ArticleClinical and experimental nephrology2020
A questionnaire on prescription patterns of proton pump inhibitors for hemodialysis patients in Japan.
Article in Clinical and experimental nephrology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating physicians' awareness and prescribing trends regarding proton pump inhibitors: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Proton pump inhibitor usage associates with higher risk of first episodes of pneumonia and peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients.Renal failure · 2022Article
- Characteristics and Patterns of Proton Pump Inhibitors Prescribing at the Primary Health Care.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used in the general population often without an endpoint. The practice of prescribing PPIs in the hemodialysis (HD) population is unknown. Thus, we aimed to identify the practice pattern related to PPI prescription for HD patients in Japan through a questionnaire survey.
methodsWe conducted a questionnaire survey for physicians engaged in dialysis practice through email. An email was sent to physicians listed in the Japanese Society of Nephrology (JSN) and iHOPE International registry.
resultsWe received 187 physicians' answers. One-hundred twelve (60%) physicians would prefer to continuously prescribe PPIs after 8 weeks of treatment for peptic ulcer (PU) or gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The main reason for continuous PPI prescription was the concern for recurrence of PU or GERD. Approximately 20% of physicians responded that they were not accustomed to de-prescribing PPIs for PU or GERD. The reason for PPI de-prescription was the concern for side effects or insurance adaptation period. Even in cases wherein PPIs were prescribed for uncertain reasons, 42% physicians would continuously prescribe PPIs. Most physicians (82%) who answered about stopping PPIs regarded HD patients as a high-risk group for PU.
conclusionsPPI prescription is often continued in HD patients. De-prescription is not a common practice in Japan. It remains unclear whether discontinuation of PPIs should be recommended in hemodialysis patients who have a high risk of gastrointestinal ulcer. Yet, considering the side effects and polypharmacy in the HD population, more discussions on preferable de-prescription of PPIs are needed.
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.