Comparative study of risk assessment tools for patients with non-varicose gastrointestinal bleeding
10.3760/cma.j.cn115682-20200224-01011
- VernacularTitle:非静脉曲张性消化道出血患者风险评估工具的比较研究
- Author:
Qiuxia JIANG
1
;
Jinfeng LIU
;
Feng YANG
;
Alan LIU
;
Changfeng WANG
Author Information
1. 中国科学技术大学附属第一医院消化内科，合肥 230001
- Keywords:
Non-varicose gastrointestinal bleeding;
Scoring system;
Risk assessment
- From:
Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing
2020;26(24):3261-3267
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the evaluation value of Glascow-Scoring Scoring System (GBS) and Modified Glascow-Scoring System (mGBS) for clinical intervention and prognosis of patients with non-varicose gastrointestinal bleeding.Methods:The convenient sampling method was used to retrospectively analyze 254 patients with non-varicose gastrointestinal bleeding who were admitted to a Class Ⅲ Grade A hospital in Anhui province from January 2017 to May 2018, and GBS and revised GBS scores of all patients were calculated. The value of the two scoring systems in predicting of rebleeding rate during hospitalization, blood transfusion, endoscopic intervention, deaths of patients and the rate of patients transferring to ICU.Results:Area under the ROC curve ( AUC) of GBS scoring system for blood transfusion, rebleeding, death and ICU transfer in patients with non-varicose gastrointestinal bleeding were 0.761, 0.714, 0.865 and 0.829, respectively. AUC of mGBS scoring system for blood transfusion, rebleeding, death and ICU transfer in non-varicose gastrointestinal bleeding patients were 0.753, 0.718, 0.871 and 0.792, respectively. Both scoring systems had good predictive ability. The predicted AUC of GBS scoring system for endoscopic intervention was 0.540, and that of mGBS scoring system was 0.542, showing a low predictive value. The cut-off points for blood transfusion, rebleeding, death and transfer to ICU were respectively 8, 11, 12, and 11 for the GBS scoring system, and those were respectively 7, 8, 10, and 11 for mGBS scoring system. The optimal cutoff point increased with the increase of disease severity, and there was no statistically significant difference between the two scoring systems ( P>0.05) . Conclusions:Both scoring systems can better predict the disease intervention needs and prognosis of patients with non-varicose gastrointestinal bleeding. It is recommended to use the simpler and modified GBS scoring system in clinical practice.
