BACKGROUND: Knowledge regarding the possible health benefits of probiotic preparations has been increasing, but clinical trials have largely produced non-significant results. In contrast, the open market for probiotics is expanding worldwide despite little research of consumer characteristics. AIM: We aimed to survey the availability of probiotic preparations, the recommendation patterns of general practitioners (GP) and the characteristics of consumers. METHODS: Pharmacies were visited and the types of probiotic supplements were reviewed. A telephone survey was conducted to identify and characterise users and non-users. A questionnaire was sent to GPs. RESULTS: We found 31 probiotic products containing 16 different strains of bacteria. The majority of GPs were unable to clearly define a probiotic. Of 1512 random phone numbers called, 873 were answered. The prevalence of probiotic use was 25.4% of respondents. More females than males had ever used probiotics (30.6% vs 17.2%; p<0.0001). The highest rate of use was found in those with tertiary qualifications (34.2%; p<0.001). Of users, 75.2% said they had used probiotics on a recommendation, 80.5% of non-users said they would consider taking a probiotic if it was recommended by the GP. Probiotics were mainly used alongside antibiotic treatment (23%) and gastrointestinal disorders (27.5%). Significantly more users than non-users believed in the benefits of probiotic without concern for possible side effects. CONCLUSION: The majority of participants would consider taking a probiotic if it was recommended by their GP, but GPs exhibited a lack of knowledge in the use and indications for probiotic therapy. There was a general lack of concern regarding potential side-effects.
BACKGROUND: Knowledge regarding the possible health benefits of probiotic preparations has been increasing, but clinical trials have largely produced non-significant results. In contrast, the open market for probiotics is expanding worldwide despite little research of consumer characteristics. AIM: We aimed to survey the availability of probiotic preparations, the recommendation patterns of general practitioners (GP) and the characteristics of consumers. METHODS: Pharmacies were visited and the types of probiotic supplements were reviewed. A telephone survey was conducted to identify and characterise users and non-users. A questionnaire was sent to GPs. RESULTS: We found 31 probiotic products containing 16 different strains of bacteria. The majority of GPs were unable to clearly define a probiotic. Of 1512 random phone numbers called, 873 were answered. The prevalence of probiotic use was 25.4% of respondents. More females than males had ever used probiotics (30.6% vs 17.2%; p<0.0001). The highest rate of use was found in those with tertiary qualifications (34.2%; p<0.001). Of users, 75.2% said they had used probiotics on a recommendation, 80.5% of non-users said they would consider taking a probiotic if it was recommended by the GP. Probiotics were mainly used alongside antibiotic treatment (23%) and gastrointestinal disorders (27.5%). Significantly more users than non-users believed in the benefits of probiotic without concern for possible side effects. CONCLUSION: The majority of participants would consider taking a probiotic if it was recommended by their GP, but GPs exhibited a lack of knowledge in the use and indications for probiotic therapy. There was a general lack of concern regarding potential side-effects.
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
Authors: Samaneh Khanpour Ardestani; Joan L Robinson; Levinus A Dieleman; Hien Q Huynh; Hsing Jou; Sunita Vohra Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Gabriela Precup; Cristina Bianca Pocol; Bernadette-Emőke Teleky; Dan Cristian Vodnar Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: A P S Hungin; C Mulligan; B Pot; P Whorwell; L Agréus; P Fracasso; C Lionis; J Mendive; J-M Philippart de Foy; G Rubin; C Winchester; N de Wit Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2013-08-27 Impact factor: 8.171