skip to main content
Language:
Search Limited to: Search Limited to: Resource type Show Results with: Show Results with: Search type Index

P037: Adherence to the Canadian CT Head Rule in a Nova Scotian emergency and trauma centre

Canadian journal of emergency medicine, 2020-05, Vol.22 (S1), p.S77-S78 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2020 ;ISSN: 1481-8035 ;EISSN: 1481-8043 ;DOI: 10.1017/cem.2020.244

Full text available

Citations Cited by
  • Title:
    P037: Adherence to the Canadian CT Head Rule in a Nova Scotian emergency and trauma centre
  • Author: LeBlanc, C. ; Sampalli, A. ; Campbell, S.
  • Subjects: Audits ; Trauma
  • Is Part Of: Canadian journal of emergency medicine, 2020-05, Vol.22 (S1), p.S77-S78
  • Description: Introduction: Choosing Wisely Nova Scotia (CWNS), an affiliate of Choosing Wisely Canada™ (CWC), aims to address unnecessary care and testing through literature-informed lists developed by various disciplines. CWC has identified unnecessary head CTs among the top five interventions to question in the Emergency Department (ED). Zyluk (2015) determined the Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR) as the most effective clinical decision rule in adults with minor head injuries. To better understand the current status of CCHR use in Nova Scotia, we conducted a retrospective audit of patient charts at the Charles V. Keating Emergency and Trauma Center, in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Methods: Our mixed methods design included a literature review, retrospective chart audit, and a qualitative audit-feedback component with participating physicians. The chart audit applied the guidelines for adherence to the CCHR and reported on the level of compliance within the ED. Analysis of qualitative data is included here, in parallel with in-depth to contextualize findings from the audit. Results: 302 charts of patients having presented to the surveyed site were retrospectively reviewed. Of the 37 cases where a CT head was indicated as per the CCHR, a CT was ordered 32 (86.5%) times. Of the 176 cases where a CT head was not indicated, a CT was not ordered 155 (88.1%) times. Therefore, the CCHR was followed in 187 (87.8%) of the total 213 cases where the CCHR should be applied. Conclusion: Our study reveals adherence to the CCHR in 87.8% of cases at this ED. Identifying contextual factors that facilitate or hinder the application of CCHR in practice is critical for reducing unnecessary CTs. This work has been presented to the physician group to gain physician engagement and to elucidate enablers and barriers to guideline adherence. In light of the frequency of CT heads ordered EDs, even a small reduction would be impactful.
  • Publisher: Pickering: Springer Nature B.V
  • Language: English
  • Identifier: ISSN: 1481-8035
    EISSN: 1481-8043
    DOI: 10.1017/cem.2020.244
  • Source: Alma/SFX Local Collection
    ProQuest Central
Back to results list
INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY (84-028) 37 755 057 Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn

Copyright © 2017 INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait