Spanish primary care survey on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection and dyspepsia: Information, attitudes, and decisions. Issue 4 (20th May 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: McNicholl, Adrian G.; Amador, Javier; Ricote, Mercedes; Cañones‐Garzón, Pedro J.; Gene, Emili; Calvet, Xavier; Gisbert, Javier P.
• Is Part Of: Helicobacter. Volume 24:Issue 4(2019)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2019-05-20
• Subjects: attitudes -- dyspepsia -- general practitioner -- Helicobacter pylori -- primary care -- survey; Helicobacter -- Periodicals; Helicobacter infections -- Periodicals; Stomach -- Diseases -- Periodicals; 616.3301405
• DOI: 10.1111/hel.12593
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1083-4389

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Dyspepsia and Helicobacter pylori are two of the most relevant digestive conditions in primary care. Several consensuses on the subject have been published, but the assimilation/implementation of these guidelines is uncertain. Aims and Methods: To evaluate the attitudes, perceptions, limitations, and adherence to recommendations of Spanish primary care physicians using an open online survey. Responses were anonymously codified. Estimated margin of error was 3.4%. Responses were weighted by province, gender, age, and type of practice. Survey was performed using the AEG‐REDCap platform. Results: A total of 1445 responses, received between December 2017 and April 2018, were analyzed. Women represented 54%, and the average age was 48 years; 59% were from urban context, 20% from semi‐urban, and 21% from rural; 93% provided public practice. Over 40% had read at least one Maastricht consensus (24% Maastricht V), and 34% had attended a course related to H. pylori . 16% reported no direct access to any validated diagnostic method, only 44% to urea breath test, and 33% did not systematically refer to eradication confirmation test. The first‐line treatment of choice was standard triple therapy in 56%, followed by concomitant therapy (28%). Only 20% of physicians had optimal adherence to recommendations. Conclusion: Even though some improvements from guidelines have been partially incorporated, the level of penetration of recommendations is still poor and delayed. To provide optimal primary care, the barriers for implementation, access to diagnostic tests and to continuous medical education, should be removed. Rigorous dissemination, implementation, and evaluation programs are desired in future consensuses.