Many injured patients receive urgent CT imaging to identify major injury. CT imaging of trauma patients is often time critical and the accurate detection of life-threatening findings on this CT is essential. Often following a scan a radiologist is not immediately available to review the imaging, however other members of the trauma team have access to the imaging and may be in a position to provide a "hot" report. In this study we aim to demonstrate if an educational intervention with a checklist improves accuracy of the hot report.
This is a randomised controlled trial to evaluate whether a standardised approach, educational package (with checklist) may improve recognition of major life-threatening injuries in the hot reporting of trauma scans. A pilot study with 20 participants allocated to the two groups on 1:1 ratio which will receive the education package, will inform feasibility of the larger study. The larger study will recruit 300 participants, 100 on each group on 1:1:1 ratio, to evaluate the primary objective. Participants will be clinicians who volunteer to participate in an online educational package. Participant data will be collected by the online platform under a unique identifier. Results will then be extracted from the platform and then associated with the demographic data on the trust system. Following application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, participants will be allocated into one of three groups, and assigned a participant number. The test data set will consist of cases that have been pseudo anonymised with the key stored on trust systems.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
300
The three groups will report 2 image banks of 15 CT images each. Image bank A will contain 15 CT images each with a brief history including the mechanism of injury. Image bank B will contain 10 new CT images and 5 CT images contained within image bank A, but with an altered but compatible mechanism of injury. Group 1 will report image bank A, receive the educational intervention and then report image bank B with the checklist. Group 2 will report image bank B, receive the educational intervention and then report image bank A. Group 3 will report image bank A and B without any intervention.
University Hospitals Plymouth
Plymouth, Devon, United Kingdom
Rates of detection and error of a hot CT report.
Measure using percentage difference in hot report accuracy rates between those who receive the educational package and those who did not. Participants will submit their answers onto the platform and these will be evaluated by Radiologists familiar with the trauma scans the participants have reviewed. The primary analysis will be comparative between the pickup rate between the first and second imaging set within groups 1 and 2. Group 3 will act a control group to determine the effect of repetition on skill development rather than the education package.
Time frame: 1 year
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.