佛罗里达州老年头部创伤 CT 临床决策规则。

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Journal of the American Geriatrics Society Pub Date : 2024-07-03 DOI:10.1111/jgs.19057
Richard D. Shih MD, Scott M. Alter MD, Mike Wells MBBCh, PhD, Joshua J. Solano MD, Gabriella Engstrom PhD, RN, Lisa M. Clayton DO, Patrick G. Hughes DO, Lara Goldstein MBBCh, PhD, Lawrence Lottenberg MD, Joseph G. Ouslander MD
{"title":"佛罗里达州老年头部创伤 CT 临床决策规则。","authors":"Richard D. Shih MD,&nbsp;Scott M. Alter MD,&nbsp;Mike Wells MBBCh, PhD,&nbsp;Joshua J. Solano MD,&nbsp;Gabriella Engstrom PhD, RN,&nbsp;Lisa M. Clayton DO,&nbsp;Patrick G. Hughes DO,&nbsp;Lara Goldstein MBBCh, PhD,&nbsp;Lawrence Lottenberg MD,&nbsp;Joseph G. Ouslander MD","doi":"10.1111/jgs.19057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Several clinical decision rules have been devised to guide head computed tomography (CT) use in patients with minor head injuries, but none have been validated in patients 65 years or older. We aimed to derive and validate a head injury clinical decision rule for older adults.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a secondary analysis of an existing dataset of consecutive emergency department (ED) patients &gt;65 years old with blunt head trauma. The main predictive outcomes were significant intracranial injury and Need for Neurosurgical Intervention on CT. The secondary outcomes also considered in the model development and validation were All Injuries and All Intracranial Injuries. Predictor variables were identified using multiple variable logistic regression, and clinical decision rule models were developed in a split-sample derivation cohort and then tested in an independent validation cohort.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of 5776 patients, 233 (4.0%) had significant intracranial injury and an additional 104 (1.8%) met CT criteria for Need for Neurosurgical Intervention. The best performing model, the Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule, assigns points based on several clinical variables. If the points totaled 25 or more, a CT scan is indicated. The included predictors were arrival via Emergency Medical Services (+30 points), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) &lt;15 (+20 points), GCS &lt;14 (+50 points), antiplatelet medications (+17 points), loss of consciousness (+16 points), signs of basilar skull fracture (+50 points), and headache (+20 points). Utilizing this clinical decision rule in the validation cohort, a point total ≥25 had a sensitivity and specificity of 100.0% (95% CI: 96.0–100) and 12.3% (95% CI: 10.9–13.8), respectively, for significant intracranial injury and Need for Neurosurgical Intervention.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule has the potential to reduce unnecessary CT scans in older adults, without compromising safe emergency medicine practice.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":17240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","volume":"72 9","pages":"2738-2751"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule\",\"authors\":\"Richard D. Shih MD,&nbsp;Scott M. Alter MD,&nbsp;Mike Wells MBBCh, PhD,&nbsp;Joshua J. Solano MD,&nbsp;Gabriella Engstrom PhD, RN,&nbsp;Lisa M. Clayton DO,&nbsp;Patrick G. Hughes DO,&nbsp;Lara Goldstein MBBCh, PhD,&nbsp;Lawrence Lottenberg MD,&nbsp;Joseph G. Ouslander MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jgs.19057\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Several clinical decision rules have been devised to guide head computed tomography (CT) use in patients with minor head injuries, but none have been validated in patients 65 years or older. We aimed to derive and validate a head injury clinical decision rule for older adults.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We conducted a secondary analysis of an existing dataset of consecutive emergency department (ED) patients &gt;65 years old with blunt head trauma. The main predictive outcomes were significant intracranial injury and Need for Neurosurgical Intervention on CT. The secondary outcomes also considered in the model development and validation were All Injuries and All Intracranial Injuries. Predictor variables were identified using multiple variable logistic regression, and clinical decision rule models were developed in a split-sample derivation cohort and then tested in an independent validation cohort.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Of 5776 patients, 233 (4.0%) had significant intracranial injury and an additional 104 (1.8%) met CT criteria for Need for Neurosurgical Intervention. The best performing model, the Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule, assigns points based on several clinical variables. If the points totaled 25 or more, a CT scan is indicated. The included predictors were arrival via Emergency Medical Services (+30 points), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) &lt;15 (+20 points), GCS &lt;14 (+50 points), antiplatelet medications (+17 points), loss of consciousness (+16 points), signs of basilar skull fracture (+50 points), and headache (+20 points). Utilizing this clinical decision rule in the validation cohort, a point total ≥25 had a sensitivity and specificity of 100.0% (95% CI: 96.0–100) and 12.3% (95% CI: 10.9–13.8), respectively, for significant intracranial injury and Need for Neurosurgical Intervention.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule has the potential to reduce unnecessary CT scans in older adults, without compromising safe emergency medicine practice.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society\",\"volume\":\"72 9\",\"pages\":\"2738-2751\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jgs.19057\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jgs.19057","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前已设计出几种临床决策规则来指导头部轻微损伤患者使用头部计算机断层扫描(CT),但没有一种规则在 65 岁或以上的患者中得到验证。我们的目标是为老年人制定并验证头部损伤临床决策规则:我们对现有的急诊科(ED)连续数据集进行了二次分析,该数据集包含年龄大于 65 岁的钝性头部外伤患者。主要的预测结果是明显的颅内损伤和 CT 神经外科干预需求。在模型开发和验证过程中还考虑了次要结果,即所有损伤和所有颅内损伤。使用多变量逻辑回归确定了预测变量,并在分离样本衍生队列中开发了临床决策规则模型,然后在独立验证队列中进行了测试:在 5776 名患者中,有 233 人(4.0%)有明显的颅内损伤,另有 104 人(1.8%)符合需要神经外科干预的 CT 标准。表现最好的模型是佛罗里达老年头部创伤 CT 临床决策规则,它根据几个临床变量分配分数。如果总分达到或超过 25 分,则需要进行 CT 扫描。其中的预测因素包括通过紧急医疗服务到达(+30 分)、格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)结论:佛罗里达州老年头部创伤 CT 临床决策规则有可能减少老年人不必要的 CT 扫描,同时又不影响安全的急诊医学实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule

Background

Several clinical decision rules have been devised to guide head computed tomography (CT) use in patients with minor head injuries, but none have been validated in patients 65 years or older. We aimed to derive and validate a head injury clinical decision rule for older adults.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of an existing dataset of consecutive emergency department (ED) patients >65 years old with blunt head trauma. The main predictive outcomes were significant intracranial injury and Need for Neurosurgical Intervention on CT. The secondary outcomes also considered in the model development and validation were All Injuries and All Intracranial Injuries. Predictor variables were identified using multiple variable logistic regression, and clinical decision rule models were developed in a split-sample derivation cohort and then tested in an independent validation cohort.

Results

Of 5776 patients, 233 (4.0%) had significant intracranial injury and an additional 104 (1.8%) met CT criteria for Need for Neurosurgical Intervention. The best performing model, the Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule, assigns points based on several clinical variables. If the points totaled 25 or more, a CT scan is indicated. The included predictors were arrival via Emergency Medical Services (+30 points), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) <15 (+20 points), GCS <14 (+50 points), antiplatelet medications (+17 points), loss of consciousness (+16 points), signs of basilar skull fracture (+50 points), and headache (+20 points). Utilizing this clinical decision rule in the validation cohort, a point total ≥25 had a sensitivity and specificity of 100.0% (95% CI: 96.0–100) and 12.3% (95% CI: 10.9–13.8), respectively, for significant intracranial injury and Need for Neurosurgical Intervention.

Conclusions

The Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule has the potential to reduce unnecessary CT scans in older adults, without compromising safe emergency medicine practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
6.30%
发文量
504
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (JAGS) is the go-to journal for clinical aging research. We provide a diverse, interprofessional community of healthcare professionals with the latest insights on geriatrics education, clinical practice, and public policy—all supporting the high-quality, person-centered care essential to our well-being as we age. Since the publication of our first edition in 1953, JAGS has remained one of the oldest and most impactful journals dedicated exclusively to gerontology and geriatrics.
期刊最新文献
Notices Issue Information Cover Issue Information Author Index
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1