HOW DO CLINICIAN PRACTICING IN THE US MANAGE HELICOBACTER PYLORI-RELATED GASTROINTESTINAL-DISEASES - A COMPARISON OF PRIMARY-CARE AND SPECIALIST PHYSICIANS
T. Breuer et al., HOW DO CLINICIAN PRACTICING IN THE US MANAGE HELICOBACTER PYLORI-RELATED GASTROINTESTINAL-DISEASES - A COMPARISON OF PRIMARY-CARE AND SPECIALIST PHYSICIANS, The American journal of gastroenterology, 93(4), 1998, pp. 553-561
Objectives: We sought to examine the extent to which physicians recogn
ize H. pylori as a causal agent in peptic ulcer disease or as a potent
ial cofactor in other gastrointestinal diseases, and to observe how th
is knowledge has influenced diagnostic and therapeutic practices. Meth
ods: We used a national mail survey in the U.S. between February and M
ay of 1996, querying 5994 U.S. physicians (family/general practitioner
s [FPs], internists [IMs], and gastroenterologists) selected at random
from three different membership databases of professional association
s. Results: The response rate was 52%. More than 95% of physicians who
treat symptoms empirically would prescribe acid suppressant therapy r
ather than anti-H. pylori therapy. Between 43% and 66% of physicians,
varying in frequency by medical specialty, would treat the infection i
n H. pylori-positive patients with nonulcer dyspepsia. In confirmed pe
ptic ulcer disease, between 88% and 100% of physicians would treat the
H. pylori infection, depending on the physician group and whether or
not the presentation of an ulcer was recurrent. Although 103 distinct
anti-H. pylori regimens were reported, 89% of the gastroenterologists
and 70% of the primary care physicians (PCPs) used combinations of ant
imicrobials with reported cure rates of at least 80%. Conclusions: Gen
eral knowledge regarding H. pylori-associated diseases was widespread
among primary care physicians and gastroenterologists. However, anti-H
. pylori therapies judged ineffective were reported as the first choic
e regimen by 5% of gastroenterologists and 18% of primary care physici
ans. Gastroenterologists appear to implement the latest scientific dev
elopments in the field rapidly whereas PCPs manifest a delayed respons
e, due to either insufficient knowledge or to other factors influencin
g their approach to treatment. (C) 1998 by Am. Coll. of Gastroenterolo
gy.