ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2013
Chronic hepatitis B management based on standard guidelines in community primary care and specialty clinics.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Noncompliance with Therapeutic Guidelines for Chronic Hepatitis B Patients in Minas Gerais, Brazil.Infectious disease reports · 2022Article
- Low eligibility for hepatitis B treatment in the Brazilian public health system.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2022Article
- Hepatitis B Evaluation and Linkage to Care for Newly Arrived Refugees: A Multisite Quality Improvement Initiative.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2021Article
- Knowledge and Perceptions of Hepatitis B and Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening Guidelines Among Trainees: A Tale of Three Centers.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020Article
- Hepatitis B Virus: Advances in Prevention, Diagnosis, and Therapy.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2020Review
- Thyroid-stimulating hormone is associated with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in patients with chronic hepatitis B.Medicine · 2019Observational
- A Comparison Between Community and Academic Practices in the USA in the Management of Chronic Hepatitis B Patients Receiving Entecavir: Results of the ENUMERATE Study.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2019Article
- Increasing co-morbidities in chronic hepatitis B patients: experience in primary care and referral practices during 2000-2015.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2018Article
- A Noninvasive Score Model for Prediction of NASH in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B and Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.BioMed research international · 2017Article
- Rates of Treatment Eligibility in Follow-Up of Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B (CHB) Across Various Clinical Settings Who Were Initially Ineligible at Presentation.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2016Article
- Long-term follow-up and suboptimal treatment rates of treatment-eligible chronic hepatitis B patients in diverse practice settings: a gap in linkage to care.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2015Article
- Low treatment rates in patients meeting guideline criteria in diverse practice settings.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2014Article
- Characteristics and management of patients with chronic hepatitis B in an integrated care setting.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2014Article
- Peripartum Maternal Hepatitis B Care in a US Nationwide Data Set.Journal of clinical gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsPrior studies have underlined the need for increased screening and awareness of chronic hepatitis B (CHB), especially in certain high-risk populations. However, few studies have examined the patterns of evaluation and management of CHB between primary care physicians (PCP) and specialists according to commonly-used professional guidelines. Our goal was to examine whether necessary laboratory parameters used to determine disease status and eligibility for antiviral therapy were performed by PCPs and specialists.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study of 253 treatment-naïve CHB patients who were evaluated by PCP only (n=63) or by specialists (n=190) for CHB at a community multispecialty medical center between March 2007 and June 2009. Criteria for CHB management and treatment eligibility were based on the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases 2007 guideline and the US Panel 2006 algorithm. Required parameters for optimal evaluation for CHB included hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg), HBV DNA, and alanine aminotransferase (ALT). Preferred antiviral agents for CHB included pegylated interferon, adefovir, and entecavir.
resultsThe majority of patients were Asians (90%) and (54%) with a mean age of 43±11.6 years. Compared to PCPs, specialists were more likely to order laboratory testing for ALT (94 vs. 86%, P=0.05), HBeAg (67 vs. 41%, P<0.0001) and HBV DNA (83 vs. 52%, P<0.0001). The proportion of patients having all three laboratory parameters was significantly higher among those evaluated by specialists compared to PCP (62 vs. 33%, P<0.0001). A total of 55 patients were initiated on antiviral treatment (n=47 by specialists and n=6 by PCPs). Lamivudine was prescribed more often by PCPs than specialists (33 vs. 2%, P=0.05). Preferred agents were used 96% of the time by specialists compared to 67% of those treated by PCPs (P=0.05).
conclusionPatients evaluated by specialists for CHB are more likely to undergo more complete laboratory evaluation and, if eligible, are also more likely to be treated with preferred longer-term agents for CHB compared to those evaluated by PCPs only. A collaborative model of care involving both PCP and specialists may further optimize management of patients with CHB.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.