Several risk scoring systems exist for upper gastrointestinal bleed.
Dr Cheng and colleagues from California, USA hypothesized that a modified Glasgow Blatchford Score (mGBS) that eliminates the subjective components of the GBS might perform as well as current scoring systems.
The research team compared the performance of the mGBS to the most widely reported scoring systems for prediction of clinical outcomes in patients presenting with UGIB.
Prospective cohort study from 2010 to 2011.
Accuracy of the mGBS was compared with the full GBS, full Rockall Score and clinical RS using area under the receiver operating characterstics-curve.
|32% of patients required blood transfusion|
|Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics|
Primary outcome was need for clinical intervention: blood transfusion, endoscopic, radiological or surgical intervention.
The team's secondary outcome was repeat bleeding or mortality.
The research team included 199 patients.
Median age was 56 with 40% of women.
The research team found that 32% of patients required blood transfusion, 24% endoscopic interventions, 0.5% radiological intervention, 0 surgical interventions, 5% had repeat bleeding and 0.5% mortality.
Dr Cheng's team commented, "The modified Glasgow Blatchford Score performed as well as the full Glasgow Blatchford Score while outperforming both Rockall Scores for prediction of clinical outcomes in American patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed."
"By eliminating the subjective components of the Glasgow Blatchford Score, the modified Glasgow Blatchford Score may be easier to use and therefore more easily implemented into routine clinical practice."