Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 53
Filter
Add more filters

Country/Region as subject
Publication year range
1.
Alzheimers Dement ; 20(3): 1716-1724, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38088512

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Our population-based study assessed whether clinically apparent Helicobacter pylori infection (CAHPI) is associated with the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: We assembled a population-based cohort of all dementia-free subjects in the United Kingdom's Clinical Practice Research Datalink (UK CPRD), aged ≥50 years (1988-2017). Using a nested case-control approach, we matched each newly developed case of AD with 40 controls. Conditional logistic regression estimated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of AD associated with CAHPI compared with no CAHPI during ≥2 years before the index date. We also used salmonellosis as a negative control exposure. RESULTS: Among 4,262,092 dementia-free subjects, 40,455 developed AD after a mean 11 years of follow-up. CAHPI was associated with an increased risk of AD (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.21) compared with no CAHPI. Salmonellosis was not associated with the risk of AD (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.29). DISCUSSION: CAHPI was associated with a moderately increased risk of AD. HIGHLIGHTS: CAHPI was associated with an 11% increased risk of AD in subjects aged ≥50 years. The increase in the risk of AD reached a peak of 24% a decade after CAHPI onset. There was no major effect modification by age or sex. Sensitivity analyses addressing several potential biases led to consistent results.


Subject(s)
Alzheimer Disease , Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Humans , Middle Aged , Alzheimer Disease/complications , Case-Control Studies , Helicobacter Infections/epidemiology , Logistic Models , Risk Factors , Male , Female , Aged
2.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 116(6): 1339-1341, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33734112

ABSTRACT

In the context of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 pandemic, we have developed a novel negative pressure aerosol protector for upper endoscopy (TRACEY). TRACEY is the first endoscopic enclosure to have passed stringent testing for aerosol protection. The following describes its clinical use in a single-center prospective case series. Overall, 15 patients were included. All endoscopic procedures were successful without premature removal of TRACEY. In addition, its use did not lead to significant patient discomfort, technical hinderance, or adverse events. TRACEY seems to offer a safe and easy to use aerosol protection for upper endoscopy and a potential Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 mitigation strategy in endoscopy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/instrumentation , Infection Control/instrumentation , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment , Adult , Aerosols , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/adverse effects , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
3.
Gastroenterology ; 157(1): 44-53, 2019 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30998990

ABSTRACT

Increasing resistance to antibiotics worldwide has adverse effects on the effectiveness of standard therapies to eradicate Helicobacter pylori infection. We reviewed guidelines developed by expert groups in Europe, Canada, and the United States for the treatment of H pylori infection. We compared the recommendations of these guidelines, reconciled them, and addressed the increasing resistance of H pylori to antibiotic therapy regimens. The guidelines recommend bismuth quadruple therapy for first-line treatment, replacing clarithromycin-based triple therapy. There is consensus for concomitant 4-drug therapy as an alternative, especially when bismuth is not available. When therapy is unsuccessful, it is likely due to resistance to clarithromycin, levofloxacin, and/or metronidazole; these drugs, if used previously, should be avoided in subsequent eradication attempts. Second-line therapies should be bismuth quadruple therapy or levofloxacin triple therapy, depending on suspected resistance, reserving rifabutin-based triple and high-dose dual amoxicillin proton pump inhibitor therapy for subsequent treatment attempts. The increasing resistance of H pylori to antibiotic therapy necessitates local availability of susceptibility tests for individuals, and establishment of regional and national monitoring programs to develop evidence-based locally relevant eradication strategies. Further studies into the development of more easily accessible methods of resistance testing, such as biomarker analysis of stool samples, are required. Options under investigation include substituting vonoprazan for proton pump inhibitors, adding probiotics, and vaccine development. Narrow-spectrum antibiotics and new therapeutic targets could be identified based on genomic, proteomic, and metabolomic analyses of H pylori.


Subject(s)
Antacids/therapeutic use , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Resistance, Bacterial , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Proton Pump Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Amoxicillin/therapeutic use , Bismuth/therapeutic use , Canada , Clarithromycin/therapeutic use , Drug Therapy, Combination , Europe , Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Humans , Levofloxacin/therapeutic use , Metronidazole/therapeutic use , Microbial Sensitivity Tests , Rifabutin/therapeutic use , Tetracycline/therapeutic use , United States
5.
N Engl J Med ; 381(6): 588, 2019 08 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31390512
6.
Gastroenterology ; 151(1): 51-69.e14, 2016 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27102658

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Helicobacter pylori infection is increasingly difficult to treat. The purpose of these consensus statements is to provide a review of the literature and specific, updated recommendations for eradication therapy in adults. METHODS: A systematic literature search identified studies on H pylori treatment. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Statements were developed through an online platform, finalized, and voted on by an international working group of specialists chosen by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology. RESULTS: Because of increasing failure of therapy, the consensus group strongly recommends that all H pylori eradication regimens now be given for 14 days. Recommended first-line strategies include concomitant nonbismuth quadruple therapy (proton pump inhibitor [PPI] + amoxicillin + metronidazole + clarithromycin [PAMC]) and traditional bismuth quadruple therapy (PPI + bismuth + metronidazole + tetracycline [PBMT]). PPI triple therapy (PPI + clarithromycin + either amoxicillin or metronidazole) is restricted to areas with known low clarithromycin resistance or high eradication success with these regimens. Recommended rescue therapies include PBMT and levofloxacin-containing therapy (PPI + amoxicillin + levofloxacin). Rifabutin regimens should be restricted to patients who have failed to respond to at least 3 prior options. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal treatment of H pylori infection requires careful attention to local antibiotic resistance and eradication patterns. The quadruple therapies PAMC or PBMT should play a more prominent role in eradication of H pylori infection, and all treatments should be given for 14 days.


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents/standards , Helicobacter Infections/drug therapy , Helicobacter pylori , Proton Pump Inhibitors/standards , Adult , Amoxicillin/administration & dosage , Amoxicillin/standards , Anti-Infective Agents/administration & dosage , Bismuth/administration & dosage , Bismuth/standards , Canada , Clarithromycin/administration & dosage , Clarithromycin/standards , Drug Administration Schedule , Drug Therapy, Combination/standards , Humans , Levofloxacin/administration & dosage , Levofloxacin/standards , Metronidazole/administration & dosage , Metronidazole/standards , Proton Pump Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Tetracycline/administration & dosage , Tetracycline/standards
7.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (6): CD009034, 2016 Jun 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27351542

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Non-bismuth quadruple sequential therapy (SEQ) comprising a first induction phase with a dual regimen of amoxicillin and a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) for five days followed by a triple regimen phase with a PPI, clarithromycin and metronidazole for another five days, has been suggested as a new first-line treatment option to replace the standard triple therapy (STT) comprising a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), clarithromycin and amoxicillin, in which eradication proportions have declined to disappointing levels. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of a SEQ regimen with STT for the eradication of H. pylori infection, and to compare the incidence of adverse effects associated with both STT and SEQ H. pylori eradication therapies. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted bibliographical searches in electronic databases, and handsearched abstracts from Congresses up to April 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 10-day SEQ and STT (of at least seven days) for the eradication of H. pylori. Participants were adults and children diagnosed as positive for H. pylori infection and naïve to H. pylori treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used a pre-piloted, tabular summary to collect demographic and medical information of included study participants as well as therapeutic data and information related to the diagnosis and confirmatory tests.We evaluated the difference in intention-to-treat eradication between SEQ and STT regimens across studies, and assessed sources of the heterogeneity of this risk difference (RD) using subgroup analyses.We evaluated the quality of the evidence following Cochrane standards, and summarised it using GRADE methodology. MAIN RESULTS: We included 44 RCTs with a total of 12,284 participants (6042 in SEQ and 6242 in STT). The overall analysis showed that SEQ was significantly more effective than STT (82% vs 75% in the intention-to-treat analysis; RD 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.11; P < 0.001, moderate-quality evidence). Results were highly heterogeneous (I² = 75%), and 20 studies did not demonstrate differences between therapies.Reporting by geographic region (RD 0.09, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.12; studies = 44; I² = 75%, based on low-quality evidence) showed that differences between SEQ and STT were greater in Europe (RD 0.16, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.19) when compared to Asia, Africa or South America. European studies also showed a tendency towards better efficacy with SEQ; however, this tendency was reversed in 33% of the Asian studies. Africa reported the closest risk difference (RD 0.14 , 95% 0.07 to 0.22) to Europe among studied regions, but confidence intervals were wider and therefore the quality of the evidence showing SEQ to be superior to STT was reduced for this region.Based on high-quality evidence, subgroup analyses showed that SEQ and STT therapies were equivalent when STT lasted for 14 days. Although, overall, the mean eradication proportion with SEQ was over 80%, we noted a tendency towards a lower average effect with this regimen in the more recent studies (2008 and after); weighted linear regression showed that the efficacies of both regimens evolved differently over the years, having a higher reduction in the efficacy of SEQ (-1.72% yearly) than in STT (-0.9% yearly). In these more recent studies (2008 and after) we were also unable to detect the superiority of SEQ over STT when STT was given for 10 days.Based on very low-quality evidence, subgroup analyses on antibiotic resistance showed that the widest difference in efficacy between SEQ and STT was in the subgroup analysis based on clarithromycin-resistant participants, in which SEQ reached a 75% average efficacy versus 43% with STT.Reporting on adverse events (AEs) (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02; participants = 8103; studies = 27; I² = 26%, based on high-quality evidence) showed no significant differences between SEQ and STT (20.4% vs 19.5%, respectively) and results were homogeneous.The quality of the studies was limited due to a lack of systematic reporting of the factors affecting risk of bias. Although randomisation was reported, its methodology (e.g. algorithms, number of blocks) was not specified in several studies. Additionally, the other 'Risk of bias' domains (such as allocation concealment of the sequence randomisation, or blinding during either performance or outcome assessment) were also unreported.However, subgroup analyses as well as sensitivity analyses or funnel plots indicated that treatment outcomes were not influenced by the quality of the included studies. On the other hand, we rated 'length of STT' and AEs for the main outcome as high-quality according to GRADE classification; but we downgraded 'publication date' quality to moderate, and 'geographic region' and 'antibiotic resistance' to low- and very low-quality, respectively. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis indicates that prior to 2008 SEQ was more effective than STT, especially when STT was given for only seven days. Nevertheless, the apparent advantage of sequential treatment has decreased over time, and more recent studies do not show SEQ to have a higher efficacy versus STT when STT is given for 10 days.Based on the results of this meta-analysis, although SEQ offers an advantage when compared with STT, it cannot be presented as a valid alternative, given that neither SEQ nor STT regimens achieved optimal efficacy ( ≥ 90% eradication rate).


Subject(s)
Helicobacter Infections/drug therapy , Helicobacter pylori , Adult , Drug Therapy, Combination/methods , Geography, Medical , Humans , Intention to Treat Analysis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
8.
Antibiotics (Basel) ; 13(2)2024 Jan 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38391522

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: non-bismuth sequential therapy (SEQ) was suggested as a first-line anti-Helicobacter pylori treatment alternative to standard triple therapy (STT). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review with a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of 10-day SEQ vs. STT (of at least 7 days) using bibliographical searches up to July 2021, including treatment-naïve adult or children. The intention-to-treat (ITT) eradication rate and the risk difference (RD) were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 69 RCTs were evaluated, including 19,657 patients (9486 in SEQ; 10,171 in STT). Overall, SEQ was significantly more effective than STT (82% vs. 75%; RD 0.08; p < 0.001). The results were highly heterogeneous (I2 = 68%), and 38 studies did not demonstrate differences between therapies. Subgroup analyses suggested that patients with clarithromycin resistance only and all geographical areas but South America could benefit more from SEQ. Both therapies have evolved over the years, showing similar results when STT lasted 14 days; however, a tendency toward lower SEQ efficacy was noted from 2010 onwards. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to 2010, SEQ was significantly more effective than STT, notably when 7-day STT was prescribed. A tendency toward lower differences between SEQ and STT has been noted, especially when using 10-day STT. None of the therapies achieved an optimal efficacy and therefore cannot be recommended as a valid first-line H. pylori treatment.

