These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A comparison of two scoring systems for endoscopic grading of gastric ulceration in horses.
    Author: Bell RJ, Kingston JK, Mogg TD.
    Journal: N Z Vet J; 2007 Feb; 55(1):19-22. PubMed ID: 17339912.
    Abstract:
    AIM: To compare two scoring systems for grading gastric ulcers in adult horses. METHODS: Digitised recordings of gastroscopy examinations of 22 horses that were part of a study on prevalence of gastric ulceration in racehorses in New Zealand were reviewed independently by three examiners. All stomachs were graded by each examiner using two different grading systems, the Equine Gastric Ulcer Council (EGUC) system and the Number/Severity (N/S) system. RESULTS: All examiners commented that the EGUC system was quicker and easier to use. There was no significant difference between examiners in the grades assigned using the EGUC system (p=0.31) and the agreement between examiners was high (Kappa values of 0. 85(1vs2), 0.88(1vs3) and 0.80(2vs3)). There was a significant difference between examiners in the grades assigned using the severity component of the N/S system (p=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The EGUC system was more repeatable, and was faster and easier to use than the N/S system. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The EGUC system is suitable as a standard scoring system due to its ease of use, and the repeatability and correlation of grades assigned between independent examiners. Use of a standard scoring system will more easily allow comparisons to be made between different research groups and clinicians.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]