Admission discipline and timing of admission may influence outcomes for gastrointestinal bleeding patients.
endoscopic surgery
haemodynamics
lower GI bleeding
outcome
upper gi bleeding
Journal
ANZ journal of surgery
ISSN: 1445-2197
Titre abrégé: ANZ J Surg
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 101086634
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2021
09 2021
Historique:
revised:
27
03
2021
received:
27
09
2020
accepted:
05
04
2021
pubmed:
14
5
2021
medline:
18
9
2021
entrez:
13
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Bleeding of the gastrointestinal tract (BGIT) is a common gastrointestinal emergency. There is no consensus whether this condition should be admitted to medical or surgical discipline. Timing of presentation may also impact patient outcomes due to differences in healthcare resource availability. This study thus aims to investigate the impact of admitting discipline and timing of admission on patient outcomes in BGIT. A 2-year tertiary institution database was retrospectively reviewed. Outcome measures included 30-day mortality, 30-day readmissions and rebleeding requiring repeat endoscopic, angiographic or surgical interventions. Secondary outcome measures included time to endoscopy, percutaneous angiographic interventions and surgery. The effect of admission discipline (medical versus surgical) and time of admission (office-hours versus after office-hours) were analysed using a propensity-score-adjusted estimate. A total of 1384 patients were included for analysis, medical (n = 853), surgical (n = 530); during office-hours (n = 785) and after office-hours (n = 595). After propensity-score-adjusted analysis, no significant differences in mortality or readmissions were noted between medical or surgical admissions. Patients admitted under surgery were less likely to sustain rebleeding (P = 0.004) for lower BGIT and had an earlier time to endoscopy for upper BGIT (P = 0.04). Patients admitted after office-hours had similar outcomes with those admitted during office hours apart from a delay in time to endoscopy (P = 0.02). For BGIT patients, admission to a surgical discipline compared to a medical discipline appeared to have at least equivalent patient outcomes. Patients presenting with BGIT after office-hours were more likely to experience a delay to endoscopy, although it did not affect patient mortality.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Bleeding of the gastrointestinal tract (BGIT) is a common gastrointestinal emergency. There is no consensus whether this condition should be admitted to medical or surgical discipline. Timing of presentation may also impact patient outcomes due to differences in healthcare resource availability. This study thus aims to investigate the impact of admitting discipline and timing of admission on patient outcomes in BGIT.
METHODS
A 2-year tertiary institution database was retrospectively reviewed. Outcome measures included 30-day mortality, 30-day readmissions and rebleeding requiring repeat endoscopic, angiographic or surgical interventions. Secondary outcome measures included time to endoscopy, percutaneous angiographic interventions and surgery. The effect of admission discipline (medical versus surgical) and time of admission (office-hours versus after office-hours) were analysed using a propensity-score-adjusted estimate.
RESULTS
A total of 1384 patients were included for analysis, medical (n = 853), surgical (n = 530); during office-hours (n = 785) and after office-hours (n = 595). After propensity-score-adjusted analysis, no significant differences in mortality or readmissions were noted between medical or surgical admissions. Patients admitted under surgery were less likely to sustain rebleeding (P = 0.004) for lower BGIT and had an earlier time to endoscopy for upper BGIT (P = 0.04). Patients admitted after office-hours had similar outcomes with those admitted during office hours apart from a delay in time to endoscopy (P = 0.02).
CONCLUSION
For BGIT patients, admission to a surgical discipline compared to a medical discipline appeared to have at least equivalent patient outcomes. Patients presenting with BGIT after office-hours were more likely to experience a delay to endoscopy, although it did not affect patient mortality.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1832-1840Informations de copyright
© 2021 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.
Références
Manning-Dimmitt LL, Dimmitt SG, Wilson GR. Diagnosis of gastrointestinal bleeding in adults. Am. Fam. Physician 2005; 71: 1339-46.
Laine L, Peterson WL. Bleeding peptic ulcer. N. Engl. J. Med. 1994; 331: 717-27.
Rockall TA, Logan RFA, Devlin HB, Northfield TC. 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. BMJ 1995; 311: 222-6.
Blatchford O, Murray WR, Blatchford M. A risk score to predict need for treatment for upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Lancet 2000; 356: 1318-21.
Lanas A, García-Rodríguez LA, Polo-Tomás M et al. Time trends and impact of upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation in clinical practice. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2009; 104: 1633-41.
Hreinsson JP, Gumundsson S, Kalaitzakis E, Björnsson ES. Lower gastrointestinal bleeding: incidence, etiology and outcomes in a population-based setting. Eur. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2013; 25: 37-43.
Oakland K, Guy R, Uberoi R et al. Acute lower GI bleeding in the UK: patient characteristics, interventions and outcomes in the first nationwide audit. Gut 2018; 67: 654-62.
Pardo A, Durández R, Hernández M et al. Impact of physician specialty on the cost of nonvariceal upper GI bleeding care. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2002; 97: 1535-42.
Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Management of Acute Upper and Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding. Edinburgh: Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, 2008.
Hearnshaw SA, Logan RFA, Lowe D, Travis SPL, Murphy MF, Palmer KR. Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the UK: patient characteristics, diagnoses and outcomes in the 2007 UK audit. Gut 2011; 60: 1327-35.
Stanley AJ, Laine L, Dalton HR et al. Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study. BMJ 2017; 356: i6432.
Villanueva C, Colomo A, Bosch A et al. Transfusion strategies for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. N. Engl. J. Med. 2013; 368: 11-21.
Quirk DM, Barry MJ, Aserkoff B, Podolsky DK. Physician specialty and variations in the cost of treating patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Gastroenterology 1997; 113: 1443-8.
Sandel MH, Kolkman JJ, Kuipers EJ, Cuesta MA, Meuwissen SG. Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: differences in outcome for patients admitted to internal medicine and gastroenterological services. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2000; 95: 2357-62.
Gardner AK, Scott DJ, Willis RE et al. Is current surgery resident and GI fellow training adequate to pass FES? Surg. Endosc. 2017; 31: 352-8.
Nimeri AA, Hussein SA, Panzeter E et al. The economic impact of incorporating flexible endoscopy into a community general surgery practice. Surg. Endosc. 2005; 19: 702-4.
Gardner AK, Willis RE, Dunkin BJ et al. What do residents need to be competent laparoscopic and endoscopic surgeons? Surg. Endosc. 2016; 30: 3050-9.
Reid S, George R, Warnock GL et al. Canadian Association of General Surgeons statement on endoscopy. Can. J. Surg. 2011; 54: 295.
Skubleny D, Switzer N, Karmali S, de Gara C. Endoscopy services and training: a national survey of general surgeons. Can. J. Surg. 2015; 58: 330-4.
Azin A, Saleh F, Cleghorn M et al. A comparison of endoscopic localization error rate between operating surgeons and referring endoscopists in colorectal cancer. Surg. Endosc. 2017; 31: 1318-26.
de Jonge V, Sint Nicolaas J, Cahen DL et al. Quality evaluation of colonoscopy reporting and colonoscopy performance in daily clinical practice. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2012; 75: 98-106.
Jones RP, Stylianides NA, Robertson AG, Yip VSK, Chadwick G. National survey on endoscopy training in the UK. Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. 2015; 97: 386-9.
Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. Recommendations for Endoscopic Training for Gastrointestinal Surgeons. London: AUGIS, 2010.
Bell CM, Redelmeier DA. Mortality among patients admitted to hospitals on weekends as compared with weekdays. N. Engl. J. Med. 2001; 345: 663-8.
Shih PC, Liu SJ, Li ST, Chiu AC, Wang PC, Liu LY. Weekend effect in upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PeerJ 2018; 6: e4248.
Roberts SE, Button LA, Williams JG. Prognosis following upper gastrointestinal bleeding. PLoS One 2012; 7: e49507.
Strate LL, Ayanian JZ, Kotler G, Syngal S. Risk factors for mortality in lower intestinal bleeding. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2008; 6: 1004-10.
Kulvantunyou N, Watt J, Friese RS et al. Management of acute mild gallstone pancreatitis under acute care surgery: should patients be admitted to the surgery or medicine service? Am. J. Surg. 2014; 208: 981-7.
Macedo FI, Eid JJ, Mittal VK, Flynn J, Jacobs MJ, Pearlman R. Impact of medical or surgical admission on outcomes of patients with acute cholecystitis. HPB (Oxford) 2017; 19: 99-103.
Aquina CT, Becerra AZ, Probst CP et al. Patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction should be primarily managed by a surgical team. Ann. Surg. 2016; 264: 437-47.
Oyasiji T, Angelo S, Kyriakides EC, Helton SW. Small bowel obstruction: outcome and cost implications of admitting service. Am. Surg. 2010; 76: 687-91.
Bilderback PA, Massman JD III, Smith RK, La Selva D, Helton WS. Small bowel obstruction is a surgical disease: patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction requiring operation have more cost-effective care when admitted to a surgical service. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 2015; 221: 7-13.
Mikulich O, Callaly E, Bennett K, O'Riordan D, Silke B. The increased mortality associated with a weekend emergency admission is due to increased illness severity and altered case-mix. Acute Med. 2011; 10: 182-7.
de Groot NL, Bosman JH, Siersema PD, van Oijen MGH, Bredenoord AJ, RASTA Study Group. Admission time is associated with outcome of upper gastrointestinal bleeding: results of a multicentre prospective cohort study. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 2012; 36: 477-84.
Abougergi MS, Travis AC, Saltzman JR. Impact of day of admission on mortality and other outcomes in upper GI haemorrhage: a nationwide analysis. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2014; 80: 228-35.
Ahmed A, Armstrong M, Robertson I, Morris AJ, Blatchford O, Stanley AJ. Upper gastrointestinal bleeding in Scotland 2000-2010: improved outcomes but a significant weekend effect. World J. Gastroenterol. 2015; 21: 10890-7.
Ananthakrishnan AN, McGinley EL, Saeian K. Outcomes of weekend admissions for upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage: a nationwide analysis. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2009; 7: 296-302e1.
Fujita M, Manabe N, Murao T et al. Differences in the clinical course of 516 Japanese patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding between weekday and weekend admissions. Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 2017; 52: 1365-70.
Haas JM, Gundrum JD, Rathgaber SW. Comparison of time to endoscopy and outcome between weekend/ weekday hospital admissions in patients with upper GI haemorrhage. WMJ 2012; 111: 161-5.
Myers RP, Kaplan GG, Shaheen AM. The effect of weekend versus weekday admissions on outcomes of esophageal variceal haemorrhage. Can. J. Gastroenterol. 2009; 23: 495-501.
Wu T, Chuah S, Chang K et al. Outcome of holiday and nonholiday admission patients with acute peptic ulcer bleeding: a real-world report from southern Taiwan. Biomed. Res. Int. 2014; 2014: 906531.
Zhou Y, Li W, Herath C et al. Off-hour admission and mortality risk for 28 specific diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 251 cohorts. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2016; 5: e003102.
Lau JYW, Yu YY, Tang RSY et al. Timing of endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020; 382: 1299-308.
Lonjon G, Porcher R, Ergina P, Fouet M, Boutron I. Potential pitfalls of reporting and bias in observational studies with propensity score analysis assessing a surgical procedure: a methodological systematic review. Ann. Surg. 2017; 265: 901-9.