Key result
The AIMS65 score was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality risk (OR 1.735) in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, demonstrating superiority over the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scores.
Why the study?
The study aimed to evaluate and compare the performance of the AIMS65 score, Glasgow-Blatchford score, and Rockall score for predicting clinical outcomes in patients with nonvariceal versus variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Does the AIMS65 score better predict clinical outcomes compared to the Glasgow-Blatchford score and Rockall score in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding?
Population
337 patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding
Comparison
AIMS65 score vs Glasgow-Blatchford score vs Rockall score
Design
Prospective observational study
Authors
Loading...
AIMS65 may aid mortality risk stratification in upper GI bleeding; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Observational (n=337)
No
Does the AIMS65 score better predict clinical outcomes compared to the Glasgow-Blatchford score and Rockall score in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding?
Odds Ratio: 1.735 (95% CI 1.148–2.62)
p-value: p=0.009
The AIMS65 score is superior to the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scores in predicting in-hospital mortality among patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Chang et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (n=337). AIMS65 score vs. Glasgow-Blatchford score and Rockall score was evaluated on In-hospital mortality (OR 1.735, 95% CI 1.148-2.620, p=0.009). The AIMS65 score was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality risk (OR 1.735) in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, demonstrating superiority over the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scores.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: