We have located links that may give you full text access.
Introduction of a pan-scan protocol for blunt trauma activations: what are the consequences?
American Journal of Emergency Medicine 2017 January
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine if the introduction of a pan-scan protocol during the initial assessment for blunt trauma activations would affect missed injuries, incidental findings, treatment times, radiation exposure, and cost.
METHODS: A 6-month prospective study was performed on patients with blunt trauma at a level 1 trauma center. During the last 3 months of the study, a pan-scan protocol was introduced to the trauma assessment. Categorical data were analyzed by Fisher exact test and continuous data were analyzed by Mann-Whitney nonparametric test.
RESULTS: There were a total of 220 patients in the pre-pan-scan period and 206 patients during the pan-scan period. There was no significant difference in injury severity or mortality between the groups. Introduction of the pan-scan protocol substantially reduced the incidence of missed injuries from 3.2% to 0.5%, the length of stay in the emergency department by 68.2 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI], -134.4 to -2.1), and the mean time to the first operating room visit by 1465 minutes (95% CI, -2519 to -411). In contrast, fixed computed tomographic scan cost increased by $48.1 (95% CI, 32-64.1) per patient; however, total radiology cost per patient decreased by $50 (95% CI, -271.1 to 171.4). In addition, the rate of incidental findings increased by 14.4% and the average radiation exposure per patient was 8.2 mSv (95% CI, 5.0-11.3) greater during the pan-scan period.
CONCLUSION: Although there are advantages to whole-body computed tomography, elucidation of the appropriate blunt trauma patient population is warranted when implementing a pan-scan protocol.
METHODS: A 6-month prospective study was performed on patients with blunt trauma at a level 1 trauma center. During the last 3 months of the study, a pan-scan protocol was introduced to the trauma assessment. Categorical data were analyzed by Fisher exact test and continuous data were analyzed by Mann-Whitney nonparametric test.
RESULTS: There were a total of 220 patients in the pre-pan-scan period and 206 patients during the pan-scan period. There was no significant difference in injury severity or mortality between the groups. Introduction of the pan-scan protocol substantially reduced the incidence of missed injuries from 3.2% to 0.5%, the length of stay in the emergency department by 68.2 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI], -134.4 to -2.1), and the mean time to the first operating room visit by 1465 minutes (95% CI, -2519 to -411). In contrast, fixed computed tomographic scan cost increased by $48.1 (95% CI, 32-64.1) per patient; however, total radiology cost per patient decreased by $50 (95% CI, -271.1 to 171.4). In addition, the rate of incidental findings increased by 14.4% and the average radiation exposure per patient was 8.2 mSv (95% CI, 5.0-11.3) greater during the pan-scan period.
CONCLUSION: Although there are advantages to whole-body computed tomography, elucidation of the appropriate blunt trauma patient population is warranted when implementing a pan-scan protocol.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app