ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2025
Comparison of Emergency Physicians' and Hospitalists' Attitudes Toward Fecal Occult Blood Testing in Gastrointestinal Bleeding.
Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe guaiac fecal occult blood test, originally designed for colorectal cancer screening, is frequently used in emergency departments (ED) to detect occult gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. However, the test has low sensitivity and specificity, leading to potential false positives and negatives. This study evaluates the current practices and perceptions of emergency physicians and hospitalists regarding the utility of the guaiac test in the setting of suspected GI bleeding in the ED.
objectiveOur primary aim in this study was to evaluate the current practice and views of emergency physicians and hospitalists on the utility of the stool guaiac test in the ED.
methodsWe conducted a multicenter survey from January 3-April 3, 2024, across four hospital systems, targeting attending physicians in the ED and hospitalists. Participants were asked to rate their agreement with statements about the stool guaiac test on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
resultsResponse rates were 47/93 (50.5%) for emergency attendings and 9/18 (50%) for hospitalists. Emergency attendings were significantly less likely than hospitalists to agree that stool guaiac testing is important for evaluating GI bleeding (31% vs 67%, P < .001). More than half of emergency attendings (55%) reported often performing the test, while 44% of hospitalists reported frequently requesting it before accepting a patient. Although 70% of emergency attendings believed that guaiac results influence hospitalists' admission decisions (P = .02), 67% of hospitalists stated they would accept a patient with suspected GI bleeding even without a result. Despite rating the test as important, only 33% of hospitalists felt that stool guaiac testing frequently changes management during hospitalization. Overall, the groups showed distinct attitudes regarding the utility and impact of stool guaiac testing.
conclusionThe guaiac fecal occult blood test remains widely used despite skepticism among emergency attendings regarding its importance. Hospitalists were more likely to request the test but acknowledged it rarely changes patient management. These findings highlight the need for re-evaluation of guaiac testing in acute care settings and improved communication between ED and inpatient teams. Further research should explore the clinical impact of removing routine stool guaiac testing.
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.