Iain MacPhail

Implementation of the Canadian C-Spine Rule: prospective 12 centre cluster randomised trial

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of an active strategy to implement the validated Canadian C-Spine Rule into multiple emergency departments. Design Matched pair cluster randomised trial. Setting University and community emergency departments in Canada. Participants 11 824 alert and stable adults presenting with blunt trauma to the head or neck at one of 12 hospitals. Interventions Six hospitals were randomly allocated to the intervention and six to the control. At the intervention sites, active strategies were used to implement the Canadian C-Spine Rule, including education, policy, and real time reminders on radiology requisitions. No specific intervention was introduced to alter the behaviour of doctors requesting cervical spine imaging at the control sites. Main outcome measure Diagnostic imaging rate of the cervical spine during two 12 month before and after periods. Results Patients were balanced between control and intervention sites. From the before to the after periods, the intervention group showed a relative reduction in cervical spine imaging of 12.8% (95% confidence interval 9% to 16%; 61.7% v 53.3%; P=0.01) and the control group a relative increase of 12.5% (7% to 18%; 52.8% v 58.9%; P=0.03). These changes were significant when both groups were compared (P<0.001). No fractures were missed and no adverse outcomes occurred. Conclusions Implementation of the Canadian C-Spine Rule led to a significant decrease in imaging without injuries being missed or patient morbidity. Final imaging rates were much lower at intervention sites than at most US hospitals. Widespread implementation of this rule could lead to reduced healthcare costs and more efficient patient flow in busy emergency departments worldwide. Trial registration Clinical trials NCT00290875.

Canadian C-Spine Rule study for alert and stable trauma patients: I. Background and rationale

This paper is Part I of a 2-part series to describe the background and methodology for the Canadian C-Spine Rule study to develop a clinical decision rule for rational imaging in alert and stable trauma patients. Current use of radiography is inefficient and variable, in part because there has been a lack of evidence-based guidelines to assist emergency physicians. Clinical decision rules are research-based decision-making tools that incorporate 3 or more variables from the history, physical examination or simple tests. The Canadian CT Head and C-Spine (CCC) Study is a large collaborative effort to develop clinical decision rules for the use of CT head in minor head injury and for the use of cervical spine radiography in alert and stable trauma victims. Part I details the background and rationale for the development of the Canadian C-Spine Rule. Part II will describe in detail the objectives and methods of the Canadian C-Spine Rule study.

Aminophylline in bradyasystolic cardiac arrest: a randomised placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND Endogenous adenosine might cause or perpetuate bradyasystole. Our aim was to determine whether aminophylline, an adenosine antagonist, increases the rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS In a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 971 patients older than 16 years with asystole or pulseless electrical activity at fewer than 60 beats per minute, and who were unresponsive to initial treatment with epinephrine and atropine, to receive intravenous aminophylline (250 mg, and an additional 250 mg if necessary) (n=486) or placebo (n=485). The patients were enrolled between January, 2001 and September, 2003, from 1886 people who had had cardiac arrests. Standard resuscitation measures were used for at least 10 mins after the study drug was administered. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov registry with the number NCT00312273. FINDINGS Baseline characteristics and survival predictors were similar in both groups. The median time from the arrival of the advanced life-support paramedic team to study drug administration was 13 min. The proportion of patients who had an ROSC was 24.5% in the aminophylline group and 23.7% in the placebo group (difference 0.8%; 95% CI -4.6% to 6.2%; p=0.778). The proportion of patients with non-sinus tachyarrhythmias after study drug administration was 34.6% in the aminophylline group and 26.2% in the placebo group (p=0.004). Survival to hospital admission and survival to hospital discharge were not significantly different between the groups. A multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no evidence of a significant subgroup or interactive effect from aminophylline. INTERPRETATION Although aminophylline increases non-sinus tachyarrhythmias, we noted no evidence that it significantly increases the proportion of patients who achieve ROSC after bradyasystolic cardiac arrest.