ArticleAtencion primaria2000
[Benefits of treatment to eradicate Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with ulcer at a primary care center].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Seven or ten days? Cost-effectiveness study on the duration of H. pylori treatment in primary care].Atencion primaria · 2006Article
- [Management of dyspepsia, gastroduodenal ulcer and Helicobacter pylori infection in primary care].Atencion primaria · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the clinical evolution and the use of Primary Care health resources one year after treatment to eradicate Helicobacter pylori (Hp) infection in patients with peptic ulcers and Hp infection.
designRetrospective study on the effect of an intervention.
settingUrban, reformed primary care centre. PATIENTS: 102 patients with peptic ulcers and Hp infection.
interventionTreatment to eradicate Hp. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsa) Total medical attendance; b) attendance for dyspepsia; c) number of ulcerous outbreaks; d) medicines taken to treat dyspepsia. 79.4% of the patients treated were male. Overall mean age was 47.8 +/- 12.4. After the intervention, total attendance (from 8.3 to 6.6, p < 0.001), attendance for dyspepsia (from 3.1 to 1.1, p < 0.00001), and ulcerous outbreaks (from 1.2 to 0.06, p < 0.00001) all dropped sharply. The mean number of medicines prescribed for dyspepsia per patient fell from 1.24 to 0.43, p < 0.0001. Ranitidine prescription fell from 72.7 to 13.8 days (p < 0.001); and omeprazol from 35.1 to 12.2 days (p < 0.03). Estimated total saving per patient was 26,792 pesetas at 1998 values.
conclusionsTreatment in primary care to eradicate Hp(+) in ulcerous patients reduced the needs of attendance and the prescription of drugs for ulcers. Just in the first year this supposed a clinical benefit for these patients and important economic savings for the public health service.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10857226PMC7675822W2164070186What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.