Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Alexander C Ford

Publications and source records attributed to Alexander C Ford.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Initial poor quality of life and new onset of dyspepsia: results from a longitudinal 10-year follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies examining the prevalence and natural history of dyspepsia in the general population have been conducted. However, few have reported the effect of quality of life on the development of dyspepsia. A 10-year longitudinal follow-up study examining the effect of quality of life on subsequent dyspepsia was performed. METHODS: Individuals originally enrolled in a population-screening programme for Helicobacter pylori were contacted through a validated postal dyspepsia questionnaire. Baseline demographic data, quality of life at original study entry, and dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) symptom data were already on file. Consent to examine primary-care records was sought, and data regarding non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) and aspirin use were obtained from these. RESULTS: Of 8407 individuals originally involved, 3912 (46.5%) provided symptom data at baseline and 10-year follow-up. Of 2550 (65%) individuals asymptomatic at study entry, 717 (28%) developed new-onset dyspepsia at 10 years, an incidence of 2.8% per year. After multivariate logistic regression, lower quality of life at study entry (OR 2.63; 99% CI 1.86 to 3.71), higher body mass index (OR per unit 1.05; 99% CI 1.02 to 1.08), presence of IBS at study entry (OR 3.1; 99% CI 1.51 to 6.37) and use of NSAIDs and/or aspirin (OR 1.32; 99% CI 0.99 to 1.75) were significant risk factors for new-onset dyspepsia. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of new-onset dyspepsia was almost 3% per year. Low quality of life at baseline exerted a strong effect on the likelihood of developing dyspepsia at 10 years.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗
PubMed2005

Ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status as risk factors for esophagitis and Barrett's esophagus.

Barrett's esophagus is thought to be a disease occurring predominantly in White Caucasian males of higher socioeconomic status. There are no published studies simultaneously examining risk of Barrett's esophagus according to ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status within a single data set. The authors conducted a retrospective case-control analysis within a cross-sectional study to determine risk of Barrett's esophagus in relation to sociodemographic variables in a large United Kingdom population. All patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy at two clinical centers between January 2000 and January 2003 were evaluated. Data on ethnicity, age, gender, socioeconomic status, and the presence of Barrett's esophagus and esophagitis at endoscopy were collected. A total of 20,310 patients were analyzed. Barrett's esophagus was more common in White Caucasians (401/14,095 (2.8%)) than in South Asians (16/5,190 (0.3%)) (adjusted odds ratio (OR)=6.03, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.56, 10.22), as was esophagitis (2,500/14,095 (17.7%) vs. 557/5,190 (10.7%); adjusted OR=1.76, 95% CI: 1.57, 1.97). Patients with Barrett's esophagus were also more likely to be male (adjusted OR=2.70, 95% CI: 2.18, 3.35) and of higher socioeconomic status (adjusted OR=1.58, 95% CI: 1.16, 2.15 (top tertile vs. bottom tertile)). White Caucasian ethnicity, male gender, and higher socioeconomic status are independent risk factors for Barrett's esophagus.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Helicobacter pylori "test and treat" or endoscopy for managing dyspepsia: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Helicobacter pylori "test and treat" has been recommended for the management of young dyspeptic patients without alarm symptoms, and trials have suggested that it is as effective as endoscopy. However, none of these trials have had sufficient sample size to confirm that "test and treat" costs less or to detect small differences in effect. A collaborative group has prospectively registered trials comparing prompt endoscopy with a "test and treat" approach, with the aim of performing an individual patient data meta-analysis of both effect and resource utilization data. METHODS: Researchers provided data for meta-analysis, pooling effects of interventions on individual dyspepsia symptoms. Standardized unit costs were applied to resource utilization, and net benefit was calculated at patient level. Effects, costs, and net benefit were then pooled at study level. RESULTS: Five trials were identified, containing 1924 patients (946 endoscopy [mean age, 40 years], 978 "test and treat" [mean age, 41 years]). The relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic after 1 year was reduced with endoscopy compared with "test and treat" (RR = 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92-0.99). "Test and treat" cost 389 dollars less per patient (95% CI: 275-502 dollars). Using the net benefit approach, at no realistic level of willingness to pay per patient symptom-free did prompt endoscopy become cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Prompt endoscopy confers a small benefit in terms of cure of dyspepsia but costs more than "test and treat" and is not a cost-effective strategy for the initial management of dyspepsia.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2005

A community screening program for Helicobacter pylori saves money: 10-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Population screening and treatment of Helicobacter pylori has been advocated as a means of reducing mortality from gastric cancer, as well as dyspepsia and dyspepsia-related resource use. Previous programs have failed to demonstrate a significant effect on mortality or resource use, but follow-up was only for 1 or 2 years. We aimed to determine the effect of screening for H pylori on dyspepsia and dyspepsia-related resource use over 10 years. METHODS: H pylori-positive individuals, aged 40-49 years, enrolled in a community screening program, randomized to eradication therapy or placebo in 1994, were sent a validated dyspepsia questionnaire by mail 10 years later, and primary care records were reexamined. Consultation, referral, prescribing, and investigation data related to dyspepsia were extracted. United Kingdom costs were applied to derive total cost per person (1 pound = 1.8 dollars). RESULTS: Of 2324 original participants, 1864 (80%) were traced and contacted. Of these, 1086 (47%) responded, and 919 (40%) agreed to a review of their primary care records. There was a 10-year mean saving in total dyspepsia-related costs of 117 dollars per person (95% confidence interval [CI] = 11 dollars-220 dollars, P = .03) with eradication therapy. Those symptomatic at baseline showed a nonsignificant trend toward resolution of symptoms at 10 years with eradication therapy (relative risk of remaining symptomatic, 0.89; 95% CI: 0.77-1.03). CONCLUSIONS: There were significant reductions in total dyspepsia-related health care costs. The savings made were greater than the initial cost of H pylori screening and treatment.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Eradication therapy in Helicobacter pylori positive peptic ulcer disease: systematic review and economic analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We conducted a systematic review and economic analysis to ascertain the efficacy of eradication therapy in the treatment of H. pylori positive peptic ulcer disease. METHODS: Comprehensive search of electronic databases, bibliographies of retrieved articles, contact with pharmaceutical companies, and experts in the field to identify published and unpublished literature from 1966 to the present. The data were incorporated into a Monte Carlo simulation Markov model that incorporated all the uncertainty in the estimates to evaluate cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: Fifty-two trials were included in the final metaanalysis. In duodenal ulcer healing, H. pylori eradication therapy was superior to ulcer healing drug (relative risk (RR) of ulcer persisting = 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.58 to 0.76) and no treatment (RR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.53). In gastric ulcer healing, H. pylori eradication therapy was not statistically superior to ulcer healing drug (RR = 1.32; 95% CI = 0.92 to 1.90). In preventing duodenal ulcer recurrence, H. pylori eradication therapy was not statistically superior to maintenance therapy with ulcer healing drug (RR of ulcer recurring = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.42 to 1.25), but was superior to no treatment (RR = 0.19; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.26). In preventing gastric ulcer recurrence, H. pylori eradication was superior to no treatment (RR = 0.31; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.48). The Markov model suggested H. pylori eradication is cost-effective for duodenal ulcer over 1 year and gastric ulcer over 2 years with over 95% confidence despite the uncertainty in the data. CONCLUSIONS: H. pylori eradication therapy reduces the recurrence of peptic ulcer disease and is cost-effective.

Adult↗