Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostic strategies in the management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Patient and physician ppreferences

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Routine diagnostic endoscopy is commonly obtained for low-risk patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding despite evidence from controlled trials that it does not improve patient outcome.

Objective: To determine whether endoscopy is being overutilized for these patients or whether considerations not addressed in the trials could justify its widespread use.

Methods: Twenty-five patients recovering from a recent hemorrhage and 22 primary care physicians used the analytic hierarchy process to perform an individualized analysis regarding the diagnostic management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The results were used to determine whether routine endoscopy was consistent with each subject’s interpretation of relevant data and judgments regarding the relative importance of five management goals. The authors then compared the proportion of subjects in each group who preferred endoscopy over two non-endoscopy strategies (upper gastrointestinal series and no routine diagnostic test) with 8596, the current rate of endoscopy at the authors’ hospital.

Results: Endoscopy was preferred by 92% (97.5% CI: 70%–98%) of the patients and 55% (97.5% CI: 31%–77%) of the physicians. The patients ranked identifying the cause of bleeding the second most important management goal after avoiding a poor outcome from the acute bleeding episode.

Conclusions: The current rate of diagnostic endoscopy is higher than would be expected based on physicians’ preferences but quite consistent with patients’ preferences. Patients regard knowledge of the bleeding site as important, even if this information will not affect management or prognosis. Attempts to assess the use of diagnostic endoscopy and other diagnostic tests should take both patient preferences and the pure value of diagnostic information into account.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kandel G. Management of nonvariceal upper GI hemorrhage. Hosp Pract (Off Ed). 1990;25(l):167–84.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Griffiths WJ, Neumann DA, Welsh JD. The visible vessel as an indicator of uncontrolled or recurrent gastrointestinal hemorrhage. N Engl J Med. 1979;300:1411–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Storey DW, Bown SG, Swain CP, Salmon PR, Kirkham JS, North-field TC. Endoscopic prediction pf recurrent bleeding in peptic ulcers. N Engl J Med. 1981;305:915–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Consensus Development Panel. Endoscopy. What is its role in upper GI bleeding? Dig Dis Sci 1981;26(suppl):1s-5s.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Peterson WL, Barnett CC, Smith HJ, et al. Routine early endoscopy in upper-gastrointestinal bleeding. N Engl J Med. 1981;304:925–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dronfield MW, Langman MJS, Atkinson M, et al. Outcome of endoscopy and barium radiography for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: controlled trial in 1037 patients. B M J. 1982;284:545–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bordley DR, Mushlin AI, Dolan JG, et al. Early clinical signs identify low-risk patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. JAMA. 1985;253:3282–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Morgan AG, Clamp SE. OMGE international upper gastrointestinal bleeding survey, 1978-1986. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1988;23(suppl 144):51–8.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kahn KL, Kosecoff J, Chassin MR, et al. The use and misuse of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Ann Intern Med. 1988;109:664–70.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gray GM, Young HS. Gastrointestinal bleeding. In: Rubenstein E, Federman DD (eds). Scientific American Medicine. New York: Scientific American, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Saaty TL. Multicriteria Decision Making. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Harker PT, Vargas LG. The theory of ratio scale estimation: Saaty’s analytic hierarchy process. Management Sci. 1987;33:1383–403.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Dolan JG, Isselhardt BJ, Cappuccio JD. The analytic hierarchy process in medical decision making: a tutorial. Med Decis Making. 1989;9:40–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Dolan JG. Can decision analysis adequately represent clinical problems? J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43:277.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Dolan JG, Bordley, DR. Using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to develop and disseminate guidelines. QRB Qual Rev Bull. 1992;18:440–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Dolan JG, Bordley, DR. Involving patients in complex decisions about their care: an approach using the analytic hierarchy process. J Gen Intern Med. 1993;8:204–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Expert Choice (computer program) version 7.0. Pittsburgh, PA: Expert Choice, Inc.

  18. Minitab reference manual, Release 7, State College, PA: Minitab Inc.:15-3, 15-8.

  19. Feinstein AR. Clinical Epidemiology. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders, 1985;517.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Simon R. Confidence intervals for reporting results of clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 1986;105:429–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Kraemer HC, Thiemann S. How Many Subjects? Newbury Park, CA. Sage Publications, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dyer JS. Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process. Management Sci. 1990;36:249–58.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Saaty TL. An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper “Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process.” Management Sci. 1990;36:259–68.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Harker PT, Vargas LG. Reply to “Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process” by J.S. Dyer. Management Sci. 1990;36:269–73.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Saaty TL. Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Management Sci. 1986;32:841–55.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Zahedi F. The analytic hierarchy process—a survey of the method and its applications. Interfaces 1986;16:96–108.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Golden BL, Wasil EA, Harker PT (eds.) The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Applications and Studies. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hamalainen RP. Computer assisted energy policy analysis in the parliament of Finland. Interfaces. 1988;18:12–23.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Eyrich HG. Benchmarking to become the best of the breed. Manufacturing Sys. Apr 1991.

  30. Libertore MJ, Nydick RL, Sanchez PM. The evaluation of research papers (or how to get an academic committee to agree on something). Interfaces. 1992;22:92–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Marton KI, Sox HC, Alexander J, Duisenberg CE. Attitudes of patients toward diagnostic tests. Med Decis Making 1982;2:439–48.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Sox HC, Margulies I, Sox CH. Psychologically mediated effects of diagnostic tests. Ann Intern Med. 1981;95:680–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Berwick DM, Weinstein MC. What do patients value? Med Care. 1985;23:881–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Detsky AS, Redelmeier D, Abrams HB. What’s wrong with decision analysis? Can the left brain influence the right? J Chron Dis. 1987;40:831–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rochester General Hospital, 1425 Portland Avenue, 14621, Rochester, NY

    Donald R. Bordley MD

Authors
  1. James C. Dolan MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Donald R. Bordley MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heidi Miller PA-C
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Received from the General Medicine Unit, Department of Medicine, Rochester General Hospital and the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, New York.

Supported by grant number HS 06391-01A1 from the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dolan, J.C., Bordley, D.R. & Miller, H. Diagnostic strategies in the management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. J Gen Intern Med 8, 525–529 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02599632

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02599632

Key words

Search

Navigation