Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2010 Aug 10;182(11):1173-9.
doi: 10.1503/cmaj.091430. Epub 2010 May 10.

Multicentre prospective validation of use of the Canadian C-Spine Rule by triage nurses in the emergency department

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Multicentre prospective validation of use of the Canadian C-Spine Rule by triage nurses in the emergency department

Ian G Stiell et al. CMAJ. .

Abstract

Objectives: The Canadian C-Spine Rule for imaging of the cervical spine was developed for use by physicians. We believe that nurses in the emergency department could use this rule to clinically clear the cervical spine. We prospectively evaluated the accuracy, reliability and acceptability of the Canadian C-Spine Rule when used by nurses.

Methods: We conducted this three-year prospective cohort study in six Canadian emergency departments. The study involved adult trauma patients who were alert and whose condition was stable. We provided two hours of training to 191 triage nurses. The nurses then assessed patients using the Canadian C-Spine Rule, including determination of neck tenderness and range of motion, reapplied immobilization and completed a data form.

Results: Of the 3633 study patients, 42 (1.2%) had clinically important injuries of the cervical spine. The kappa value for interobserver assessments of 498 patients with the Canadian C-Spine Rule was 0.78. We calculated sensitivity of 100.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.0%-100.0%) and specificity of 43.4% (95% CI 42.0%-45.0%) for the Canadian C-Spine Rule as interpreted by the investigators. The nurses classified patients with a sensitivity of 90.2% (95% CI 76.0%-95.0%) and a specificity of 43.9% (95% CI 42.0%-46.0%). Early in the study, nurses failed to identify four cases of injury, despite the presence of clear high-risk factors. None of these patients suffered sequelae, and after retraining there were no further missed cases. We estimated that for 40.7% of patients, the cervical spine could be cleared clinically by nurses. Nurses reported discomfort in applying the Canadian C-Spine Rule in only 4.8% of cases.

Conclusion: Use of the Canadian C-Spine Rule by nurses was accurate, reliable and clinically acceptable. Widespread implementation by nurses throughout Canada and elsewhere would diminish patient discomfort and improve patient flow in overcrowded emergency departments.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The Canadian C-Spine Rule to rule out cervical spine injury, adapted for use by nurses. The rule is intended for patients who have experienced trauma, who are alert (score on Glasgow Coma Scale = 15) and whose condition is stable. *The following mechanisms of injury were defined as dangerous: fall from elevation of more than 3 ft (91 cm) or five stairs, axial load to the head (e.g., diving injury), motor vehicle collision at high speed (> 100 km/h), motor vehicle collision involving a rollover or ejection, injury involving a motorized recreational vehicle, bicycle-related injury (rider struck or collision). †Simple rear-end motor vehicle collisions exclude incidents in which the patient was pushed into oncoming traffic or was hit by a bus, large truck or vehicle travelling at high speed, as well as rollovers; all such incidents would be considered high risk. ‡Neck pain with delayed onset is any pain that did not occur immediately following the precipitating incident. Adapted, with permission, from Stiell IG, Wells GA, Vandemheen K, et al. The Canadian Cervical Spine Radiography Rule for alert and stable trauma patients. JAMA 2001;286:1841–8. Copyright © 2001 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Pitts SR, Niska RW, Xu J, et al. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2006 emergency department summary. Natl Health Stat Rep. 2008;(7):1–38. - PubMed
    1. Stiell IG, Wells GA, Vandemheen K, et al. Variation in emergency department use of cervical spine radiography for alert, stable trauma patients. CMAJ. 1997;156:1537–44. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chan BT, Schull MJ, Schultz SE. Emergency department services in Ontario 1993–2000. Toronto (ON): Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences; 2001.
    1. Schull MJ, Slaughter PM, Redelmeier DA. Urban emergency department overcrowding: defining the problem and eliminating misconceptions. CJEM. 2002;4:76–83. - PubMed
    1. Lindsay P, Bronskill S, Schull MJ, et al. Clinical utilization and outcomes. In: Brown AD, editor. Hospital report 2001: emergency department care. Toronto (ON): Ontario Hospital Association and Government of Ontario; 2001.

Publication types