File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)

Article: Comparison between empirical prokinetics, Helicobacter test-and-treat and empirical endoscopy in primary-care patients presenting with dyspepsia: A one-year study

TitleComparison between empirical prokinetics, Helicobacter test-and-treat and empirical endoscopy in primary-care patients presenting with dyspepsia: A one-year study
Authors
KeywordsDyspeptic patients
Empirical endoscopy
H pylori test-and treat
Issue Date2006
PublisherBeijing Baishideng BioMed Scientific Co., Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/index.htm
Citation
World Journal Of Gastroenterology, 2006, v. 12 n. 31, p. 5010-5016 How to Cite?
AbstractAim: To investigate the optimal strategy to treat dyspeptic patients in primary care. Methods: Dyspeptic patients presenting to primary care outpatient clinics were randomly assigned to: (1) empirical endoscopy, (2) H pylori test-and-treat, and (3) empirical prokinetic treatment with cisapride. Early endoscopy was arranged if patients remained symptomatic after 2 wk. Symptom severity, quality-of-life (SF-36) as well as patient preference and satisfaction were assessed. All patients underwent endoscopy by wk 6. Patients were followed up for one year. Results: Two hundred and thirty four patients were recruited (163 female, mean age 49). 46% were H pylori positive. 26% of H pylori tested and 25% of empirical prokinetic patients showed no improvement at wk 2 follow-up and needed early endoscopy. 15% of patients receiving empirical cisapride responded well to treatment but peptic ulcer was the final diagnosis. Symptom resolution and quality-of-life were similar among the groups. Costs for the three strategies were HK$4343, $1771 and $1750 per patient. 66% of the patients preferred to have early endoscopy. Conclusion: The three strategies are equally effective. Empirical prokinetic treatment was the least expensive but peptic ulcers may be missed with this treatment. The H pylori test-and-treat was the most cost-effective option. © 2006 The WJG Press. All rights reserved.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/86728
ISSN
2014 Impact Factor: 2.369
2013 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.022
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHu, WHCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLam, SKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLam, CLKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, WMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLam, KFen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLai, KCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, YHen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, BCYen_HK
dc.contributor.authorChan, AOOen_HK
dc.contributor.authorChan, CKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLeung, GMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorHui, WMen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T09:20:36Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T09:20:36Z-
dc.date.issued2006en_HK
dc.identifier.citationWorld Journal Of Gastroenterology, 2006, v. 12 n. 31, p. 5010-5016en_HK
dc.identifier.issn1007-9327en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/86728-
dc.description.abstractAim: To investigate the optimal strategy to treat dyspeptic patients in primary care. Methods: Dyspeptic patients presenting to primary care outpatient clinics were randomly assigned to: (1) empirical endoscopy, (2) H pylori test-and-treat, and (3) empirical prokinetic treatment with cisapride. Early endoscopy was arranged if patients remained symptomatic after 2 wk. Symptom severity, quality-of-life (SF-36) as well as patient preference and satisfaction were assessed. All patients underwent endoscopy by wk 6. Patients were followed up for one year. Results: Two hundred and thirty four patients were recruited (163 female, mean age 49). 46% were H pylori positive. 26% of H pylori tested and 25% of empirical prokinetic patients showed no improvement at wk 2 follow-up and needed early endoscopy. 15% of patients receiving empirical cisapride responded well to treatment but peptic ulcer was the final diagnosis. Symptom resolution and quality-of-life were similar among the groups. Costs for the three strategies were HK$4343, $1771 and $1750 per patient. 66% of the patients preferred to have early endoscopy. Conclusion: The three strategies are equally effective. Empirical prokinetic treatment was the least expensive but peptic ulcers may be missed with this treatment. The H pylori test-and-treat was the most cost-effective option. © 2006 The WJG Press. All rights reserved.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherBeijing Baishideng BioMed Scientific Co., Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/index.htmen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofWorld Journal of Gastroenterologyen_HK
dc.subjectDyspeptic patientsen_HK
dc.subjectEmpirical endoscopyen_HK
dc.subjectH pylori test-and treaten_HK
dc.subject.meshAdolescenten_HK
dc.subject.meshAdulten_HK
dc.subject.meshAgeden_HK
dc.subject.meshCost-Benefit Analysisen_HK
dc.subject.meshDyspepsia - diagnosisen_HK
dc.subject.meshEndoscopy - economics - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshHelicobacter Infections - diagnosisen_HK
dc.subject.meshHelicobacter pylori - metabolismen_HK
dc.subject.meshHumansen_HK
dc.subject.meshMaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_HK
dc.subject.meshPrimary Health Care - methodsen_HK
dc.titleComparison between empirical prokinetics, Helicobacter test-and-treat and empirical endoscopy in primary-care patients presenting with dyspepsia: A one-year studyen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=1007-9327&volume=12&issue=31&spage=5010&epage=5016&date=2006&atitle=Comparison+between+Empirical+Prokinetics,+Helicobacter+Test-and-Treat+and+Empirical+Endoscopy+in+Primary-Care+Patients+Presenting+with+Dyspepsia:+A+One-Year+Studyen_HK
dc.identifier.emailLam, CLK: clklam@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailLam, KF: hrntlkf@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailWong, BCY: bcywong@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailLeung, GM: gmleung@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLam, CLK=rp00350en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLam, KF=rp00718en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityWong, BCY=rp00429en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLeung, GM=rp00460en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.3748/wjg.v12.i31.5010-
dc.identifier.pmid16937497en_HK
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-33748323445en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros124069en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-33748323445&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume12en_HK
dc.identifier.issue31en_HK
dc.identifier.spage5010en_HK
dc.identifier.epage5016en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000240185800011-
dc.publisher.placeChinaen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHu, WHC=25932937100en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLam, SK=7402279473en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLam, CLK=24755913900en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, WM=7403972413en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLam, KF=8948421200en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLai, KC=7402135595en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, YH=24073787400en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, BCY=7402023340en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChan, AOO=7403167965en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChan, CK=7404813824en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLeung, GM=7007159841en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHui, WM=7103196477en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats