Jean Félix Piñerúa-Gonsálvez, Rosanna Del Carmen Zambrano-Infantino, Julio César Albornoz-Sandoval, Pedro Waykin Tong-Morao, Mariangel Nohemy León-Hernández, Barbara Daniela Matheus-Alonso, Frank Suárez-López, Yormalis Flores, Santos Neomar Higuera, María Lourdes Ruiz-Rebollo, Mariseli Sulbaran
{"title":"BEHIND THE PROTON PUMP INHIBITOR PRESCRIPTION: AN INTERNATIONAL SURVEY ON PHYSICIAN PRACTICES AND KNOWLEDGE.","authors":"Jean Félix Piñerúa-Gonsálvez, Rosanna Del Carmen Zambrano-Infantino, Julio César Albornoz-Sandoval, Pedro Waykin Tong-Morao, Mariangel Nohemy León-Hernández, Barbara Daniela Matheus-Alonso, Frank Suárez-López, Yormalis Flores, Santos Neomar Higuera, María Lourdes Ruiz-Rebollo, Mariseli Sulbaran","doi":"10.1590/S0004-2803.24612023-153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed worldwide, often resulting in their overuse. Consequently, it is essential to identify the likely causes of this overuse to facilitate their appropriate prescription.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to assess physician prescribing patterns, their knowledge of PPIs, and factors affecting their knowledge.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online survey was conducted among Latin American and Spanish physicians, collecting the following data: professional information, patterns of PPI usage, familiarity with published evidence, and the management approach in three hypothetical case-scenarios. Participant knowledge was categorized as sufficient or insufficient based on the results of the case scenarios. Subsequently, subgroup analysis was performed based on physician training level, years in practice, specialty, and time since the last PPI literature review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 371 physicians participated in the survey. Thirty-eight percent frequently prescribe PPIs, primarily for prophylactic purposes (57.9%). Eighty percent were unfamiliar with PPI deprescribing strategies, and 54.4% rarely reviewed the ongoing indication of patients taking a PPI. Sixty-four percent demonstrated sufficient knowledge in the case-scenarios. A significant association was observed between specialty type (medical vs surgical: 69.4% vs 46.8%, P<0.001), the timing of the PPI indication literature review (<5 years vs >5 years: 71.4% vs 58.7%, P=0.010), and sufficient knowledge.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While most participants prescribed PPIs regularly and for prophylaxis purposes, the majority were unfamiliar with deprescribing strategies and rarely reviewed ongoing indications. Sufficient knowledge is correlated with recent literature reviews and medical specialty affiliation.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>• The study aims to evaluate physician prescribing patterns, assess their knowledge of proton pump inhibitors, and identify factors influencing their knowledge.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>• An online survey of Latin American and Spanish physicians assessed proton pump inhibitor usage patterns and case-scenario responses, categorizing knowledge, and conducting subgroup analysis based on training, experience, specialty, and literature review timing.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>• Thirty-eight percent of surveyed physicians commonly prescribed proton pump inhibitors, and among them, 80% were unfamiliar with deprescribing strategies, with 54.4% rarely reviewing ongoing indications.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>• Sufficient knowledge was correlated with recent literature reviews and medical specialty affiliations.</p>","PeriodicalId":35671,"journal":{"name":"Arquivos de Gastroenterologia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arquivos de Gastroenterologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/S0004-2803.24612023-153","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed worldwide, often resulting in their overuse. Consequently, it is essential to identify the likely causes of this overuse to facilitate their appropriate prescription.
Objective: This study aims to assess physician prescribing patterns, their knowledge of PPIs, and factors affecting their knowledge.
Methods: An online survey was conducted among Latin American and Spanish physicians, collecting the following data: professional information, patterns of PPI usage, familiarity with published evidence, and the management approach in three hypothetical case-scenarios. Participant knowledge was categorized as sufficient or insufficient based on the results of the case scenarios. Subsequently, subgroup analysis was performed based on physician training level, years in practice, specialty, and time since the last PPI literature review.
