The major risk for radiologists is probably the shock of having to be out of
bed at 3AM and venture into that place called a hospital in the dark. Any
risk is relative, operative surgical lesion may be uncommon. But those and
the contusion that increase in size are injuries you don't want to miss. The
Americans scan many more head injuries than we do....have they seen many
more complications.....apart from needing to have a CT to see if they have a
CT induced brain tumour?
Has George Bush had one too many CT scans?
Andy Webster
-----Original Message-----
From: Accident and Emergency Academic List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of jason smith
Sent: 14 November 2003 13:57
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: nice head injury
Regarding the NICE head injury guidelines, does anyone know the rates of
complications of head CT in later life, i.e. increased rate of cerebral
malignancy?
One of the comments we have had from our radiologists is that they don't
like doing head CT's on young patients because of this risk, but none were
able to quantify.
Should it influence the application of the guidelines in those patients who
we think are at low risk of having intracranial problems yet fall within the
rigid inclusion criteria of NICE?
Jason Smith
>From: sri srinivas <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Accident and Emergency Academic List <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: nice head injury
>Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:22:36 +0000
>
>hi
>is anybody actively looking at implementing the nice
>guidelines for head injuries. we have started
>discussing with our radiology colleagues and there
>were some queries on the following points just for
>openers, which i am sure will increase the more we
>look at implementing it in its entirerity.
>
>
>1) any idea what <gcs13 at anytime means- does it mean
>measured by a healthcare professional?
>
>2) >1 episode of vomiting - especially kids this is
>pretty common. and what do folks think of one seizure
>post injury with complete recovery in kids requiring
>c.t scan
>
>3)any l.o.c - this again is a big bug bear - should
>there be a time span- say l.o.c over a minute or so
>altho this is not evidence based we do get patients
>often with momentary l.o.c say less than a minute. and
>pts who are amnesic for 5 minutes or so post injury
>might say there were unconscious altho they might not
>be.
>
>these are national guidelines and can we interpret and
>adapt it locally. what is the consensus?
>
>sri
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo!
>Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk
_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today!
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger
________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned using the CleanPort MEF antivirus
system. Funded for members by the Doctors.net.uk Bulletin service
How does this protect me? http://www.Doctors.net.uk/qualityemail
________________________________________________________________________
|