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

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 'low-quality' 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 'strongly agree' or 'agree with minor reservation'). 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.

A personalized intervention to prevent depression in primary care based on risk predictive algorithms and decision support systems: protocol of the e-predictD study

The predictD is an intervention implemented by general practitioners (GPs) to prevent depression, which reduced the incidence of depression-anxiety and was cost-effective. The e-predictD study aims to design, develop, and evaluate an evolved predictD intervention to prevent the onset of major depression in primary care based on Information and Communication Technologies, predictive risk algorithms, decision support systems (DSSs), and personalized prevention plans (PPPs). A multicenter cluster randomized trial with GPs randomly assigned to the e-predictD intervention + care-as-usual (CAU) group or the active-control + CAU group and 1-year follow-up is being conducted. The required sample size is 720 non-depressed patients (aged 18-55 years), with moderate-to-high depression risk, under the care of 72 GPs in six Spanish cities. The GPs assigned to the e-predictD-intervention group receive brief training, and those assigned to the control group do not. Recruited patients of the GPs allocated to the e-predictD group download the e-predictD app, which incorporates validated risk algorithms to predict depression, monitoring systems, and DSSs. Integrating all inputs, the DSS automatically proposes to the patients a PPP for depression based on eight intervention modules: physical exercise, social relationships, improving sleep, problem-solving, communication skills, decision-making, assertiveness, and working with thoughts. This PPP is discussed in a 15-min semi-structured GP-patient interview. Patients then choose one or more of the intervention modules proposed by the DSS to be self-implemented over the next 3 months. This process will be reformulated at 3, 6, and 9 months but without the GP-patient interview. Recruited patients of the GPs allocated to the control-group+CAU download another version of the e-predictD app, but the only intervention that they receive via the app is weekly brief psychoeducational messages (active-control group). The primary outcome is the cumulative incidence of major depression measured by the Composite International Diagnostic Interview at 6 and 12 months. Other outcomes include depressive symptoms (PHQ-9) and anxiety symptoms (GAD-7), depression risk (predictD risk algorithm), mental and physical quality of life (SF-12), and acceptability and satisfaction ('e-Health Impact' questionnaire) with the intervention. Patients are evaluated at baseline and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. An economic evaluation will also be performed (cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis) from two perspectives, societal and health systems.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03990792.

Practical guideline on obesity care in patients with gastrointestinal and liver diseases - Joint ESPEN/UEG guideline

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic gastrointestinal disease such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), celiac disease, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), pancreatitis, and chronic liver disease (CLD) often suffer from obesity because of coincidence (IBD, IBS, celiac disease) or related pathophysiology (GERD, pancreatitis and CLD). It is unclear if such patients need a particular diagnostic and treatment that differs from the needs of lean gastrointestinal patients. The present guideline addresses this question according to current knowledge and evidence.

OBJECTIVE

The present practical guideline is intended for clinicians and practitioners in general medicine, gastroenterology, surgery and other obesity management, including dietitians and focuses on obesity care in patients with chronic gastrointestinal diseases.

METHODS

The present practical guideline is the shortened version of a previously published scientific guideline developed according to the standard operating procedure for ESPEN guidelines. The content has been re-structured and transformed into flow-charts that allow a quick navigation through the text.

RESULTS

In 100 recommendations (3× A, 33× B, 24 × 0, 40× GPP, all with a consensus grade of 90% or more) care of gastrointestinal patients with obesity - including sarcopenic obesity - is addressed in a multidisciplinary way. A particular emphasis is on CLD, especially metabolic associated liver disease, since such diseases are closely related to obesity, whereas liver cirrhosis is rather associated with sarcopenic obesity. A special chapter is dedicated to obesity care in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. The guideline focuses on adults, not on children, for whom data are scarce. Whether some of the recommendations apply to children must be left to the judgment of the experienced pediatrician.

CONCLUSION

The present practical guideline offers in a condensed way evidence-based advice how to care for patients with chronic gastrointestinal diseases and concomitant obesity, an increasingly frequent constellation in clinical practice.

European guideline on obesity care in patients with gastrointestinal and liver diseases - Joint European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism / United European Gastroenterology guideline

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic gastrointestinal (GI) disease such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), celiac disease, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), pancreatitis, and chronic liver disease (CLD) often suffer from obesity because of coincidence (IBD, IBS, celiac disease) or related pathophysiology (GERD, pancreatitis and CLD). It is unclear if such patients need a particular diagnostic and treatment that differs from the needs of lean GI patients. The present guideline addresses this question according to current knowledge and evidence.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the guideline is to give advice to all professionals working in the field of gastroenterology care including physicians, surgeons, dietitians and others how to handle patients with GI disease and obesity.

METHODS

The present guideline was developed according to the standard operating procedure for European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism guidelines, following the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network grading system (A, B, 0, and good practice point [GPP]). The procedure included an online voting (Delphi) and a final consensus conference.

RESULTS

In 100 recommendations (3x A, 33x B, 24x 0, 40x GPP, all with a consensus grade of 90% or more) care of GI patients with obesity - including sarcopenic obesity - is addressed in a multidisciplinary way. A particular emphasis is on CLD, especially fatty liver disease, since such diseases are closely related to obesity, whereas liver cirrhosis is rather associated with sarcopenic obesity. A special chapter is dedicated to obesity care in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. The guideline focuses on adults, not on children, for whom data are scarce. Whether some of the recommendations apply to children must be left to the judgment of the experienced pediatrician.

CONCLUSION

The present guideline offers for the first time evidence-based advice how to care for patients with chronic GI diseases and concomitant obesity, an increasingly frequent constellation in clinical practice.

European guideline on obesity care in patients with gastrointestinal and liver diseases - Joint ESPEN/UEG guideline

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic gastrointestinal (GI) disease such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), celiac disease, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), pancreatitis, and chronic liver disease (CLD) often suffer from obesity because of coincidence (IBD, IBS, celiac disease) or related pathophysiology (GERD, pancreatitis and CLD). It is unclear if such patients need a particular diagnostic and treatment that differs from the needs of lean GI patients. The present guideline addresses this question according to current knowledge and evidence.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the guideline is to give advice to all professionals working in the field of gastroenterology care including physicians, surgeons, dietitians and others how to handle patients with GI disease and obesity.

METHODS

The present guideline was developed according to the standard operating procedure for ESPEN guidelines, following the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) grading system (A, B, 0, and good practice point (GPP)). The procedure included an online voting (Delphi) and a final consensus conference.

RESULTS

In 100 recommendations (3x A, 33x B, 24x 0, 40x GPP, all with a consensus grade of 90% or more) care of GI patients with obesity - including sarcopenic obesity - is addressed in a multidisciplinary way. A particular emphasis is on CLD, especially fatty liver disease, since such diseases are closely related to obesity, whereas liver cirrhosis is rather associated with sarcopenic obesity. A special chapter is dedicated to obesity care in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. The guideline focuses on adults, not on children, for whom data are scarce. Whether some of the recommendations apply to children must be left to the judgment of the experienced pediatrician.

CONCLUSION

The present guideline offers for the first time evidence-based advice how to care for patients with chronic GI diseases and concomitant obesity, an increasingly frequent constellation in clinical practice.

Review article: rethinking the "ladder" approach to reflux-like symptom management in the era of PPI "resistance" - a multidisciplinary perspective

BACKGROUND

Despite widespread adoption of potent acid suppression treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPI) for reflux-like symptoms, persistent symptoms are commonly reported in primary care and community studies.

AIMS

This multidisciplinary review critically evaluates how the management of reflux-like symptoms could better reflect their multifactorial pathophysiology.

METHODS

A panel of experts (from general practice, gastroenterology and gastropsychology) attended a series of workshops to review current management and propose a framework for the provision of more individualised care.

RESULTS

It was agreed that the perceptual (as well as the physiological) causes of reflux-like symptoms should be considered at the start of management, not as a last resort when all else has failed. A short course of PPI is a pragmatic approach to address reflux-like symptoms, but equally important is counselling about the gut-brain axis and provision of symptom-specific behavioural interventions for those who show signs of somatisation, hypervigilance or co-existing disorders of gut-brain interaction. Other low-harm interventions such as lifestyle and dietary advice, should also be better integrated into care at an early stage. Multidisciplinary care management programmes (including dietary, weight loss, exercise and behavioural intervention) should be developed to promote greater self-management and take advantage of the general shift toward the use of remotely accessed health care resources.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of reflux-like symptoms should be adapted to reflect the advances in knowledge about the multifactorial aetiology of these symptoms, addressing both acid-related and behavioural components early in management. The time has come to treat the patient, not the "disease".

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A patient guideline

This patient guideline is intended for all patients at risk of or living with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). NAFLD is the most frequent chronic liver disease worldwide and comes with a high disease burden. Yet, there is a lot of unawareness. Furthermore, many aspects of the disease are still to be unravelled, which has an important impact on the information that is given (or not) to patients. Its management requires a close interaction between patients and their many healthcare providers. It is important for patients to develop a full understanding of NAFLD in order to enable them to take an active role in their disease management. This guide summarises the current knowledge relevant to NAFLD and its management. It has been developed by patients, patient representatives, clinicians and scientists and is based on current scientific recommendations, intended to support patients in making informed decisions.

Cost-effectiveness of antidepressants versus active monitoring for mild-to-moderate major depressive disorder: a multisite non-randomized-controlled trial in primary care (INFAP study)

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of antidepressants vs active monitoring (AM) for patients with mild-moderate major depressive disorder.

METHODS

This was a 12-month observational prospective controlled trial. Adult patients with a new episode of major depression were invited to participate and assigned to AM or antidepressants according to General Practitioners' clinical judgment and experience. Patients were evaluated at baseline, and 6 and 12-month follow-up. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained were estimated and used to calculate incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) from the healthcare and government perspective. To minimize the bias resulting from non-randomization, a propensity score-based method was used.

RESULTS

At 6 and 12-month follow-up, ICUR was 2549 €/QALY and 6,142 €/QALY, respectively, in favor of antidepressants. At 6 months, for a willingness to pay (WTP) of 25,000 €/QALY, antidepressants had a probability of 0.89 (healthcare perspective) and 0.81 (government perspective) of being more cost-effective than AM. At 12 months, this probability was 0.86 (healthcare perspective) and 0.73 (government perspective).

CONCLUSIONS

Incremental cost-utility ratios favor pharmacological treatment as a first-line approach for patients with mild-moderate major depressive disorder. While our results should be interpreted with caution and further real world research is needed, clinical practice guidelines should consider antidepressant therapy for mild-moderate major depressive patients as an alternative to active monitoring in PC.

Diagnostic accuracy and treatment approach to depression in primary care: predictive factors

OBJECTIVE

The study assessed the predictive factors of diagnostic accuracy and treatment approach (antidepressants versus active monitoring) for depression in primary care.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study that uses information from a naturalistic prospective controlled trial performed in Barcelona (Spain) enrolling newly diagnosed patients with mild to moderate depression by GPs. Treatment approach was based on clinical judgement. Diagnosis was later assessed according to DSM-IV criteria using Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID-I) interview by an external researcher. Patients (sociodemographic, psychiatric diagnosis, severity of depression and anxiety, health-related quality of life, disability, beliefs about medication and illness and comorbidities) and GP factors associated with diagnostic accuracy and treatment approach were assessed using multilevel logistic regression. Variables with missing data were imputed through multiple imputations.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-three patients were recruited by 53 GPs. Mean age was 51 years (SD = 15). Thirty percent met DSM-IV criteria for major depression. Mean depression symptomatology was moderate-severe. Using multivariate analyses, patients' beliefs about medicines were the only variable associated with the antidepressant approach. Specialization in general medicine and being a resident tutor were associated with a more accurate diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical depression diagnosis by GPs was not always associated with a formal diagnosis through a SCID-I. GPs' training background was central to an adequate depression diagnosis. Patients' beliefs in medication were the only factor associated with treatment approach. More resources should be allocated to improving the diagnosis of depression.

A personalized intervention to prevent depression in primary care: cost-effectiveness study nested into a clustered randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Depression is viewed as a major and increasing public health issue, as it causes high distress in the people experiencing it and considerable financial costs to society. Efforts are being made to reduce this burden by preventing depression. A critical component of this strategy is the ability to assess the individual level and profile of risk for the development of major depression. This paper presents the cost-effectiveness of a personalized intervention based on the risk of developing depression carried out in primary care, compared with usual care.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness analyses are nested within a multicentre, clustered, randomized controlled trial of a personalized intervention to prevent depression. The study was carried out in 70 primary care centres from seven cities in Spain. Two general practitioners (GPs) were randomly sampled from those prepared to participate in each centre (i.e. 140 GPs), and 3326 participants consented and were eligible to participate. The intervention included the GP communicating to the patient his/her individual risk for depression and personal risk factors and the construction by both GPs and patients of a psychosocial programme tailored to prevent depression. In addition, GPs carried out measures to activate and empower the patients, who also received a leaflet about preventing depression. GPs were trained in a 10- to 15-h workshop. Costs were measured from a societal and National Health care perspective. Qualityadjustedlife years were assessed using the EuroQOL five dimensions questionnaire. The time horizon was 18 months.

RESULTS

With a willingness-to-pay threshold of €10,000 (£8568) the probability of cost-effectiveness oscillated from 83% (societal perspective) to 89% (health perspective). If the threshold was increased to €30,000 (£25,704), the probability of being considered cost-effective was 94% (societal perspective) and 96%, respectively (health perspective). The sensitivity analysis confirmed these results.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with usual care, an intervention based on personal predictors of risk of depression implemented by GPs is a cost-effective strategy to prevent depression. This type of personalized intervention in primary care should be further developed and evaluated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01151982. Registered on June 29, 2010.

Cost-effectiveness of active monitoring versus antidepressants for major depression in primary health care: a 12-month non-randomized controlled trial (INFAP study)

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) recommend antidepressants for patients with moderate-severe depression and active monitoring for patients with mild-moderate symptoms. The feasibility and efficiency of active monitoring has not been proven conclusively. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of active monitoring in comparison to antidepressants for primary care patients with mild-moderate MDD.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a 12-month follow-up multicenter observational prospective controlled trial. Patients are enrolled in 12 primary care centers in Barcelona (Spain). Eligible patients are adults (≥18 years-old) with a new episode of MDD that sign a written consent to participate. This is a naturalistic study in which general practitioners (GPs) use their professional judgment to allocate patients into active monitoring or antidepressants groups. GPs treat the patients following their clinical criteria. At baseline, GPs complete a questionnaire (sociodemographic/job characteristics, training, attitude towards depression, interest on mental health and participation in communication groups). Patients' measurements take place at baseline and after six and 12 months. Main outcome measures include severity of depression (PHQ-9), health-related quality of life (EuroQol-5D) and use of healthcare and social care services (Client Service Receipt Inventory). Secondary outcomes include diagnosis of MDD according to DSM-IV diagnostic criteria (SCID-I), disability (WHO-DAS), anxiety (BAI), comorbidities, medication side-effects and beliefs about medicines (BMQ). The analysis will be done according to the intention to treat analysis. Missing data will be imputed using multiple imputation by chained equations. To minimize the bias resulting from the lack of randomization, a propensity score will be used. Incremental effects and costs between groups will be modelled in each of the imputed databases using multivariate generalized linear models and then combined as per Rubin's rules. Propensity scores will be used to adjust the models. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios will be calculated by dividing the difference in costs between groups by the difference in effects. To deal with the uncertainty, resampling techniques with bootstrapping will be used and cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves will be constructed. A series of sensitivity analyses will be performed.

DISCUSSION

Given the high burden and costs generated by depressive disorder, it is important that general practitioners treat major depression efficiently. Recent evidence has suggested that antidepressants have low benefits for patients with mild to moderate major depression. For such cases of depression, active monitoring exists as a treatment option, but it is not without difficulties for implementation and its effectiveness and efficiency have not been demonstrated conclusively. The results of the study will provide information on which is the most efficient approach to treat patients with mild to moderate major depression in primary care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02245373.

Adjustment disorders in primary care: prevalence, recognition and use of services

BACKGROUND

Within the ICD and DSM review processes there is growing debate on the future classification and status of adjustment disorders, even though evidence on this clinical entity is scant, particularly outside specialised care.

AIMS

To estimate the prevalence of adjustment disorders in primary care; to explore whether there are differences between primary care patients with adjustment disorders and those with other mental disorders; and to describe the recognition and treatment of adjustment disorders by general practitioners (GPs).

METHOD

Participants were drawn from a cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of 3815 patients from 77 primary healthcare centres in Catalonia. The prevalence of current adjustment disorders and subtypes were assessed face to face using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID-I). Multilevel logistic regressions were conducted to assess differences between adjustment disorders and other mental disorders. Recognition and treatment of adjustment disorders by GPs were assessed through a review of patients' computerised clinical histories.

RESULTS

The prevalence of adjustment disorders was 2.94%. Patients with adjustment disorders had higher mental quality-of-life scores than patients with major depressive disorder but lower than patients without mental disorder. Self-perceived stress was also higher in adjustment disorders compared with those with anxiety disorders and those without mental disorder. Recognition of adjustment disorders by GPs was low: only 2 of the 110 cases identified using the SCID-I were detected by the GP. Among those with adjustment disorders, 37% had at least one psychotropic prescription.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjustment disorder shows a distinct profile as an intermediate category between no mental disorder and affective disorders (depression and anxiety disorders).

[A tumor registry at a primary care center]

AIM

We analysed the data obtained from a tumor register kept in a Primary Care Centre (PCC) to find out the variables which contribute to the diagnostic and therapeutic evolution of our patients.

DESIGN

Retrospective study on every Neoplasia registered in the Centre.

PATIENTS

293 malignant Neoplasias were recorded in the period between June 1984 and June 1990 (184 in males--62.8%; and 109 in women--37.2%).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The intervals between symptom and consultation (ISC), between consultation and referral (ICR), between referral and diagnosis (IRD) and between diagnosis and treatment (IDT) were evaluated. The average age at the moment of diagnosis was 59 (SD:13). There were 3.9% double neoplasias. The most frequent type was lung cancer with 41 cases (14%). This also occupied first place among men, whereas breast cancer did so among women. 10 tumours were diagnosed by screening: 4 breast, 5 cervix and 1 endometrium, which represent 16%, 50% and 14.3% respectively of these cancers. For all neoplasias taken together, the average time of ISC was 44.09 days (SD 73.48) and of IDT 25.75 days (SD:61.55). Given the wide variations, we assessed the most common types of tumour.

CONCLUSIONS

The usefulness of keeping a tumour register in a Primary Care Centre, which could identify the factors which affect diagnostic delays and find possible corrective measures to reduce the delays, was appraised.