title: Retrospective review of image quality of CT in polytrauma patients: comparison of patients scanned using a scoop stretcher and without a scoop stretcher.
abstract: Increasingly pre-hospital trauma management involves transfer of patients using a scoop stretcher; a number of computed tomography (CT) compatible scoops have recently appeared on the market. We sought to evaluate any differences in image quality in polytrauma patients scanned in a scoop stretcher. CT studies of 234 consecutive patients presenting between December 2011 and August 2012 at our regional level 1 tertiary trauma centre were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were allocated into two groups: those scanned with a scoop stretcher and without. CTs were reviewed by a consultant radiologist and two senior radiology trainees and graded separately for quality/artefact. A scale of 1-5 was employed: 1-uninterpretable, 2-borderline image quality, 3-acceptable, 4-good, 5-excellent. A total of 128 (54.7 %) patients were scanned in a scoop stretcher and 106 (45.3 %) were scanned without, 183 males and 51 females (average age, 46 (16-94) years; SD, 20). The average quality grading for the patients scanned in the scoop was 4.64 compared to 4.68 in those without the scoop. There was no significant grading difference between the groups, consultant (p = 0.096) and trainees (p = 0.782). No artefacts were attributable to the scoop stretcher 0/128 (0 %). Following our experience, the use of scoop stretchers is recommended for efficient, safe and practical management of trauma patients and in terms of imaging, with no detrimental effect on image quality.
authors: Department of Radiology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2WB, UK, sachin.modi@doctors.net.uk.
authors: Sachin
authors: S
authors: Modi
authors: Rakesh
authors: R
authors: Gadvi
authors: David
authors: D
authors: Yeo
authors: Sandro
authors: S
authors: Galea-Soler
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D016477:Artifacts; D004867:Equipment Design; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009104:Multiple Trauma / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D058254:Stretchers; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods*
references: Emerg Med J. 2011 Apr;28(4):300-4
references: 20659885
references: Patient Saf Surg. 2008 Aug 23;2:20
references: 18721480
references: Arch Surg. 2006 May;141(5):468-73; discussion 473-5
references: 16702518
references: J Trauma. 1987 May;27(5):525-31
references: 3573109
references: Emerg Med J. 2011 May;28(5):378-82
references: 20515906
references: Surg Neurol Int. 2012;3(Suppl 3):S188-97
references: 22905325
references: Prehosp Emerg Care. 2006 Jan-Mar;10(1):46-51
references: 16418091
references: Clin Radiol. 2006 Apr;61(4):365-9
references: 16546467
references: J Trauma. 2007 Jan;62(1):142-6
references: 17215745
references: Emerg Med J. 2012 Aug;29(8):630-4
references: 21785144
references: Lancet. 2009 Apr 25;373(9673):1455-61
references: 19321199
references: Clin J Sport Med. 2011 Mar;21(2):80-8
references: 21358496