Related Experiment Videos
Do patients assess rectal bleeding accurately?
R R Simpson1, M L Kennedy, S B Chew
1Colorectal Unit, St George Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
ANZ Journal of Surgery
|December 12, 2001
Summary
Patients and healthcare professionals significantly overestimate small rectal bleeding volumes but underestimate large ones. This perception gap impacts rectal bleeding management and patient assessment accuracy.
Area of Science:
- Medical Research
- Clinical Assessment
- Patient Perception Studies
Background:
- Accurate assessment of rectal blood loss volume is crucial for patient diagnosis and management.
- Subjective patient estimations of blood volume passed per rectum are common but their accuracy is not well-established.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare subjective visual estimations of blood volumes with known quantities.
- To evaluate the accuracy of patients', nurses', and doctors' estimations of rectal blood loss.
Main Methods:
- Thirty participants (10 patients, 10 nurses, 10 doctors) visually estimated four known blood volumes (0.25 mL, 10 mL, 50 mL, 200 mL).
- Estimations were made in milliliters and by marking a cup to indicate perceived volume.
- Statistical analysis included Student's t-test and ANOVA for multiple comparisons.
Main Results:
- No significant differences in estimation accuracy were found between patient, nurse, and doctor groups.
- Small to moderate volumes (0.25 mL, 10 mL, 50 mL) were consistently overestimated across all groups.
- Larger volumes (200 mL) tended to be underestimated by patients and doctors, and to a lesser extent by nurses.
Conclusions:
- Subjective overestimation of small rectal bleeding volumes and underestimation of large volumes are common.
- These perceptual inaccuracies may influence clinical decision-making for patients with rectal bleeding.
- Further research into objective measurement tools for rectal blood loss is warranted.