Value of Canadian C-spine rule versus the NEXUS criteria in ruling out clinically important cervical spine injuries: derivation of modified Canadian C-spine rule
- PMID: 32965634
- DOI: 10.1007/s11547-020-01288-7
Value of Canadian C-spine rule versus the NEXUS criteria in ruling out clinically important cervical spine injuries: derivation of modified Canadian C-spine rule
Abstract
Purpose: Although, Canadian C-spine rule and the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) criteria in ruling out clinically important cervical spine injuries have been validated using large prospective studies, no consensus exist as to which rule should be endorsed. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare the accuracy of the Canadian C-spine and NEXUS criteria in ruling out clinically important cervical spine injuries in trauma patients. Finally, we introduced the modified Canadian C-spine rule.
Methods: A prospective diagnostic accuracy study was conducted on trauma patients referred to four emergency departments of Iran in 2018. Emergency physicians evaluated the patients based on the Canadian C-spine rule and NEXUS criteria in two groups of low risk and high risk for clinically important cervical spine injury. Afterward, all patients underwent cervical imaging. In addition, modified Canadian C-spine rule was derived by removing dangerous mechanism and simple rear-end motor vehicle collision from the model.
Results: Data from 673 patients were included. The area under the curve of the NEXUS criteria, Canadian C-spine, and modified Canadian C-spine rule were 0.76 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.81)], 0.78 (95% CI 0.74-0.83), and 0.79 (95% CI 0.74-0.83), respectively. The sensitivities of NEXUS criteria, Canadian C-spine, and modified Canadian C-spine rule were 93.4%, 100.0% and 100.0%, respectively.
Conclusions: The modified Canadian C-spine rule has fewer variables than the original Canadian C-spine rule and is entirely based on physical examination, which seems easier to use in emergency departments.
Keywords: Cervical spine; Decision supportive technique; Diagnostic imaging; Sensitivity and specificity; Trauma.
Similar articles
-
Canadian C-spine Rule versus NEXUS in Screening of Clinically Important Traumatic Cervical Spine Injuries; a systematic review and meta-analysis.Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2023 Jan 1;11(1):e5. doi: 10.22037/aaem.v11i1.1833. eCollection 2023. Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2023. PMID: 36620739 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Retrospective application of the NEXUS low-risk criteria for cervical spine radiography in Canadian emergency departments.Ann Emerg Med. 2004 Apr;43(4):507-14. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2003.10.036. Ann Emerg Med. 2004. PMID: 15039695
-
The Canadian C-spine rule performs better than unstructured physician judgment.Ann Emerg Med. 2003 Sep;42(3):395-402. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(03)00422-0. Ann Emerg Med. 2003. PMID: 12944893
-
Projected paediatric cervical spine imaging rates with application of NEXUS, Canadian C-Spine and PECARN clinical decision rules in a prospective Australian cohort.Emerg Med J. 2021 May;38(5):330-337. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2020-210325. Emerg Med J. 2021. PMID: 34449409
-
Emergency department evaluation and treatment of cervical spine injuries.Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2015 May;33(2):241-82. doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2014.12.002. Epub 2015 Mar 14. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2015. PMID: 25892721 Review.
Cited by
-
NEXUS vs. Canadian C-Spine Rule (CCR) in Predicting Cervical Spine Injuries; a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2023 Sep 29;11(1):e66. doi: 10.22037/aaem.v11i1.2143. eCollection 2023. Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2023. PMID: 37840870 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Prediction Score for Cervical Spine Fracture in Patients with Traumatic Neck Injury.Neurol Res Int. 2021 Mar 18;2021:6658679. doi: 10.1155/2021/6658679. eCollection 2021. Neurol Res Int. 2021. PMID: 33815844 Free PMC article.
-
Triage tools for detecting cervical spine injury in paediatric trauma patients.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Mar 22;3(3):CD011686. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011686.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024. PMID: 38517085 Free PMC article.
-
Canadian C-spine Rule versus NEXUS in Screening of Clinically Important Traumatic Cervical Spine Injuries; a systematic review and meta-analysis.Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2023 Jan 1;11(1):e5. doi: 10.22037/aaem.v11i1.1833. eCollection 2023. Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2023. PMID: 36620739 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A Case Report of an Unstable C-spine Fracture in the Emergency Department.J Educ Teach Emerg Med. 2025 Apr 30;10(2):V1-V5. doi: 10.21980/J8SK90. eCollection 2025 Apr. J Educ Teach Emerg Med. 2025. PMID: 40336696 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Kanwar R, Delasobera BE, Hudson K, Frohna W (2015) Emergency department evaluation and treatment of cervical spine injuries. Emerg Med Clin North Am 33(2):241–282 - DOI
-
- Yue JK, Upadhyayula PS, Chan AK, Winkler EA, Burke JF, Readdy WJ et al (2016) A review and update on the current and emerging clinical trials for the acute management of cervical spine and spinal cord injuries-Part III. J Neurosurg Sci 60(4):529–542 - PubMed
-
- James IA, Moukalled A, Yu E, Tulman DB, Bergese SD, Jones CD et al (2014) A systematic review of the need for MRI for the clearance of cervical spine injury in obtunded blunt trauma patients after normal cervical spine CT. J Emerg Trauma Shock 7(4):251–255. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-2700.142611 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Pimentel L, Diegelmann L (2010) Evaluation and management of acute cervical spine trauma. Emerg Med Clin North Am 28(4):719–738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emc.2010.07.003 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Hanson JA, Blackmore CC, Mann FA, Wilson AJ (2000) Cervical spine injury: a clinical decision rule to identify high-risk patients for helical CT screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174(3):713–717 - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical