SOFTLY: Comparison of outcomes of rigid versus soft collar during emergency department investigation for potential cervical spine injury in low-risk blunt trauma patients – A pilot study

Objective

Blunt trauma patients with potential cervical spine injury are traditionally immobilised in rigid collars. Recently, this has been challenged. The present study's objective was comparison of the rate of patient-oriented adverse events in stable, alert, low-risk patients with potential cervical spine injuries immobilised in rigid versus soft collars.

Methods

Unblinded, prospective quasi-randomised clinical trial of neurologically intact, adult, blunt trauma patients assessed as having potential cervical spine injury. Patients were randomised to collar type. All other aspects of care were unchanged. Primary outcome was patient-reported discomfort related to neck immobilisation by collar type. Secondary outcomes included adverse neurological events, agitation and clinically important cervical spine injuries (clinical trial registration number: ACTRN12621000286842).

Results

A total of 137 patients were enrolled: 59 patients allocated to a rigid collar and 78 to a soft collar. Most injuries were from a fall <1 m (54%) or a motor vehicle crash (21.9%). Median neck pain score of collar immobilisation was lower in the soft collar group (3.0 [interquartile range 0–6.1] vs 6.0 [interquartile range 3–8.8], P < 0.001). The proportion of patients with clinician-identified agitation was lower in the soft collar group (5% vs 17%, P = 0.04). There were four clinically important cervical spine injuries (two in each group). All were treated conservatively. There were no adverse neurological events.

Conclusions

Use of soft rather than rigid collar immobilisation for low-risk blunt trauma patients with potential cervical spine injury is significantly less painful for patients and results in less agitation. A larger study is needed to determine the safety of this approach or whether collars are required at all.     

Missed cervical spine fracture-dislocations: the importance of clinical and radiographic assessment

OBJECTIVE: To review the case of a patient who suffered a cervical spine fracture-dislocation missed at a hospital emergency department. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 77-year-old man involved in a motor vehicle accident was transported to a local emergency hospital where cervical spine x-ray films taken were reported as demonstrating no evidence of acute injury. The patient visited a chiropractic clinic 6 days later, where x-ray films were again obtained, finding that the patient sustained fractures of C5 and C6, as well as a bilateral facet dislocation at C5/C6. Computed tomography confirmed the fractures, and magnetic resonance imaging findings demonstrated cervical spinal cord compression and posterior spinal cord displacement. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: The patient was referred for preoperative medical evaluation. He underwent C5-6 closed reduction and anterior/posterior fusion surgery and was released without complication. Patient follow-up indicated full recovery with minimal neurologic symptoms. CONCLUSION: Cervical spine fracture-dislocations are often missed during standard radiographic examinations in emergency department settings. Chiropractors are encouraged to perform a comprehensive evaluation of patients presenting with cervical trauma even if they have had prior x-ray films reported as normal. Standard x-ray films taken at emergency department facilities are not entirely reliable for detecting or revealing cervical spine fracture-dislocations. This case stresses the importance of careful clinical assessment and imaging procedures on patients who have encountered cervical spine trauma.     

New Immobilization Guidelines Change EMS Critical Thinking in Older Adults With Spine Trauma

Objective: The impact of immobilization techniques on older adult trauma patients with spinal injury has rarely been studied. Our advisory group implemented a change in the immobilization protocol used by emergency medical services (EMS) professionals across a region encompassing 9 trauma centers and 24 EMS agencies in a Rocky Mountain state using a decentralized process on July 1, 2014. We sought to determine whether implementing the protocol would alter immobilization methods and affect patient outcomes among adults ≥60 years with a cervical spine injury. Methods: This was a 4-year retrospective study of patients ≥60 years with a cervical spine injury (fracture or cord). Immobilization techniques used by EMS professionals, patient demographics, injury characteristics, and in-hospital outcomes were compared before (1/1/12–6/30/14) and after (7/1/14–12/31/15) implementation of the Spinal Precautions Protocol using bivariate and multivariate analyses. Results: Of 15,063 adult trauma patients admitted to nine trauma centers, 7,737 (51%) were ≥60 years. Of those, 237 patients had cervical spine injury and were included in the study; 123 (51.9%) and 114 (48.1%) were transported before and after protocol implementation, respectively. There was a significant shift in the immobilization methods used after protocol implementation, with less full immobilization (59.4% to 28.1%, p < 0.001) and an increase in the use of both a cervical collar only (8.9% to 27.2%, p < 0.001) and not using any immobilization device (15.5% to 31.6%, p = 0.003) after protocol implementation. While the proportion of patients who only received a cervical collar increased after implementing the Spinal Precautions Protocol, the overall proportion of patients who received a cervical collar alone or in combination with other immobilization techniques decreased (72.4% to 56.1%, p = 0.01). The presence of a neurological deficit (6.5% vs. 5.3, p = 0.69) was similar before and after protocol implementation; in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio = 0.56, 95% confidence interval: 0.24–1.30, p = 0.18) was similar post–protocol implementation after adjusting for injury severity. Conclusions: There were no differences in neurologic deficit or patient disposition in the older adult patient with cervical spine trauma despite changes in spinal restriction protocols and resulting differences in immobilization devices.     

Neck collar used in treatment of victims of urban motorcycle accidents: over- or underprotection?

Background

Cervical collar brace protection of the cervical spine at the scene of the incident is the first priority for emergency medical technicians treating patients who have sustained trauma. However, there is still controversy between over- or underprotection. The objective of this study was to survey the cervical spine injury of lightweight motorcycle accident victims and further evaluate the neck collar protection policy.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients who sustained lightweight motorcycle injuries, assumed to have been at a low velocity, with incidence of cervical spine damage, from a single medical center's trauma registration from 2008 to 2009. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those who were immobilized by cervical collar brace and those who were not.

Results

Of the 8633 motorcycle crash victims, 63 patients had cervical spine injury. The average of the injury severity score in these patients was 14.31 ± 8.25. There was no significant correlation of cervical spine injury between the patients who had had the neck collar applied and those who had not (χ², P = .896). The length of stay in intensive care unit was longer in the patients who had the neck collar applied, but the total hospital length of stay was not statistically different to the patients who did not have the neck collar applied.

Conclusion

The incidence of cervical spinal injuries in the urban area lightweight motorcyclists is very low. Prehospital protocol for application of a cervical collar brace to people who have sustained a lightweight motorcycle accident in the urban area should be revised to avoid unnecessary restraint and possible complications.     

Clinical outcomes of magnetic resonance imaging in blunt cervical trauma

Objectives: To determine whether MRI of the cervical spine resulted in a change in management of patients with blunt trauma and normal plain X‐ray (XR)/CT of the cervical spine. Methods: An explicit chart review was conducted of patients seen at a Level 1 trauma centre over a 1 year period. Clinical details were extracted from the charts of patients with blunt trauma who had a normal plain XR and CT scan of the cervical spine and who underwent cervical spine MRI. A comparison of clinical details was made between those with a normal/abnormal MRI secondary to the acute injury. Results: One hundred and thirty‐four patients met entry criteria. Discharge non‐operative management of the cervical spine was associated with a change in management by the MRI result (P < 0.0001) where MRI of the cervical spine occurred a median of 3 days (interquartile range 0–4.5, range 0–137) after the injury. The MRI occurred before discharge 90% of the time in both groups. Operative management occurred in three patients and was delayed until after first outpatient review in two patients. Conclusions: An abnormal MRI after normal plain XR and CT cervical spine studies resulted in a change in non‐operative management at discharge. Early MRI resulted in one patient receiving surgery before discharge. No unstable injuries were detected by MRI that were not evident on plain XR or CT cervical spine.     

Evaluation of neck discomfort, neck tenderness, and neurologic deficits as indicators for radiography in blunt trauma victims.

Seventeen of 480 adult blunt trauma victims who sustained cervical spine injuries (CSI) were studied prospectively. In reliable patients, complaints of neck discomfort and tenderness demonstrated sensitivities of 86% and 79%, respectively, for CSI. A positive physical examination, defined as neurologic deficits, or cervical region discomfort or tenderness was noted in 13 of 14 reliable individuals sustaining CSI (sensitivity 93%, specificity 16%, positive predictive value 3.3%, negative predictive value 98.7%). Lack of absolute sensitivity of these studied clinical parameters, either singly or in concert, for CSI suggests that eliminating cervical spine radiography on the basis of the absence of neck discomfort, tenderness, or neurological deficits in reliable blunt trauma victims could result in missed CSI. An enormous prospective data base will be required to definitively address the sensitivity of all clinical parameters currently employed to determine the need for cervical spine radiography in reliable blunt trauma victims.     

Does the National Emergency X-ray Utilization Study make a difference?

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the introduction of the National Emergency X-ray Utilization Study guidelines in a UK emergency department reduced the number of patients having cervical spine radiographs and altered the accuracy of diagnosis of cervical spine injury. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study. The number of patients with recent neck injury who had cervical spine radiographs taken was assessed for 3 months before and three months after the introduction of the National Emergency X-ray Utilization Study guidelines to an urban emergency department in the UK. The number of injuries missed by emergency department doctors during the two 3-month periods was also recorded. RESULTS: Prior to using the guidelines, 252 of 715 patients (35%) were X-rayed and when using the guidelines, 268 of 706 patients (38%) were X-rayed. No significant difference was observed between the rates of X-ray in the two groups (P=0.288). No injuries were missed by emergency department doctors either before or after the introduction of the guidelines. CONCLUSION: Introduction of the National Emergency X-ray Utilization Study guidelines to a UK emergency department did not reduce the number of patients having cervical spine radiographs after neck trauma and had no effect on the pick-up rate for cervical spine injuries.     

Spinal Motion Restriction: An Educational and Implementation Program to Redefine Prehospital Spinal Assessment and Care

Abstract

Introduction. Prehospital spine immobilization has long been applied to victims of trauma in the United States and up to 5 million patients per year are immobilized mostly with a cervical collar and a backboard. Objective. The training of paramedics and emergency medical technicians on the principals of spine motion restriction (SMR) will decrease the use of backboards. Methods. The training for SMR emphasized the need to immobilize those patients with a significant potential for an unstable cervical spine fracture and to use alternative methods of maintaining spine precautions for those with lower risk. The training addressed the potential complications of the use of the unpadded backboard and education was provided about the mechanics of spine injuries. Emergency medical services (EMS} personnel were taught to differentiate between the critical multisystem trauma patients from the more common moderate, low kinetic energy trauma patients. A comprehensive education and outreach program that included all of the EMS providers (fire and private), hospitals, and EMS educational institutions was developed. Results. Within 4 months of the policy implementation, prehospital care practitioners reduced the use of the backboard by 58%. This was accomplished by a decrease in the number of patients considered for SMR with low kinetic energy and the use of other methods, such as the cervical collar only. Conclusion. The implementation of a SMR training program significantly decreases the use of backboards and allows alternative methods of maintaining spine precautions.     

The usefulness of a modified adult protocol for the clearance of paediatric cervical spine injury in the emergency department

Objective: To determine if the use of a modified adult protocol that uses cervical spine imaging on presentation for the assessment of cervical spine injury in children improves clinical outcome. Methods: This is a case series study on all consecutive trauma patients presenting from April to July 2000 inclusive to the ED of a major paediatric trauma hospital. Children presenting to the ED with potential cervical spine injury (CSI) were identified using standard selection criteria. Patient demographics, mechanism of injury, method and time of presentation, associated injuries, radiological investigation and clinical outcome were recorded. The major outcome measures for this study were: time to clearance of the cervical spine, length of stay in the ED and admission to an in‐hospital bed. Data were analysed for compliance to the protocol, this being the standard assessment pathway of cervical spine clearance used by our trauma service. Results: The trauma registry identified 1721 trauma presentations during the 4‐month study period; 208 presentations representing 200 children with potential CSI were entered into the study. Males represented 72.5% of the study population, having a mean age of 8.32 years, although 29% were less than 5 years of age. The majority of presentations (69%) occurred outside of normal working hours. In 17.8% of cases the cervical spine was cleared based on clinical assessment alone, half less than 5 years of age. Compliance to the protocol occurred in 78% of presentations. However, when examined by age group, children 5 years of age or above were 1.5 times more likely to comply with the protocol as compared with younger children. Adequate plain imaging was not obtained in 18% of presentations, this group almost exclusively less than 5 years of age. There were no missed injuries and no short or long‐term neurological sequelae reported during this study. There were no differences in time to clearance, length of stay and admission rate between compliant and non‐compliant groups. Conclusions: Modified adult protocols for cervical spine clearance offer guidance in managing the majority of children suffering blunt trauma. However, we recommend caution in rigidly applying such protocols, especially to children of young age.     

