Utilization of a clinical prediction rule for abdominal-pelvic CT scans in patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

This study aims to determine if a clinical prediction (CP) rule to identify patients at low risk for intra-abdominal injury (IAI) is being utilized in patients undergoing abdominal computed tomography (CT) following blunt abdominal trauma. A retrospective review of adult patients with blunt abdominal trauma undergoing abdominal CT scans was performed. The CP rule was positive if any of the following were present: systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg; urinalysis >25 red blood cells/high power field; Glasgow Coma Scale score <14; abdominal tenderness; costal margin tenderness; femur fracture; hematocrit <30 %; or pneumothorax or rib fracture on chest X-ray. The CP rule was negative if all variables were negative. Acute intervention was defined as therapeutic laparotomy or angiographic embolization. All variables in the CP rule were obtained in 218/262 (83 %; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 78, 88 %) patients. Of the 44 patients without complete CP rule assessment, 1 (2.3 %; 95 % CI, 0.1 %, 12.0 %) had an IAI but did not undergo therapeutic intervention. IAI was present in 11 (6.7 %; 95 % CI, 3.4, 11.6 %) of the 165 patients with at least one CP rule positive and 4 (36 %; 95 % CI, 11, 69 %) underwent therapeutic intervention. In the CP rule-negative patients, IAI was identified in 1/53 (1.9 %; 95 % CI, 0, 10.1 %) and no therapeutic intervention was required. An important percentage of patients undergoing abdominal CT are not assessed for or have a negative CP rule. Improved implementation of this CP rule may reduce unnecessary abdominal CT scans in patients presenting with blunt abdominal trauma.

A comparison of test-ordering choices of college physicians and emergency physicians for young adults with abdominal pain: influences and preferences for CT use.

The objective of this study was to compare through questionnaires the test-ordering behavior of college health professionals and emergency physicians with respect to the choosing of computed tomography scans under two clinical scenarios-suspicion of appendicitis and nondescript abdominal pain. Surveys were sent to physician members of both the American College Health Association and the American College of Emergency Physicians. The recipients were asked if their initial workup would include a computed tomography (CT) scan for either clinical scenario. They were queried on their estimation of the importance of physical examination findings, practice standards, economic considerations, and interpersonal factors on the decision to obtain a CT. They were also asked if their decision to order a CT was related to physical exam findings, parental influence, established protocol, costs to student, insurance considerations, medical literature recommendations, and relationship with radiologist. For the first presentation, a clinical suspicion of appendicitis, there was little difference between the choices of the two groups. Seventy seven percent of the college health professionals would obtain one and 76% of the ER physicians would do the same. However, for the workup of nondescript pain, three times as many ER physicians as college health professionals would obtain a CT scan (34% vs 11%). Of the seven factors, the most important determinant for both groups of physicians was the results of physical exam and least important by far was the relationship to the radiologist.