Dyspepsia Management in Primary Care in The Netherlands: To What Extent Is Helicobacter pylori Diagnosis and Treatment Incorporated?

Abstract

Background: Many guidelines on the management of Helicobacter pylori (HP)-related dyspepsia have been launched over the past decade. The suggested policies in these guidelines are often more consensus- than evidence-based (test-and-treat policy, test and endoscope), which may cause confusion among primary-care physicians. Aim: To determine the current management of HP-related dyspepsia by Dutch general practitioners (GPs). Methods: A random sample of 5% of all Dutch GPs (n = 355) were sent a questionnaire on the diagnosis and treatment of HP infections in dyspepsia management. Results: The response rate was 66.2% (n = 235). Almost 80% of the responding GPs stated they had conducted HP testing (via endoscopy or serology) during the previous 12 months. In the same time period, more than 94% had actually prescribed a HP eradication therapy. A total of 70% of the GPs stated that they used endoscopy to test for HP infection, 54% used serology (ELISA); whole-blood tests and carbon urea breath tests were not used. Patients with a history of peptic ulcer disease, those on chronic acid-suppressive drugs and patients with recurrent ulcer-like complaints were most frequently tested for HP infection. Conclusions: Given the frequency of consultations for dyspepsia in primary care in the Netherlands (150 new dyspeptic patients per average practice per year), and the reported average number of HP tests perfomed (1–5 per GP per year), HP diagnosis plays a modest role in the management of dyspepsia in Dutch general practices. Neither the ‘test-and-treat’ policy recommended in the Maastricht guidelines, nor its advice regarding the choice of diagnostic tests (carbon urea breath test or serology), is being followed. The majority of GPs uses endoscopy for the detection of HP infection.