Accuracy of the Ottawa Ankle Rules applied by non-physician providers in a pediatric emergency department. Issue 5 (2nd October 2017)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Accuracy of the Ottawa Ankle Rules applied by non-physician providers in a pediatric emergency department. Issue 5 (2nd October 2017)
- Main Title:
- Accuracy of the Ottawa Ankle Rules applied by non-physician providers in a pediatric emergency department
- Authors:
- MacLellan, Joe
Smith, Teya
Baserman, Jason
Dowling, Shawn - Abstract:
- Abstract: Objective: The Ottawa Ankle Rules (OAR) are a clinical decision tool used to minimize unnecessary radiographs in ankle and foot injuries. The OAR are a reliable tool to exclude fractures in children over 5 years of age when applied by physicians. Limited data support its use by other health care workers in children. Our objective was to determine the accuracy of the OAR when applied by non-physician providers (NPP). Methods: Children aged 5 to 17 years presenting with an acute ankle or foot injury were enrolled. Phase 1 captured baseline data on x-ray use in 106 patients. NPPs were then educated on the usage of the OAR and completed an OAR learning module. In phase 2, NPPs applied the OAR to 184 included patients. Results: The sensitivity of the foot rule, as applied by NPP's, was 100% (56-100% CI) and the specificity was 17% (9-29% CI) for clinically significant fractures. The sensitivity of the ankle portion of the rule, as applied by NPP's, was 88% (47-99 CI) and the specificity was 31% (23-40% CI) for clinically significant fractures. The only clinically significant fracture missed by NPP's was detected on physician assessment. Inter-observer agreement was κ=0.24 for the ankle rule and κ=0.49 for the foot rule. Conclusion: The sensitivity of the OAR when applied by NPP's was very good. More training and practice using the OAR would likely improve NPP's inter-observer reliability. Our data suggest the OAR may be a useful tool for NPP's to apply prior toAbstract: Objective: The Ottawa Ankle Rules (OAR) are a clinical decision tool used to minimize unnecessary radiographs in ankle and foot injuries. The OAR are a reliable tool to exclude fractures in children over 5 years of age when applied by physicians. Limited data support its use by other health care workers in children. Our objective was to determine the accuracy of the OAR when applied by non-physician providers (NPP). Methods: Children aged 5 to 17 years presenting with an acute ankle or foot injury were enrolled. Phase 1 captured baseline data on x-ray use in 106 patients. NPPs were then educated on the usage of the OAR and completed an OAR learning module. In phase 2, NPPs applied the OAR to 184 included patients. Results: The sensitivity of the foot rule, as applied by NPP's, was 100% (56-100% CI) and the specificity was 17% (9-29% CI) for clinically significant fractures. The sensitivity of the ankle portion of the rule, as applied by NPP's, was 88% (47-99 CI) and the specificity was 31% (23-40% CI) for clinically significant fractures. The only clinically significant fracture missed by NPP's was detected on physician assessment. Inter-observer agreement was κ=0.24 for the ankle rule and κ=0.49 for the foot rule. Conclusion: The sensitivity of the OAR when applied by NPP's was very good. More training and practice using the OAR would likely improve NPP's inter-observer reliability. Our data suggest the OAR may be a useful tool for NPP's to apply prior to physician assessment. RÉSUMÉ: Objectif: La Règle d'Ottawa pour la cheville (ROC) est un outil de décision clinique visant à réduire le nombre de radiographies inutiles dans les cas de blessures au pied ou à la cheville. Il s'agit d'un outil digne de confiance pour exclure les fractures chez les enfants de plus de 5 ans lorsqu'il est appliqué par les médecins. Il existe toutefois peu de données étayant son utilisation par d'autres catégories de professionnels de la santé chez les enfants. L'étude visait donc à déterminer l'exactitude de la ROC lorsque celle-ci est appliquée par des fournisseurs de soins non médicaux (FSNM). Méthode: Ont participé à l'étude des enfants de 5 à 17 ans qui sont allés au service des urgences pour la survenue de blessures au pied ou à la cheville. À la phase I, on a recueilli des données de base sur le recours à la radiographie chez 106 patients. Par la suite, les FSNM ont reçu une formation sur l'application de la ROC, complétée par un module d'apprentissage. À la phase II, les FSNM ont appliqué la ROC chez 184 patients. Résultats: La sensibilité de la règle relative au pied, telle qu'elle a été appliquée par les FSNM, était de 100 % (IC : 56-100 %) et la spécificité, de 17 % (IC : 9-29 %) pour les fractures importantes sur le plan clinique. Quant à la sensibilité de la règle relative à la cheville, telle qu'elle a été appliquée par les FSNM, elle était de 88 % (IC : 47-99) et la spécificité, de 31 % (IC : 23-40 %) pour les fractures importantes sur le plan clinique. La seule fracture importante sur le plan clinique qui a échappé aux FSNM a été décelée à l'examen médical. La fiabilité interévaluateurs (κ) était égale à 0, 24 pour la partie de la règle concernant la cheville, et égale à 0, 49 pour celle concernant le pied. Conclusion: La sensibilité de la ROC, lorsqu'elle était appliquée par les FSNM, était très bonne. Toutefois, une formation approfondie sur l'application de la ROC et une pratique accrue de celle-ci permettraient sans doute d'améliorer la fiabilité interévaluateurs parmi les FSNM. Enfin, les résultats de l'étude donnent à penser que la ROC serait un outil utile aux FSNM avant l'examen médical. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- CJEM. Volume 20:Issue 5(2018)
- Journal:
- CJEM
- Issue:
- Volume 20:Issue 5(2018)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 20, Issue 5 (2018)
- Year:
- 2018
- Volume:
- 20
- Issue:
- 5
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2018-0020-0005-0000
- Page Start:
- 746
- Page End:
- 752
- Publication Date:
- 2017-10-02
- Subjects:
- Ottawa Ankle Rules, -- pediatric, -- non-physician provider, -- nurse, -- accuracy, -- sensitivity
Emergency Treatment -- Periodicals
Emergency Medicine -- Periodicals
Emergency medical services -- Canada -- Periodicals
Medical emergencies -- Canada -- Periodicals
Emergency medical services
Medical emergencies
Canada
Periodicals
616.02505 - Journal URLs:
- http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=CEM ↗
http://www.caep.ca/004.cjem-jcmu/004-00.cjem/004-01v.archives.htm#main ↗
http://link.springer.com/ ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1017/cem.2017.399 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1481-8035
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library STI - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 7506.xml