BACKGROUND: The use of complementary and alternative medicine in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been extensively studied. However, the use of probiotics and prebiotics is poorly documented, despite evidence of efficacy of particular probiotic strains in specific forms of IBD. METHODS: A case-control study comprising interviewer-administered questionnaires was conducted in IBD patients and healthy controls. Data regarding use and knowledge of probiotics and prebiotics, demographic, and clinical information were collected. RESULTS: In total, 334 participants (234 IBD, 100 controls) were interviewed. Significantly more IBD patients than controls had ever used probiotics to manage their health (Crohn's disease [CD] 43%, ulcerative colitis [UC] 51%, controls 21%, P < 0.001). Prebiotic use was negligible. On logistic regression analysis, having UC (odds ratio [OR] 4.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.27-8.12) or CD (OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.66-5.60) were the strongest predictors of probiotic use. Within IBD patients the strongest predictor of probiotic use was current steroid use (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.11-5.18). IBD patients had greater probiotic knowledge scores than controls (P = 0.003), although 20% of IBD probiotic users could not provide a definition of a probiotic. Less than half of IBD probiotic users discussed probiotic use with healthcare professionals, with commercial advertising being the primary source of information. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IBD use probiotics to manage their health but frequently choose strains without evidence of efficacy in IBD. Patients rely on nonclinical sources of information and often do not disclose probiotic use to healthcare professionals. Conventional healthcare providers should inquire about probiotic use among their patients and offer evidence-based advice.
BACKGROUND: The use of complementary and alternative medicine in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been extensively studied. However, the use of probiotics and prebiotics is poorly documented, despite evidence of efficacy of particular probiotic strains in specific forms of IBD. METHODS: A case-control study comprising interviewer-administered questionnaires was conducted in IBD patients and healthy controls. Data regarding use and knowledge of probiotics and prebiotics, demographic, and clinical information were collected. RESULTS: In total, 334 participants (234 IBD, 100 controls) were interviewed. Significantly more IBD patients than controls had ever used probiotics to manage their health (Crohn's disease [CD] 43%, ulcerative colitis [UC] 51%, controls 21%, P < 0.001). Prebiotic use was negligible. On logistic regression analysis, having UC (odds ratio [OR] 4.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.27-8.12) or CD (OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.66-5.60) were the strongest predictors of probiotic use. Within IBD patients the strongest predictor of probiotic use was current steroid use (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.11-5.18). IBD patients had greater probiotic knowledge scores than controls (P = 0.003), although 20% of IBD probiotic users could not provide a definition of a probiotic. Less than half of IBD probiotic users discussed probiotic use with healthcare professionals, with commercial advertising being the primary source of information. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with IBD use probiotics to manage their health but frequently choose strains without evidence of efficacy in IBD. Patients rely on nonclinical sources of information and often do not disclose probiotic use to healthcare professionals. Conventional healthcare providers should inquire about probiotic use among their patients and offer evidence-based advice.
Authors: Silvia Lorente-Cebrián; André G V Costa; Santiago Navas-Carretero; María Zabala; Laura M Laiglesia; J Alfredo Martínez; María J Moreno-Aliaga Journal: J Physiol Biochem Date: 2015-03-11 Impact factor: 4.158
Authors: Alexis C Prince; Arifa Moosa; Miranda C E Lomer; Dianne P Reidlinger; Kevin Whelan Journal: Health Expect Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Blake Chin-Lee; William J Curry; John Fetterman; Marie A Graybill; Kelly Karpa Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2014-10-31 Impact factor: 2.711