Cargando…

Assessment of cervical spine CT scans by emergency physicians: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study in a non‐clinical setting

OBJECTIVES: To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of assessing injuries on cervical spine computed tomography (CT) scans by trained emergency physicians and radiologists, both in a non‐clinical setting. METHODS: In this comparative diagnostic accuracy study, 411 cervical spine CT scans, o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van der Kolk, Brigitta (Britt) Y.M., van den Wittenboer, Gabriella (Gaby) J., Warringa, Niek, Nijholt, Ingrid M., van Hasselt, Boudewijn A.A.M., Buijteweg, Lonneke N., Schep, Niels W.L., Maas, Mario, Boomsma, Martijn F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8776040/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35079729
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12609
_version_ 1784636734435229696
author van der Kolk, Brigitta (Britt) Y.M.
van den Wittenboer, Gabriella (Gaby) J.
Warringa, Niek
Nijholt, Ingrid M.
van Hasselt, Boudewijn A.A.M.
Buijteweg, Lonneke N.
Schep, Niels W.L.
Maas, Mario
Boomsma, Martijn F.
author_facet van der Kolk, Brigitta (Britt) Y.M.
van den Wittenboer, Gabriella (Gaby) J.
Warringa, Niek
Nijholt, Ingrid M.
van Hasselt, Boudewijn A.A.M.
Buijteweg, Lonneke N.
Schep, Niels W.L.
Maas, Mario
Boomsma, Martijn F.
author_sort van der Kolk, Brigitta (Britt) Y.M.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of assessing injuries on cervical spine computed tomography (CT) scans by trained emergency physicians and radiologists, both in a non‐clinical setting. METHODS: In this comparative diagnostic accuracy study, 411 cervical spine CT scans, of which 120 contained injuries (fractures and/or dislocations), were divided into 8 subsets. Eight emergency physicians received focused training and assessed 1 subset each before and after training. Four radiologists assessed 2 subsets each. Diagnostic accuracy between both groups was compared. The reference standard used was a multiverified data set, assessed by radiologists, neurosurgeons, and emergency physicians. The neurosurgeons also classified whether an "injury in need of stabilizing therapy" (IST) was present. RESULTS: Posttraining, the emergency physicians demonstrated increased sensitivity and specificity for identifying cervical spine injuries compared to pretraining: sensitivity 88% (95% confidence interval [CI] 80% to 93%) versus 80% (95% CI 72% to 87%) and specificity 89% (95% CI 85% to 93%) versus 86% (95% CI 81% to 89%). When comparing the trained emergency physicians to the group of radiologists, no difference in sensitivity was found, 88% (95% CI 80% to 83%); however, the radiologists showed a significantly higher specificity (P < 0.01): 99% (95% CI 96% to 100%). In the 12% (15 scans) with missed injuries, emergency physicians missed more ISTs than radiologists, 6 versus 4 scans; however, this difference was not significant (P = 0.45). CONCLUSION: After focused training and in a non‐clinical setting, no significant difference was found between emergency physicians and radiologists in ruling out cervical spine injuries; however, the radiologists achieved a significantly higher specificity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8776040
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87760402022-01-24 Assessment of cervical spine CT scans by emergency physicians: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study in a non‐clinical setting van der Kolk, Brigitta (Britt) Y.M. van den Wittenboer, Gabriella (Gaby) J. Warringa, Niek Nijholt, Ingrid M. van Hasselt, Boudewijn A.A.M. Buijteweg, Lonneke N. Schep, Niels W.L. Maas, Mario Boomsma, Martijn F. J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open Imaging OBJECTIVES: To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of assessing injuries on cervical spine computed tomography (CT) scans by trained emergency physicians and radiologists, both in a non‐clinical setting. METHODS: In this comparative diagnostic accuracy study, 411 cervical spine CT scans, of which 120 contained injuries (fractures and/or dislocations), were divided into 8 subsets. Eight emergency physicians received focused training and assessed 1 subset each before and after training. Four radiologists assessed 2 subsets each. Diagnostic accuracy between both groups was compared. The reference standard used was a multiverified data set, assessed by radiologists, neurosurgeons, and emergency physicians. The neurosurgeons also classified whether an "injury in need of stabilizing therapy" (IST) was present. RESULTS: Posttraining, the emergency physicians demonstrated increased sensitivity and specificity for identifying cervical spine injuries compared to pretraining: sensitivity 88% (95% confidence interval [CI] 80% to 93%) versus 80% (95% CI 72% to 87%) and specificity 89% (95% CI 85% to 93%) versus 86% (95% CI 81% to 89%). When comparing the trained emergency physicians to the group of radiologists, no difference in sensitivity was found, 88% (95% CI 80% to 83%); however, the radiologists showed a significantly higher specificity (P < 0.01): 99% (95% CI 96% to 100%). In the 12% (15 scans) with missed injuries, emergency physicians missed more ISTs than radiologists, 6 versus 4 scans; however, this difference was not significant (P = 0.45). CONCLUSION: After focused training and in a non‐clinical setting, no significant difference was found between emergency physicians and radiologists in ruling out cervical spine injuries; however, the radiologists achieved a significantly higher specificity. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8776040/ /pubmed/35079729 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12609 Text en © 2022 The Authors. JACEP Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Emergency Physicians https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Imaging
van der Kolk, Brigitta (Britt) Y.M.
van den Wittenboer, Gabriella (Gaby) J.
Warringa, Niek
Nijholt, Ingrid M.
van Hasselt, Boudewijn A.A.M.
Buijteweg, Lonneke N.
Schep, Niels W.L.
Maas, Mario
Boomsma, Martijn F.
Assessment of cervical spine CT scans by emergency physicians: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study in a non‐clinical setting
title Assessment of cervical spine CT scans by emergency physicians: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study in a non‐clinical setting
title_full Assessment of cervical spine CT scans by emergency physicians: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study in a non‐clinical setting
title_fullStr Assessment of cervical spine CT scans by emergency physicians: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study in a non‐clinical setting
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of cervical spine CT scans by emergency physicians: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study in a non‐clinical setting
title_short Assessment of cervical spine CT scans by emergency physicians: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study in a non‐clinical setting
title_sort assessment of cervical spine ct scans by emergency physicians: a comparative diagnostic accuracy study in a non‐clinical setting
topic Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8776040/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35079729
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12609
work_keys_str_mv AT vanderkolkbrigittabrittym assessmentofcervicalspinectscansbyemergencyphysiciansacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudyinanonclinicalsetting
AT vandenwittenboergabriellagabyj assessmentofcervicalspinectscansbyemergencyphysiciansacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudyinanonclinicalsetting
AT warringaniek assessmentofcervicalspinectscansbyemergencyphysiciansacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudyinanonclinicalsetting
AT nijholtingridm assessmentofcervicalspinectscansbyemergencyphysiciansacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudyinanonclinicalsetting
AT vanhasseltboudewijnaam assessmentofcervicalspinectscansbyemergencyphysiciansacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudyinanonclinicalsetting
AT buijteweglonneken assessmentofcervicalspinectscansbyemergencyphysiciansacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudyinanonclinicalsetting
AT schepnielswl assessmentofcervicalspinectscansbyemergencyphysiciansacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudyinanonclinicalsetting
AT maasmario assessmentofcervicalspinectscansbyemergencyphysiciansacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudyinanonclinicalsetting
AT boomsmamartijnf assessmentofcervicalspinectscansbyemergencyphysiciansacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudyinanonclinicalsetting