Methods: Introduction of the AUGIB proforma during continued use of "consult forms" gave a proforma group (P) and a "consult form" group (C). The quality of referral information was prospectively assessed. Five critical fields made up the primary
outcome measure: Hb, INR, platelets, heart rate and blood pressure. Sample size calculation estimated that 73 referrals would be required to detect a 33% difference between groups P and C for the presence of all 5 of these outcome measures with p= 0.05 and beta = 0.8.
Results: A total of 87 referrals were examined: 29 group C and 58 group P. No group C and 69% of the group P (p < 0.001)referrals fulfilled the primary outcome measure. In addition no group C and 97% of group P (p < 0.001) referrals included some form of risk assessment.
Conclusions: An endoscopy referral proforma significantly improved the quality of information provided for endoscopy triage and significantly improved the communication of pre-endoscopic risk. This is likely to result in improved prioritization of endoscopy and might influence quality of care in AUGIB. The effect of this simple approach on AUGIB outcomes merits further investigation.