• G G Robins, M S Sarwar, M J Armstrong, M Armstrong, M E Denyer, S Bush, T Hassan, and S M Everett.
• Department of Gastroenterology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK. medggr@leeds.ac.uk
• Postgrad Med J. 2007 Dec 1; 83 (986): 768-72.

AimsTo audit the safety of differing protocol-driven early-discharge policies, from two sites, for low-risk acute upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and determine if default early (<24 h) in-patient endoscopy is necessary.MethodsAll patients with low-risk acute upper GI bleeding presenting to two separate hospital sites in Leeds from August 2002 to March 2005 were identified. Both hospitals operate nurse-led process-driven protocols for discharge within 24 h, but only one includes default endoscopy. Relevant information was obtained from patients' notes, patient administration systems, discharge letters and endoscopy records.Results120 patients were admitted to site A and 74 to site B. Median length of stay on the clinical decisions unit was 12.6 h at site A and 9.4 h at site B (p = 0.045). Oesophagogastroduodenoscopy was performed on 89/120 (74%) patients at site A compared with only 7/74 (9%) at site B (p<0.001). Six of 120 (5%) patients from site A were admitted to hospital for further observation compared with 6/74 (8%) from site B (p = 0.38). Of the remaining patients, all were discharged within 24 h, and 8/114 (7%) at site A vs 17/68 (25%) at site B were given hospital clinic follow-up (p<0.001). None of the 194 patients had further bleeding or complications within 30 days.ConclusionsPatients admitted with a low-risk acute upper GI bleeding can be managed safely by a nurse-led process-driven protocol, based on readily available clinical and laboratory variables, with early discharge <24 h. Avoiding in-patient endoscopy appears to be safe but at the price of greater clinic follow-up.

20 keywords...

hide…