Distracting injury defined: does an isolated hip fracture constitute a distracting injury for clearance of the cervical spine?

Objectives As the population within the USA ages, the number of hip fractures seen yearly in the emergency department is expected to rise. According to the NEXUS criteria, many of these patients receive computerized tomographic scan (CT) evaluation of the cervical spine because a hip fracture may co...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Emergency radiology 2018-02, Vol.25 (1), p.35-39
Main Authors: Lindborg, Ryan, Jambhekar, Amani, Chan, Vincent, Laskey, Daniel, Rucinski, James, Fahoum, Bashar
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Computed tomography
Criteria
Demographics
Emergency medical services
Emergency Medicine
Fractures
Hip joint
Imaging
Injury prevention
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Older people
Original Article
Patients
Radiography
Radiology
Spine
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objectives As the population within the USA ages, the number of hip fractures seen yearly in the emergency department is expected to rise. According to the NEXUS criteria, many of these patients receive computerized tomographic scan (CT) evaluation of the cervical spine because a hip fracture may constitute a distracting injury. The objective of this study is to determine if an isolated hip fracture constitutes a distracting injury which requires imaging of the cervical spine. Methods Data were prospectively collected on 158 trauma patients with isolated hip fractures between April 1, 2015 and March 9, 2016. Patient demographics were analyzed and compared to the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS). Results Patients with isolated hip fractures were predominantly elderly, on average 78.6 +/− 15.9 years old, and 94.3% of these injuries occurred after a fall from standing. Only one patient also had a cervical spine fracture which was not clinically significant. When compared to the established rate of cervical spine injury of 2.4%, the absolute risk reduction (ARR) was 0.35% (95% CI, − 1.06 to 1.75%) and the number needed to treat (NNT) was 290. Conclusion In the case of an elderly patient with an isolated hip fracture and no cervical midline tenderness, cervical spine imaging may be reserved for those who have other NEXUS criteria for further workup.
ISSN:1070-3004
1438-1435
DOI:10.1007/s10140-017-1555-x