Literature DB >> 14734372

Proposed risk stratification in upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage: is hospitalisation essential?

A E Courtney1, R M S Mitchell, L Rocke, B T Johnston.   

Abstract

AIMS: Patients with upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage (UGIH) are usually admitted to hospital regardless of the severity of the bleed. The aim of this study was to identify patients who could be safely managed without hospitalisation and immediate inpatient endoscopy.
METHODS: Based on a literature review, a protocol was devised using clinical and laboratory data regarded as being of prognostic value. A retrospective observational study of consecutive patients who attended the emergency department (ED) with UGIH was conducted during one calendar month.
RESULTS: Fifty four patients were identified of whom 44 (81%) were admitted. Twelve suffered an adverse event. One of the 10 patients (10%) initially discharged from the ED was later admitted. Strict implementation of the protocol would have resulted in safe discharge of a further 15 patients, (34% of those admitted), and a saving of an estimated 37 bed days per month.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients at low risk from UGIH may be identified in the ED. If validated, this protocol may improve patient management and resource utilisation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14734372      PMCID: PMC1756367          DOI: 10.1136/emj.2003.012328

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Med J        ISSN: 1472-0205            Impact factor:   2.740


  7 in total

1.  Acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage in west of Scotland: case ascertainment study.

Authors:  O Blatchford; L A Davidson; W R Murray; M Blatchford; J Pell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-08-30

2.  Retrospective review of emergency department patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage for potential outpatient management.

Authors:  K Y Tham; H Kimura; T Nagurney; F Volinsky
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 3.451

3.  A risk score to predict need for treatment for upper-gastrointestinal haemorrhage.

Authors:  O Blatchford; W R Murray; M Blatchford
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-10-14       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Validation of the Rockall risk scoring system in upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Authors:  E M Vreeburg; C B Terwee; P Snel; E A Rauws; J F Bartelsman; J H Meulen; G N Tytgat
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 23.059

5.  Outpatient care of selected patients with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage.

Authors:  G F Longstreth; S P Feitelberg
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1995-01-14       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Selection of patients for early discharge or outpatient care after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. National Audit of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Haemorrhage.

Authors:  T A Rockall; R F Logan; H B Devlin; T C Northfield
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-04-27       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Incidence of and mortality from acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage in the United Kingdom. Steering Committee and members of the National Audit of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Haemorrhage.

Authors:  T A Rockall; R F Logan; H B Devlin; T C Northfield
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-07-22
  7 in total
  3 in total

Review 1.  Safe discharge: an irrational, unhelpful and unachievable concept.

Authors:  S Goodacre
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.740

2.  The cost-effectiveness analysis of video capsule endoscopy compared to other strategies to manage acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage in the ED.

Authors:  Andrew C Meltzer; Michael J Ward; Ian M Gralnek; Jesse M Pines
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 2.469

3.  Clinical outcome of acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage among patients admitted to a government hospital in Egypt.

Authors:  Ahmed S Gado; Basel A Ebeid; Aida M Abdelmohsen; Anthony T Axon
Journal:  Saudi J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.485

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.