Diagnostic accuracy of the ROSIER scale for detecting acute ischemic stroke: a comparison with FAST-ED, CPSS, and reference criteria.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Farhad Heydari, Mobina Marzban, Mehrdad Esmailian, Amir Bahador Boroumand, Afshin Najafi, Mehdi Nasr Isfahani, Elahe Nasri Nasrabadi, Ali Emamjomeh
{"title":"Diagnostic accuracy of the ROSIER scale for detecting acute ischemic stroke: a comparison with FAST-ED, CPSS, and reference criteria.","authors":"Farhad Heydari, Mobina Marzban, Mehrdad Esmailian, Amir Bahador Boroumand, Afshin Najafi, Mehdi Nasr Isfahani, Elahe Nasri Nasrabadi, Ali Emamjomeh","doi":"10.1186/s12873-026-01654-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) requires rapid diagnosis and treatment. While neuroimaging remains the gold standard, it is often unavailable in early emergency or prehospital settings. Clinical stroke scales may bridge this gap. Thus, this study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the ROSIER scale with the Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale (CPSS), Field Assessment Stroke Triage for Emergency Destination (FAST-ED), and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) for the detection of AIS in patients with suspected stroke, using MRI as the imaging reference standard.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective cross-sectional study was performed on adult patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) between June 2021 and 2023, with acute neurological symptoms and underwent brain MRI for a suspected stroke. After data gathering, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed, and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of ROSIER for detecting of AIS were calculated and compared with CPSS, FAST-ED, and NIHSS. MRI was considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of AIS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 655 patients were included, and 477 (72.8%) were diagnosed with AIS. The mean age was 68.43 ± 13.01 years, and 57.3% were male. The AUROC values for ROSIER, CPSS, FAST-ED, and NIHSS were 0.813, 0.860, 0.811, and 0.822, respectively. No significant differences were found between the tools. Sensitivities for ROSIER ≥ 2, CPSS ≥ 2, FAST-ED ≥ 3, and NIHSS ≥ 8 were 86.8%, 90.7%, 74.7%, and 73.5%, respectively. Their specificities were 58.1%, 67.7%, 77.4%, and 81.5%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All four tools showed good diagnostic accuracy. CPSS was the most sensitive and suitable for prehospital detection, whereas NIHSS offered the best specificity for in-hospital confirmation. Selection of the tool should be context-dependent, based on resources, time, and examiner expertise.</p>","PeriodicalId":9002,"journal":{"name":"BMC Emergency Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13587276/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-026-01654-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) requires rapid diagnosis and treatment. While neuroimaging remains the gold standard, it is often unavailable in early emergency or prehospital settings. Clinical stroke scales may bridge this gap. Thus, this study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the ROSIER scale with the Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale (CPSS), Field Assessment Stroke Triage for Emergency Destination (FAST-ED), and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) for the detection of AIS in patients with suspected stroke, using MRI as the imaging reference standard.

Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study was performed on adult patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) between June 2021 and 2023, with acute neurological symptoms and underwent brain MRI for a suspected stroke. After data gathering, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed, and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of ROSIER for detecting of AIS were calculated and compared with CPSS, FAST-ED, and NIHSS. MRI was considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of AIS.

Results: A total of 655 patients were included, and 477 (72.8%) were diagnosed with AIS. The mean age was 68.43 ± 13.01 years, and 57.3% were male. The AUROC values for ROSIER, CPSS, FAST-ED, and NIHSS were 0.813, 0.860, 0.811, and 0.822, respectively. No significant differences were found between the tools. Sensitivities for ROSIER ≥ 2, CPSS ≥ 2, FAST-ED ≥ 3, and NIHSS ≥ 8 were 86.8%, 90.7%, 74.7%, and 73.5%, respectively. Their specificities were 58.1%, 67.7%, 77.4%, and 81.5%, respectively.

Conclusion: All four tools showed good diagnostic accuracy. CPSS was the most sensitive and suitable for prehospital detection, whereas NIHSS offered the best specificity for in-hospital confirmation. Selection of the tool should be context-dependent, based on resources, time, and examiner expertise.

ROSIER量表检测急性缺血性卒中的诊断准确性:与FAST-ED、CPSS和参考标准的比较
背景:急性缺血性脑卒中(AIS)需要快速诊断和治疗。虽然神经成像仍然是金标准,但在早期急诊或院前环境中往往无法使用。临床中风量表可以弥补这一差距。因此,本研究旨在以MRI为影像学参考标准,比较ROSIER量表与辛辛那提院前卒中量表(CPSS)、急诊目的地卒中分诊量表(FAST-ED)、美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)对疑似卒中患者AIS的诊断准确性。方法:这项前瞻性横断面研究是对2021年6月至2023年6月期间急诊科(ED)收治的成年患者进行的,这些患者有急性神经系统症状,并因疑似中风接受了脑部MRI检查。收集资料后进行受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析,计算ROSIER检测AIS的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值,并与CPSS、FAST-ED、NIHSS进行比较。MRI被认为是诊断AIS的金标准。结果:共纳入655例患者,其中477例(72.8%)确诊为AIS。平均年龄68.43±13.01岁,男性占57.3%。ROSIER、CPSS、FAST-ED、NIHSS的AUROC值分别为0.813、0.860、0.811、0.822。在这些工具之间没有发现显著差异。ROSIER≥2、CPSS≥2、FAST-ED≥3、NIHSS≥8的敏感性分别为86.8%、90.7%、74.7%、73.5%。特异性分别为58.1%、67.7%、77.4%和81.5%。结论:四种工具均具有较好的诊断准确性。CPSS对院前检测最敏感,适用于院前检测,而NIHSS对院内确认的特异性最好。工具的选择应该与环境相关,基于资源、时间和审查员的专业知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Emergency Medicine
BMC Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
8.00%
发文量
178
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Emergency Medicine is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all urgent and emergency aspects of medicine, in both practice and basic research. In addition, the journal covers aspects of disaster medicine and medicine in special locations, such as conflict areas and military medicine, together with articles concerning healthcare services in the emergency departments.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书