Falls and anticoagulation; a "NICE" opportunity to step away from CT scanning?

Abstract ID
4827
Authors' names
Dr R Mallinson1, Dr E Reid2, Dr S Gilson2, Dr K Morris2, Dr R Kitchener3 and Dr J Brown1
Author's provenances
1 Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, 2 University Hospital Southampton, 3 University Hospital Dorset
Abstract category

Abstract

With an ageing population, the number of older people attending emergency departments with head injuries is increasing.  2023 NICE guidelines advise to consider a CT scan for these patients who have sustained a head injury and have no other indication for a CT head scan but are on anticoagulation treatment or antiplatelet treatment.  However, there are time, financial and personal costs of hospital conveyance to facilitate scanning to both individuals and the wider system.

Method

Across two UK, South coast hospitals, retrospective review of requests for CT brains from 1964 patients over 80years old were performed.  Patients who underwent a full trauma scan of which CT head was part or had other criteria within NICE guidelines to preform scanning were excluded. This resulted in 624 patients who underwent CT head scan purely because of the use of anticoagulation in head injury.  CT head reports were then reviewed for traumatic findings and notes viewed for treatments.

Results

In 4 consecutive months of 2021 at Southampton, 302 scans were preformed and in 6 consecutive months of 2023 at Portsmouth emergency departments 322 scans were performed. Only 10 cases across both sites had a traumatic bleed on CTB report. None of the 10 cases underwent surgical intervention.  Discussions around decisions to pause and the duration of pause of anticoagulation medication was inconsistent, despite neurosurgical advice in all.

Conclusion

With advancing age and frailty, it is likely that a significant proportion of patients over 80 undergoing a CT head scan for traumatic injury would not be for surgical intervention in the event of an acute bleed. With long waiting times in emergency departments, it may not be in the patient’s best interest to be subjected to the process of CT imaging when the only indication is anticoagulant use. Clear decisions around goals of care and shared risk-benefit discussions may reduce scanning burden for both individuals and the wider system.

Comments

Really interesting poster and much needed work! Of the 1.6% who had a haemorrhage identified what was their prognosis/outcomes?

Submitted by erippon_21108 on

Permalink

Patient 1: Small SAH (subarachnoid) 

Patient 2 Tiny parenchymal haemorrhage on clopidogrel

Patient 3 Bilateral subdural- 21day admission and home with Admission avoidance planning and RIP 17days later

Patient 4 Tiny bleed anterior falx- 7day admission and then discharged home

Patient 5 Small focal haemorrhage in occipital region admitted for 4days and then discharged home,

Patient 6 Small volume tSAH- admitted 9days and discharged home, re-admitted for 25days and then discharged to rehab bed

Patient 7 Subdural- admitted 5days and then discharged

Patient 8 Multiple small foci haemorrhage- admitted 22days and discharged home with new QDS package of care

Patient 9 subdural-ortho admission and RIP 15days

Patient 10 tSAH 9 day admission discharged to rehab bed

 

So quite an interesting spread of short admissions with no change, requirement for rehab, new care packages and admission avoidance plans and expected death.  The radiological findings in majority were described as 'tiny or small' so are the discharge decisions due to frailty or injury....lots of consider and what makes older person trauma so fascinating to me.  Thank you for your comment and interest.