Risk Scoring Systems in Upper GI-haemorrhage
Use of risk scoring systems in the assessment of patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage is increasing. Comparative studies have intended to identify the system of choice, but the majority of these are characterized by retrospective designs, small sample sizes, low rate of severe bleeding, or low mortality. The main aim of this study was to identify the optimal scoring system.
Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage
|Study Design:||Time Perspective: Prospective|
|Official Title:||Risk Scoring Systems in Upper GI-haemorrhage|
- Need for hospital-based intervention [ Time Frame: 1 month ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]Need of hospital-based intervention was defined as treatment with blood transfusion, endoscopic therapy, transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE), surgery, or identification of cancer at upper endoscopy.
- Identification of low-risk patients [ Time Frame: 1 month ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]Low-risk patients were defined as patients who did not need hospital-based intervention, and survived more than 30 days from day of admission. Low-risk patients were considered as suitable for early discharge and potential outpatient management.
- Rebleeding [ Time Frame: 1 month ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]Rebleeding was defined as presence of hematemesis, blood per nasogastric tube, or melaena associated with a decline in B-hemoglobin of at least 1mmol/l (not explained by hemodilution) or decline in systolic arterial pressure of at least 20mmHg after the initial bleeding had stopped.
- 30 day mortality [ Time Frame: 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
|Study Start Date:||August 2009|
|Study Completion Date:||April 2012|
|Primary Completion Date:||August 2011 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)|