SENSITIVITY OF THE OTTAWA RULES

被引:52
作者
LUCCHESI, GM
JACKSON, RE
PEACOCK, WF
CERASANI, C
SWOR, RA
机构
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0196-0644(95)70229-6
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Study objective: To validate criteria predicting ankle and midfoot fractures with 100% sensitivity. Design: Prospective validation study Setting: A 929-bed community teaching hospital with an annual census of 76,488 ED visits. Participants: Convenience sample of patients older than 18 years with acute ankle or midfoot injury. Interventions: Radiography was performed in each patient received after pertinent history and physical examination findings were recorded. Results: Five hundred seventy radiographs were obtained in 484 patients. Four hundred twenty-one were of the ankle, and 149 were of the foot. There were 93 ankle fractures and 29 midfoot fractures, giving a fracture yield of 22.1% for ankle films and 19.5% for foot films. Decision rules had sensitivity of 94.6% and specificity of 15.5% for ankle fractures and sensitivity of 93.1% and specificity of 11.5% for midfoot fractures. Prospective criteria failed to predict fracture in five of the ankle group and two of the midfoot group. Physicians predicting fracture solely on the basis of clinical suspicion had a sensitivity of 69% in ankle injuries and 76% in midfoot injuries. Conclusion: We were unable to validate with 100% sensitivity the Ottawa rules predicting ankle and midfoot fractures. However, the Ottawa rules were more sensitive than clinical suspicion alone.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 5
页数:5
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]  
Sujitkumar, Hadfield, Yates, Et al., An analysis of 2000 ankle injuries, Ann Emerg Med, 3, pp. 101-106, (1986)
[2]  
Dunlop, Beattie, White, Et al., Guidelines for selective radiological assessment of inversion ankle injuries, BMJ, 293, pp. 603-605, (1986)
[3]  
Auletta, Conway, Hayes, Et al., Indications for radiography in patients with acute ankle injury: Role of physical exam, AJR Am J Roentgenol, 157, pp. 789-791, (1991)
[4]  
Vargish, Clarke, Young, Et al., The ankle injury: Indications for the selective use of x-rays, Br J Accident Surg, 14, pp. 507-512, (1982)
[5]  
Stiell, Greenberg, McKnight, Et al., A study to develop clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries, Annals of Emergency Medicine, 21, pp. 55-61, (1992)
[6]  
Stiell, Greenberg, McKnight, Et al., Decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries: Refinement and prospective validation, JAMA, 269, pp. 1127-1132, (1993)
[7]  
Pigman, Klug, Sanford, Et al., Evaluation of the Ottawa clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle and midfoot injuries in the emergency department: An independent site assessment, Ann Emerg Med, 24, pp. 41-45, (1994)
[8]  
Kerr, Kelly, Grant, Et al., Failed validation of a clinical decision rule for a use of radiography in acute ankle injury, NZ Med J, 107, pp. 294-295, (1994)
[9]  
Charlson, Ales, Simon, Et al., Why predictive indices perform less well in validation studies, Arch Intern Med, 147, pp. 2155-2161, (1987)
[10]  
Gratton, Salomone, Watson, Et al., Clinically significant radiograph misinterpretations at an emergency medicine residency program, Ann Emerg Med, 19, pp. 497-502, (1990)