• Matthew L Uriell, Jason W Allen, Brendan P Lovasik, Marc D Benayoun, Robert M Spandorfer, and Chad A Holder.
• Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, United States; Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States. Electronic address: muriell@emory.edu.
• Injury. 2017 Jan 1; 48 (1): 133-136.

BackgroundComputed tomography (CT) of the cervical spine (C-spine) is routinely ordered for low-impact, non-penetrating or "simple" assault at our institution and others. Common clinical decision tools for C-spine imaging in the setting of trauma include the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) and the Canadian Cervical Spine Rule for Radiography (CCR). While NEXUS and CCR have served to decrease the amount of unnecessary imaging of the C-spine, overutilization of CT is still of concern.MethodsA retrospective, cross-sectional study was performed of the electronic medical record (EMR) database at an urban, Level I Trauma Center over a 6-month period for patients receiving a C-spine CT. The primary outcome of interest was prevalence of cervical spine fracture. Secondary outcomes of interest included appropriateness of C-spine imaging after retrospective application of NEXUS and CCR. The hypothesis was that fracture rates within this patient population would be extremely low.ResultsNo C-spine fractures were identified in the 460 patients who met inclusion criteria. Approximately 29% of patients did not warrant imaging by CCR, and 25% by NEXUS. Of note, approximately 44% of patients were indeterminate for whether imaging was warranted by CCR, with the most common reason being lack of assessment for active neck rotation.ConclusionsCervical spine CT is overutilized in the setting of simple assault, despite established clinical decision rules. With no fractures identified regardless of other factors, the likelihood that a CT of the cervical spine will identify clinically significant findings in the setting of "simple" assault is extremely low, approaching zero. At minimum, adherence to CCR and NEXUS within this patient population would serve to reduce both imaging costs and population radiation dose exposure.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

41 keywords...

hide…