Validity of an Ocular Emergency Triage System Compared to the Existing Grading System at the Emergency Unit of a Tertiary Eye Hospital in Saudi Arabia

Alsamnan, Mazen; Al-Amry, Mohammed; aldossari, Saif; Talea, Mohamed; Khandekar, Rajiv; Al-Ghadeer, Huda

doi:10.2147/opth.s397504

Cited by 3 publications

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Enhancing Ophthalmic Triage: identification of new clinical features to support healthcare professionals in triage

Jindal,

Brandao-de-Resende,

Neo

et al. 2024

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate which features from a patient's history are either high or low risk concerning ocular emergencies, which could be seamlessly integrated into the training of healthcare professionals in order to facilitate e cient ophthalmic triage. MethodsProspective, 12,584 visits from 11,733 adult patients attending an Accident and Emergency department at a single tertiary centre were analysed. Data was collected by ophthalmic nurses working in triage between August 2021 and April 2022 using an online form. Multivariate analysis (MVA) was conducted to identify which features from the patients' history would be associated with urgent care. ResultsThere were 5731 (45.5%) patients were appropriate for same day eye emergency examination (SDEE), 1416 (11.3%) urgent care and 5437 (43.2%) elective (GP/optometrist). The MVA top ten features that were statistically signi cant (p<0.05) that would warrant SDEE with odds ratio (95% CI) were: bilateral eye injury 36.5 [15.6-85.5], unilateral eye injury 25.8 [20.9-31.7], vision loss 4.8 [2.9-7.8], post-operative ophthalmic (<4 weeks) 4.6 [3.8-5.7], contact lens wearer 3.9 [3.3-4.7], history of uveitis 3.9 [3.3-4.7], photophobia 2.9 [2.4-3.6], unilateral dark shadow/curtain in vision 2.4 [1.8-3.0], unilateral injected red eye 2.0 [1.8-2.2] and rapid change in visual acuity 1.8 [1.5-2.2]. ConclusionThis comprehensive study covered almost 100 ophthalmic acute presentations and identi ed features that can be readily incorporated into triage and healthcare professional training, which could facilitate appropriate pathway selection for patients. Further research is required to evaluate the real-world impact application of these ndings on patient attendance in both primary and secondary care.res from a patient's history are either high or low risk concerning ocular emergencies, which could be seamlessly integrated into the training of healthcare professionals in order to facilitate e cient ophthalmic triage.

show abstract

Enhancing Ophthalmic Triage: identification of new clinical features to support healthcare professionals in triage

Jindal,

Brandao-de-Resende,

Neo

et al. 2024

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The profile of patients attending to the general emergency department with ocular complaints within the last year: is it a true ocular emergency?

Dag,

Aydın,

Kumantas

2024

BMC Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Ocular emergencies require immediate intervention to prevent rapid vision loss or functional impairment. The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of true ocular emergencies among patients who presented to the general emergency department with ocular complaints and were referred to the Eye Clinic. Methods In a retrospective cross-sectional study in a tertiary hospital in Istanbul, patients aged 0–100 years who presented to the general emergency department with ocular complaints between January and December 2022 were included. Inconclusive diagnoses and incomplete records were excluded. Patients were divided into three groups: top eye emergencies (TE), relative eye emergencies (REE), and non-emergency eyes (NEE). Results Among the 652,224 individuals seeking care, 9,982 (1.5%) were referred to the Eye Emergency Clinic. Of these, 2,788 (27.9%) were female, and 7,194 (72.1%) were male, with ages ranging from 0 to 98 years. TopEye Emergencies (TEE), Relative Eye Emergencies (REE), and Non-Eye Emergencies (NEE) accounted for 13%, 60%, and 27% of the cases, respectively. Common top-eye emergencies (TEE) include chemical injuries, orbital-preseptal cellulitis, and orbital fractures. Relative eye emergencies (REEs) commonly feature corneal foreign bodies, corneal erosion, and conjunctivitis. Nonemulsion eye (NEE) methods involve simple eye redness, trauma without eye involvement, and subconjunctival haemorrhage. Conclusions Consistent with the literature, 1.5% of patients presenting to the general emergency department had eye complaints.However, 27% of those referred to the ophthalmological clinic did not have an urgent eye condition. This is partly due to the high proportion of patients presenting to the emergency department with ocular complaints and the lack of knowledge of ophthalmological diseases by emergency physicians, leading to unnecessary referrals to the ophthalmology clinic, resulting in a loss of the workforce and reduced time allocated to patients with true ocular emergencies.

show abstract

The Profile of Patients Attending the Eye Emergency Clinic Within the Last Year: Is it a True Ocular Emergency?

dağ,

Aydın,

Kumantas

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Ocular emergencies require immediate intervention to prevent rapid vision loss or functional impairment. The aim of this study was to evaluate patients presenting to the general emergency department with ocular complaints and referred to the Eye Clinic and to determine the proportion of true ocular emergencies. Methods In a retrospective cross-sectional study in a tertiary hospital in Istanbul, patients aged 0-100 years who presented to the emergency department with ocular complaints between January and December 2022 were included. Inconclusive diagnoses and incomplete records were excluded. Patients were divided into three groups: Top Eye Emergencies (TEE), Relative Eye Emergencies (REE) and Non-Emergency Eye (NEE). Results Among 652,224 individuals seeking care, 9,982 (1.5%) were referred to the Eye Emergency Clinic. Of these, 2,788 (27.9%) were female, and 7,194 (72.1%) were male, with ages ranging from 0 to 98 years. Top Eye Emergencies (TEE), Relative Eye Emergencies (REE, and Non-emergency Eye (NEE) comprised 13%, 60%, and 27% of cases, respectively. Common Top Eye Emergencies (TEE) conditions included chemical injuries, orbital-preseptal cellulitis, and orbital fractures. Relative Eye Emergencies (REE)commonly featured corneal foreign bodies, corneal erosion, and conjunctivitis. Non-emergency Eye (NEE) mostly involved simple eye redness, trauma without eye involvement, and subconjunctival hemorrhage. Conclusions Consistent with the literature, 1.5% of patients presenting to the general emergency department had eye complaints. However, 27% of those referred to the ophthalmological clinic did not have an urgent eye condition. This is partly due to the high proportion of patients presenting to the emergency department with ocular complaints and the lack of knowledge of emergency physicians about ophthalmological diseases, leading to unnecessary referrals to the Ophthalmology Clinic, resulting in loss of workforce and reduced time allocated to patients with true ocular emergencies.

show abstract

Validity of an Ocular Emergency Triage System Compared to the Existing Grading System at the Emergency Unit of a Tertiary Eye Hospital in Saudi Arabia

Cited by 3 publications

References 20 publications

Enhancing Ophthalmic Triage: identification of new clinical features to support healthcare professionals in triage

Enhancing Ophthalmic Triage: identification of new clinical features to support healthcare professionals in triage

The profile of patients attending to the general emergency department with ocular complaints within the last year: is it a true ocular emergency?

The Profile of Patients Attending the Eye Emergency Clinic Within the Last Year: Is it a True Ocular Emergency?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About