10.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (12): CD008337, 2013 Dec 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24338763

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication therapy is controversial, with recommendations ranging from 7 to 14 days. Several systematic reviews have attempted to address this issue but have given conflicting results and limited their analysis to proton pump inhibitor (PPI), two antibiotics (PPI triple) therapy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the optimal duration of multiple H. pylori eradication regimens. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess the relative effectiveness of different durations (7, 10 or 14 days) of a variety of regimens for eradicating H. pylori. The primary outcome was H. pylori persistence. The secondary outcome was adverse events. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched up to December 2011 to identify eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also searched the proceedings of six conferences from 1995 to 2011, dissertations and theses, and grey literature. There were no language restrictions applied to any search. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only parallel group RCTs assessing the efficacy of one to two weeks duration of first line H. pylori eradication regimens in adults were eligible. Within each regimen, the same combinations of drugs at the same dose were compared over different durations. Studies with at least two arms comparing 7, 10, or 14 days were eligible. Enrolled participants needed to be diagnosed with at least one positive test for H. pylori on the basis of a rapid urease test (RUT), histology, culture, urea breath test (UBT), or a stool antigen test (HpSA) before treatment. Eligible trials needed to confirm eradication of H. pylori as their primary outcome at least 28 days after completion of eradication treatment. Trials using only serology or a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to determine H. pylori infection or eradication were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study eligibility and data extraction were performed by two independent review authors. Data analyses were performed within each type of intervention, for both primary and secondary outcomes. The relative risk (RR) and number needed to treat (NNT)/number needed to harm (NNTH) according to duration of therapy were calculated using the outcomes of H. pylori persistence and adverse events. A random-effects model was used. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were planned a priori. MAIN RESULTS: In total, 75 studies met the inclusion criteria. Eight types of regimens were reported with at least two comparative eligible durations. They included: PPI + two antibiotics triple therapy (n = 59), PPI bismuth-based quadruple therapy (n = 6), PPI + three antibiotics quadruple therapy (n = 1), PPI dual therapy (n = 2), histamine H2-receptor antagonist (H2RA) bismuth quadruple therapy (n = 3), H2RA bismuth-based triple therapy (n = 2), H2RA + two antibiotics triple therapy (n = 3), and bismuth + two antibiotics triple therapy (n = 2). Some studies provided data for more than one regimen or more than two durations.For the PPI triple therapy, 59 studies with five regimens were reported: PPI + clarithromycin + amoxicillin (PCA); PPI + clarithromycin + a nitroimidazole (PCN); PPI + amoxicillin + nitroimidazole (PAN); PPI + amoxicillin + a quinolone (PAQ); and PPI + amoxicillin + a nitrofuran (PANi). Regardless of type and dose of antibiotics, increased duration of PPI triple therapy from 7 to 14 days significantly increased the H. pylori eradication rate (45 studies, 72.9% versus 81.9%), the RR for H. pylori persistence was 0.66 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.74), NNT was 11 (95% CI 9 to 14). Significant effects were seen in the subgroup of PCA (34 studies, RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.75; NNT 12, 95% CI 9 to 16); PAN (10 studies, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.86; NNT = 11, 95% CI 8 to 25); and in PAQ (2 studies, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.83; NNT 3, 95% CI 2 to 10); but not in PCN triple therapy (4 studies, RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07). Significantly increased eradication rates were also seen for PPI triple therapy with 10 versus 7 days (24 studies, 79.9% versus 75.7%; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.89; NNT 21, 95% CI 15 to 38) and 14 versus 10 days (12 studies, 84.4% versus 78.5%; RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.90; NNT 17, 95% CI 11 to 46); especially in the subgroup of PAC for 10 versus 7 days (17 studies, RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.91) and for 14 versus 10 days (10 studies, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.91). A trend towards increased H. pylori eradication rates was seen with increased duration of PCN for 10 versus 7 days, and of PAN for 10 versus 7 days and 14 versus 10 days, though this was not statistical significant. The proportion of patients with adverse events, defined by authors, was marginally significantly increased only between 7 days and 14 days (15.5% versus 19.4%; RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.37; NNTH 31, 95% CI 18 to 104) but not for other duration comparisons. The proportion of patients discontinuing treatment due to adverse events was not significantly different between treatment durations.Only limited data were reported for different durations of regimens other than PPI triple therapy. No significant difference of the eradication rate was seen for all regimens according to different durations except for H2RA bismuth quadruple therapy, where a significantly higher eradication rate was seen for 14 days versus 7 days, however only one study reported outcome data. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the duration of PPI-based triple therapy increases H. pylori eradication rates. For PCA, prolonging treatment duration from 7 to 10 or from 10 to 14 days is associated with a significantly higher eradication rate. The optimal duration of therapy for PCA and PAN is at least 14 days. More data are needed to confirm if there is any benefit of increasing the duration of therapy for PCN therapy. Information is limited for regimens other than PPI triple therapy; more studies are needed to draw meaningful conclusions for optimal duration of other H. pylori eradication regimens.


Subject(s)
Anti-Ulcer Agents/administration & dosage , Helicobacter Infections/drug therapy , Helicobacter pylori , Proton Pump Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Amoxicillin/administration & dosage , Anti-Bacterial Agents/administration & dosage , Bismuth/administration & dosage , Clarithromycin/administration & dosage , Drug Administration Schedule , Drug Therapy, Combination/adverse effects , Drug Therapy, Combination/methods , Humans , Nitroimidazoles/administration & dosage , Quinolones/therapeutic use
11.
Can J Gastroenterol ; 27(4): 224-8, 2013 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23616961

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Differences between American (United States [US]) and European guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance may create confusion for the practicing clinician. Under- or overutilization of surveillance colonoscopy can impact patient care. METHODS: The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (CAG) convened a working group (CAG-WG) to review available guidelines and provide unified guidance to Canadian clinicians regarding appropriate follow-up for colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance after index colonoscopy. A literature search was conducted for relevant data that postdated the published guidelines. RESULTS: The CAG-WG chose the 2012 US Multi-Society Task Force (MSTF) on Colorectal Cancer to serve as the basis for the Canadian position, primarily because the US approach was the simplest and comprehensively addressed the issue of serrated polyps. Aspects of other guidelines were incorporated where relevant. The CAG-WG recommendations differed from the US MSTF guidelines in three main areas: patients with negative index colonoscopy should be followed-up at 10 years using any of the appropriate screening tests, including colonoscopy, for average-risk individuals; among patients with >10 adenomas, a one-year interval for subsequent colonoscopy is recommended; and for long-term follow-up, patients with low-risk adenomas on both the index and first follow-up procedures can undergo second follow-up colonoscopy at an interval of five to 10 years. DISCUSSION: The CAG-WG adapted the US MSTF guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance to the Canadian health care environment with a few modifications. It is anticipated that the present article will provide unified guidance that will enhance physician acceptance and encourage appropriate utilization of recommended surveillance intervals.


Subject(s)
Colonoscopy/methods , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Adenoma/diagnosis , Canada , Gastroenterology , Humans , Intestinal Polyps/diagnosis , Occult Blood , Societies, Medical , Time Factors
12.
Can J Gastroenterol ; 26(2): 97-103, 2012 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22312609

ABSTRACT

The diminishing prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection among most segments of the Canadian population has led to changes in the etiologies and patterns of associated upper gastrointestinal diseases, including fewer peptic ulcers and their complications. Canadian Aboriginals and recent immigrants are among populations in which the prevalence of H pylori infection remains high and, therefore, the health risks imposed by H pylori remain a significant concern. Population-based strategies for H pylori eradication in groups with a low prevalence of infection are unlikely to be cost effective, but such measures are attractive in groups in which the prevalence rates of infection remain substantial. In addition to a lower prevalence of peptic ulcers and dyspepsia, the public health value of eradication may be particularly important if this leads to a reduction in the prevalence of gastric cancer in high prevalence groups. Therefore The Canadian Helicobacter Study Group held a conference that brought together experts in the field to address these issues, the results of which are reviewed in the present article. Canadians with the highest prevalence of H pylori infection are an appropriate focus for considering the health advantages of eradicating persistent infection. In Canadian communities with a high prevalence of both H pylori and gastric cancer, there remains an opportunity to test the hypothesis that H pylori infection is a treatable risk factor for malignancy.


Subject(s)
Emigrants and Immigrants/statistics & numerical data , Helicobacter Infections/ethnology , Helicobacter pylori , Indians, North American/statistics & numerical data , Refugees/statistics & numerical data , Canada/epidemiology , Helicobacter Infections/transmission , Helicobacter pylori/isolation & purification , Humans , Prevalence , Risk Factors , Stomach Neoplasms/prevention & control
13.
Can J Gastroenterol ; 24(1): 20-5, 2010 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20186352

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Assessment of current wait times for specialist health services in Canada is a key method that can assist government and health care providers to plan wisely for future health needs. These data are not readily available. A method to capture wait time data at the time of consultation or procedure has been developed, which should be applicable to other specialist groups and also allows for assessment of wait time trends over intervals of years. METHODS: In November 2008, gastroenterologists across Canada were asked to complete a questionnaire (online or by fax) that included personal demographics and data from one week on at least five consecutive new consultations and five consecutive procedure patients who had not previously undergone a procedure for the same indication. Wait times were collected for 18 primary indications and results were then compared with similar survey data collected in 2005. RESULTS: The longest wait times observed were for screening colonoscopy (201 days) and surveillance of previous colon cancer or polyps (272 days). The shortest wait times were for cancer-likely based on imaging or physical examination (82 days), severe or rapidly progressing dysphagia or odynophagia (83 days), documented iron deficiency anemia (90 days) and dyspepsia with alarm symptoms (99 days). Compared with 2005 data, total wait times in 2008 were lengthened overall (127 days versus 155 days; P<0.05) and for most of the seven individual indications that permitted data comparison. CONCLUSION: Median wait times for gastroenterology services continue to exceed consensus conference recommended targets and have significantly worsened since 2005.


Subject(s)
Gastroenterology , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Waiting Lists , Canada , Digestive System Diseases/diagnosis , Digestive System Diseases/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , Time Factors
14.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth ; 7(7): e12242, 2019 07 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31125310

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The preparation for colonoscopy is elaborate and complex. In the context of colorectal cancer screening, up to 11% of patients do not keep their colonoscopy appointments and up to 33% of those attending their appointments have inadequately cleansed bowels that can delay cancer diagnosis and treatment. A smartphone app may be an acceptable and wide-reaching tool to improve patient adherence to colonoscopy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this qualitative study was to employ a user-centered approach to design the content and features of a smartphone app called colonAPPscopy to support individuals preparing for their colonoscopy appointments. METHODS: We conducted 2 focus group discussions (FGDs) with gastroenterology patients treated at the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal, Canada. Patients were aged 50 to 75 years, were English- or French-speaking, and had undergone outpatient colonoscopy in the previous 3 months; they did not have inflammatory bowel disease or colorectal cancer. FGDs were 75 to 90 min, conducted by a trained facilitator, and audiotaped. Participants discussed the electronic health support tools they might use to help them prepare for the colonoscopy, the content needed for colonoscopy preparation, and the features that would make the smartphone app useful. Recordings of FGDs were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key user-defined content and features to inform the design of colonAPPscopy. RESULTS: A total of 9 patients (7 male and 2 female) participated in one of 2 FGDs. Main content areas focused on bowel preparation instructions, medication restrictions, appointment logistics, communication, and postcolonoscopy expectations. Design features to make the app useful and engaging included minimization of data input, reminders and alerts for up to 7 days precolonoscopy, and visual aids. Participants wanted a smartphone app that comes from a trusted source, sends timely and tailored messages, provides reassurance, provides clear instructions, and is simple to use. CONCLUSIONS: Participants identified the need for postcolonoscopy information as well as reminders and alerts in the week before colonoscopy, novel content, and features that had not been included in previous smartphone-based strategies for colonoscopy preparation. The ability to tailor instructions made the smartphone app preferable to other modes of delivery. Study findings recognize the importance of including potential users in the development phase of building a smartphone app.


Subject(s)
Colonoscopy/psychology , Mobile Applications/standards , Test Taking Skills/methods , Aged , Colonoscopy/statistics & numerical data , Female , Focus Groups/methods , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mobile Applications/statistics & numerical data , Patient-Centered Care/methods , Patient-Centered Care/standards , Qualitative Research , Quebec , Test Taking Skills/standards , Test Taking Skills/statistics & numerical data
15.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 6(4): 418-25, 2008 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18304891

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Randomized trials suggest high-dose proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) administered before gastroscopy in suspected upper gastrointestinal bleeding downstage bleeding ulcer stigmata. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of this approach. METHODS: A decision model compared high-dose IVPPI initiated while awaiting endoscopy with IVPPI administration on the basis of endoscopic findings. IVPPIs were given to all patients undergoing endoscopic hemostasis for 72 hours thereafter. Once the IV regimen was completed or for patients with low-risk endoscopic lesions, an oral daily PPI was given for the remainder of the time horizon (30 days after endoscopy). The unit of effectiveness was the proportion of patients without rebleeding, representing the denominator of the cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per no rebleeding). Probabilities and costs were derived from the literature and national databases. RESULTS: IVPPIs before endoscopy were both slightly more costly and effective than after gastroscopy in the U.S. and Canadian settings, with cost-effectiveness ratios of US$5048 versus $4933 and CAN$6064 versus $6025 and incremental costs of US$45,673 and CAN$19,832 to prevent one additional rebleeding episode, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed robust results in the US In Canada, intravenous proton-pump inhibitors (IVPPIs) before endoscopy became more effective and less costly (dominant strategy) when the uncomplicated stay for high-risk patients increased above 6 days or that of low-risk patients decreased below 3 days. CONCLUSIONS: With conservative estimates and high-quality data, IVPPIs given before endoscopy are slightly more effective and costly than no administration. In Canada, this approach becomes dominant as the duration of hospitalization for high-risk ulcer patients increases or that of low-risk ulcer patients decreases.


Subject(s)
2-Pyridinylmethylsulfinylbenzimidazoles/economics , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Gastroscopy , Premedication , Proton Pump Inhibitors/economics , 2-Pyridinylmethylsulfinylbenzimidazoles/administration & dosage , Canada , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Decision Trees , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/complications , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Length of Stay/economics , Pantoprazole , Peptic Ulcer/complications , Proton Pump Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Secondary Prevention , United States
17.
Can J Gastroenterol ; 22(4): 399-403, 2008 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18414716

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a serious medical condition requiring prompt resuscitation and early endoscopic therapy in those with high-risk endoscopic lesions (HRLs). There are little or no data correlating sole blood urea nitrogen (BUN) level with the severity of nonvariceal UGIB or the presence of HRLs in the adult population. OBJECTIVES: To determine if the BUN level on presentation correlates with parameters of severity of UGIB (need for blood transfusion or intensive care unit [ICU] admission) or to the subsequent finding of HRL, and in so doing identify patients who will require early endoscopic intervention. METHODS: The Canadian Registry of patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding undergoing Endoscopy was used to identify patients enrolled from the McGill University Health Centre (Montreal, Quebec) who presented with or developed acute nonvariceal UGIB while admitted. All comparisons were performed using Student's t test or Wilcoxon's signed rank test, as appropriate. Logistic regression modelling using a stepwise method was performed to identify independent predictors of severe nonvariceal UGIB and HRL. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients were enrolled in the study. The mean age was 67+/-18 years and 59.8% were male. The mean BUN level was 13.4+/-9.4 mmol/L. Univariate analysis demonstrated that the BUN level was a significant predictor of ICU admission (BUN 14.7+/-10.4 mmol/L versus 12.0+/-8.0 mmol/L, P=0.035). However, when adjusted for systolic blood pressure, BUN level became a weaker predictor of ICU admission, just failing to achieve statistical significance (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.06; P=0.08). Univariate analysis also demonstrated that BUN level was not a statistically significant predictor of blood transfusion requirement (BUN 14.1+/-10.6 mmol/L versus 13.6+/-8.6 mmol/L, P=0.508), nor of HRL (BUN 14.2+/-10.7 mmol/L versus 12.9+/-8.6 mmol/L, P=0.605). CONCLUSION: In patients with nonvariceal UGIB, the BUN level at initial presentation is a weak predictor of the severity of UGIB as defined by ICU admission, but is not helpful in identifying patients with a HRL.


Subject(s)
Blood Urea Nitrogen , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/blood , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Acute Disease , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Quebec , Risk Assessment , Severity of Illness Index , Upper Gastrointestinal Tract
19.
Pharmacoeconomics ; 25(5): 385-96, 2007.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17488137

