Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39830332›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2024

Inappropriate prescribing of drugs for peptic ulcer and gastro-esophageal reflux disease remains a matter of concern: Results from the LAPTOP-PPI cluster randomized trial.

Manuela Casula, Ilaria Ardoino, Laura Pierini, Lara Perrella, Stefano Scotti, Sara Mucherino, Valentina Orlando, Enrica Menditto, Carlotta Franchi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Manuela CasulaEpidemiology and Preventive Pharmacology Service (SEFAP), Department of Pharmacological and Biomolecular Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Ilaria ArdoinoLaboratory of Pharmacoepidemiology and Human Nutrition, Department of Health Policy, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Laura PieriniLaboratory of Pharmacoepidemiology and Human Nutrition, Department of Health Policy, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Lara PerrellaDepartment of Pharmacy, Center of Pharmacoeconomics and Drug Utilization Research (CIRFF), University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Stefano ScottiIRCCS MultiMedica, Sesto San Giovanni, Milan, Italy.
Sara MucherinoDepartment of Pharmacy, Center of Pharmacoeconomics and Drug Utilization Research (CIRFF), University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Valentina OrlandoDepartment of Pharmacy, Center of Pharmacoeconomics and Drug Utilization Research (CIRFF), University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Enrica MendittoDepartment of Pharmacy, Center of Pharmacoeconomics and Drug Utilization Research (CIRFF), University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Carlotta FranchiLaboratory of Pharmacoepidemiology and Human Nutrition, Department of Health Policy, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most commonly and inappropriately prescribed drugs by general practitioners (GPs), resulting in increased risk of adverse outcomes for patients and in avoidable costs for Italy's National Health Service (NHS). This study aims to assess the effectiveness of a low-cost and easily implementable informative intervention directed at GPs to enhance the appropriate prescription of PPIs. Methods: The LAPTOP-PPI study is a pragmatic, cluster-randomized controlled trial designed to improve the appropriateness of PPI prescriptions among community-dwelling individuals aged ≥65 years. In June 2021, GPs in the Local Health Units (LHUs) of Bergamo (Northern Italy) and Caserta (Southern Italy) were randomly allocated to either an intervention group (summary reports on prescribing habits, scientific documents on the Italian Medicine Agency's therapeutic indications, strategies for PPI de-prescribing, along with educational materials for patients), and a control group (standard practice). PPI appropriateness was assessed through an algorithm specifically designed and based on NHS prescription appropriateness and reimbursement criteria. Intervention efficacy was evaluated by comparing data from the baseline period (July 1 to 31 December 2019) with those from the follow-up period (July 1 to 31 December 2021), 6 months after randomization. The analysis was performed on the intention-to-treat principle and according to GP level. To estimate the effectiveness of the intervention, we used a difference-in-differences (DID) approach. Results: Overall, 942 GPs (540 from Bergamo and 402 from Caserta LHUs) were included in the analysis. At baseline, 171,978 patients aged ≥65 received drug prescriptions for acid-related diseases and were assessable for evaluation of appropriateness. At follow-up, this number was 137,699. The overall inappropriateness rate at baseline among GPs included in the analysis was 57.4% (std.dev. 8.4%) in the intervention arm and 57.6% (std.dev. 8.8%) in the control arm; 6 months after the intervention delivery, they were 59.2% (std.dev. 8.0%) and 58.5% (std.dev. 7.3%), respectively. Conclusion: Given their widespread use, improving the prescription quality of PPIs is a major concern. Educational interventions for GPs and patients are routine strategies to address inappropriateness, but they appear to be insufficient for independently improving prescribing practice, especially in a critical situation such as the post-pandemic period.

Indexed as

algorithminappropriate prescriptioninformative interventionpragmatic trialproton pump inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID39830332
PMCPMC11739113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.