Article Data

  • Views 75
  • Dowloads 5

Original Research

Open Access

The Role of Pain Scoring in Multi-detector Computed Tomography Indications in Pediatric Occult Fractures

  • Hüseyin Mutlu1
  • Ahmet Çağlar1
  • Ekrem Taha Sert1

1Aksaray University Medical School, Department of Emergency Medicine, Aksaray, Turkey

DOI: 10.22514/sv.2020.16.0020 Vol.16,Issue 1,June 2020 pp.153-158

Published: 30 June 2020

*Corresponding Author(s): Ahmet Çağlar E-mail:

PDF (244.81 kB)


Introduction: Computed tomography (CT) is used in emergency orthopedic trauma cases with suspicion of fracture that cannot be detected on X-ray. Also pain during examination in patients with fracture is important for clinicians. We aimed to investigate whether pain severity is indicative of multi-detector CT (MDCT). Methods: A total of 175 patients included in the study. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate pre-examination pain in all patients. The most painful and suitable region for palpation were determined, palpated and the patients were asked to re-score their pain. In this way, the local VAS score was determined. MDCT was performed in all patients with general VAS of > 5. MDCT results were compared with the VAS scores. Results: Fracture detection in MDCT was 61.1% in patients with general VAS score of ≥ 5. Of the 105 patients with the local VAS score of ≥ 7, 90 had fractures. In these patients, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of MDCT for detecting fractures were 84.1%, 77.9%, 85.7% and 75.7%, respectively. Conclusion: We believe that MDCT should be performed for suspected fracture if pain severity is high in isolated extremity trauma cases without fracture detection on X-ray.

Key words

Multi-detector Computed tomography, Pediatric trauma, Pain, Visual analogue scale

Cite And Share

Hüseyin Mutlu,Ahmet Çağlar,Ekrem Taha Sert. The Role of Pain Scoring in Multi-detector Computed Tomography Indications in Pediatric Occult Fractures. Signa Vitae. 2020. 16(1);153-158.


[1] Spady DW, Saunders DL, Schopflocher DP, Svenson LW. Patterns of injury in children: a population-basedapproach. Pediatrics. 2004;113:522-9.

[2] Mathison JD, Agrawal D. General principles of fracture management: Fracture patterns and description in children. Accessed June 14, 2010.

[3] Reisdorf E, Schwartz T. Introduction to emergency radiology. In Schwartz T. Reisdorf E, Editor. Emergency Radiology. 1 st ed. New York: McGraw Hill. 2000;p:1-10

[4] Freed HA, Shields NN. Most frequently overlooked radiographically apparent fractures in a teaching hospital emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 1984;13:900-4.

[5] Jarraya M, Hayashi D, Roemer FW, Crema MD, Diaz L, Conlin J et al. Radiographically occult and subtle fractures: a pictorial review. Radiol Res Pract. 2013;2013:370169.

[6] Freyd M. The graphic rating scale. J Educ Psychol. 1923;14:83–102.

[7] Downie WW, Leatham PA, Rhind VW, Wright V, Branco JA, Anderson JA. Studies with pain rating scales. Ann Rheum Dis. 1978;37:378–81.

[8] Todd KH, Funk KG, Funk JP, Bonacci R. Clinical significance of reported changes in pain severity. Ann Emerg Med.1996;4:485–9.

[9] McGrath PJ1, Walco GA, Turk DC et al. Core outcome domains and measures for pediatric acute and chronic/recurrent pain clinical trials: PedIMMPACT recommendations. J Pain. 2008;9:771-83.

[10] Collins SL, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. The visual analogue pain intensity scale: what is moderate pain in millimetres? Pain. 1997;72:95–7.

[11] Buckwalter KA, Farber JM. Application of multidetector CT in skeletal trauma. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2004;8:147-56.

[12] Pretorius ES, Fishman EK. Volume-rendered three-dimensional spiral CT: musculoskeletal applications. Radiographics. 1999;19:1143-1160.

[13] Dalinka MK, Boorstein JM, Zlatkin MB. Computed tomography of musculoskeletal trauma. Radiol Clin North Am. 1989;27: 933-944.

[14] Naranja RJ Jr, Gregg JR, Dormans JP, Drummond DS, Davidson RS, Hahn M. Pediatric fracture without radiographic abnormality. Description and significance. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;342: 141-6.

[15] Allen GM, Wilson DJ, Bullock SA, Watson M. Extremity CT and ultrasound in the assessment of ankle injuries: occult fractures and ligament injuries. Br J Radiol. 2020;93:20180989.

[16] Berger PE, Ofstein RA, Jackson DW, Morrison DS, Silvino N, Amador R. MRI demonstration of radiographically occult fractures: what have we been missing? Radiographics. 1989;9: 407-36.

[17] Mallee W, Doornberg JN, Ring D, van Dijk CN, Maas M, Goslings JC. Comparison of CT and MRI for diagnosis of suspected scaphoid fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;5;93:20-28

[18] Memarsadeghi M, Breitenseher MJ, Schaefer-Prokop C, Weber M, Aldrian S, Gäbler C et al. Occult scaphoid fractures: comparison of multidetector CT and MR imaging—initial experience. Radiology. 2006;240:169-76.

[19] Holmes JF, Akkinepalli R. Computed tomography versus plain radiography to screen for cervical spine injury: a meta-analysis. J Trauma. 2005;58:902-5.

[20] Wei CJ, Tsai WC, Tiu CM, Wu HT, Chiou HJ, Chang CY. Systematic analysis of missed extremity fractures in emergency radiology. Acta Radiol. 2006;47:710-7.

[21] Welling RD, Jacobson JA, Jamadar DA, Chong S, Caoili EM, Jebson PJ. MDCT and radiography of wrist fractures: radiographic sensitivity and fracture patterns. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:10-16.

[22] Imerci A, Canbek U, Kaya A, Sürer L, Savran A. Distribution of occult fractures detected in emergency orthopedic patient trauma with computerized tomography. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2013;19:157-63

[23] Gandhi TK, Kachalia A, Thomas EJ, Puopolo AL, Yoon C, Brennan TA et al. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: a study of closed malpractice claims. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:488-96.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) The Science Citation Index (SCI) is a citation index originally produced by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and created by Eugene Garfield. It (Science Citation Index Expanded) covers more than 8,500 notable and significant journals, across 150 disciplines in science and technology, from 1900 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Chemical Abstracts Service Source Index The CAS Source Index (CASSI) Search Tool is an online resource that can quickly identify or confirm journal titles and abbreviations for publications indexed by CAS since 1907, including serial and non-serial scientific and technical publications.

IndexCopernicus The Index Copernicus International (ICI) Journals database’s is an international indexation database of scientific journals. It covered international scientific journals which divided into general information, contents of individual issues, detailed bibliography (references) sections for every publication, as well as full texts of publications in the form of attached files (optional). For now, there are more than 58,000 scientific journals registered at ICI.

Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research The Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research (GFMER) is a non-profit organization established in 2002 and it works in close collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO). The overall objectives of the Foundation are to promote and develop health education and research programs.

Scopus Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Embase Embase (often styled EMBASE for Excerpta Medica dataBASE), produced by Elsevier, is a biomedical and pharmacological database of published literature designed to support information managers and pharmacovigilance in complying with the regulatory requirements of a licensed drug.

Submission Turnaround Time

Editorial review: 1 - 2 days

Peer review: 1 - 2 months

Ahead of Print: within 2 months after being accepted

Notes: Your information is kept confide-ntial throughout the review process.