Management advice for patients with reflux-like symptoms: an evidence-based consensus

Copyright \ua9 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Patients with reflux-like symptoms (heartburn and regurgitation) are often not well advised on implementing individualised strategies to help control their symptoms using dietary changes, lifestyle modifications, behavioural changes or fast-acting rescue therapies. One reason for this may be the lack of emphasis in management guidelines owing to \u27low-quality\u27 evidence and a paucity of interventional studies. Thus, a panel of 11 gastroenterologists and primary care doctors used the Delphi method to develop consolidated advice for patients based on expert consensus. A steering committee selected topics for literature searches using the PubMed database, and a modified Delphi process including two online meetings and two rounds of voting was conducted to generate consensus statements based on prespecified criteria (67% voting \u27strongly agree\u27 or \u27agree with minor reservation\u27). After expert discussion and two rounds of voting, 21 consensus statements were generated, and assigned strength of evidence and Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) rating. Eleven statements achieved the strongest (100%) agreement: five are related to diet and include identification and avoidance of dietary triggers, limiting alcohol, coffee and carbonated beverages, and advising patients troubled by postprandial symptoms not to overeat; the remaining six statements concern advice around smoking cessation, weight loss, raising the head-of-the-bed, avoiding recumbency after meals, stress reduction and alginate use. The aim of developing the consensus statements is that they may serve as a foundation for tools and advice that can routinely help patients with reflux-like symptoms better understand the causes of their symptoms and manage their individual risk factors and triggers

Long-term management of GERD in the elderly with pantoprazole

The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) increases with age and elderly are more likely to develop severe disease. Older patients often complain of less severe or frequent heartburn than younger patients and they may present with atypical symptoms such as dysphagia, weight loss, or extraesophageal symptoms. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are central in the management of GERD and are unchallenged with regards to their efficacy. They are considered safe and more effective than histamine receptor antagonists for healing esophagitis and for preventing its recurrence using a long term maintenance treatment. PPI have minimal side effects and few slight drug interactions and are considered safe for long term treatment. Pantoprazole is significantly effective both for acute and long-term treatment with excellent control of relapse and symptoms. It is well tolerated even for long-term therapy and its tolerability is optimal. Pantoprazole shows to have minimal interactions with other drugs because of a lower affinity for cytocrome P450 than older PPIs. Although the majority of elderly has concomitant illnesses and receive other drugs, this does not adversely effect the efficacy of pantoprazole because of its pharmacokinetics, which are independent of patient age. Clinical practice suggests that a low dose maintenance of PPIs should be used in older patients with GERD

ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document): A reporting guideline for consensus methods in biomedicine developed via a modified Delphi

\ua9 2024 Gattrell et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.Background In biomedical research, it is often desirable to seek consensus among individuals who have differing perspectives and experience. This is important when evidence is emerging, inconsistent, limited, or absent. Even when research evidence is abundant, clinical recommendations, policy decisions, and priority-setting may still require agreement from multiple, sometimes ideologically opposed parties. Despite their prominence and influence on key decisions, consensus methods are often poorly reported. Our aim was to develop the first reporting guideline dedicated to and applicable to all consensus methods used in biomedical research regardless of the objective of the consensus process, called ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document). Methods and findings We followed methodology recommended by the EQUATOR Network for the development of reporting guidelines: a systematic review was followed by a Delphi process and meetings to finalize the ACCORD checklist. The preliminary checklist was drawn from the systematic review of existing literature on the quality of reporting of consensus methods and suggestions from the Steering Committee. A Delphi panel (n = 72) was recruited with representation from 6 continents and a broad range of experience, including clinical, research, policy, and patient perspectives. The 3 rounds of the Delphi process were completed by 58, 54, and 51 panelists. The preliminary checklist of 56 items was refined to a final checklist of 35 items relating to the article title (n = 1), introduction (n = 3), methods (n = 21), results (n = 5), discussion (n = 2), and other information (n = 3). Conclusions The ACCORD checklist is the first reporting guideline applicable to all consensus-based studies. It will support authors in writing accurate, detailed manuscripts, thereby improving the completeness and transparency of reporting and providing readers with clarity regarding the methods used to reach agreement. Furthermore, the checklist will make the rigor of the consensus methods used to guide the recommendations clear for readers. Reporting consensus studies with greater clarity and transparency may enhance trust in the recommendations made by consensus panels

Comparing administrative and survey data for ascertaining cases of irritable bowel syndrome: a population-based investigation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Administrative and survey data are two key data sources for population-based research about chronic disease. The objectives of this methodological paper are to: (1) estimate agreement between the two data sources for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and compare the results to those for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); (2) compare the frequency of IBS-related diagnoses in administrative data for survey respondents with and without self-reported IBS, and (3) estimate IBS prevalence from both sources.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This retrospective cohort study used linked administrative and health survey data for 5,134 adults from the province of Manitoba, Canada. Diagnoses in hospital and physician administrative data were investigated for respondents with self-reported IBS, IBD, and no bowel disorder. Agreement between survey and administrative data was estimated using the κ statistic. The χ²statistic tested the association between the frequency of IBS-related diagnoses and self-reported IBS. Crude, sex-specific, and age-specific IBS prevalence estimates were calculated from both sources.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall, 3.0% of the cohort had self-reported IBS, 0.8% had self-reported IBD, and 95.3% reported no bowel disorder. Agreement was poor to fair for IBS and substantially higher for IBD. The most frequent IBS-related diagnoses among the cohort were anxiety disorders (34.4%), symptoms of the abdomen and pelvis (26.9%), and diverticulitis of the intestine (10.6%). Crude IBS prevalence estimates from both sources were lower than those reported previously.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Poor agreement between administrative and survey data for IBS may account for differences in the results of health services and outcomes research using these sources. Further research is needed to identify the optimal method(s) to ascertain IBS cases in both data sources.</p

Chinese herbal recipe versus diclofenac in symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN70292892]

BACKGROUND: Duhuo Jisheng Wan (DJW) is perhaps the best known and most widely used Chinese herbal recipe for arthralgia, but the clinical study to verify its efficacy is lacking. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of DJW versus diclofenac in symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. METHODS: This study was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled trial. The 200 patients suffering from OA of the knee, were randomized into the DJW and diclofenac group. The patients were evaluated after a run-in period of one week (week 0) and then weekly during 4 weeks of treatment. The clinical assessments included visual analog scale (VAS) score that assessed pain and stiffness, Lequesne's functional index, time for climbing up 10 steps, as well as physician's and patients' overall opinions on improvement. RESULTS: Ninety four patients in each group completed the study. In the first few weeks of treatment, the mean changes in some variables (VAS, which assessed walking pain, standing pain and stiffness, as well as Lequesne's functional index) of the DJW group were significantly lower than those of the diclofenac group. Afterwards, these mean changes became no different throughout the study. Most of the physician's and patients' overall opinions on improvement at each time point did not significantly differ between the two groups. Approximately 30% of patients in both groups experienced mild adverse events. CONCLUSION: DJW demonstrates clinically comparable efficacy to diclofenac after 4 weeks of treatment. However, the slow onset of action as well as approximately equal rate of adverse events to diclofenac might limit its alternative role in treatment of OA of the knee

How does comorbidity affect cost of health care in patients with irritable bowel syndrome? A cohort study in general practice

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is associated with other disorders (comorbidity), reduced quality of life and increased use of health resources. We aimed to explore the impact of comorbidity on cost of health care in patients with IBS in general practice.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this cohort study 208 consecutive patients with IBS (Rome II) were recruited. Sociodemographic data, IBS symptoms, and comorbidity (somatic symptoms, organic diseases and psychiatric disorders) were assessed at baseline. Based on a follow up interview after 6-9 months and use of medical records, IBS and non-IBS related health resource use were measured as consultations, hospitalisations, use of medications and alternative health care products and sick leave days. Costs were calculated by national tariffs and reported in Norwegian Kroner (NOK, 1 EURO equals 8 NOK). Multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors of costs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 164 patients (mean age 52 years, 69% female, median duration of IBS 17 years) were available at follow up, 143 patients (88%) had consulted their GP of whom 31 (19%) had consulted for IBS. Mean number of sick- leave days for IBS and comorbidity were 1.7 and 16.3 respectively (p < 0.01), costs related to IBS and comorbidity were 954 NOK and 14854 NOK respectively (p < 0.001). Age, organic diseases and somatic symptoms, but not IBS severity, were significant predictors for total costs.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Costs for health resource use among patients with IBS in general practice were largely explained by comorbidity, which generated ten times the costs for IBS.</p

The frequency of microscopic and focal active colitis in patients with irritable bowel syndrome

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic functional bowel disorder. The frequency of microscopic colitis and focal active colitis in the colonic mucosa has been investigated in IBS patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Between June 2007 and September 2010, 378 patients (between 16 and 84 years) were recruited prospectively. Of these 378 patients, 226 patients were diagnosed with IBS using the Rome III criteria. 152 control patients were also enrolled who were undergoing colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening or investigation of anemia. Histopathological abnormalities identified during colonoscopy were compared between the IBS and control groups.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The average age of the IBS group was 46.13 ± 14.16 years and and the average age of the control group was 57.01 ± 13.07 years. The prevalence of microscopic colitis (MC) in the diarrhea predominant and the mixed subgroup of IBS patients was 4.32% (7/162) whereas in all IBS patients, the prevalence was 3.09% (7/226). MC was not found in the 152 control cases, (p = 0.045). Lymphocytic colitis was seen in 7 IBS patients, with 1 case in the mixed group and 6 cases in the diarrhea group and there was a significant difference in the frequency of lymphocytic colitis between the IBS subgroups (p < 0.01). Focal active colitis was found in 6.6% (15/226) of the IBS patients and in none of the controls (p < 0.01), and there was no differences between IBS subtypes.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Microscopic colitis was more often found in the diarrhea predominant/mixed subgroups of IBS patients and in patients who were older women. In patients who are older woman with non-constipated IBS, it may be reasonable to perform a biopsy to screen for microscopic colitis. Focal active colitis was significantly increased in patients with IBS compared to controls.</p

Evaluation of the Birmingham IBS symptom questionnaire

Abstract Background Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is a chronic/common condition that causes a significant effect on the individual (reduced quality of life), society (time lost off work) and health services. Comparison of studies evaluating the management of IBS has been hindered by the lack of a widely adopted validated symptom score. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a disease specific score to measure the symptoms of patients with IBS. Methods A self-administered 14-item symptom questionnaire (based on Rome II criteria) was mailed to 533 persons included in a prevalence study of IBS. The reliability of each underlying dimension identified was measured by Cronbach's α. Validity was assessed by comparing symptom scores with concurrent IBS specific quality of life (QoL) scores. Reproducibility was measured by the test-retest method and responsiveness measured by effect size. Results 379 (71%) questionnaires were returned. The underlying dimensions identified were pain, diarrhoea and constipation. Cronbach's α was 0.74 for pain, 0.90 for diarrhoea and 0.79 for constipation. Pain and diarrhoea dimensions had good external validity (r = -0.3 to -0.6), constipation dimension had moderate external validity (r = -0.2 to -0.3). All dimensions were reproducible (ICCs 0.75 to 0.81). Effect sizes of 0.27 to 0.53 were calculated for those with a reported improvement in symptoms. Conclusion The Birmingham IBS Symptom Questionnaire has been developed and tested. It has been shown to be suitable for self-completion and acceptable to patients. The questionnaire has 3 internal dimensions which have good reliability, external validity and are responsive to a change in health status.</p