<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.2d1 20170631//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="1.0" article-type="healthcare" lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">IJCRR</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">I Journ Cur Res Re</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>International Journal of Current Research and Review</journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">I Journ Cur Res Re</abbrev-journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2231-2196</issn><issn pub-type="opub">0975-5241</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Radiance Research Academy</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">3861</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi"/><article-id pub-id-type="doi-url"> http://dx.doi.org/10.31782/IJCRR.2021.131316</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>A Comparative Analysis of Scoring Systems in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleed to Predict Mortality and Rebleed among Patients from South India&#13;
&#13;
__ampersandsignnbsp;&#13;
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>V</surname><given-names>Aradya H</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Suvarna</surname><given-names>Deepak</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Lavekar</surname><given-names>Anurag</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>HP</surname><given-names>Nandeesh</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>R</surname><given-names>Vijay Kumar T</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>C</surname><given-names>Anupama</given-names></name></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><day>5</day><month>07</month><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>3)</volume><issue/><fpage>28</fpage><lpage>32</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>This article is copyright of Popeye Publishing, 2009</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2009</copyright-year><license license-type="open-access" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><license-p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) Licence. You may share and adapt the material, but must give appropriate credit to the source, provide a link to the licence, and indicate if changes were made.</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>Introduction: One of the major gastroenterological emergencies encountered is Upper Gastrointestinal bleeding. The major factors which influence the bleeding are the age of the patients, Comorbid conditions, Haemoglobin, ulcer size, shock, and need for repeated blood transfusion. The increased mortality rate among patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding is due to rebleeding. Objective: To compare the Sensitivity, Specificity of the various scoring system in predicting the outcome of upper gastrointes tinal bleeding. Methodology: A Prospective study was conducted at JSS Hospital, Mysore, India inMarch 2018. to September 2018. Compari son of different scoring systems (Rockall, Blatchford, AIMS 65, T score, and PNED score) was done using the ROC curve in predicting the risk of rebleed and mortality. Results: The area under the curve was more for the PNED Score, followed by Rockall Score. It was least for the T Scoring Technique when compared with Mortality Scoring Pattern with the risk scoring. All the scoring systems were found to be statisti cally Significant for the Mortality risk factor except for Blatchford Score. The different risk scoring for rebleeding was found to be statistically significant for all Scores except for the PNED Score which was significant. Conclusion: Rockall score, PNED, Blatchford Glasgow score and AIMS 65 has very good sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value for rebleed and mortality. However, their positive predictive value for rebleed and mortality is a limiting factor.&#13;
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>GI Bleed Scoring</kwd><kwd> Rebleed</kwd><kwd> Duodenal Ulcer</kwd><kwd> Mortality</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front></article>