Results: A total of 371 physicians participated in the survey. Thirty-eight percent frequently prescribe PPIs, primarily for prophylactic purposes (57.9%). Eighty percent were unfamiliar with PPI deprescribing strategies, and 54.4% rarely reviewed the ongoing indication of patients taking a PPI. Sixty-four percent demonstrated sufficient knowledge in the case-scenarios. A significant association was observed between specialty type (medical vs surgical: 69.4% vs 46.8%, P<0.001), the timing of the PPI indication literature review (<5 years vs >5 years: 71.4% vs 58.7%, P=0.010), and sufficient knowledge.
Conclusion: While most participants prescribed PPIs regularly and for prophylaxis purposes, the majority were unfamiliar with deprescribing strategies and rarely reviewed ongoing indications. Sufficient knowledge is correlated with recent literature reviews and medical specialty affiliation.
Background: • The study aims to evaluate physician prescribing patterns, assess their knowledge of proton pump inhibitors, and identify factors influencing their knowledge.
Background: • An online survey of Latin American and Spanish physicians assessed proton pump inhibitor usage patterns and case-scenario responses, categorizing knowledge, and conducting subgroup analysis based on training, experience, specialty, and literature review timing.
Background: • Thirty-eight percent of surveyed physicians commonly prescribed proton pump inhibitors, and among them, 80% were unfamiliar with deprescribing strategies, with 54.4% rarely reviewing ongoing indications.
Background: • Sufficient knowledge was correlated with recent literature reviews and medical specialty affiliations.
背景:质子泵抑制剂(PPIs)在全球范围内被广泛处方,常常导致过度使用。因此,必须找出造成这种过度使用的可能原因,以促进合理处方:本研究旨在评估医生的处方模式、他们对 PPIs 的了解程度以及影响他们了解程度的因素:对拉丁美洲和西班牙医生进行了在线调查,收集了以下数据:专业信息、PPI 使用模式、对已发表证据的熟悉程度以及三种假设病例情景下的管理方法。根据病例情景的结果,将参与者的知识分为充分和不充分两类。随后,根据医生的培训水平、执业年限、专业以及距上一次 PPI 文献综述的时间进行了分组分析:共有 371 名医生参与了调查。38%的医生经常处方 PPIs,主要用于预防目的(57.9%)。80%的医生不熟悉 PPI 停药策略,54.4%的医生很少审查正在服用 PPI 的患者的适应症。64%的人在案例情景模拟中表现出足够的知识储备。专科类型(内科 vs 外科:69.4% vs 46.8%,P5 年:71.4% vs 58.7%,P=0.010)与足够知识之间存在明显关联:结论:虽然大多数参与者定期处方 PPIs 并用于预防目的,但大多数人不熟悉停药策略,也很少回顾正在使用的适应症。足够的知识与最近的文献综述和所属医学专业相关:- 该研究旨在评估医生的处方模式,评估他们对质子泵抑制剂的了解程度,并确定影响其了解程度的因素:- 一项针对拉丁美洲和西班牙医生的在线调查评估了质子泵抑制剂的使用模式和病例情景反应,对知识进行了分类,并根据培训、经验、专业和文献综述时间进行了分组分析:- 38%的受访医生通常开质子泵抑制剂处方,其中80%的医生不熟悉停药策略,54.4%的医生很少回顾正在进行的适应症:- 足够的知识与最近的文献回顾和医学专业关联相关。
期刊介绍:
The journal Arquivos de Gastroenterologia (Archives of Gastroenterology), a quarterly journal, is the Official Publication of the Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia IBEPEGE (Brazilian Institute for Studies and Research in Gastroenterology), Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva - CBCD (Brazilian College of Digestive Surgery) and of the Sociedade Brasileira de Motilidade Digestiva - SBMD (Brazilian Digestive Motility Society). It is dedicated to the publishing of scientific papers by national and foreign researchers who are in agreement with the aim of the journal as well as with its editorial policies.