Management of gastroesophageal reflux disease: Patient and physician communication challenges and shared decision making

Development and psychometric validation of the hospitalized patients' expectations for treatment scale-clinician version

Objective

Patient safety management systems in general hospitals require a comprehensive tool for assessing the expectations of inpatients across different wards. This study aimed to develop and psychometrically validate a new scale, the hospitalized patients' expectations for treatment scale-clinician version (HOPE-C), to meet this requirement.

Methods

We interviewed 35 experts and 10 inpatients while developing the HOPE-C scale. The scale was initially designed with three dimensions: clinicians' expectations regarding doctor-patient communication, clinicians' expectations regarding treatment outcome, and clinicians' expectations regarding disease management. We recruited 200 inpatients from a general hospital in China. At the same time, 51 clinicians were assigned to the enrolled patients who completed the HOPE-C to examine the reliability, validity, and psychometric characteristics of the questionnaire. We applied item analysis, assessed construct validity, evaluated internal consistency, and conducted a test-retest reliability analysis over 7 days.

Results

Both exploratory and confirmatory analyses supported a 2-dimensional structure, comprising doctor-patient communication expectations and treatment outcome expectations, with favorable model fit parameters (root mean square residual [RMR] = 0.042, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.049, comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.989, Tucker-Lewis index [TLI] = 0.984). Item analysis demonstrated appropriate item design (r = 0.744-0.961). The scale exhibited strong internal consistency, with Cronbach's α values of 0.884, 0.816, and 0.840 for the overall scale, the doctor-patient communication expectation subscale, and the treatment outcome expectation subscale, respectively. The 7-day test-retest reliability was 0.996 (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that the HOPE-C is a reliable and valid assessment tool for measuring the expectations of inpatients in general hospitals. It effectively identifies patients' expectations concerning doctor-patient communication and treatment outcomes.

Randomised clinical trial: Efficacy and safety of on-demand vonoprazan versus placebo for non-erosive reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) symptoms are often episodic, making on-demand treatment an attractive treatment approach.

AIMS

We compared the efficacy and safety of on-demand vonoprazan versus placebo in patients with NERD.

METHODS

Patients with NERD, defined as heartburn for ≥6 months and for ≥4/7 consecutive days with normal endoscopy, received once-daily vonoprazan 20 mg during a 4-week run-in period. Patients without heartburn during the last 7 days and with ≥80% study drug and diary compliance were randomised 1:1:1:1 to vonoprazan 10, 20, 40 mg or placebo on-demand for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the percentage of evaluable heartburn episodes completely relieved within 3 h of on-demand dosing and sustained for 24 h.

RESULTS

Of 458 patients in the run-in period, 207 entered the on-demand period. In the vonoprazan 10 mg group, 56.0% (201/359) of evaluable heartburn episodes met the criteria for complete and sustained relief; 60.6% (198/327) in the 20 mg group; and 70.0% (226/323) in the 40 mg group, compared with 27.3% (101/370) in the placebo group (p < 0.0001 versus placebo for each vonoprazan group). By 1 h post-dose, vonoprazan was associated with complete relief of significantly more heartburn episodes compared with placebo. No serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

On-demand vonoprazan may be a potential alternative to continued daily acid suppression therapy for the relief of episodic heartburn in patients with NERD.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov: NCT04799158.

Epidemiology, Causes, and Management of Gastro-esophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review

Our comprehensive systematic review aimed to examine gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), a disorder that occurs when stomach contents flow back into the esophagus. It may manifest as either non-erosive reflux disease or erosive esophagitis. The activity depicts the assessment and medical management of GERD and emphasizes the interprofessional team's involvement to enhance care for people with this ailment. Data sources were PubMed/Medline and Embase. Our review investigated English-language articles (from 2014 to 2023) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Overall, there were seven articles. Surveys and analyses of national databases were the most widely used methods (n=7). The search identified 3,730 studies, and seven were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. Further understanding of GERD and treatment protocols may help improve evaluation and management in the future. Millions of individuals worldwide suffer from GERD, a common clinical condition. Patients can be identified by symptoms that are both common and uncommon. For many GERD patients, acid suppression treatment reduces symptoms and avoids clinical complications. Our capacity to recognize and treat disease consequences has improved with the advancement of diagnostic and treatment methods. Here, we go into the etiology and consequences of GERD and offer details on the treatment strategy for this prevalent illness.

