Cargando…
The value of clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic fractures in blunt trauma patients: a brief review
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the value of a pelvic X-ray compared to clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic ring fractures, using computed tomography (CT) as the gold standard, in alert [Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) ≥ 13] adult blunt trauma patients in the emergency room. METHODS: A systematic l...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer-Verlag
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3151399/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21949543 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-011-0076-7 |
_version_ | 1782209613838417920 |
---|---|
author | den Boer, T. A. W. Geurts, M. van Hulsteijn, L. T. Mubarak, A. Slingerland, J. Zwart, B. van der Heijden, G. J. M. G. Blokhuis, T. J. |
author_facet | den Boer, T. A. W. Geurts, M. van Hulsteijn, L. T. Mubarak, A. Slingerland, J. Zwart, B. van der Heijden, G. J. M. G. Blokhuis, T. J. |
author_sort | den Boer, T. A. W. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the value of a pelvic X-ray compared to clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic ring fractures, using computed tomography (CT) as the gold standard, in alert [Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) ≥ 13] adult blunt trauma patients in the emergency room. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and Embase. The results were screened on their titles and abstracts using in- and exclusion criteria. Subsequently, the selected articles were critically appraised for their relevance and validity. RESULTS: Two studies investigating the diagnostic value of clinical examination and pelvic X-ray compared to CT were identified. Both studies demonstrate higher negative predictive values for clinical examination [0.99 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98–1.0) and 1.0 (95% CI 0.99–1.0)] compared to the negative predictive values of pelvic X-ray [0.98 (95% CI 0.93–0.99) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.99–1.0)]. The positive predictive values for clinical examination were low [0.18 (95% CI 0.16–0.23) and 0.35 (95% CI 0.30–0.42)] compared to pelvic X-ray [0.97 (95% CI 0.96–0.98) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.90–0.99)]. CONCLUSIONS: In alert blunt trauma patients, pelvic X-ray only has additional diagnostic value for the detection of pelvic ring fractures if the clinical examination is positive. Pelvic X-ray should not be performed if the clinical examination is negative. In this manner, the expenditure of time, costs, and radiation are optimized. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3151399 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Springer-Verlag |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-31513992011-09-21 The value of clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic fractures in blunt trauma patients: a brief review den Boer, T. A. W. Geurts, M. van Hulsteijn, L. T. Mubarak, A. Slingerland, J. Zwart, B. van der Heijden, G. J. M. G. Blokhuis, T. J. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Review Article PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the value of a pelvic X-ray compared to clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic ring fractures, using computed tomography (CT) as the gold standard, in alert [Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) ≥ 13] adult blunt trauma patients in the emergency room. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and Embase. The results were screened on their titles and abstracts using in- and exclusion criteria. Subsequently, the selected articles were critically appraised for their relevance and validity. RESULTS: Two studies investigating the diagnostic value of clinical examination and pelvic X-ray compared to CT were identified. Both studies demonstrate higher negative predictive values for clinical examination [0.99 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98–1.0) and 1.0 (95% CI 0.99–1.0)] compared to the negative predictive values of pelvic X-ray [0.98 (95% CI 0.93–0.99) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.99–1.0)]. The positive predictive values for clinical examination were low [0.18 (95% CI 0.16–0.23) and 0.35 (95% CI 0.30–0.42)] compared to pelvic X-ray [0.97 (95% CI 0.96–0.98) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.90–0.99)]. CONCLUSIONS: In alert blunt trauma patients, pelvic X-ray only has additional diagnostic value for the detection of pelvic ring fractures if the clinical examination is positive. Pelvic X-ray should not be performed if the clinical examination is negative. In this manner, the expenditure of time, costs, and radiation are optimized. Springer-Verlag 2011-01-26 2011 /pmc/articles/PMC3151399/ /pubmed/21949543 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-011-0076-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2011 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Review Article den Boer, T. A. W. Geurts, M. van Hulsteijn, L. T. Mubarak, A. Slingerland, J. Zwart, B. van der Heijden, G. J. M. G. Blokhuis, T. J. The value of clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic fractures in blunt trauma patients: a brief review |
title | The value of clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic fractures in blunt trauma patients: a brief review |
title_full | The value of clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic fractures in blunt trauma patients: a brief review |
title_fullStr | The value of clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic fractures in blunt trauma patients: a brief review |
title_full_unstemmed | The value of clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic fractures in blunt trauma patients: a brief review |
title_short | The value of clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic fractures in blunt trauma patients: a brief review |
title_sort | value of clinical examination in diagnosing pelvic fractures in blunt trauma patients: a brief review |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3151399/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21949543 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-011-0076-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT denboertaw thevalueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT geurtsm thevalueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT vanhulsteijnlt thevalueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT mubaraka thevalueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT slingerlandj thevalueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT zwartb thevalueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT vanderheijdengjmg thevalueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT blokhuistj thevalueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT denboertaw valueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT geurtsm valueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT vanhulsteijnlt valueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT mubaraka valueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT slingerlandj valueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT zwartb valueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT vanderheijdengjmg valueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview AT blokhuistj valueofclinicalexaminationindiagnosingpelvicfracturesinblunttraumapatientsabriefreview |