Abstract

PURPOSE
This study aimed to determine new criteria for detecting independent factors with high sensitivity in cases of cervical spine injury. We compared the sensitivity, the specificity, and the false negative predictive value (NPV) of plain radiographs with those of computed tomography for cervical spine injury in patients with minor head injury.
METHODS
We retrospectively reviewed the cases of 357 patients who underwent both cervical plain radiographs and computer tomography from January 2006, to September 2008. Patients were divided into two groups: the cervical spine injury group and the no cervical spine injury group. New criteria were organized based on variables that had significant differences in the logistic regression test.
RESULTS
Among the 357 patients, 78 patients had cervical spine injuries. The average age was 43.9+/-15.2 yrs old, and the male-to-female ratio was 1.90. The most common mechanism of injury was motor vehicle accidents. There was a significant difference in loss of consciousness, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS)=14, neurologic deficit, posterior neck tenderness, and abnormality of the cervical plain radiographs between the two groups on the logistic regression test. New criteria included the above five variables. If a patient has at least variable, the area under the ROC curve of the new criteria was 0.850, and the sensitivity and the false NPV were 87.2% and 5.2%, respectively.
CONCLUSION
New criteria included loss of consciousness, GCS=14, neurologic deficit, posterior neck tenderness, and abnormality of the cervical plain radiographs. If the patient had at least 1 variable, he or she could have a of cervical spine injury with a sensitivity of 87.2% and a false NPV of 5.2%.

• Keywords: Cervical vertebraeComputed tomographyPhysical examination