"It doesn't do any harm, but patients feel better": a qualitative exploratory study on gastroenterologists' perspectives on the role of antidepressants in inflammatory bowel disease

Background: Interest in psychological factors in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has increased in recent years. It has even been proposed that treating psychological co-morbidities with antidepressants may control disease activity and improve quality of life. Despite this, there is no data on gastroenterologists' attitudes to, and experiences with, antidepressant therapy in patients with IBD. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 gastroenterologists associated with metropolitan teaching hospitals. Qualitative content analysis was used to examine their responses. Results: Seventy-eight percent of gastroenterologists had treated IBD patients with antidepressants for pain, depression and/or anxiety, and insomnia. Antidepressants were reported to be useful in improving psychosocial well-being, quality of life, and self-management of the disease by patients. However, in this group of gastroenterologists, there appears to be skepticism towards psychological disorders themselves or antidepressant therapy having a central role in either the causation of IBD or its clinical course. Nevertheless, these gastroenterologists were receptive to the idea of conducting a trial of the role of antidepressants in IBD. Conclusion: While the majority of specialists have treated IBD patients with antidepressants, there is considerable skepticism with regard to efficacy of antidepressive therapy or the role of psychological factors in the outcome of IBD patients.Antonina A Mikocka-Walus, Deborah A Turnbull, Nicole T Moulding, Ian G Wilson, Jane M Andrews and Gerald J Holtman

Acid inhibition on the first day of dosing : comparison of four proton pump inhibitors

RESUME Introduction: Les inhibiteurs de la pompe à protons sont actuellement considérés comme les médicaments de choix pour le traitement des affections peptiques comme l'ulcère gastroduodénal et l'oesophagite de reflux. La rapidité, ainsi que le degré d'inhibition de la sécrétion gastrique acide sont importants pour le contrôle optimal des symptômes ainsi que pour le traitement de ces affections. But : Le but principal de cette étude a été de comparer, chez les sujets asymptomatiques non infectés par H. pylori, par pH-métrie intragastrique de 24 heures, la rapidité et la durée de l'action antisécrétoire de doses uniques de rabéprazole 20 mg, d'oméprazole capsule 20 mg, d'oméprazole en comprimé MUPS (« Multiple Unit Pellet System ») 20 mg, de pantoprazole 40 mg et de lansoprazole 30 mg, respectivement. Matériel et méthodes : Cette étude, effectuée en double aveugle et randomisée, a été conduite de manière croisée chez 18 sujets H. pylori-négatifs. Une pH-métrie de 24 heures a été effectuée le jour de l'administration du médicament (dose unique de rabéprazole 20 mg, de lansoprazole 30mg, de pantoprazole 40 mg, d'oméprazole capsule 20 mg, d'oméprazole MUPS comprimé 20mg, ou de placebo). Résultats : Le pH intragastrique médian (3.4 vs. 2.9, 2.2, 1.9 et 1.8, respectivement; p≤ 0.03) et le temps avec un pH supérieur à 4 pendant les 24 heures suivant la prise du médicament (8.0 heures vs. 7.4, 4.9, 2.9, et 3.0, respectivement; p≤ 0.003) ont été statistiquement plus élevés avec le rabéprazole qu'avec le lansoprazole, le pantoprazole, l'oméprazole capsule, l'oméprazole comprimé MUPS, ou le placebo. Les valeurs du pH pendant les périodes diurnes et nocturnes étaient plus hautes avec le rabeprazole et le lansoprazole qu'avec le pantoprazole, l'oméprazole capsule, et l'oméprazole comprimé MUPS (p≤0.04). Conclusion : Le rabéprazole s'est montré le plus efficace de tous les inhibiteurs de pompe à protons étudiés durant le premier jour de l'administration du médicament. SUMMARY Background: Rapid and consistent acid suppression on the first day of dosing may be important in treating acid-related disorders. Aim: To compare the antisecretory activity and onset of action of single doses of rabeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, omeprazole capsule, omeprazole multiple unit pellet system (MUPS) tablet and placebo in healthy Helicobacter pylori-negative subjects. Methods: This cross-over, double-blind, randomized study was performed in 18 H. pylori-negative subjects. Twenty-four-hour intragastric pH monitoring was performed on the day of treatment (once-daily dose of rabeprazole 20 mg, lansoprazole 30 mg, pantoprazole 40 mg, omeprazole capsule 20 mg, omeprazole MUPS tablet 20 mg or placebo). Results: The intragastric pH (3.4) and time at pH > 4 during the 24 h post-dose (8.0 h) were significantly greater with rabeprazole than with lansoprazole, pantoprazole, omeprazole capsule, omeprazole MUPS tablet or placebo (P ≤ 0.04 for rabeprazole vs. the others). Daytime and night-time pH values were higher with rabeprazole and lansoprazole than with pantoprazole, omeprazole capsule and omeprazole MUPS tablet (P ≤ 0.04). Conclusion: Rabeprazole was the most potent acid inhibitor of all the proton pump inhibitors tested during the first day of dosing

Is early endoscopy in the emergency room beneficial in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer? A " fortuitously controlled " study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: In previous randomized trials, early endoscopy improved the outcome in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer, though most of these studies defined "early" as endoscopy performed within 24 hours after admission. Using the length of hospital stay as the primary criterion for the clinical outcome, we compared the results of endoscopy done immediately after admission (early endoscopy in the emergency room, EEE) with endoscopy postponed to a time within the first 24 hours after hospitalization, but still during normal working hours ("delayed" endoscopy in the endoscopy unit, DEU). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from 81 consecutive patients with bleeding peptic ulcer admitted in 1997 and 1998 (age range 16 - 90 years). Of these 81 patients, 38 underwent DEU (the standard therapy at the hospital) and 43 underwent EEE. Patients in the two groups were comparable with regard to admission criteria, were equally distributed with respect to their risk of adverse outcome (assessed using the Baylor bleeding score and the Rockall score), and differed only in the treatment they received. Endoscopic hemostasis was performed whenever possible in all patients with Forrest types I, IIa, and IIb ulcer bleeding. RESULTS: We found similar rates in the two groups for recurrent bleeding (16 % in DEU patients vs. 14 % in EEE patients), persistent bleeding (8 % in DEU patients vs. none in EEE patients), medical complications (21 % in DEU patients vs. 26 % in EEE patients), the need for surgery (8 % in DEU patients vs. 9 % in EEE patients), and the length of hospital stay (5.1 days for DEU patients vs. 5.9 days for EEE patients). None of the differences between the two groups in these parameters were statistically significant. None of the patients died. CONCLUSIONS: Early endoscopy in an emergency room did not improve the clinical outcome in our 81 consecutive patients with bleeding peptic ulcer