Clinical decision rules for adults with minor head injury: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND There are many clinical decision rules for adults with minor head injury, but it is unclear how they compare in terms of diagnostic accuracy. This study aimed to systematically identify clinical decision rules for adults with minor head injury and compare the estimated diagnostic accuracies for any intracranial injury and injury requiring neurosurgical intervention. METHODS Several electronic bibliographic databases covering biomedical, scientific, and gray literature were searched from inception to March 2010. At least two independent reviewers determined the eligibility of cohort studies that described a clinical decision rule to identify adults with minor head injury (Glasgow Coma Scale score, 13-15) at risk of intracranial injury or injury requiring neurosurgical intervention. RESULTS Twenty-two relevant studies were identified. Differences existed in patient selection, outcome definition, and reference standards used. Nine rules stratified patients into high- and moderate-risk categories (to identify neurosurgical or nonsurgical intracranial lesions). The Canadian Computed Tomography Head Rule (CCHR) high-risk criteria have sensitivity of 99% to 100% with specificity of 48% to 77% for injury requiring neurosurgical intervention. Other rules such as New Orleans criteria, National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study II, Neurotraumatology Committee of the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies, Scandinavian, and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network produce similar sensitivities for injury requiring neurosurgical intervention but with lower and more variable specificity values. DISCUSSION The most widely researched decision rule is the CCHR, which has consistently shown high sensitivity for identifying injury requiring neurosurgical intervention with an acceptable specificity to allow considered use of cranial computed tomography. No other decision rule has been as widely validated or demonstrated as acceptable results, but its exclusion criteria make it difficult to apply universally.

[1]  Marion Smits,et al.  External validation of the Canadian CT Head Rule and the New Orleans Criteria for CT scanning in patients with minor head injury. , 2005, JAMA.

[2]  T Ingebrigtsen,et al.  Scandinavian guidelines for initial management of minimal, mild, and moderate head injuries. The Scandinavian Neurotrauma Committee. , 2000, The Journal of trauma.

[3]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  BMC Medical Research Methodology , 2002 .

[4]  T. Mills,et al.  Indications for computed tomography in patients with minor head injury. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  C. Madden,et al.  High-yield selection criteria for cranial computed tomography after acute trauma. , 1995, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[6]  Henry A Glick,et al.  A critical comparison of clinical decision instruments for computed tomographic scanning in mild closed traumatic brain injury in adolescents and adults. , 2009, Annals of emergency medicine.

[7]  F. Lapierre.  [Guide-lines for head injured patients management in adult age. Neurosurgical Society of France]. , 1998, Neuro-Chirurgie.

[8]  R O Cummins,et al.  Recommended guidelines for uniform reporting of data from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the Utstein Style. Task Force of the American Heart Association, the European Resuscitation Council, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, and the Australian Resuscitation Council. , 1991, Annals of emergency medicine.

[9]  Mel Herbert,et al.  Developing a decision instrument to guide computed tomographic imaging of blunt head injury patients. , 2005, The Journal of trauma.

[10]  J. Wilberger,et al.  The need for head computed tomography in patients sustaining loss of consciousness after mild head injury. , 2003, The Journal of trauma.

[11]  L. Battistin,et al.  EFNS guideline on mild traumatic brain injury: report of an EFNS task force , 2002, European journal of neurology.

[12]  K. Chu,et al.  The application of North American CT scan criteria to an Australian population with minor head injury. , 2004, Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA.

[13]  Marion Smits,et al.  Predicting Intracranial Traumatic Findings on Computed Tomography in Patients with Minor Head Injury: The CHIP Prediction Rule , 2007, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[14]  Brian H Rowe,et al.  Comparison of the Canadian CT Head Rule and the New Orleans Criteria in patients with minor head injury. , 2005, JAMA.

[15]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  Sources of Variation and Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy , 2004, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[16]  R. Derlet,et al.  Failure of the Miller criteria to predict significant intracranial injury in patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 14 after minor head trauma. , 1997, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[17]  David W Wright,et al.  Clinical policy: neuroimaging and decisionmaking in adult mild traumatic brain injury in the acute setting. , 2009, Journal of emergency nursing: JEN : official publication of the Emergency Department Nurses Association.

[18]  G. Tomei,et al.  Guidelines for minor head injured patients' management in adult age. The Study Group on Head Injury of the Italian Society for Neurosurgery. , 1996, Journal of neurosurgical sciences.

[19]  W. Reinus,et al.  Practical selection criteria for noncontrast cranial computed tomography in patients with head trauma. , 1993, Annals of emergency medicine.

[20]  M. Saboori,et al.  Indications for brain CT scan in patients with minor head injury , 2006, Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery.

[21]  George A Wells,et al.  The Canadian CT Head Rule for patients with minor head injury , 2001, The Lancet.

[22]  D. Kool,et al.  Minor head injury: guidelines for the use of CT--a multicenter validation study. , 2007, Radiology.

[23]  P. Borczuk.  Predictors of Intracranial Injury in Patients With Mild Head Trauma , 1995 .

[24]  O. A. Nielsen,et al.  The role of neuroimaging in the initial management of patients with minor head injury. , 1994, Annals of emergency medicine.

[25]  S. Balbi,et al.  Management of head-injured patients in the emergency department: a practical protocol. , 1997, Surgical neurology.

[26]  Enrique Rubio,et al.  Reliability of clinical guidelines in the detection of patients at risk following mild head injury: results of a prospective study. , 2004, Journal of neurosurgery.

[27]  S. Stein.  Management of Minor Closed Head Injury , 1996 .

[28]  G. Teasdale,et al.  Defining acute mild head injury in adults: a proposal based on prognostic factors, diagnosis, and management. , 2001, Journal of neurotrauma.

[29]  S. Saadat,et al.  Prediction of intracranial computed tomography findings in patients with minor head injury by using logistic regression. , 2009, Journal of neurosurgery.

[30]  R. Derlet,et al.  Utilizing clinical factors to reduce head CT scan ordering for minor head trauma patients. , 1997, The Journal of emergency medicine.

[31]  W. Murshid.  Management of Minor Head Injuries: Admission Criteria, Radiological Evaluation and Treatment of Complications , 1998, Acta Neurochirurgica.

[32]  G. Marchesini,et al.  Clinical performance of NICE recommendations versus NCWFNS proposal in patients with mild head injury. , 2005, Journal of neurotrauma.

[33]  K. Wada,et al.  Indications for computed tomography in patients with mild head injury. , 2007, Neurologia medico-chirurgica.