Cervical spine clearance and neck extension during percutaneous tracheostomy in trauma patients

INTRODUCTION: The lack of cervical spine clearance and inability to extend the neck are assumed to be relative contraindications for percutaneous tracheostomy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the necessity of cervical spine clearance and neck extension in trauma patients receiving percutaneous tracheostomy. DESIGN: Prospective analysis of case series from August 1, 1995 to August 31, 1998. SETTING: A university-based Level I trauma center. PATIENTS: A total of 88 consecutive trauma patients receiving percutaneous tracheostomy. Patients were divided into two groups based on the radiographic or clinical status of their cervical spine: cleared and noncleared. RESULTS: The overall success and complication rate were 99% (87/88) and 11% (10/88), respectively. There were no procedure-related deaths. The cleared group consisted of 60 patients; three patients in this group who had "bull" or "thick" necks did not have full neck extension during percutaneous tracheostomy. The noncleared group consisted of 28 patients, 13 of which had known cervical spine fractures; 27 noncleared patients were maintained in the neutral position (no extension) during percutaneous tracheostomy, whereas one patient with low suspicion of spinal injury was partially extended. Of the 13 patients with cervical spine fractures, six patients had been stabilized with a halo or operative fixation, and seven patients were stabilized with a cervical collar at the time of percutaneous tracheostomy. The success rate was 100% (60/60) for the cleared group compared with 96% (27/28) for the noncleared group (p > .05). The complication rate was 13% (8/60) for the cleared group compared with 7.1% (2/28) for the noncleared group (p > .05). We had a 100% success rate and no complications in the seven patients with cervical spine injury who were stabilized with a cervical collar. No patient had spinal cord injury caused by percutaneous tracheostomy. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous tracheostomy can be safely performed in trauma patients without cervical spine clearance and neck extension, including patients with stabilized cervical spine or spinal cord injury.     

Trauma radiology: Part V. Imaging of acute cervical spine trauma

Cervical spine injury constitutes a major cause of morbidity resulting from trauma. The consequences of a missed "significant" injury can be devastating for the patient and can create potential medical legal consequences for involved physicians. Multiple imaging modalities can be applied to imaging of the cervical spine after trauma, including radiography, computed tomography (CT), myelography, CT myelography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Controversy exists concerning the appropriate number of radiographic views required for the screening assessment of cervical spine injuries. CT clarifies uncertain radiological findings, identifies subtle fractures in patients with neck pain or with neurological deficits but with normal radiographs, determines details of injury, and assists in operative planning. MRI has virtually replaced myelography and CT myelography in evaluating the traumatized cervical spine. MRI is more accurate than CT with intrathecal contrast in delineating epidural pathology, ligament injury, soft-tissue edema, and cord parenchymal injury. Information derived from MRI guides appropriate management and has value in predicting injury outcome. We consider indications for and relative merits of these various diagnostic modalities, and we describe imaging features of major patterns of cervical spine injury.     

Distracting injuries in patients with vertebral injuries

To describe the prevalence and types of distracting injuries associated with vertebral injuries at all levels of the spine in blunt trauma patients. A prospective cohort study was conducted at an urban Level I trauma center. All patients undergoing radiographic evaluation of the cervical, thoracic, or lumbar vertebrae after blunt trauma were enrolled. Patients had a data collection form completed by the treating physician before radiographic imaging and were evaluated for the following upon initial presentation: tenderness to the cervical, thoracic, or lumbar spine, distracting injuries, altered mental status, alcohol or drug intoxication, or neurological deficits. Patients with distracting injuries as the sole documented indication for vertebral radiographs were reviewed for the types of injuries present. A total of 4698 patients were enrolled in the study. There were 336 (7.2%) patients who had distracting injuries as the sole documented indication for obtaining radiographic studies of the vertebrae. Eight (2.4%, 95% CI 1.0-4.6%) of the 336 patients had 14 acute vertebral injuries including compression fractures (5), transverse process fractures (7), spinous process fracture (1), and cervical spine rotatory subluxation (1). There were 13 thoracolumbar injuries and one cervical spine injury. Distracting injuries in the eight patients with acute vertebral injuries included 13 bony fractures. Distracting injuries in those patients without vertebral injuries included bony fractures (333), lacerations (63), soft tissue contusions (62), head injuries (15), bony dislocations (12), abrasions (11), visceral injuries (8), dental injuries (5), burns (3), ligamentous injuries (3), amputation (1), and compartment syndrome (1). In conclusion, in patients with distracting injuries, bony fractures of any type were important for identifying patients with vertebral injuries. Other types of distracting injuries did not contribute to the sensitivity of the clinical screening criteria in the detection of patients with vertebral injuries.     

