be made with more accurate indications.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the appropriateness of the examinations by evaluating the pre-diagnosis of the patients who underwent brain Computed Tomography (CT) in the paediatric emergency departments and the existing pathologies in the brain CTs. In addition, a comparison of the efficiency of the brain CT examinations performed for trauma and non-traumatic reasons was made.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: CT’s were examined by dividing into 2 groups according to the indications as trauma (group 1) and non-trauma related (group 2). The 2 groups were compared statistically according to the number of pathologies, distribution of pathologies by gender and age.

RESULTS: Pathologies were detected in 9.3% (n = 30) of the patients in the first group and 21.2% (n = 14) of the patients in the second group. A statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of whether pathology was detected (p = 0.023). The rate of pathology detection in the group that underwent CT for non-traumatic reasons was statistically significantly higher than the other group.

CONCLUSION: Precautions should be taken especially with trauma patients to prevent unnecessary CT scans in the paediatric emergency department. In addition, if a CT scan is planned in the paediatric emergency department with the approval of the paediatrician and radiologist, the CT examinations can be made with more accurate indications.

Get Citation

Keywords

Multi-detector Computed Tomography, paediatric, head trauma, radiation, emergency department

About this article
Title

Comparison of the efficiency of the paediatric brain CTs with trauma and non-trauma related indications in the paediatric emergency department

Journal

Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal

Issue

Vol 6, No 2 (2021)

Article type

Research paper

Pages

80-84

Published online

2021-06-28

DOI

10.5603/DEMJ.a2021.0014

Bibliographic record

Disaster Emerg Med J 2021;6(2):80-84.

Keywords

Multi-detector Computed Tomography
paediatric
head trauma
radiation
emergency department

Authors

Gulec Mert Dogan

References (18)
  1. Bellolio MF, Bellew SD, Sangaralingham LR, et al. Access to primary care and computed tomography use in the emergency department. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018; 18(1): 154.
  2. Wintermark M, Sanelli PC, Anzai Y, et al. American College of Radiology Head Injury Institute. Imaging evidence and recommendations for traumatic brain injury: advanced neuro- and neurovascular imaging techniques. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015; 36(2): E1–E11.
  3. Seidel J, Bissell MB, Vatturi S, et al. Retrospective Analysis of Emergency Computed Tomography Imaging Utilization at an Academic Centre: An Analysis of Clinical Indications and Outcomes. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2019; 70(1): 13–22.
  4. Kirsch TD, Hsieh YH, Horana L, et al. Computed tomography scan utilization in emergency departments: a multi-state analysis. J Emerg Med. 2011; 41(3): 302–309.
  5. Albert JM. Radiation risk from CT: implications for cancer screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013; 201(1): W81–W87.
  6. Miglioretti DL, Johnson E, Williams A, et al. The use of computed tomography in pediatrics and the associated radiation exposure and estimated cancer risk. JAMA Pediatr. 2013; 167(8): 700–707.
  7. Griffey RT, Jeffe DB, Bailey T. Emergency physicians' attitudes and preferences regarding computed tomography, radiation exposure, and imaging decision support. Acad Emerg Med. 2014; 21(7): 768–777.
  8. Slovis TL. Children, computed tomography radiation dose, and the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) concept. Pediatrics. 2003; 112(4): 971–972.
  9. Er A, Akman C, Alatas I, et al. Should Children with Minor Head Injury Routinely Have CT Scan? Jinekoloji Obstetrik Pediatri ve Pediatrik Cerrahi Dergisi. 2013; 5(3): 131–135.
  10. Atabaki SM. Pediatric Head Injury. Pediatrics in Review. 2007; 28(6): 215–224.
  11. Atabaki SM. Pediatric head injury. Pediatr Rev. 2007; 28(6): 215–224.
  12. Kuppermann N, Holmes J, Dayan P, et al. Identification of children at very low risk of clinically-important brain injuries after head trauma: a prospective cohort study. The Lancet. 2009; 374(9696): 1160–1170.
  13. Mannix R, Bourgeois FT, Schutzman SA, et al. Neuroimaging for pediatric head trauma: do patient and hospital characteristics influence who gets imaged? Acad Emerg Med. 2010; 17(7): 694–700.
  14. Hardy JE, Brennan N. Computerized tomography of the brain for elderly patients presenting to the emergency department with acute confusion. Emerg Med Australas. 2008; 20(5): 420–424.
  15. Grossman SA, Fischer C, Bar JL, et al. The yield of head CT in syncope: a pilot study. Intern Emerg Med. 2007; 2(1): 46–49.
  16. Wang Xi, You JJ. Head CT for nontrauma patients in the emergency department: clinical predictors of abnormal findings. Radiology. 2013; 266(3): 783–790.
  17. Akça H, Tuygun N, Karacan C, et al. Contribution of Cranial Computed Tomographies to Patient Management in Pediatric Emergency Department. Turkish Journal of Pediatric Emergency and Intensive Care Medicine. 2015; 2(1): 1–6.
  18. ÖZTOPRAK Ü, ENERGİN V. Evaluation of Patients Admitted to the Pediatric Emergency Department with Intoxication. Journal of Contemporary Medicine. 2020.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl