TY - JOUR
T1 - Structured management strategy based on the Gastro-oesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) Questionnaire (GerdQ) vs. usual primary care for GERD
T2 - Pooled analysis of five cluster-randomised European studies
AU - Ponce, J.
AU - Garrigues, V.
AU - Agréus, L.
AU - Tabaglio, E.
AU - Gschwantler, M.
AU - Guallar, E.
AU - Tafalla, M.
AU - Nuevo, J.
AU - Hatlebakk, J.
PY - 2012/9
Y1 - 2012/9
N2 - Background: Response to treatment among primary care patients with gastro-oesophageal disease (GERD) is variable. Aim: The GERD Management Project (GMP) evaluated the effectiveness of a structured management approach to GERD vs. standard treatment (usual care). Methods: Data from five cluster-randomised clinical trials in adult primary care patients with symptoms of GERD were pooled. The structured pathway was based on the self-administered GERD Questionnaire (GerdQ) and was compared with standard treatment. Results: 1734 patients were enrolled (structured treatment, n = 834; standard treatment, n = 900). The difference in the mean GerdQ score change from baseline favoured the structured pathway (-0.61; 95% CI: -0.88, -0.34; p < 0.001). The odds ratio for an indication for treatment revision at the end of follow-up (structured vs. standard treatment) was 0.39 (95% CI: 0.29, 0.52; p = 0.001). Conclusions: Management of primary care patients with GERD can be improved by systematic stratification of patients using a patient management tool such as the GerdQ.
AB - Background: Response to treatment among primary care patients with gastro-oesophageal disease (GERD) is variable. Aim: The GERD Management Project (GMP) evaluated the effectiveness of a structured management approach to GERD vs. standard treatment (usual care). Methods: Data from five cluster-randomised clinical trials in adult primary care patients with symptoms of GERD were pooled. The structured pathway was based on the self-administered GERD Questionnaire (GerdQ) and was compared with standard treatment. Results: 1734 patients were enrolled (structured treatment, n = 834; standard treatment, n = 900). The difference in the mean GerdQ score change from baseline favoured the structured pathway (-0.61; 95% CI: -0.88, -0.34; p < 0.001). The odds ratio for an indication for treatment revision at the end of follow-up (structured vs. standard treatment) was 0.39 (95% CI: 0.29, 0.52; p = 0.001). Conclusions: Management of primary care patients with GERD can be improved by systematic stratification of patients using a patient management tool such as the GerdQ.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84865260649&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84865260649&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2012.02992.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2012.02992.x
M3 - Article
C2 - 22805293
AN - SCOPUS:84865260649
SN - 1368-5031
VL - 66
SP - 897
EP - 905
JO - International Journal of Clinical Practice
JF - International Journal of Clinical Practice
IS - 9
ER -