Outcome of Trauma Patients Immobilized by Emergency Department Staff,but Not by Emergency Medical Services Providers: A Quality Assurance Initiative

Abstract

Background. Prehospital selective cervical spine immobilization (CSI) is a relatively new concept. In our emergency medical services (EMS) system, protocols for selective CSI are widely used; yet, some patients who are brought to the hospital without CSI undergo secondary immobilization and cervical spine imaging in the emergency department (ED). Immobilization in the ED, after a decision not to immobilize by EMS, suggests that either the prehospital assessment is not trusted or the patient has developed new symptoms over time. We undertook a quality assurance initiative to evaluate whether trauma patients brought to the ED without CSI, who then underwent secondary CSI and imaging in the ED, had injuries that were initially missed by EMS selective CSI protocol. Methods. This was a 36-month retrospective data analysis of blunt trauma patients transported directly from the field to the University of New Mexico Hospital level I trauma center by Albuquerque Ambulance Service (AAS) between March 2009 and February 2012. Inclusion criteria were age 18 years and older, transported by AAS without CSI, and cervical spinal imaging done in the ED. Patients were excluded if they were being transported between facilities, were prisoners, and/or refused CSI. A positive finding was defined as any acute abnormality identified by the attending radiologist on the final imaging report. Results. The study included 101 patients who met inclusion criteria. There were no significant missed injuries. Ninety-four of the 101 patients received cervical spinal CT imaging at an estimated cost of $1,570 per scan, not including physician charges. The remaining patients had plain film radiographic imaging. No patients had magnetic resonance imaging. Conclusions. In this retrospective quality assurance initiative, none of 101 patients who underwent secondary CSI and imaging in the ED had a missed acute cervical injury. No patients had any adverse effects or required treatment, yet these patients incurred substantial costs and increased radiation exposure. While our results suggest hospital personnel should have confidence in prehospital decisions regarding CSI, continued surveillance and a large-scale, prospective study are needed to confirm our findings.     

Cervical spine injuries in blunt trauma patients requiring emergent endotracheal intubation.

Airway management in the blunt trauma patient is complicated by the potential for causing or exacerbating an injury to the cervical cord if an unstable cervical fracture is present. The records of 987 blunt trauma patients who required emergent endotracheal intubation over a 5-year period were retrospectively reviewed to determine the incidence and type of cervical spine injury and the incidence of injury based on airway management. Sixty of the patients (6.1%) had a cervical fracture; 53 were potentially unstable injuries by radiographic criteria. Twenty patients had neurologic deficits prior to intubation. Twenty-six patients with unstable injuries were intubated orally, 25 nasally, and two by cricothyrotomy. One patient developed a neurologic deficit after nasotracheal intubation. Because of a possible selection bias in which severely injured patients were preferentially referred to this trauma center, the true incidence of cervical spine injuries may be lower than the 6.1% we found. The authors conclude that the incidence of serious cervical spine injury in a very severely injured population of blunt trauma patients is relatively low, and that commonly used methods of precautionary airway management rarely lead to neurologic deterioration.     

Utility of flexion–extension radiography for the detection of ligamentous cervical spine injury and its current role in the clearance of the cervical spine

Detecting the presence of injuries to the cervical spine is an important component of the initial assessment of patients sustaining blunt trauma. A small proportion of cervical spine injuries consists of ligamentous disruption. Accurate detection of ligamentous injury is essential as it may result in sequelae including radiculopathy, quadriplegia and death. Flexion–extension (FE) radiography has traditionally been utilised for the detection of ligamentous injury in patients who have been cleared of bony injury. There are controversies surrounding the use of FE for alert patients with neck pain. There are studies that call into question the diagnostic accuracy of FE, the high proportion of inadequate FE images due to muscle spasm and the adverse effects of prolonged cervical collar immobilisation while awaiting FE. Other literature indicates that FE provides no additional diagnostic information following a multi‐detector helical computed tomography. This review evaluates the literature on the utility of FE for the detection of ligamentous injury and explores alternate strategies for clearing the cervical spine of ligamentous injury.     

Assessment and management of a child with suspected acute neck injury

Any child presenting at an emergency department after trauma, such as road traffic accidents, falls, sports and head injuries, should be assessed for risk of injury to the cervical spine. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the assessment and nursing management of a child with a suspected cervical spine injury. Basic anatomy is covered along with neck injury assessment, how to measure a cervical collar correctly, safe immobilisation, and communication.     

Management of suspected cervical spine injuries--the paediatric perspective

Paediatric cervical spine immobilisation and management is one of the most difficult tasks to master in the paediatric trauma population. The Royal Children's Hospital--Melbourne has admitted 54 patients with diagnosed cervical spine injuries since January 1999. The management of such patients admitted to acute care facilities with suspected cervical spine injuries is inconsistent and at times sub-optimal. Management controversies centre around, application of cervical collars, clearance of the c-spine, patient movement and general care principles. In an endeavour to address these issues, the Royal Children's Hospital Trauma Service, in conjunction with the Emergency Department developed cervical spine guidelines. Teams consulted in the formulation of these guidelines included, Emergency Department, Intensive Care Unit, Orthopaedics, Neurosurgery, Radiology and General Surgery. These guidelines were developed as a clinical tool to guide management and standardise the approach of care for these patients. Specifically, the guidelines address: immobilisation of the paediatric cervical spine; radiology; clearing the cervical spine of injury; suspected or proven cervical spine injury; guidelines for times to fitting Philadelphia collar; ongoing care.     

放射学检查在颈椎损伤早期诊断价值的研究

评估传统放射学检查方法对颈椎损伤早期诊断价值。对１５２例疑有急性颈椎损伤的成人患者行常规放射学检查即颈椎侧位片、前后位片及枢椎齿状突开口位片检查，并与断层扫描、ＣＴ扫描及ＭＲＩ检查结果进行比较。结果１５２例患者中８７例发生颈椎骨折（占５７．２％）；颈椎侧位片诊断的敏感性、特异性和准确性分别是８４％、７４％和８０％，而颈椎常规放射学诊断的敏感性、特异性和准确性分别为９３％、８０％和８７％。作者认为：颈椎损伤早期应采用颈椎侧位片、前后位片及枢椎齿状突开口位片作为放射学常规检查；对于常规放射学检查或临床表现提示有颈椎损伤者以及根据常规放射学检查难以确定诊断者，应考虑行断层扫描、ＣＴ扫描及ＭＲＩ检查     

Implementation of a dual cervical spine and blunt cerebrovascular injury assessment pathway for pediatric trauma patients

Background:Pediatric cervical spine (CSI) and blunt cerebrovascular injuries (BCVI) are challenging to evaluate as they are rare but carry high morbidity and mortality. CT scans are the traditional imaging modality to evaluate for CSI/BCVI, but involve radiation exposure and potential future increased risk of malignancy. Therefore, we present results from the implementation of a combined CSI/BCVI pediatric trauma clinical pathway to aid clinicians in their decision-making.Methods:We conducted a 2-year retrospective cohort study analyzing data pre and post implementation of the combined CSI/BCVI pathway. Data was obtained from a level 1 pediatric trauma center and included blunt trauma patients under the age of 14. We evaluated the use of cervical spine computed tomography (CT), CT angiography, and plain radiographs, as well as missed injuries and provider pathway adherence.Results:We included 358 patients: 209 pre-pathway and 149 post-pathway implementation. Patient mean age was 8.9 years and 61% were male (61% males). There were no significant differences in GCS, AIS, and ISS between pre and post pathway groups. Post pathway implementation saw reduced use of cervical spine CT, although this was not clinically significant (33% vs 31%, p = 0.74). However, cervical spine radiography use increased (9% vs 16%, p = 0.03), and there was also an increase in screening for BCVI injuries with higher use of CTA (5% vs 7%, p = 0.52). A total of 12 CSI and 3 BCVI were identified with no missed injuries. Provider adherence to the pathway was modest (54%).ConclusionImplementation of a combined CSI/BCVI clinical pathway for pediatric trauma patients increased screening radiography and did not miss any injuries. However, CT use did not significantly decrease and provider adherence was modest, supporting the need for further implementation analysis and larger studies to validate the pathway's sensitivity and specificity for CSI/BCVI.