Evaluating The Glasgow Blatchford Score for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Risk Stratification in A Community Hospital: A Retrospective Study.

Spartan medical research journal Pub Date : 2025-05-01 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.51894/001c.137546
Hind H Neamah, Alexandra Davies, Anthony Teta, Grace D Brannan, Sami Abdelaziz, Bruce Kovan
{"title":"Evaluating The Glasgow Blatchford Score for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Risk Stratification in A Community Hospital: A Retrospective Study.","authors":"Hind H Neamah, Alexandra Davies, Anthony Teta, Grace D Brannan, Sami Abdelaziz, Bruce Kovan","doi":"10.51894/001c.137546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is the most common emergency in gastroenterology. The Glasgow Blatchford Score (GBS) is a validated tool used for risk stratification. The cutoff values for GBS to predict the need for clinical intervention, endoscopic treatment, and mortality, are not consistent. To determine the relationship between mean GBS score and the need for hemostatic intervention, and blood transfusion, and to evaluate quality of care and proper allocation of resources at our midwestern community hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, we retrospectively extracted records for patients ≥18 years who were admitted for UGIB and underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy between July 2018 and July 2020. GBS was calculated for each observation. Multivariate analysis and a logistic regression model were performed to predict the GBS score, and the odds ratio, associated with the need for hemostatic intervention and blood transfusion while controlling for confounding factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The GBS sample mean score was 11.17. Those who required hemostatic intervention and blood transfusion scored significantly higher GBS (13.18 versus 10.79) and (13.57 versus 9.21), respectively. A GBS of >10 was associated with higher odds at 21.84 (CI: 10.324,46.185, P<0.001) and 5.085 (CI: 1.864, 13.872, P=0.001) for receiving blood transfusion and hemostatic intervention, respectively. A cutoff of 10 was 22.41% sensitive and 95.41% specific for requiring hemostatic interventions and 66.67% sensitive and 89.91% specific for receiving blood transfusion.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a clinical role to using the GBS even at a score higher than 2 to further stratify the severity of UGIB and determine the need for intervention. The sensitivity of a score of 10 on the GBS in this dataset was low. A cutoff with higher sensitivity is needed to stratify a life-threatening condition such as UGIB.</p>","PeriodicalId":74853,"journal":{"name":"Spartan medical research journal","volume":"10 1","pages":"15-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12065547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spartan medical research journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51894/001c.137546","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is the most common emergency in gastroenterology. The Glasgow Blatchford Score (GBS) is a validated tool used for risk stratification. The cutoff values for GBS to predict the need for clinical intervention, endoscopic treatment, and mortality, are not consistent. To determine the relationship between mean GBS score and the need for hemostatic intervention, and blood transfusion, and to evaluate quality of care and proper allocation of resources at our midwestern community hospital.

Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we retrospectively extracted records for patients ≥18 years who were admitted for UGIB and underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy between July 2018 and July 2020. GBS was calculated for each observation. Multivariate analysis and a logistic regression model were performed to predict the GBS score, and the odds ratio, associated with the need for hemostatic intervention and blood transfusion while controlling for confounding factors.

Results: The GBS sample mean score was 11.17. Those who required hemostatic intervention and blood transfusion scored significantly higher GBS (13.18 versus 10.79) and (13.57 versus 9.21), respectively. A GBS of >10 was associated with higher odds at 21.84 (CI: 10.324,46.185, P<0.001) and 5.085 (CI: 1.864, 13.872, P=0.001) for receiving blood transfusion and hemostatic intervention, respectively. A cutoff of 10 was 22.41% sensitive and 95.41% specific for requiring hemostatic interventions and 66.67% sensitive and 89.91% specific for receiving blood transfusion.

Conclusion: There is a clinical role to using the GBS even at a score higher than 2 to further stratify the severity of UGIB and determine the need for intervention. The sensitivity of a score of 10 on the GBS in this dataset was low. A cutoff with higher sensitivity is needed to stratify a life-threatening condition such as UGIB.

评价社区医院格拉斯哥布拉奇福德评分对上消化道出血风险分层的回顾性研究
上消化道出血(UGIB)是胃肠病学中最常见的急症。格拉斯哥布拉奇福德评分(GBS)是用于风险分层的有效工具。GBS预测临床干预需求、内镜治疗和死亡率的临界值并不一致。确定GBS平均评分与止血干预和输血需求之间的关系,并评估中西部社区医院的护理质量和资源合理分配。方法:在这项横断面研究中,我们回顾性提取2018年7月至2020年7月期间因UGIB入院并接受食管胃十二指肠镜检查的≥18岁患者的记录。计算每次观察的GBS。在控制混杂因素的情况下,采用多因素分析和logistic回归模型预测与止血干预和输血需求相关的GBS评分和优势比。结果:GBS样本平均评分为11.17分。需要止血干预和输血的患者GBS评分明显更高(分别为13.18对10.79和13.57对9.21)。GBS评分为10.324,46.185,为21.84 (CI: 10.324,46.185)。结论:即使评分高于2分,使用GBS评分对进一步划分UGIB的严重程度和确定干预的必要性也有临床作用。在该数据集中,GBS得分为10的灵敏度较低。对危及生命的疾病(如UGIB)进行分层,需要灵敏度更高的分界点。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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