Search

Background: Patient adherence status to the newly introduced family‐based Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection control and management strategy remains unclear, so are its influencing factors. We aim to investigate family members' adherence and its influencing factors during the family‐based H. pylori infection management practice for related disease prevention. Materials and Methods: Based on our previously family‐based H. pylori survey in 2021, 282 families including 772 individuals were followed up 2 years after the initial survey to compare if the investigation and education might improve family member's adherence. The participant's adherence to H. pylori infection awareness, retest, treatment, publicity, gastroscopy, and hygiene habits were followed up, and their influencing factors were also analyzed. Results: The overall participant's adherence to recommendations on H. pylori awareness, retest, treatment, publicity, gastroscopy, and hygiene habits were 77% (187/243), 67.3% (138/205), 60.1% (211/351), 46.5% (107/230), 45.6% (159/349), and 39.1% (213/545), respectively; and all showed improvements compared with their prior survey stages. The top reasons for rejection to treatment, retest, and gastroscopy were forgetting or unaware of H. pylori infection (30.3%), busy (32.8%), and asymptomatic (67.9%), respectively. Independent risk factor for low adherence to treatment was occupation (e.g., staff: OR 4.49, 95% CI 1.34–15.10). Independent favorable factors for treatment adherence were individuals at the ages of 18–44 years (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04–0.89) and had a large family size (e.g., four family members: OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06–0.41); for retest adherence, it was individuals at the ages of 60–69 years (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06–0.97); for gastroscopy adherence, it was individuals at the age of 60–69 years (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.28–0.75), and with gastrointestinal symptoms (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36–0.90). Conclusions: Family‐based H. pylori management increases individual adherence to treatment, retest, and awareness, and there are also improved adherence to gastroscopy, publicity, and personal hygiene recommendations; further efforts are required to enhance the individual adherence rate for related disease prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The overall benefits of the newly introduced family‐based Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection control and management (FBCM) and screen‐and‐treat strategies in preventing multiple upper gastrointestinal diseases at national level in China have not been explored. We investigate the cost‐effectiveness of these strategies in the whole Chinese population. Materials and Methods: Decision trees and Markov models of H. pylori infection‐related non‐ulcer dyspepsia (NUD), peptic ulcer disease (PUD), and gastric cancer (GC) were developed to simulate the cost‐effectiveness of these strategies in the whole 494 million households in China. The main outcomes include cost‐effectiveness, life years (LY), quality‐adjusted life year (QALY), and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: When compared with no‐screen strategy, both FBCM and screen‐and‐treat strategies reduced the number of new cases of NUD, PUD, PUD‐related deaths, and the prevalence of GC, and cancer‐related deaths. The costs saved by these two strategies were $1467 million and $879 million, quality‐adjusted life years gained were 227 million and 267 million, and life years gained were 59 million and 69 million, respectively. Cost‐effectiveness analysis showed that FBCM strategy costs −$6.46/QALY and −$24.75/LY, and screen‐and‐treat strategy costs −$3.3/QALY and −$12.71/LY when compared with no‐screen strategy. Compared to the FBCM strategy, the screen‐and‐treat strategy reduced the incidence of H. pylori‐related diseases, added 40 million QALYs, and saved 10 million LYs, but at the increased cost of $588 million. Cost‐effectiveness analysis showed that screen‐and‐treat strategy costs $14.88/QALY and $59.5/LY when compared with FBCM strategy. The robustness of the results was also verified. Conclusions: Both FBCM and screen‐and‐treat strategies are highly cost‐effective in preventing NUD, PUD, and GC than the no‐screen strategy in Chinese families at national level. As FBCM strategy is more practical and efficient, it is expected to play a more important role in preventing familial H. pylori infection and also serves as an excellent reference for other highly infected societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection and its related diseases are substantial public health burden for highly infected areas. Recently, a novel family‐based H. pylori infection control and management (FBCM) strategy is introduced for H. pylori infection prevention and control. However, its cost‐effectiveness has not been evaluated. We conducted this health economic evaluation to investigate the cost‐effectiveness of FBCM, screen‐and‐treat, and no‐screen strategies in Chinese population. Materials and Methods: Cost‐effectiveness analysis was performed using decision tree and Markov model. Parameters required for the model were from published literatures and public databases, including health state utility, screening characteristics, treatment effectiveness, and medical costs for the three strategies. Outcomes were cost, quality‐adjusted life year (QALY), incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER). Uncertainty analysis was performed to verify the robustness of this model. Results: To prevent gastric cancer in a cohort of 1 million asymptomatic Chinese families, FBCM and screen‐and‐treat strategies prevented 1010 and 1201 new gastric cancer cases, reduced 2809 and 3339 gastric cancer‐related death, and saved 956,971 and 1,137,549 QALYs, respectively, when compared with no‐screen strategy. Cost‐effectiveness analysis showed that FBCM strategy cost $9.18/QALY, and screen‐and‐treat strategy cost $12.08/QALY for gastric cancer prevention when compared with no‐screen strategy. One‐way sensitivity analysis revealed that screening from younger age by both strategies are more cost‐effective. When compared with FBCM strategy, screen‐and‐treat strategy saved 5.98% gastric cancer cases and 5.78% of gastric cancer deaths, but costed $9348 to reduce a gastric cancer case. Results are not sensitive to any variables, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed robustness of the results. Conclusions: Both FBCM and screen‐and‐treat strategies are cost‐effective for gastric cancer prevention compared with no‐screen strategy. Since FBCM is more practical and convenient, it may be an efficient and excellent cost‐effective strategy for gastric cancer prevention in H. pylori and gastric cancer prevalent areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Antibiotic resistance emerges as a major issue for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) treatment. High‐dose dual therapy has recently shown encouraging results in H. pylori eradication, but it has yet to be validated in this H. pylori highly infected area; it is also not known if this concept can be extended to antibiotics other than amoxicillin, and factors that affect the eradication. We investigate if rabeprazole plus amoxicillin or furazolidone regimens could be a first‐line therapy for H. pylori eradication, and factors that affect the curing rate. Methods: This is a single‐center, prospective, open‐label, randomized‐controlled trial. Naive patients (n=292) were randomly treated with bismuth‐containing quadruple therapy (BQT), rabeprazole plus amoxicillin (RADT), or furazolidone (RFDT) groups. RADT and FADT use three times daily regimens. H. pylori diagnosis and eradication were determined and confirmed by 13C‐urea breath test. Results: In per‐protocol (PP) analysis, H. pylori eradication rate was 91.2% in BQT group, 89.6% in RADT, and 51.0% in RFDT group. In intention‐to‐treat (ITT) analysis, infection was eradicated in 86.7% of patients in BQT group, 85.8% in RADT, and 48.1% in RFDT groups, respectively. Noninferiority was confirmed between BQT and RADT groups. The incidence of side effects in BQT group was significantly higher than that in RADT group. Successful eradication was associated with lower body surface area (BSA) and low body mass index (BMI) in BQT group. Smoking and high BSA index reduced H. pylori eradication rate in RADT group. Conclusions: Rabeprazole‐amoxicillin dual therapy is equally effective to the bismuth‐containing quadruple therapy for H. pylori eradication with fewer side effects and saves use of one antibiotic per each treatment. Successful eradication is also associated with low BSA and non‐smoking condition, which deserves future stratified analysis for refinement and optimization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Two critical concerns during Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication are the successful eradication and recurrence. It is debatable whether whole family‐based H. pylori treatment regimen might have any advantage over single‐infected patient treatment approach in increasing eradication rate and reducing recurrence rate. We conduct systematic review and meta‐analysis to compare the efficacy of these two treatment regimens in order to provide clinical practice a better option for H. pylori eradication. Methods: Randomized controlled trials evaluating H. pylori eradication and recurrence in whole family‐based treatment group (WFTG) versus single‐infected patient treatment group (SPTG) were collected from published literature up to July 2020 from common databases. Pooled results were analyzed using either fixed‐effect or random‐effect model. Results were expressed as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: A total of 1751 relevant articles were identified, and 12 studies were eligible for analysis. Among them: (a) Eight articles including 1198 patients were selected to analyze H. pylori eradication rate, pooled result showed that eradication rate of WFTG was higher than that of SPTG (OR=2.93; 95% CI 1.68–5.13). Stratified analysis showed that H. pylori eradication rate in WFTG were higher over SPTG in children subgroup, but had no difference in spouse subgroup. (b) Six studies including 881 patients were analyzed for recurrence rate between the two groups, pooled analysis showed that the overall recurrence rate of WFTG was lower than that of SPTG (OR=0.3; 95% CI 0.19–0.48). Stratified analysis showed that the recurrence rate in WFTG was lower over SPTG at 6, 12, 18, and more than 24 months post‐treatment subgroups. Conclusion: Whole family‐based H. pylori treatment can partially increase eradication rate and reduce recurrence rate over single‐infected patient treatment approach, the results provide clinical practice a novel notion for H. pylori eradication and infection prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]