Correlation between the glasgow-blatchford score, shock index, and forrest classification in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding

7Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background/aim: To investigate the correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score, shock index, and Forrest classification in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). Materials and methods: A total of 955 patients with PUB were assessed using the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index, as well as the Forrest classification based on their gastroscopy results. The correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index was determined using scatter plot analysis, and the correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score or shock index and Forrest classification was determined using Spearman’s analysis. Results: Both the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index showed the highest values in patients with Forrest class IIa. The Glasgow-Blatchford score was significantly higher than patients with Forrest class Ib/IIc/III (P < 0.05), and the shock index was significantly higher than patients with Forrest class Ib/IIb/III (P < 0.05). A positive correlation was observed between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index, at r = 0.427 (P < 0.001). A negative correlation was observed between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and Forrest classification, at r = –0.111 (P < 0.01), and between the shock index and Forrest classification, at r = –0.138 (P < 0.01). Conclusion: A moderate correlation was observed between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index in patients with PUB, and the correlation between the Forrest classification and Glasgow-Blatchford score or shock index was relatively low.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yang, H., Pan, C., Liu, Q., Wang, Y., Liu, Z., Cao, X., & Lei, J. (2020). Correlation between the glasgow-blatchford score, shock index, and forrest classification in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, 50(4), 706–712. https://doi.org/10.3906/sag-1906-154

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free