- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT04237454
Thermal Imaging Compared to Skeletal Survey in Children Below 2 Years
January 17, 2020 updated by: Sheffield Children's NHS Foundation Trust
Thermal Imaging Compared to Skeletal Survey for Diagnosis of Fractures in Suspected Inflicted Injury in Children Below 2 Years of Age: A Prospective Diagnostic Accuracy Study
When a child less than 2 years old attends the Emergency Department (ED) with an injury, carers should offer an explanation.
When there is no explanation or if the explanation is inconsistent & because the child cannot say what happened, the doctor will need to consider all possible causes including child abuse.
To help exclude abuse, the doctor will request x-rays of all the child's bones to make sure there are no other unexplained fractures.
This requires up to 20 x-rays, which are called a skeletal survey.
Even if there are no fractures, some or all of the x-rays will be repeated in the following 7-21 days, because by that time any fractures will have started to heal and so are easier to see than on the first skeletal survey.
It means that if a doctor is worried about abuse, the child may need to have up to 40 x-rays, which amounts to a significant radiation dose (more than 6 months of natural UK background radiation) & increases the child's lifetime risk of getting cancer.
79 to 97 out of 100 skeletal surveys performed are normal.
While it is of paramount importance to identify if a child is being abused, it is also important to minimise radiation dose.
A camera which detects light and heat given off by the body has shown promise in some areas of medical practice.
We plan to compare the results from the camera to those of the skeletal survey in 40 children below 2 years of age attending our hospital over a 6-month period.
We hope to demonstrate that this technology can be used to further select children who should have a skeletal survey, reducing radiation dose in children without missing those who are being abused and sending them home to be abused again.
Study Overview
Status
Completed
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Interventional
Enrollment (Actual)
2
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.
Study Locations
-
-
South Yorkshire
-
Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom, S10 2TH
- Clinical Research Facility
-
-
Participation Criteria
Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
1 month to 16 years (CHILD)
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Yes
Genders Eligible for Study
All
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Children between 1 month and 2 years of age having initial/follow-up skeletal survey for investigation of suspected abuse
- Healthy Control children
Exclusion Criteria:
- 1. Informed consent withheld by main carer/guardian for the skeletal survey (court order would then be issues) 2. Informed consent for participation in the research study withheld 2. Situations where informed consent cannot be obtained (e.g. inability of carer/guardian to understand written English) 3. Postmortem cases (inclusion of the demised would unduly complicate the consent process for this small pilot study)
Study Plan
This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: DIAGNOSTIC
- Allocation: NA
- Interventional Model: SINGLE_GROUP
- Masking: NONE
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
EXPERIMENTAL: Infrared Imaging undertaken
|
To develop a non-ionising radiation-based method of excluding fractures in children with suspected physical abuse
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Diagnostic accuracy of thermal imaging for fracture detection compared to skeletal survey as the gold standard
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value) of thermal imaging compared to the full skeletal survey as gold standard
|
6 months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Potential radiation dose reduction - calculated on the basis of known radiation exposure of the images that form the skeletal survey
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Radiation dose saving of a protocol that only images those areas of abnormality seen on thermal imaging compared to the full skeletal survey as gold standard
|
6 months
|
|
Carer acceptability/preference of the imaging modalities
Time Frame: 6 months
|
Descriptive statistics based on responses to a non-validated questionnaire on carer experiences of both imaging techniques
|
6 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.
Study record dates
These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.
Study Major Dates
Study Start (ACTUAL)
September 1, 2016
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
April 11, 2017
Study Completion (ACTUAL)
April 11, 2017
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
January 3, 2020
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
January 17, 2020
First Posted (ACTUAL)
January 23, 2020
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)
January 23, 2020
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
January 17, 2020
Last Verified
January 1, 2020
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- SCH-13-067f
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
NO
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
No
product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.
No
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Fracture
-
Charite University, Berlin, GermanyJena University Hospital; Beckman Coulter, Inc.; University Hospital Dresden; Unfallkrankenhaus... and other collaboratorsRecruitingFemoral Neck Fractures | Femoral Shaft Fracture | Tibial Shaft Fracture | Forearm Fracture | Fracture Non Union | Distal Tibia Fracture | Fracture Healing | Femur Distal Fracture | Proximal Tibia Fracture | Humerus Shaft Fracture | Long Bone Delayed-Union Fracture | Pertrochanteric Fracture of FemurGermany
-
Intermountain Health Care, Inc.University of UtahCompletedPilon Fracture | Calcaneus Fracture | Ankle Fracture | Talus FractureUnited States
-
Balgrist University HospitalRecruitingStress Fracture Metatarsal | Lower Limb Fracture | Stress Fracture Foot | Stress Fracture Ankle | Stress Fracture of TibiaSwitzerland
-
Massachusetts General HospitalCompletedDistal Radius Fracture | Metacarpal Fracture | Mallet Fracture | Radial Head Fracture | Metacarpal Neck FractureUnited States
-
St. Louis UniversityTerminatedCompression Fracture of Thoracic Vertebral Body | Thoracic Fracture | Lumbar Fracture | Compression Fracture of Lumbar Spine | Burst Fracture of Thoracic Vertebra | Burst Fracture of Lumbar VertebraUnited States
-
University of TennesseeSoutheastern Fracture ConsortiumUnknownAnkle Fracture | Trimalleolar Fracture | Medial Malleolus Fracture | Bimalleolar Fracture | Malleolus FractureUnited States
-
Oregon Health and Science UniversityRecruitingAnkle Fractures | Ankle Fracture - Lateral Malleolus | Syndesmotic Injuries | Ankle Fracture, Trimalleolar | Ankle Fracture, Bimalleolar | Fibula Fracture | Ankle Fracture - Medial Malleolus | Maisonneuve's FractureUnited States
-
Balgrist University HospitalUniversity of ZurichTerminatedFracture of Clavicle | Fracture of Femur | Fracture of Humerus | Fracture of Ulna Radius | Fracture of Hand | Fracture of Pelvis | Fracture of Tibia Fibula | Fracture of SkullSwitzerland
-
George Washington UniversityRecruitingFracture | Fracture Dislocation of Ankle Joint | Fracture Leg | Fracture Femur | Fracture Lower LegUnited States
-
Inion OyUnknownTrimalleolar Fracture | Distal Fibular Fracture | Bimalleolar FractureUnited Kingdom
Clinical Trials on Thermal Imaging Camera
-
Sheffield Children's NHS Foundation TrustCompletedSleep ApneaUnited Kingdom
-
Sciberras, Stephen M.D.University of MaltaRecruitingHemodynamic Monitoring | Monitoring, PhysiologicMalta
-
Seinajoki Central HospitalTurku University Hospital; Oulu University Hospital; Kuopio University Hospital; Tampere University Hospital and other collaboratorsNot yet recruiting
-
Diabetis JSCManchester University NHS Foundation Trust; Vilnius University Hospital Santaros... and other collaboratorsNot yet recruitingDiabetic Foot UlcerLithuania, United Kingdom
-
Ain Shams UniversityRecruitingPeriodontal DiseasesEgypt
-
Doron CarmiUnknownFever | Sore ThroatIsrael
-
Digital Diagnostics, Inc.RecruitingDiabetic Retinopathy | Diabetic Macular EdemaUnited States
-
Sheffield Children's NHS Foundation TrustCompleted
-
University of ArkansasWithdrawnPressure Ulcer | Decubitus UlcerUnited States