Testing the reliability of an eye-dedicated triaging system: the RESCUE.

PURPOSE: To calculate the reliability of an eye-dedicated triaging system named Rome Eye Scoring System for Urgency and Emergency (RESCUE). METHODS: There were four coding parameters: pain, redness, loss of vision, and risk of open globe. Each parameter is assigned a score, the sum of which allows color coding. There were 1000 consecutive patients divided into urgent (U) or non-urgent (NU) based upon diagnosis, need for treatment, hospitalization, and/or follow-up visit. Correlation between RESCUE triage scoring as assigned by the nurse on presentation and urgency as estimated retrospectively was calculated. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity have been calculated. False positives (FP) have been defined as patients assigned a RESCUE green or yellow code while retrospectively judged NU and false negatives (FN) have been defined as patients assigned a white code despite being considered U. RESULTS: Of 1000 patients, 332 (33.2%) were classified as U and 668 (66.8%) NU. The difference in RESCUE scoring between U and NU patients was significant (p<0.001), as well as the correlation between RESCUE scoring and urgency status. Accuracy was 95% with 9.3% FP and 2.7% FN. Sensitivity was 90.7% and specificity 97.2%. Positive predictive value was 94.6%, and negative predictive value was 95.2%. All 32 hospitalized patients and 147/198 (74.2%) patients given a return appointment properly received a yellow or green code. CONCLUSIONS: RESCUE accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity yield encouraging results, confirming the system''s ability to properly spot the most urgent cases. The concept of urgency in ophthalmology can be difficult to establish; nonetheless, an eye-dedicated triage can help in properly prioritizing urgent patients.

Triaging and coding ophthalmic emergency: the Rome Eye Scoring System for Urgency and Emergency (RESCUE): a pilot study of 1,000 eye-dedicated emergency room patients.

PURPOSE: Ophthalmic emergency (OE) triage is essential for prompt recognition of urgent cases. To date, no formal eye-dedicated triaging system has been widely accepted. The purpose of the present study is to propose a fast, accurate, and reproducible coding scale called the Rome Eye System for Scoring Urgency and Emergency (Rescue). METHODS: Phase 1 of the study is a retrospective analysis of electronic medical records (EMR); phase 2 is a prospective consecutive series. Phase 1 included 160,936 patients. Phase 2 included 1000 consecutive patients referred to the emergency department (ED) of our institution. In phase 1, the authors retrospectively analyzed EMRs of patients presenting to the ED, listing signs and symptoms most frequently associated with hospitalization. Redness, pain, loss of vision, and the risk for an open eye were identified and assigned a score ranging from 0 to 12. Color coding was assigned based on increasing scoring: 0-3 white, 4-7 green, 8-12 yellow code. In phase 2, 1000 consecutive ED patients were enrolled and prospectively coded according to RESCUE. After diagnosis and proper treatment, EMRs were retrospectively reviewed by a masked physician and patients recoded (Retro coding) according to clinical course. Correlation between Rescue and Retro coding was calculated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prospective and retrospective ED color coding correlation. RESULTS: A total of 160,936 EMR were retrospectively analyzed; 2407 (1.4%) patients required hospitalization. Loss of vision (90%), redness (76%), and pain (47%) were the most frequent complaints. Rescue significantly correlated to Retro coding (p<0.01): 841/1000 patients coded exactly the same color, 45/1000 were overestimated by one color class, none by two, 107/1000 underestimated by one, and 6/1000 by two classes. The 32/1000 hospitalized patients in the prospective cohort had a Rescue score significantly higher than non-admitted patients (p<0.01) and color coding among admitted and dismissed patients was significantly different as well (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The Rescue system seems promising in terms of usefulness and ease of implementation. The high correlation between Rescue code assigned prospectively and the post-diagnosis coding, as well as the prompt discrimination of cases that eventually required hospitalization, may lead to a wider use of the Rescue system. Further testing on larger samples and different institutions is warranted.