Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Pediatrics. 2010 Jan;125(1):96-104. doi: 10.1542/peds.2008-3841. Epub 2009 Dec 14.
Wide variation exists in the treatment of suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in premature infants; it is unknown to what degree diagnosis and treatment are affected by the treating physician's medical specialty or interpretation of the medical literature.
This study involved an online survey of board-certified neonatologists, pediatric pulmonologists, and pediatric gastroenterologists about their beliefs regarding the symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment of GERD in premature infants in the NICU on the basis of both clinical impression and interpretation of the literature.
A total of 1021 neonatologists, 232 pediatric pulmonologists, and 222 pediatric gastroenterologists participated in the study (47.5% response rate). There was disagreement among specialists in nearly all aspects of the survey. Pulmonologists were most likely to report that respiratory symptoms are caused by GERD (P < .001). Neonatologists were least likely to report that a therapeutic trial of pharmacologic agents would be useful for diagnosing GERD (P < .001) or that lansoprazole, ranitidine, or cimetidine are safe or effective (P < .001). No pharmacologic therapy had >50% of respondents supporting its effectiveness. There was moderate correlation between physician belief based on the medical literature and belief based on clinical impression (Spearman rank correlation: 0.47-0.75). For therapies supported by multiple meta-analyses in infants versus therapies with few infant trials, physicians rated the evidence for effectiveness similarly.
There is wide variation among pediatric specialists regarding beliefs about GERD in premature infants, as well as about the weight of evidence in the medical literature for this patient population. Physician beliefs do not seem to be driven by the degree of evidence in the neonatal literature. With no agreed-on standard of care in the setting of widespread use of antireflux medications, greater understanding is needed about the ways physicians form clinical impressions, access and process medical evidence, and apply it to patient care.
早产儿中胃食管反流病(GERD)的治疗方法存在很大差异;尚不清楚诊断和治疗在多大程度上受到治疗医生的专业或对医学文献的解释的影响。
本研究通过在线调查,调查了经过董事会认证的新生儿科医生、儿科肺科医生和儿科胃肠病学家,了解他们根据临床印象和文献解读,对新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)中早产儿 GERD 的症状、诊断和治疗的看法。
共有 1021 名新生儿科医生、232 名儿科肺科医生和 222 名儿科胃肠病学家参与了这项研究(47.5%的回复率)。在调查的几乎所有方面,专家们都存在分歧。肺科医生最有可能报告呼吸症状是由 GERD 引起的(P <.001)。新生儿科医生最不可能报告药物治疗试验对 GERD 的诊断有用(P <.001),或者兰索拉唑、雷尼替丁或西咪替丁是安全或有效的(P <.001)。没有一种药物治疗方法有超过 50%的医生支持其有效性。基于医学文献的医生信念与基于临床印象的信念之间存在中度相关性(Spearman 等级相关系数:0.47-0.75)。对于在婴儿中得到多项荟萃分析支持的治疗方法与在婴儿中进行的试验较少的治疗方法,医生对有效性的证据评估相似。
儿科专家对早产儿 GERD 的看法以及对该患者人群的医学文献证据的重视程度存在很大差异。医生的信念似乎不是由新生儿文献中的证据程度驱动的。在广泛使用抗反流药物的情况下,没有达成共识的护理标准,因此需要更多地了解医生形成临床印象、获取和处理医学证据以及将其应用于患者护理的方式。