Accuracy of PECARN, CATCH, and CHALICE head injury decision rules in children: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision rules can help to determine the need for CT imaging in children with head injuries. We aimed to validate three clinical decision rules (PECARN, CATCH, and CHALICE) in a large sample of children. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, we included children and adolescents (aged <18 years) with head injuries of any severity who presented to the emergency departments of ten Australian and New Zealand hospitals. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of PECARN (stratified into children aged <2 years and ≥2 years), CATCH, and CHALICE in predicting each rule-specific outcome measure (clinically important traumatic brain injury [TBI], need for neurological intervention, and clinically significant intracranial injury, respectively). For each calculation we used rule-specific predictor variables in populations that satisfied inclusion and exclusion criteria for each rule (validation cohort). In a secondary analysis, we compiled a comparison cohort of patients with mild head injuries (Glasgow Coma Scale score 13-15) and calculated accuracy using rule-specific predictor variables for the standardised outcome of clinically important TBI. This study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12614000463673. FINDINGS: Between April 11, 2011, and Nov 30, 2014, we analysed 20 137 children and adolescents attending with head injuries. CTs were obtained for 2106 (10%) patients, 4544 (23%) were admitted, 83 (<1%) underwent neurosurgery, and 15 (<1%) died. PECARN was applicable for 4011 (75%) of 5374 patients younger than 2 years and 11 152 (76%) of 14 763 patients aged 2 years and older. CATCH was applicable for 4957 (25%) patients and CHALICE for 20 029 (99%). The highest point validation sensitivities were shown for PECARN in children younger than 2 years (100·0%, 95% CI 90·7-100·0; 38 patients identified of 38 with outcome [38/38]) and PECARN in children 2 years and older (99·0%, 94·4-100·0; 97/98), followed by CATCH (high-risk predictors only; 95·2%; 76·2-99·9; 20/21; medium-risk and high-risk predictors 88·7%; 82·2-93·4; 125/141) and CHALICE (92·3%, 89·2-94·7; 370/401). In the comparison cohort of 18 913 patients with mild injuries, sensitivities for clinically important TBI were similar. Negative predictive values in both analyses were higher than 99% for all rules. INTERPRETATION: The sensitivities of three clinical decision rules for head injuries in children were high when used as designed. The findings are an important starting point for clinicians considering the introduction of one of the rules. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council, Emergency Medicine Foundation, Perpetual Philanthropic Services, WA Health Targeted Research Funds, Townsville Hospital Private Practice Fund, Auckland Medical Research Foundation, A + Trust.

Rheumatic Heart Disease-Attributable Mortality at Ages 5-69 Years in Fiji: A Five-Year, National, Population-Based Record-Linkage Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is considered a major public health problem in developing countries, although scarce data are available to substantiate this. Here we quantify mortality from RHD in Fiji during 2008-2012 in people aged 5-69 years. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using 1,773,999 records derived from multiple sources of routine clinical and administrative data, we used probabilistic record-linkage to define a cohort of 2,619 persons diagnosed with RHD, observed for all-cause mortality over 11,538 person-years. Using relative survival methods, we estimated there were 378 RHD-attributable deaths, almost half of which occurred before age 40 years. Using census data as the denominator, we calculated there were 9.9 deaths (95% CI 9.8-10.0) and 331 years of life-lost (YLL, 95% CI 330.4-331.5) due to RHD per 100,000 person-years, standardised to the portion of the WHO World Standard Population aged 0-69 years. Valuing life using Fiji's per-capita gross domestic product, we estimated these deaths cost United States Dollar $6,077,431 annually. Compared to vital registration data for 2011-2012, we calculated there were 1.6-times more RHD-attributable deaths than the number reported, and found our estimate of RHD mortality exceeded all but the five leading reported causes of premature death, based on collapsed underlying cause-of-death diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Rheumatic heart disease is a leading cause of premature death as well as an important economic burden in this setting. Age-standardised death rates are more than twice those reported in current global estimates. Linkage of routine data provides an efficient tool to better define the epidemiology of neglected diseases.

A prospective observational study to assess the diagnostic accuracy of clinical decision rules for children presenting to emergency departments after head injuries (protocol): the Australasian Paediatric Head Injury Rules Study (APHIRST).

BACKGROUND: Head injuries in children are responsible for a large number of emergency department visits. Failure to identify a clinically significant intracranial injury in a timely fashion may result in long term neurodisability and death. Whilst cranial computed tomography (CT) provides rapid and definitive identification of intracranial injuries, it is resource intensive and associated with radiation induced cancer. Evidence based head injury clinical decision rules have been derived to aid physicians in identifying patients at risk of having a clinically significant intracranial injury. Three rules have been identified as being of high quality and accuracy: the Canadian Assessment of Tomography for Childhood Head Injury (CATCH) from Canada, the Children's Head Injury Algorithm for the Prediction of Important Clinical Events (CHALICE) from the UK, and the prediction rule for the identification of children at very low risk of clinically important traumatic brain injury developed by the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) from the USA. This study aims to prospectively validate and compare the performance accuracy of these three clinical decision rules when applied outside the derivation setting. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a prospective observational study of children aged 0 to less than 18 years presenting to 10 emergency departments within the Paediatric Research in Emergency Departments International Collaborative (PREDICT) research network in Australia and New Zealand after head injuries of any severity. Predictor variables identified in CATCH, CHALICE and PECARN clinical decision rules will be collected. Patients will be managed as per the treating clinicians at the participating hospitals. All patients not undergoing cranial CT will receive a follow up call 14 to 90 days after the injury. Outcome data collected will include results of cranial CTs (if performed) and details of admission, intubation, neurosurgery and death. The performance accuracy of each of the rules will be assessed using rule specific outcomes and inclusion and exclusion criteria. DISCUSSION: This study will allow the simultaneous comparative application and validation of three major paediatric head injury clinical decision rules outside their derivation setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR)- ACTRN12614000463673 (registered 2 May 2014).

Applicability of the CATCH, CHALICE and PECARN paediatric head injury clinical decision rules: pilot data from a single Australian centre.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision rules (CDRs) for paediatric head injury (HI) exist to identify children at risk of traumatic brain injury. Those of the highest quality are the Canadian assessment of tomography for childhood head injury (CATCH), Children's head injury algorithm for the prediction of important clinical events (CHALICE) and Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) CDRs. They target different cohorts of children with HI and have not been compared in the same setting. We set out to quantify the proportion of children with HI to which each CDR was applicable. METHODS: Consecutive children presenting to an Australian paediatric Emergency Department with HIs were enrolled. Published inclusion/exclusion criteria and predictor variables from the CDRs were collected prospectively. Using these we determined the frequency with which each CDR was applicable. RESULTS: 1012 patients (69.9%) were enrolled with 949 available for analysis. Mean age was 6.8 years (21% <2 years). 95% had initial Glasgow Coma Scale 15. CT rate was 12.8% and neurosurgery rate was 0.7%. No CDR was applicable to all patients. CHALICE was applicable to the most (97%, 95% CI 96% to 98%) and CATCH to the fewest (26%, 95% CI 24% to 29%). PECARN was applicable to 76% (95% CI 70% to 82%) aged <2 years, and 74% (95% CI 71% to 77%) aged 2-<18 years. CONCLUSIONS: Each CDR is applicable to a different proportion of children with HI. This makes a direct comparison of the CDRs difficult. Prior to selection of any for implementation they should undergo validation outside the derivation setting coupled with an analysis of their performance accuracy, usability and cost effectiveness.