Uri Ladabaum1, A Mark Fendrick, David Glidden, James M Scheiman. 1. Department of Medicine, School of Public Health, Consortium for Health Outcomes, Innovation, and Cost-Effectiveness Studies (CHOICES), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: [corrected] The Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) "test-and-treat" strategy in uninvestigated dyspepsia is an effective alternative to prompt endoscopy. Our aims were to determine whether the combination of an educational session and availability of office-based H. pylori testing (test-and-treat intervention [TTI]) increases use of the test-and-treat strategy by primary care practitioners and whether it improves patient outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a 1-yr prospective trial of patients with suspected peptic ulcer disease in six primary care centers, three with TTI and three designated as usual care controls (UCC). RESULTS:H. pylori testing was performed in 81% of 54 TTI patients and in 49% of 39 UCC patients (p = 0.004). TTI and UCC patients had similar gastroenterology referral rates (24% vs 33%, p = 0.33), endoscopy or upper GI radiography rates (30% vs 31%, p = 0.91), and primary care visits per patient (3.1 +/- 2.8 vs 3.1 +/- 2.6, p = 0.92). TTI patients were less likely than UCC patients to receive repeated antisecretory medication prescriptions (35% vs 66%, p = 0.003). Symptomatic status at 1 yr and satisfaction with medical care did not differ between groups. Median (and interquartile range) annualized disease-related expenditures per patient were $454 ($162-932) for TTI and $576 ($327-1,435) for UCC patients (p = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of an educational session and availability of office-based H. pylori testing may increase acceptance of the test-and-treat strategy by primary care providers. It remains to be determined whether increased use of the test-and-treat strategy yields significant improvements in clinical and economic outcomes compared to usual care.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: [corrected] The Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) "test-and-treat" strategy in uninvestigated dyspepsia is an effective alternative to prompt endoscopy. Our aims were to determine whether the combination of an educational session and availability of office-based H. pylori testing (test-and-treat intervention [TTI]) increases use of the test-and-treat strategy by primary care practitioners and whether it improves patient outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a 1-yr prospective trial of patients with suspected peptic ulcer disease in six primary care centers, three with TTI and three designated as usual care controls (UCC). RESULTS:H. pylori testing was performed in 81% of 54 TTI patients and in 49% of 39 UCC patients (p = 0.004). TTI and UCC patients had similar gastroenterology referral rates (24% vs 33%, p = 0.33), endoscopy or upper GI radiography rates (30% vs 31%, p = 0.91), and primary care visits per patient (3.1 +/- 2.8 vs 3.1 +/- 2.6, p = 0.92). TTI patients were less likely than UCC patients to receive repeated antisecretory medication prescriptions (35% vs 66%, p = 0.003). Symptomatic status at 1 yr and satisfaction with medical care did not differ between groups. Median (and interquartile range) annualized disease-related expenditures per patient were $454 ($162-932) for TTI and $576 ($327-1,435) for UCC patients (p = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of an educational session and availability of office-based H. pylori testing may increase acceptance of the test-and-treat strategy by primary care providers. It remains to be determined whether increased use of the test-and-treat strategy yields significant improvements in clinical and economic outcomes compared to usual care.