Alternative vs. conventional treatment given on-demand for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a randomised controlled trial
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Alternative treatments are commonly used for various disorders and often taken on-demand. On-demand treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) with pharmaceutical products is an established, cost-effective strategy. Comparis...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book |
| Published: |
BMC,
2009-02-01T00:00:00Z.
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Connect to this object online. |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Alternative treatments are commonly used for various disorders and often taken on-demand. On-demand treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) with pharmaceutical products is an established, cost-effective strategy. Comparisons between alternative medicine and pharmaceutical products are rare. The aim of this trial was to compare on-demand treatment with a pectin-based, raft-forming, natural, anti-reflux agent (PRA) with that of esomeprazole 20 mg (Eso20) in patients with mild/moderate GERD.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients with mild/moderate GERD were randomised to a six weeks' on-demand treatment with PRA or Eso20 in a pragmatic, open, multicentre trial. Overall satisfaction with treatment, satisfactory relief on a weekly basis, reflux symptoms, and treatment preferences were noted.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Seventy-seven patients were included in the analyses. Eso20 was significantly superior to PRA for proportion of overall satisfied patients (92% and 58% respectively; p = 0.001), reduction of symptoms (mean symptom scores at the end 5.9 and 8.0 respectively; p = 0.019), proportion of weeks of satisfactory relief (89% and 62% respectively; p = 0.008) and proportion preferring continuation with the same treatment (85% and 42% respectively; p < 0.001). Older patients were more satisfied than younger, and patients preferring on-demand treatment had lower symptom scores at inclusion than those preferring regular treatment.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>On-demand treatment with esomeprazole 20 mg was clearly superior to the pectin-based raft-forming agent. Most patients preferred on-demand treatment to regular treatment. Those preferring regular therapy had significantly more symptoms at inclusion.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00184522.</p> |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | 10.1186/1472-6882-9-3 1472-6882 |