Young children with a minor traumatic head injury: clinical observation or CT scan?

Currently, in young children with minor traumatic head injuries (MTHI) classified as intermediate risk (IR), PECARN recommends clinical observation over computer tomography (CT) scan depending on provider comfort, although both options being possible. In this study, we describe clinicians' choice and which factors were associated with this decision. This was a planned sub-study of a prospective multicenter observational study that enrolled 1006 children younger than 18 years with MTHI who presented to six emergency departments in The Netherlands. Of those, 280 children classified as IR group fulfilling one or more minor criteria, leaving the clinician with the choice between clinical observation and a CT scan. In our cohort, 228/280 (81%) children were admitted for clinical observation, 15/280 (5.4%) received a CT scan, 6/280 (2.1%) received a CT scan and were admitted for observation, and 31/280 (11%) children were discharged from the emergency department without any intervention. Three objective factors were associated with a CT scan, namely age above 2 years, the presence of any loss of consciousness (LOC), and presentation on weekend days. CONCLUSION: In children with MTHI in an IR group, clinicians prefer clinical observation above performing a CT scan. Older age, day of presentation, and any loss of consciousness are factors associated with a CT scan. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Clinical decision rules have been developed in the management of children of different risk groups with minor traumatic head injury (MTHI). • According to the Dutch national, clinical decision rules in children under 6 years of age up to 50% of children classify as intermediate risk (IR) and clinicians may choose between clinical observation and computed tomography (CT). WHAT IS NEW: • In this IR group, clinical observation is chosen in 81% children with MTHI. • In the subgroup where clinicians performed a CT scan, children were older and presented more frequently on a weekend day, and more frequently consciousness was lost.

Multi-centre study found that strict adherence to guidelines led to computed tomography scans being overused in children with minor head injuries.

AIM: Our primary aim was to calculate the head computed tomography (CT) scan rate in children with a minor head injury (MHI) when the Dutch National guidelines were followed in clinical practice. The secondary aim was to determine the incidence of CT abnormalities and the guideline predictors associated with traumatic abnormalities. METHODS: We performed a multi-centre, prospective observational cross-sectional study in the emergency departments of six hospitals in The Netherlands between 1 April 2015 and 31 December 2016. RESULTS: Data on 1002 patients were studied and 69% of cases complied with the guidelines. The overall CT rate was 44% and the incidence of traumatic abnormal CT findings was 13%. CT scans were performed in 19% of children under two years of age, 48% of children between two and five years and 63% of children aged six years or more. Multivariate regression analysis for all age categories showed that CT abnormalities were predicted by a Glasgow Coma Scale of less than 15, suspicion of a basal skull fracture, vomiting and scalp haematomas or external lesions of the skull. CONCLUSION: Strict adherence to the Dutch national guidelines resulted in CT overuse. New guidelines are needed to safely reduce CT scan indications.