Abstract

OBJECTIVE To study the effectiveness and value of evidence-based nursing and predictive nursing in emergency treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. METHODS A total of 100 patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in our hospital were selected. The period was from January 2020 to June 2022. They were grouped according to the double color ball method, 50 cases in the control group were given routine nursing, and 50 cases in the observation group were given evidence-based nursing combined with predictive nursing. The key points of evidence-based nursing are to identify the evidence-based question, search for relevant literature, identify scientifically effective nursing measures, and develop nursing care plans that are tailored to the patient's specific situation based on evidence and clinical experience. Predictive nursing requires nurses to have a high level of awareness and risk prevention consciousness to provide care for early signs of bleeding and prevent the occurrence of complications. The psychological state scores, clinical-related indicators, clinical efficacy, incidence of complications, nursing satisfaction, and quality of life scores of the two groups were compared. RESULTS After the intervention, the SAS score (42.25 ± 1.67) and SDS score (43.59 ± 1.86) of the observation group were lower than those of the control group, the bleeding times (2.41 ± 0.45) of the observation group were less than those of the control group, the hemostasis time (30.12 ± 5.38d) and hospitalization time (5.01 ± 1.11d) of the observation group were shorter than those of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (all P < .05). The total effective rate of hemostasis (96.00%), patient satisfaction (98.00%), and scores of physical health (88.98 ± 5.59), psychological function (91.08 ± 5.11), material life state (90.54 ± 6.46) and social function (89.59 ± 5.78) in GQOLI-74 scores in the observation group were higher than those in the control group. The incidence of complications (6.00%) in the observation group was lower than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (all P < .05). CONCLUSION Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common emergency in gastroenterology, characterized by rapid onset, severe symptoms, and quick changes. Therefore, in order to expedite the recovery of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding and ensure their safety, it is necessary to provide effective clinical emergency nursing care. Evidence-based nursing can help nurses take appropriate nursing measures based on the best and latest evidence, to meet the reasonable individualized needs of patients. Predictive nursing is a nursing model that predicts potential nursing risks in advance and takes corresponding preventive measures. It can timely and systematically address risks in nursing and promote improvements in the effectiveness of disease treatment. The combined application of evidence-based nursing and predictive nursing can improve the hemostatic efficiency of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, improve the psychological state and quality of life, reduce the incidence of complications, and obtain higher satisfaction. The combined application of these two nursing models has positive implications for improving nursing efficiency, enhancing patient cooperation during emergency care, improving hemostasis effectiveness, enhancing quality of life, and fostering a harmonious nurse-patient relationship.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Hemostatic powders have been clinically used in the treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding. We investigated the non-inferiority of a polysaccharide hemostatic powder (PHP), compared with conventional endoscopic treatments, for peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). METHODS This study was a prospective multicenter randomized open-label controlled trial at four referral institutions. We consecutively enrolled patients who had undergone emergency endoscopy for PUB. The patients were randomly assigned to either a PHP or conventional treatment group. In the PHP group, diluted epinephrine was injected, and the powder was applied as a spray. Conventional endoscopic treatment included the use of electrical coagulation or hemoclipping after injection of diluted epinephrine. RESULTS Between July 2017 and May 2021, 216 patients were enrolled in this study (PHP group, 105; control group, 111). Initial hemostasis was achieved in 92 of 105 patients (87.6%) in the PHP group and 96 of 111 patients (86.5%) in the conventional treatment group. Re-bleeding did not differ between the two groups. In subgroup analysis, the initial hemostasis failure rate in the conventional treatment group was 13.6% for Forrest IIa cases; however, there was no initial hemostasis failure in the PHP group (P=0.023). Large ulcer size (≥15mm) and chronic kidney disease with dialysis were independent risk factors for re-bleeding at 30 days. No adverse events were associated with PHP use. CONCLUSION PHP is not inferior to conventional treatments and could be of use in initial endoscopic treatment for PUB. Further studies are needed to confirm the re-bleeding rate of PHP (ClinicalTrials.gov 02717416).

Abstract

Background Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is an important cause of emergency ward admission. Antifibrinolytic agents including tranexamic acid (TXA) have been used for controlling GIB. However, there have been concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of TXA in patients with GIB. Thus, in this study, we aimed to determine the efficacy of TXA in the treatment of massive upper GIB. Methodology This double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted among 86 consecutive patients who were referred to Imam Hossein Hospital in Tehran, Iran from 2018 to 2019 with the chief complaint of massive upper GIB. Patients were chosen to be in the TXA or placebo groups based on a 1:1 allocation using the block randomization method. The rate of rebleeding, need for blood transfusion, hospital stay, adverse effects, and mortality rate were evaluated and compared across the groups. Results Of the 86 patients enrolled in this study, 55.8% (n = 48) were males. The mean age of all patients was 53.1 ± 10.6 years (TXA group: 54.9 ± 11.5 years, and placebo group: 51.4 ± 9.7 years). Rebleeding was seen in 11 (25.6%) patients in the TXA group and in 20 (46.5%) patients in the control group, which was statistically significant (p = 0.043). Blood transfusion was carried out in only three (7%) patients in the TXA group compared with 14 (32.6%) patients in the placebo group (p = 0.003). Six (14%) patients experienced a hospital stay of longer than five days in the TXA group and 15 (34.9%) patients in the control group, which was statistically significant (p = 0.024). There were no significant differences in the mortality rate across both groups (p > 0.05). Conclusions TXA has no effect on mortality associated with severe upper GIB. However, it was associated with a lower rate of rebleeding and hospitalization time, without significant adverse effects.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Gastrointestinal bleeding results in significant morbidity, cost and mortality. TXA, an antifibrinolytic agent, has been proposed to reduce mortality; however, many studies report conflicting results. METHODS The aim of the study was to perform the first systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs to evaluate the efficacy TXA for both upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. This was performed per PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Scopus databases were searched for RCTs. Dichotomous variables were pooled as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the MH method with random effects modelling. RESULTS Fourteen RCTs were identified with 14,338 patients and mean age of 58.4 years. 34.9% (n = 5008) were female and 65.1% (n = 9330) male. There was no significant difference in mortality between TXA and placebo (RR 0.86 95% CI (0.74 to 1.00), P: 0.05). The secondary outcomes, similarly, did not yield significant results. These included rebleeding, need for surgical intervention (RR: 0.75 95% CI (0.53, 1.07)), endoscopic intervention (RR: 0.92 95% CI (0.70, 1.22)), transfusion requirement (RR: 1.01 95% CI (0.94, 10.7)) and length of stay (RR: 0.03 95% CI (- 0.03, 0.08)). There was no increased risk of VTE, RR: 1.29 95% CI (0.53, 3.16). One trial (n = 12,009) reported an increased risk of seizure in the TXA group, RR: 1.73 95% CI (1.03-2.93). CONCLUSION TXA does not reduce mortality in patients with acute upper or lower gastrointestinal bleeding and may confer an increased risk of seizures. The authors do not recommend the use of TXA in acute gastrointestinal bleeding.