Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39832992›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

DepRescribing inapprOpriate Proton Pump InhibiTors (DROPIT): study protocol of a cluster-randomised controlled trial in Swiss primary care.

Angela Edith Schulthess-Lisibach, Renata Vidonscky Lüthold, Clémentine Tombez, Kristie Rebecca Weir, Martina Zangger, Samantha Chan, Flurina Jenal, Marie Roumet, Yvonne Mattmann, Christof Bieri and 11 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06129474 (DepRescribing inapprOpriate Proton Pump InhibiTors - the DROPIT Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

NCT06129474 narecruitingnot on this map

DepRescribing inapprOpriate Proton Pump InhibiTors - the DROPIT Trial: a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial in Primary Care Setting

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of BernRan2024 to 2027Enrolled400ConditionsInappropriate Prescribing, Reflux Disease, Proton Pump InhibitorsArmsProton Pump Inhibitor deprescribing tool
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

21 authors.

Angela Edith Schulthess-LisibachInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8697-492X
Renata Vidonscky LütholdInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Clémentine TombezInstitute of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Kristie Rebecca WeirInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9507-5050
Martina ZanggerInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Samantha ChanDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Flurina JenalDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Marie RoumetDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Yvonne MattmannInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Christof BieriInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Carole Elodie AubertInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Nicolas RodondiInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Sofia Carolina Zambrano RamosInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Sven TrelleDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8162-8910
Stefan Neuner-JehleInstitute of Primary Care, University of Zurich and University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6260-8148
Pascal JuilleratGastroenterology, Clinic for Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Michaela BarbierHealth Economics Facility, Departement of Public Health, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Jennifer InauenInstitute of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7884-3222
Sven StreitInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Katharina Tabea JungoInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Enriqueta Vallejo-YagüeInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland enriqueta.vallejo@unibe.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5911-2037

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesProton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed medications and commonly used for the treatment of gastric acid-related disorders. Nevertheless, PPIs are often overused leading to potential adverse effects and unnecessary healthcare costs. Deprescribing strategies have emerged to safely reduce or substitute inappropriate PPIs and optimise patient care in an evidence-based manner. This protocol describes a study to evaluate the effectiveness of a PPI deprescribing intervention in comparison to usual care in the Swiss primary care setting.

designAn open-label, cluster randomised controlled trial.

settingSwiss primary care settings.

participantsIncluded participants will be adults with inappropriate PPI treatment and will be recruited by general practitioners (GPs). Participants treated by the same GP constitute a cluster. Clusters are randomised 1:1 to either the intervention group or the control group.

interventionsThe intervention components consist of deprescribing tools including educational material, decision aids for both participants and GPs, and additional trainings for GPs only. Patients in the control group will receive usual care. Data will be collected at baseline, 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-month follow-up time through online surveys or a phone call for both GPs and participants. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The first co-primary endpoint is the effectiveness of the deprescribing intervention measured by the change of prescribed PPI dose. The second co-primary endpoint is safety, which is measured with the Reflux Disease Questionnaire assessing change in gastrointestinal symptoms. There are several secondary endpoints, such as the total number of prescribed medications, occurrences of changes in prescription patterns, PPI discontinuation and cost-effectiveness.

conclusionsThe findings from this study will provide evidence on the effectiveness and safety of a PPI deprescribing intervention for patients and GPs. Successful implementation of our PPI deprescribing strategy has the potential to improve patient outcomes and lower costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06129474.

Indexed as

DeprescriptionsInappropriate PrescribingPrimary Health CareProton Pump InhibitorsFemaleHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSwitzerlandProton Pump InhibitorsGastroenterologyMedication ReviewMultimorbidityPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPrimary Care

Identifiers

PMID39832992
PMCPMC11749314

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.