Background: Abdominal injuries rank as the third leading cause of trauma-related fatalities. For patients who are stable in terms of hemodynamics, the focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) exam provides valuable prognostic insights at a low cost. Although FAST is more accurate in identifying free intraperitoneal fluid, a positive result often leads to a preference for Computed Tomography (CT) scans to decide on the most appropriate treatment approach, whether surgical or non-surgical. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of sonography for trauma compared with the results of computed tomography as a gold standard in multiple trauma patients. Methods: A cross-sectional study conducted with 168 patients in the Emergency Department at Zagazig University Hospital. These patients had a history of blunt trauma and suspected abdominal injuries. Upon their arrival at the emergency room of Zagazig University Hospital, they underwent FAST and CT scans. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of the FAST scan for identifying free intraperitoneal fluid were determined to be 98%, 100%, 100%, 99%, and 98%, respectively. In comparison, the CT scan showed values of 100% for sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy in detecting free intraperitoneal fluid. Conclusion: We concluded that CT scans, unlike FAST scan, provides excellent imaging about source of hemorrhage in addition of detection of IPFF. While FAST is also a highly useful tool, if the patient is stable, CT scan is seen to be the best option for accurately diagnosing blunt abdominal injuries