Abstract
Background Risk scores for triage of patients with acute upper-GI hemorrhage that incorporate endoscopic variables (e.g., the complete Rockall Score) may have better test characteristics for identification of “low-risk” bleeding episodes than those (e.g., Blatchford Score, clinical Rockall Score) that rely solely on clinical variables. An endoscopy-based risk score was compared with two clinically based risk scores in a large cohort of patients hospitalized for treatment of acute upper-GI hemorrhage to quantify the incremental value of endoscopy in the identification of low-risk bleeding. Methods ICD-9-CMcodes for discharge diagnosis were used to identify a cohort of patients (n = 175) hospitalized at a university medical center with acute non-variceal upper-GI hemorrhage. Medical record data were abstracted by two data abstractors blinded to the study intent by using a standardized data collection instrument. Blatchford and Rockall Scores were generated for each case. Low risk was defined as a Blatchford Score of 0, a clinical Rockall Score of 0, or complete Rockall Score of 2 or less. Results The Blatchford Score risk stratified only 14 of 175 (8%) patients with acute, non-variceal upper-GI hemorrhage as “low risk,” while the clinical Rockall Score identified 12%. However, the complete Rockall Score identified the greatest number of low-risk cases, 53/175 (30%) ( p < 0.0001), when compared with either the Blatchford or clinical Rockall Score. Conclusions The complete Rockall Score identified significantly more low-risk patients with acute upper-GI hemorrhage than either the clinical Rockall Score or the Blatchford Score. Identification of additional low-risk patients via this endoscopy-based score could lead to decreases in the use of hospital-based services, iatrogenic complications, and time lost from work or usual activity, while improving quality of care. Use of the clinical and complete Rockall Scores sequentially, with consideration of outpatient care for patients at identified as low risk, is recommended.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.