No registrations found.
ID
Source
Brief title
Health condition
wrist, trauma, distal radius, ulna, decision rule, implementation
pols, trauma, distale radius, ulna, beslisregel, implementatie
Sponsors and support
Intervention
Outcome measures
Primary outcome
The number of requested radiographs in children with acute trauma of the wrist after implementation of the AWR.
Secondary outcome
- The number of clinically relevant missed fractures of the distal radius and distal ulna in children after implementation of the APWR
- The reduction of overall lenght of stay at the ED
- Physician compliance with the APWR
- Cost analysis of the APWR
Background summary
In most hospitals, patients with wrist trauma are routinely referred for radiography of the wrist. However, only half of these patients have a fracture of the wrist. Currently, no clinical guidelines are imbedded in daily practice on Emergency Departments (ED) to decide if a wrist radiograph is necessary. This may result in unnecessary radiographs and therefore increased time spent at the ED, increased workload, and additional healthcare costs. Encouraged by the theoretical overuse of radiological resources due to the lack of clinical guidelines a clinical decision rule for both children and adults has been develop: the Amsterdam (Pediatric) Wrist Rules. The AWR and APWR have been externally validated and recently also implemented at the ED by emergency physicians. . However, in the recently finished implementation study, the EDs had to change their workflow because patients were first seen by the ED physician and not the triage nurse. Therefore, the aim of the current study is to evaluate the effect of the implementation of the Amsterdam Wrist Rules by ED triage nurses and to evaluate if this leads to the same reduction in wrist radiographs.
Study objective
With implementation of the AWR and APWR by the ED triage nurse we expect a reduction in the total number of radiographs requested, without missing any clinical relevant fractures. We also expect a reduction in overall waiting times at the ED and cost savings.
Study design
Outcomes will be evaluated at the end of the inclusion period.
Intervention
Use of the AWR and APWR
Marjolein A.M Mulders
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
+31628243430
m.a.mulders@amc.nl
Marjolein A.M Mulders
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
+31628243430
m.a.mulders@amc.nl
Inclusion criteria
All consecutive patients from 3 years presenting with an acute trauma of the wrist at the Emergency Department.
Exclusion criteria
- The injury occurred more than 72 hours previous to the presentation at the Emergency Department
- Patients who sustained multiple injuries with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) more than 15
- Patients whose X-rays were requested previous to their visit to the Emergency Department (for example by their general practitioner)
- A wrist fracture in the past 3 months
- Patients with an unreliable examination (e.g. intoxicated patients)
Design
Recruitment
IPD sharing statement
Followed up by the following (possibly more current) registration
No registrations found.
Other (possibly less up-to-date) registrations in this register
No registrations found.
In other registers
Register | ID |
---|---|
NTR-new | NL6464 |
NTR-old | NTR6642 |
Other | METC van het Academisch Medisch Centrum Amsterdam : W17_220 # 17.259 |