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A validated productivity questionnaire, the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (WPAI-GERD), exists for Swedish patients with GERD. OBJECTIVE: To assess responsiveness to change of the WPAI-GERD and construct validity of the English language version. METHODS: We used the WPAI-GERD in a before-after treatment clinical study of Canadian GERD patients with moderate or severe symptoms treated with esomeprazole 40 mg once daily for 4 weeks. We measured productivity variables including GERD-specific absence from work, reduced productivity while at work and reduced productivity while carrying out regular daily activities other than work during the preceding week. RESULTS: The analysis included 217 patients, of whom 71% (n = 153) were employed. Before treatment, employed patients reported an average 0.9 hours of absence from work due to GERD and 14.0% reduced work productivity (5.8 hours equivalent) in the previous week, as well as 21.0% reduced productivity in daily activities (all patients). After treatment, the corresponding figures decreased to 0.3 hours, 3.0% (1.1 hours equivalent) and 4.9%, respectively. Thus, the improvement (difference from start of treatment) in productivity was 0.6 hours (p = 0.011) for absence from work and 11.0% units (p < 0.001) for reduced work productivity (4.7 hours equivalent, p < 0.001). This translated into an avoided loss of work productivity of 5.3 hours in total on a weekly basis per employed patient. In addition, a 16.1% unit (p < 0.001) improvement for reduced productivity in activities was observed. Cross-sectional correlation coefficients of WPAI variables with symptoms (range 0.04-0.63) and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL; range 0.02-0.65) supported cross-sectional construct validity. Corresponding change score correlations between WPAI variables and HR-QOL (range 0.05-0.56) supported longitudinal construct validity of the WPAI-GERD while low change score correlations between productivity variables and relevant symptoms (range 0.06-0.34) did not. CONCLUSION: The English version of the WPAI-GERD showed good cross-sectional construct validity, and results indicated that the WPAI-GERD is responsive to change. Although the results also indicated that longitudinal construct validity may be poor, the overall findings suggest that further study of the instrument remains warranted.


Subject(s)
Efficiency , Gastroesophageal Reflux/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Data Collection , Female , Gastroesophageal Reflux/epidemiology , Humans , Language , Male , Middle Aged , Reproducibility of Results , Sweden/epidemiology
20.
Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 2016: 7321574, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27446864

ABSTRACT

Aim. There is a paucity of data on the efficacy of empiric H. pylori treatment after multiple treatment failures. The aim of this study is to examine the efficacy of empiric salvage therapy as a second through sixth line treatment. Methods. In this single gastroenterology center prospective study in Montreal, Canada, patients with failed H. pylori treatment were offered empiric salvage therapy based on the patients' previous antibiotic exposure. Enrollment occurred after 1-5 previous failed attempts and eradication determined at least 4 weeks after completion of treatment. Results. 205 treatments were attempted in 175 patients using 7 different regimens. Eradication was achieved in 154 attempts (PP = 81% (154/191), ITT = 75% (154/205)). Bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) had higher eradication success (PP = 91% (102/112), ITT = 84% (102/121)) when compared to all PPI triple therapies combined (PP = 66% (49/74), absolute risk reduction (ARR): 25% (95% CI: 13-37), ITT = 62% (49/79), ARR: 22% (95% CI: 10-35), and p < 0.001) and when compared to levofloxacin triple therapy (PP = 66% (40/61), ARR: 26% (95% CI: 13-39), ITT = 61% (40/66), and ARR: 24% (95% CI: 10-37)). Eradication was achieved in a high proportion with BQT on attempt two (PP = 94% (67/71), ITT = 91% (67/74)), three (PP = 85% (17/20), ITT = 71% (17/24)), four (PP = 100% (11/11), ITT = 92% (11/12)), and five (PP = 86% (6/7), ITT = 75% (6/8)). Patients with previous combined bismuth and tetracycline exposure had a lower proportion of eradication compared to patients without such an exposure (PP: 60% (6/10) versus 95% (94/99), ARR: 35% (95% CI: 11-64), and p < 0.001; ITT: 55% (6/11) versus 90% (94/105), ARR: 35% (95% CI: 10-62), and p < 0.01). Conclusions. Salvage therapy with a bismuth quadruple regimen is superior to triple therapies and is effective for second through fifth line empirical treatment (≥85% PP, ≥70% ITT). Successful eradication is significantly lower with BQT if a similar bismuth based regimen was used in the past.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/administration & dosage , Bismuth/administration & dosage , Helicobacter Infections/drug therapy , Helicobacter pylori/drug effects , Organometallic Compounds/administration & dosage , Salicylates/administration & dosage , Salvage Therapy/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Canada , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Helicobacter Infections/microbiology , Humans , Intention to Treat Analysis , Male , Metronidazole/administration & dosage , Microbial Sensitivity Tests , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Proton Pump Inhibitors , Tetracycline/administration & dosage , Treatment Failure , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL