Cost-effectiveness of a 'score and scope' strategy for the management of dyspepsia

Efficiency of Diagnostic Testing for Helicobacter pylori Infections-A Systematic Review

Background: The most recommended treatment for a Helicobacter pylori infection is high doses of combined antibiotics. The objective of this article is to perform a systematic review of the economic evaluation studies applied to assess the efficiency of diagnostic testing for H. pylori infections, so that their main characteristics can be identified and to learn from the literature how the antimicrobial resistance (AMR) issue is incorporated into these economic evaluations. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to compare the costs and clinical effectiveness of diagnostic strategies for H. pylori infections. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and extracted the items from the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Results: We found thirteen articles that were of good quality according to CHEERS: six studies focused on diagnostics of Helicobacter pylori infections associated with dyspepsia and four on duodenal ulcers. Testing was found to be the most cost-effective strategy in eight articles. Four studies considered AMR. Conclusions: Testing was more cost-effective than empirical treatment, except in cases of high prevalence (as with developing countries) or when patients could be stratified according to their comorbidities. The introduction of AMR into the model may change the efficiency of the testing strategy.

Helicobacter Pylori "Test-and-Treat" Strategy for Management of Dyspepsia: A Comprehensive Review

OBJECTIVES:

Deciding on whether the Helicobacter pylori test-and-treat strategy is an appropriate diagnostic–therapeutic approach for patients with dyspepsia invites a series of questions. The aim present article addresses the test-and-treat strategy and attempts to provide practical conclusions for the clinician who diagnoses and treats patients with dyspepsia.

METHODS:

Bibliographical searches were performed in MEDLINE using the keywords Helicobacter pylori, test-and-treat, and dyspepsia. We focused mainly on data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, meta-analyses, cost-effectiveness analyses, and decision analyses.

RESULTS:

Several prospective studies and decision analyses support the use of the test-and-treat strategy, although we must be cautious when extrapolating the results from one geographical area to another. Many factors determine whether this strategy is appropriate in each particular area. The test-and-treat strategy will cure most cases of underlying peptic ulcer disease, prevent most potential cases of gastroduodenal disease, and yield symptomatic benefit in a minority of patients with functional dyspepsia. Future studies should be able to stratify dyspeptic patients according to their likelihood of improving after treatment of infection by H. pylori.

CONCLUSIONS:

The test-and-treat strategy will cure most cases of underlying peptic ulcer disease and prevent most potential cases of gastroduodenal disease. In addition, a minority of infected patients with functional dyspepsia will gain symptomatic benefit. Several prospective studies and decision analyses support the use of the test-and-treat strategy. The test-and-treat strategy is being reinforced by the accumulating data that support the increasingly accepted idea that “the only good H. pylori is a dead H. pylori”.

[Clinical practice guideline on the management of patients with dyspepsia. Update 2012]

The aim of the Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) on the Management of Patients with Dyspepsia is to generate recommendations on the optimal approach to dyspepsia in the primary care and specialized outpatient setting. The main objective of this CPG is to help to optimize the diagnostic process, identifying patients with a low risk of a serious organic disease (mainly tumoral), who could be safely managed without the need for invasive diagnostic tests and/or referral to a specialist. The importance of this aim lies in the need to accurately diagnose patients with esophagogastric cancer and correctly treat peptic ulcer while, at the same time, reduce negative endoscopies in order to appropriately use the available healthcare resources. This CPG reviews the initial strategies that can be used in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia and evaluates the possible decision to begin empirical therapy or to investigate the existence of a lesion that could explain the symptoms. This CPG also discusses functional dyspepsia, which encompasses all patients with dyspepsia with no demonstrable cause on endoscopy. Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of peptic ulcer and Helicobacter pylori infection are also made. To classify the scientific evidence and strengthen the recommendations, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) system has been used (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/).

[Clinical practice guideline on the management of patients with dyspepsia. Update 2012]

The aim of the Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) on the Management of Patients with Dyspepsia is to generate recommendations on the optimal approach to dyspepsia in the primary care and specialized outpatient setting. The main objective of this CPG is to help to optimize the diagnostic process, identifying patients with a low risk of a serious organic disease (mainly tumoral), who could be safely managed without the need for invasive diagnostic tests and/or referral to a specialist. The importance of this aim lies in the need to accurately diagnose patients with esophagogastric cancer and correctly treat peptic ulcer while, at the same time, reduce negative endoscopies in order to appropriately use the available healthcare resources.This CPG reviews the initial strategies that can be used in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia and evaluates the possible decision to begin empirical therapy or to investigate the existence of a lesion that could explain the symptoms. This CPG also discusses functional dyspepsia, which encompasses all patients with dyspepsia with no demonstrable cause on endoscopy. Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of peptic ulcer and Helicobacter pylori infection are also made. To classify the scientific evidence and strengthen the recommendations, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) system has been used (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/).

Functional dyspepsia impacts absenteeism and direct and indirect costs

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a common morbid condition but data are limited on the direct and indirect costs for employees with FD or on its impact on productivity. Few data on absenteeism and no objective information are available. This study aimed to assess the impact of FD on costs and effects on absenteeism and work output (productivity).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of payroll data and adjudicated health insurance medical and prescription claims collected over a 4-year study period (January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2004) from more than 300,000 employees. Data from employees with and without (controls) FD were compared using 2-part regression techniques. Outcome measures included medical (total and by place of service) and prescription costs, absenteeism, and objectively measured productivity output.

RESULTS

Employees with FD (N = 1669) had greater average annual medical and prescription drug costs and indirect costs (owing to sick leave and short- and long-term disability absences) than controls (N = 274,206). Compared with controls, the FD employees incurred costs that were $5138 greater and had greater costs for each place of service (all P < .0001). The employees with FD had an additional 0.83 absence days per year and produced 12% fewer units per hour than controls (both P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Employees with FD have greater costs at all places of service and lower productivity than employees without FD.

[Guidelines for the rational use of endoscopy to improve the detection of relevant lesions in an open-access endoscopy unit: a prospective study]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Almost 50% of gastrointestinal endoscopies performed in our Unit correspond to patients coming from primary care. Since resources are finite, adherence to appropriate indications for these procedures is essential. We prospectively assessed the appropriateness of gastrointestinal endoscopies referred from Primary Care according to the European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE) criteria.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

From May to June 2005, all consecutive patients referred from Primary care to our unit for open-access endoscopy were included (478 colonoscopies and 264 gastroscopies). Appropriateness of each exploration was established according to the EPAGE criteria. In order to evaluate whether appropriateness of use correlated with the diagnostic yield of endoscopies, relevant endoscopic findings were recorded.

RESULTS

In 146 patients (20%), an endoscopy indication was not listed in the EPAGE guidelines or data were incomplete and they were not evaluated. In the remaining 596 patients, the indication of the procedure was considered appropriate in 401 (67%) patients (253 [69%], colonoscopies and 148 [65%], gastroscopies). The diagnostic yield was significantly higher for appropriate endoscopies (30% vs 7%, p < 0.001). Endoscopies were more appropriate in older patients and in non-foreigners.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic yield of gastrointestinal endoscopies in patients coming from primary Care increases with the appropriateness of indications according to the EPAGE criteria. Since a noteworthy proportion of these patients' endoscopies are considered inappropriate, the implementation of validated guidelines for its appropriate use could improve this situation.

Progress in developing accurate tests for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection

Helicobacter pylori is a chronic infectious agent as defined the major pathogen causing gastritis, gastric and duodenal ulcer, gastric carcinoma and mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma, however little is known about its role in functional dyspepsia. H. pylori is the only microorganism known to inhabit the human stomach and the gastric mucosal cells. Chronic H. pylori infection of the stomach is increasingly recognized as a major risk factor for the development of gastroduodenal disease. H. pylori can be detected by non-invasive and invasive methods, the latter requiring endoscopy.

HELICOBACTER PYLORI INFECTION AND TREATMENT OUTCOME IN AN URBAN AUSTRALIAN POPULATION

BACKGROUND

To examine the rate of Helicobacter pylori infection in a group of symptomatic patients using rapid urease test and antral histology and report on their treatment outcomes.

METHODS

From a single-surgeon series in a tertiary teaching hospital, 200 consecutive symptomatic patients undergoing their first diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy during 2003-2004 were included in this retrospective audit. Campylobacter-like organism (CLO) test results were compared with the results of conventional histological examination plus Giemsa staining. Eradication rates and demographic data were collected.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-nine of 200 (89.5%) patients had antral biopsies for histology and for CLOtest. The CLOtest was positive in 31% (56/179) of patients. Thirty-two of 56 (57%) patients had an early-positive CLOtest (<24 h). The remaining 43% (24/56) of patients had a late-positive CLOtest (>24 h). Histological examination of the antral biopsy showed evidence of H. pylori in 28/56 (50%) patients with a positive CLOtest. H. pylori eradication therapy was prescribed in 51/56 (91%) patients with a positive CLOtest. Forty-five of 51 (88%) of these patients had a subsequent urea breath test. Urea breath test was positive in 17/45 (29%) patients after H. pylori eradication therapy was prescribed.

CONCLUSION

Rate of H. pylori in this series of symptomatic patients was 31%. As nearly half of the CLOtests became positive after 24 h, we suggest that the CLOtest should be re-examined 24 h after gastroscopy. Standard antral histology and CLOtest were in agreement in only 50% of cases, suggesting that the CLOtest is a more sensitive test. The failure rate of 29% for initial H. pylori eradication therapy reinforces the need for follow up after treatment.