NHG-Standaard Obstipatie

Management of children with non-acute abdominal pain and diarrhea in Dutch primary care: a retrospective cohort study based on a routine primary care database (AHON)

OBJECTIVE

To describe the testing, prescription, referral, and follow-up management by general practitioners (GPs) for children presenting with non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea in primary care.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study with one-year follow-up.

SETTING

Registry data from a Dutch primary care database (AHON) between 2015 and 2019.

SUBJECTS

Children aged 4-18 years old who presented by face-to-face consultation in primary care for non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea (>7 days).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We recorded the proportions of children who received (1) diagnostic testing, medicine prescriptions, follow-up consultations, and referrals at their first visit and (2) repeat consultations and referrals by one-year of follow-up.

RESULTS

Among the 2200 children (median age, 10.5 years; interquartile range, 7.0-14.6) presenting to a GP with non-acute abdominal pain and/or diarrhea, most reported abdominal pain (78.7%). At the first visit, GPs performed diagnostic testing for 32.2%, provided a prescription to 34.5%, and referred 2.5% to secondary care. Twenty-five percent of the children had a follow-up consultation within four weeks and 20.8% had a repeat consultation between four weeks and one year. Thirteen percent of the children were referred to secondary care by one year. However, only 1% of all children had documentation of an organic diagnosis needing management in secondary care.

CONCLUSION

One-third of children received diagnostic testing or a medicine prescription. Few had a follow-up consultation and >10% was referred to pediatric care. Future research should explore the motivations of GPs why and which children receive diagnostic and medical interventions.

Adherence to coprescribing of laxatives with opioids and associated characteristics in general practices in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend to prescribe a laxative with an opioid to prevent constipation. We aimed to determine the adherence by general practitioners (GPs) to this recommendation and to explore which GP- and patient related factors were associated with it from the perspective of the GP.  METHODS: We conducted an observational study using GPs' prescription data from the Nivel Primary Care Database combined with a questionnaire asking for reasons of non-adherence. The proportion of first opioid prescriptions prescribed together with a laxative was determined as primary outcome. Possible explanatory factors such as the quality of registration, the level of collaboration with the pharmacy, familiarity with the recommendation and use of a clinical decision support system were explored, as were the self-reported reasons for non-adherence (classified as either GP-related or patient-related). We assessed the association of factors with the primary outcome using univariable multilevel logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The recommendation was measured in 195 general practices. The median proportion of first opioid prescriptions prescribed together with a laxative in these practices was 54% (practice range 18-88%). None of the determinants was consistently associated with the primary outcome. GPs from 211 practices filled out the questionnaire and the most frequently mentioned reason not to prescribe a laxative was that the patient has laxatives in stock, followed by that the patient doesn't want a laxative; both were patient-related factors.

CONCLUSION

There was room for improvement in following the guideline on laxative prescribing in opioid use. A main reason seemed to be that the patient refuses a laxative. Improvement measures should therefore focus on communication between GPs and patients on the relevance of co-using a laxative with opioids. Future studies need to establish the effect of such improvement measures, and determine whether reasons for non-adherence to the guideline changed over time.

Effect of faecal calprotectin testing on referrals for children with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms in primary care: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Children with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms are frequently seen in primary care, yet general practitioners (GPs) often experience challenges distinguishing functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGID) from organic disorders. We, therefore, aim to evaluate whether a test strategy that includes point-of-care testing (POCT) for faecal calprotectin (FCal) can reduce the referral rate to paediatric specialist care among children with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms. The study findings will contribute to improving the recommendations on FCal use among children in primary care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial, we will randomise general practices into intervention and control groups. The intervention group will use FCal-POCT when indicated, after completing online training about its indication, interpretation and follow-up as well as communicating an FGID diagnosis. The control group will test and treat according to Dutch GP guidelines, which advise against FCal testing in children. GPs will include children aged 4-18 years presenting to primary care with chronic diarrhoea and/or recurrent abdominal pain. The primary outcome will be the referral rate for children with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms within 6 months after the initial assessment. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated by questionnaires completed at baseline and at 3- and 6-month follow-up. These outcomes will include parental satisfaction and concerns, gastrointestinal symptoms, impact of symptoms on daily function, quality of life, proportion of children with paediatrician-diagnosed FGID referred to secondary care, health service use and healthcare costs. A sample size calculation indicates that we need to recruit 158 GP practices to recruit 406 children.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Medical Research Ethics Committee (MREC) of the University Medical Center Groningen (The Netherlands) approved this study (MREC number: 201900309). The study results will be made available to patients, GPs, paediatricians and laboratories via peer-reviewed publications and in presentations at (inter)national conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The Netherlands Trial Register: NL7690 (Pre-results).

Observing postprandial bowel movements in diaper-dependent toddlers

The gastrocolic reflex is a response of the colon to the presence of food in the stomach. Our goal was to observe bowel movements in healthy infants and toddlers not yet toilet trained, in response to a meal. Stool behavior of 40 toddlers, aged 18-27 months, was monitored. We observed a bowel movement within the first hour after a meal in 75% of the children. This occurred 15, 30 or 60 minutes after a meal in, respectively, 25%, 48% and 66% of the observations. If we limit to the ones that actually defecated, 37% would defecate within 15 minutes and 72% within half an hour. Fifty-nine percent of all children defecated in the morning, 54% at noon and 28% in the evening. In conclusion, we believe the gastrocolic reflex can be used as a facilitating factor to help a child to defecate on the potty, 15-30 minutes after a meal. In 50% of the cases, a child will have a bowel movement on the potty and learn to defecate on it much easier.

The efficacy of standard laxative use for the prevention and treatment of opioid induced constipation during oxycodone use: a small Dutch observational pilot study

BACKGROUND

Dutch clinical guidelines recommend that a standard laxative treatment (SLT) should be prescribed concomitantly when starting opioid treatment to prevent opioid-induced constipation (OIC).

METHODS

Clinical evidence for SLT in the treatment of OIC is lacking, therefore an observational pilot study was performed to explore the efficacy and tolerability of SLT on OIC in patients treated with the opioid oxycodone.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients (58% female, median (range) age 65 (39-92)) were included in this pilot study. The analysis showed that 9 out of 21 patients (43%) were non-responders to SLT. When also taking into consideration patients tending to develop diarrhea 75% of patients are non-responsive to SLT.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study indicates that optimal laxative therapy (SLT) might not be effective and feasible for the prevention and treatment of OIC.

Cost-effectiveness of prucalopride in the treatment of chronic constipation in the Netherlands

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of prucalopride vs. continued laxative treatment for chronic constipation in patients in the Netherlands in whom laxatives have failed to provide adequate relief.

Methods: A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of prucalopride in patients with chronic constipation receiving standard laxative treatment from the perspective of Dutch payers in 2011. Data sources included published prucalopride clinical trials, published Dutch price/tariff lists, and national population statistics. The model simulated the clinical and economic outcomes associated with prucalopride vs. standard treatment and had a cycle length of 1 month and a follow-up time of 1 year. Response to treatment was defined as the proportion of patients who achieved “normal bowel function”. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the base case.

Results: In the base case analysis, the cost of prucalopride relative to continued laxative treatment was € 9015 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Extensive sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses confirmed that the base case cost-effectiveness estimate was robust. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the model was most sensitive in response to prucalopride; incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from € 6475 to 15,380 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that there is a greater than 80% probability that prucalopride would be cost-effective compared with continued standard treatment, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of € 20,000 per QALY from a Dutch societal perspective. A scenario analysis was performed for women only, which resulted in a cost-effectiveness ratio of € 7773 per QALY.

Conclusion: Prucalopride was cost-effective in a Dutch patient population, as well as in a women-only subgroup, who had chronic constipation and who obtained inadequate relief from laxatives.