Comparative Outcomes of Anti-Reflux Surgery in Obese Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease1

INTRODUCTION

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) has been the preferred operation for obese patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD); however, some patients are hesitant to undergo bypass. Obese patients have a multifactorial predisposition to GERD, including lower esophageal sphincter (LES) dysfunction and aberrant pressure gradients across their diaphragmatic crura. Among non-obese patients, anti-reflux surgery (ARS) with hiatal hernia (HH) repair and LES augmentation has shown excellent long-term results. We aimed to determine whether patient satisfaction and GERD recurrence differed between obese and non-obese patients who underwent ARS.

METHODS

Review of patients who underwent ARS between January 2012 and June 2021 was performed. Perioperative and postoperative characteristics were compared across three BMI groups: BMI < 30 kg/m², 30 kg/m² ≤ BMI < 35 kg/m², and BMI ≥ 35 kg/m².

RESULTS

Four-hundred thirteen patients were identified, of which 294 (71.1%) had BMI < 30 kg/m², 87 (21.1%) were 30 kg/m² ≤ BMI < 35 kg/m², and 32 (7.7%) had a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m². Patients with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m² had higher preoperative manometric and EndoFLIP™ intra-balloon pressure at the LES than those with lower BMIs. This value was increased to a similar level throughout ARS across the three cohorts. Post-operative GERD-specific satisfaction was similar across the three cohorts, as were rates of postoperative reflux and hiatal hernia recurrence on barium swallow; rates of reoperation were low.

CONCLUSIONS

ARS with HH repair and LES augmentation may be appropriate for select patients across a range of BMIs, including those with a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m² who are hesitant to undergo RYGB.

Question Prompt List as a Communication Tool for Adults With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Incorporation of Patients' Perspectives

BACKGROUND

Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions intended for patient use, enhancing the patient-physician communication by encouraging patients to ask relevant questions during a consultation. Recently, a preliminary 78 question gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) specific QPL was created by 12 esophageal experts through a modified Delphi (RAND/University of California, Los Angeles) technique. Patients' perspectives and opinions on each question, however, had not been accounted for in the preliminary expert' version.

AIM

The aim was to modify a preliminary experts' QPL, specific to adults with GERD, following patient perspectives and opinions.

METHODS

A preliminary GERD QPL was modified through patient input and opinions. Thirty-eight patients with a clinical diagnosis of GERD followed at Stanford University Esophageal Clinic between January and November 2019 were consented to modify the preliminary 78 question expert QPL version. After receiving the QPL in Qualtrics (Provo, UT) by a direct e-mail invitation, patients independently rated questions on a 5-point Likert scale, where 1="should not be included," 2="unimportant," 3="don't know/depends," 4="important," and 5="essential." Questions were accepted for inclusion in the QPL with an a priori interagreement of 80% ranking in the range of 4 to 5. At the end, patients were encouraged to propose additional questions to incorporate into the QPL by open-endedly asking "Are there questions we didn't ask, that you think we should?"

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients with GERD (19 female, median age 64) fully participated and modified the existing QPL (60.5%). Of the 78 questions from the preliminary GERD QPL, 66 questions (84.6%) were accepted for inclusion. The question with the highest agreement among patients rating a question as essential consisted of "what habits, food, and drinks do I have to avoid?" (82.6%). Questions eliminated because of disagreement included "What is the natural history of GERD," "Do I have a high chance to die from my Barrett's?," and "Why are you prescribing an antidepressant to treat my GERD?" Nine patients suggested additional questions totaling to 16 separate questions, including "What type of surgeries are there to help GERD?," "What stage is my GERD?," "What are the odds/percentage of getting cancer from GERD?" Incorporating the suggested questions, the final GERD QPL-created by esophageal experts and modified by patients-consisted of 82 questions.

CONCLUSION

Esophageal experts and GERD patients have a high level of agreement on important questions, though there is some variation in perspective. Future studies can simplify this list and measure the impact of a shared GERD QPL on patients' decisional conflict and perceived involvement in care.

The views of African and Middle Eastern Gastroenterologists on the management of mild-to-moderate, non-erosive gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD)

INTRODUCTION

Gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common gastrointestinal disorder that occurs when backflow of the gastric contents into the esophagus results in troublesome symptoms. Though GERD has been extensively studied in Western populations, literature on the management of GERD in patients in Africa and Middle East (AME) is scarce.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we provide an overview of the management of mild-to-moderate GERD in AME. Here we focus on the efficacy and safety of currently available treatments for GERD to help physicians and community pharmacists appropriately manage patients with mild-to-moderate GERD in the primary healthcare setting, detailing specific situations and patient scenarios that are relevant to the region, including management of GERD during Ramadan and post-bariatric surgery.

