Few patients who present to the emergency department with syncope or dizziness actually need a head CT scan, even though current medical practice pressures physicians to perform them, according to a new study in the American Journal of Roentgenology.
Fewer than 7.1% of patients coming to the emergency department with dizziness and 6.4% complaining of syncope or near-syncope benefited from the use of head CT, concluded researchers from Kaiser Foundation Hospital in Honolulu.
"If a careful history and physical examination do not find persistent neurologic signs, then a follow-up clinic visit the next day may be all that is necessary," said principal investigator Dr. Myles Mitsunaga in a statement.
The retrospective study looked at the electronic medical records of patients who presented to an HMO emergency department during the second half of 2012 and underwent a head CT for a primary complaint of dizziness, syncope, or near-syncope. The researchers looked for head CT scans with acutely abnormal findings and rates of hospital admission (AJR, January 2015, Vol. 204:1, pp. 24-28).
Of the 253 patients presenting with dizziness, 7.1% had head CT scans with acutely abnormal findings, and 18.6% were admitted to the hospital. Of the 236 patients who presented with syncope or near-syncope, 6.4% had head CT scans with acutely abnormal findings, and 39.8% were admitted.
Three clinical factors were found to correlate significantly with acutely abnormal head CT: having a focal neurologic deficit (p = 0.003), being older than 60 years (p = 0.011), and experiencing acute head trauma (p = 0.026), the authors wrote.
Unless the patients are older, have a focal neurologic deficit, or have a recent history of head trauma, CT is probably unnecessary, the study team concluded.

















![Axial images from unenhanced calcium score cardiac CT (left) and curved planar reformation images from CT angiography (right) show that higher long-term exposure to air pollution is associated with greater coronary artery calcium and more obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Top row: Images in a 68-year-old male patient with higher 10-year mean ambient air pollution exposure (7.9 μg/m3 for particulate matter measuring ≤2.5 μm in diameter [PM2.5] and 17.4 parts per billion [ppb] for NO2) with extensive CAD (coronary artery calcium score [CACS] >1,000 and obstructive CAD [≥70% diameter stenosis]). Bottom row: Images in a 57-year-old female patient with lower 10-year mean ambient air pollution exposure (6.3 μg/m3 for PM2.5 and 4.6 ppb for NO2) with no CAD (CACS = 0 and no obstructive stenosis).](https://img.auntminnie.com/mindful/smg/workspaces/default/uploads/2026/06/hanneman.r6SMLzkezo.png?auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=crop&h=112&q=70&w=112)


