Russell, Katie

Background In pediatric patients presenting after blunt trauma, the incidence of clinically significant cervical spine injury (CSI) is approximately 1%. Although multidetector CT (MDCT) is widely accepted for cervical spine clearance in adults, its utility in children remains uncertain. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity of MDCT in identifying clinically significant CSI in pediatric patients, stratified by age groups: adolescents (12 years to 17 years) and children (0 years to 11 years). Methods We designed a national, multicenter, prospective observational study to assess the diagnostic performance of MDCT in detecting clinically significant CSI in pediatric trauma patients. Data are being collected from participating centers on imaging findings, clinical outcomes, and the presence of confirmed CSIs after blunt trauma. The analysis plan includes stratification by age group and calculation of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of MDCT for CSI. Results This abstract outlines the background, methodology, and analytical framework of the study. Data collection and analysis are ongoing. This study represents the largest known cohort of pediatric patients undergoing cervical spine imaging after blunt trauma and is the first prospective study of its kind focused exclusively on this population. Conclusions This study will provide critical data to inform guidelines for pediatric cervical spine clearance after blunt trauma. By evaluating the sensitivity of MDCT in detecting clinically significant CSI, the findings aim to support evidence-based imaging strategies and improve the safety and efficiency of pediatric trauma care.

Objectives Cervical spine (c-spine) X-ray (XR) remains an important tool for pediatric trauma patients. XR is a low radiation alternative to multidetector CT (MDCT). Our primary aims were to analyze the sensitivity of a negative c-spine XR and to analyze what factors lead to additional imaging after a negative c-spine XR. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a level 1 pediatric trauma center from 2012 to 2021. We compared the group with negative c-spine XR and no additional imaging to the group with negative c-spine XR followed by additional c-spine MDCT and/or MRI. Results There were 2,081 negative XRs and 1,974 (95%) had their c-spines cleared without additional imaging. No patient required an operation for a clinically significant c-spine injury in this group, and we consider this no missed injuries. The remaining 108 patients had additional c-spine imaging after negative c-spine XR for c-spine clearance (24 MDCT, 76 MRI, 8 MDCT and MRI). Indications for additional c-spine imaging were pain (48.1%), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score ≤14 (43.5%), and paresthesia (8.3%). Patients who received additional imaging were more likely to have a GCS score ≤12 (25.4% vs 4.1%), Injury Severity Score >15 (21.9% vs 8.1%), Level 1 Trauma activation (21% vs 5%), Abbreviated Injury Scale head score of 4 or 5 (29% vs 5%), be intubated (30% vs 2%), and have non-accidental trauma as their mechanism of injury (20% vs 1%) (p value<0.0001, for all). Five patients who received additional imaging were treated with a cervical collar, but no operative intervention. Conclusions In this cohort, screening XR had a sensitivity of 100% for clinically significant c-spine injuries. GCS was the most significant predictor of obtaining additional imaging. A negative XR combined with a normal physical examination in an evaluable pediatric patient is a safe way of clearing the c-spine. Level of evidence Study contains level III evidence.

Objective: This study aims to determine if outpatient opioid prescriptions are associated with future SUD diagnoses and overdose in injured adolescents 5 years following hospital discharge. Summary of Background Data: Approximately, 1 in 8 adolescents are diagnosed with an SUD and 1 in 10 experience an overdose in the 5 years following injury. State laws have become more restrictive on opioid prescribing by acute care providers for treating pain, however, prescriptions from other outpatient providers are still often obtained. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients ages 12–18 admitted to 2 level I trauma centers. Demographic and clinical data contained in trauma registries were linked to a regional database containing 5 years of electronic health records and prescription data. Regression models assessed whether number of outpatient opioid prescription fills after discharge at different time points in recovery were associated with a new SUD diagnosis or overdose, while controlling for demographic and injury characteristics, and depression and posttraumatic stress disorder diagnoses. Results: We linked 669 patients (90.9%) from trauma registries to a regional health information exchange database. Each prescription opioid refill in the first 3 months after discharge increased the likelihood of new SUD diagnoses by 55% (odds ratio: 1.55, confidence interval: 1.04–2.32). Odds of overdose increased with ongoing opioid use over 2–4 years post-discharge (P = 0.016–0.025). Conclusions: Short-term outpatient opioid prescribing over the first few months of recovery had the largest effect on developing an SUD, while long-term prescription use over multiple years was associated with a future overdose.