EXPERT OPINION

Under-appreciation of the burden of GERD in the region has resulted in a lack of consensus on management. Barriers that currently prevent the adoption of treatment guidelines in the primary healthcare setting may include lack of availability of local guidelines and referral systems, a paucity of region-specific research, and dogmatic adherence to traditional practice. By increasing awareness, strengthening knowledge, and by more effective utilization of resources, physicians and pharmacists could optimize GERD management strategies to better support patients.

Knowledge and practice of family medicine and internal medicine residents toward the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Background

Accurate diagnosis and management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remain a challenge in the primary care setting. The objective was to assess GERD management's knowledge and practice and its association with the family and internal medicine residents.

Methods

A cross-sectional study between January 2019 and September 2020 among the family and internal medicine residents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Residents answered a self-administrated questionnaire about knowledge and practices of GERD management.

Results

A total of 596 residents were included in the current study. The average age was 26.8 ± 2.1 years, and 54.5% of the residents were males. The median knowledge score was 62.5%. The majority (89.8%) of the residents were using acid suppression drugs empirically, mainly proton-pump inhibitors (75.8%), for <8-week durations (69.7%) being taken before meals (84.7%). Frequent diagnostic testing for GERD included urea breath test (50.7%), 24-hour pH-metry/24-hour pH probe (47.3%), and upper endoscopy with biopsy (40.7%). Frequent causes for referral included gastrointestinal bleeding (82.6%), weight loss/appetite loss (82.2%), and failure of therapy (78.7%). Better knowledge was associated with older age, family medicine training, better referral practices, frequent reporting of atypical symptoms, and reading recent guidelines.

Conclusions

We are reporting a moderate knowledge level among a group of family and internal medicine residents trained in Riyadh hospitals. Practices were generally good with some areas that need improvement, especially diagnostic testing. There is an urgent need for educational programs that target family and internal medicine residents, such as education courses that include lectures and clinical discussions with the senior staff. Also, we suggest health care organizations in Saudi Arabia establish well-structured Saudi National GERD Guidelines.

Reflux Symptoms - Functional and Structural Diseases: The Approach from the General Practitioner

A primary care management strategy of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) should pay attention to the epidemiology, prevalence, and distribution of reflux-like symptoms in the community and to the special characteristics of patients presenting for the first time with reflux symptoms in primary care. General practitioners (GPs) encounter daily challenges to make cost-effective differential diagnostic and therapeutic decisions, avoiding needless and costly investigation or referral. They should provide long-term effective control of symptoms and esophageal healing in a personalized, symptom-based, patient-centered, and evidence-based manner. GPs should use a practical system of triage in order to distinguish the high majority of patients with self-limiting conditions from the minority with alarm symptoms with potentially severe disorder. They should also discriminate between troublesome and nontroublesome reflux symptoms. Most GERD is uncomplicated and can be treated using management algorithms that make the best use of resources. Some strategies such as "step-down," "intermittent," or "on-demand" therapy can cost-effectively improve the long-term management and quality of life of patients with recurrent GERD. The accurate interpretation of "step-down" therapeutic strategy and a careful interpretation of proton pump inhibitor refractoriness are also essential.

Barrier Effect of a New Topical Agent on Damaged Esophageal Mucosa: Experimental Study on an ex vivo Swine Model

PURPOSE

AL2106 is a new medical device based on a mixture of chondroitin sulphate in a xyloglucan and glycerol solution made to maximize its bioadhesive capability to the esophageal mucosa. The aim of the present study was twofold to evaluate the AL2106 protective effect on the esophageal mucosa when exposed to an acidic solution mimicking gastric reflux and to assess the resilience of this effect to saline washing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A porcine ex vivo model was used and the effects of the new medical device were compared to a sodium alginate suspension (SAS) already present on the market which was assumed as reference. Mucosal damage was induced in 19 porcine esophagi by perfusion with an acidic solution added with pepsin, and Evans blue dye (EBD) tissue uptake was used as an indicator of mucosal permeability. The EBD penetration, expressed as EBD µg/g of dry tissue, was assessed in specimens of untreated damaged mucosa and in specimens treated with AL2106 or SAS. The same evaluation was carried out after washing with normal saline.

RESULTS

Both topical agents tested significantly reduced the EBD uptake by more than 60% (AL2106 8.4±4.5, SAS 3.6±2.7 vs control 23.2±13.1, p<0.01). The saline washing did not cause any significant reduction in the protective effect of AL2106 (8.6±5.9), while it significantly reduced that of SAS (5.9±4.3, p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The new AL2106 medical device showed a good barrier effect against a reflux-like damaging solution and preserved this effect after the mucosal washing test, thus suggesting its possible relevance for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease.