ArticleFrontline gastroenterology2017
Provision of out-of-hours services for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in England: results of the 2014-2015 BSG/NHS England national survey.
Article in Frontline gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Trends for Admission, Mortality and Emergency Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Study of Eight Years of Admissions in a Tertiary Care Hospital.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
- Improving safety and reducing error in endoscopy (ISREE): a survey of UK services.Frontline gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Variation in exposure to endoscopic haemostasis for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding during UK gastroenterology training.Frontline gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Pancreatitis: Preventing catastrophic haemorrhage.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere has been a drive to raise the standard of management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) in the UK, including three previous audits, sponsored by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG).
objectiveTo review the results of the latest BSG/National Health Service (NHS) England national survey of endoscopy services in England between 2014 and 2015.
methodAll NHS hospitals accepting acute admissions in England (168) were invited to respond to the survey.
resultsOverall, 142 hospitals (84%) returned data. 85% of hospitals used a validated risk assessment score at the time of patient's admission. While 80% of hospitals provided a 24/7 endoscopy service for unstable patients, and another 10% were in network to provide an acute service, only 60% performed an endoscopy within 24 hours for stable acute admissions or inpatients with AUGIB. 11% of hospitals operated an out-of-hours ad hoc rota. 43% felt that pressure from routine work affected their ability to offer a next-day oesophagogastroduodenoscopy service, while 20% of hospitals struggled to recruit endoscopists. 28% of units reported that the previous national audit performed in 2013 had a positive influence on service development.
conclusionsThis survey has revealed significant deficiencies in provision of services for patients with AUGIB in England, without a significant increase in number of hospitals providing an emergency AUGIB service since the last national audit in 2013.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.