• P Ross, M F Perkal, L C Degutis, and C C Baker.
• Hershey S. Medical Center, Pennsylvania State University, Hershey.
• Conn Med. 1991 Jun 1;55(6):330-2.

AbstractWe reviewed 100 patients sustaining blunt trauma whose initial evaluation included an abdominal computed tomographic scan (CT) to assess the role of this modality in managing these patients. Indications for CT scan were suspicion of abdominal injury based on mechanism of injury (46), tenderness (22), falling hematocrit (9), hematuria (5), pain (4), and hyperamylasemia (1). Thirty-four patients had abdominal injury, and four scans identified non-traumatic pathology; 66 patients had no evidence of abdominal injury. There were no additional abdominal injuries detected during the hospitalizations. Mechanism of injury was the only indication for CT scan in 20 patients, none of whom had evidence of abdominal injury. CT scan charges for these 20 patients accounted for 5.5% of the total hospital bill ($204,070). Hospital costs would have been reduced by $11,270 if these patients had been followed clinically. Fifteen patients with soft tissue contusions and normal CT scans were hospitalized less than 72 hours. Room and other hospital charges accounted for 38.5% of the hospital bill; these are costs that would have been saved if these patients had been discharged from the emergency service. Several conclusions can be made from this study. First, abdominal CT scan is a sensitive test for abdominal injury. Secondly, patients without objective signs of abdominal injury whose other injuries warrant admission allowing further observation should be followed clinically and do not need the additional expense of abdominal CT scan. Finally, mechanism of injury alone is not an indication for CT scan.

20 keywords...

hide…