Cargando…

Determining whether coeliac disease case-finding in primary care is better than random testing: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND: Over 75% of patients (approximately half a million) with coeliac disease in the UK have not been formally diagnosed. AIM: To determine if case-finding of coeliac disease is better than random testing in primary care. DESIGN & SETTING: A pragmatic study looked at all referrals across...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chandler, Kim, Robins, Gerry
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Royal College of General Practitioners 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6662879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31366679
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen19X101648
_version_ 1783439732199391232
author Chandler, Kim
Robins, Gerry
author_facet Chandler, Kim
Robins, Gerry
author_sort Chandler, Kim
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Over 75% of patients (approximately half a million) with coeliac disease in the UK have not been formally diagnosed. AIM: To determine if case-finding of coeliac disease is better than random testing in primary care. DESIGN & SETTING: A pragmatic study looked at all referrals across a 12-month period (December 2013–November 2014) for coeliac serology testing and the indications for testing across 38 GP practices in a well-defined geographical area in North Yorkshire. There was further follow-up for an additional 12 months to determine conversion of positive serology to duodenal biopsy. METHOD: All serology samples sent into York Hospital biochemistry department during the study period were analysed for the indication for testing. Positive results were cross-referenced for duodenal biopsies over the following 12 months on the York Hospital pathology database. RESULTS: Case-finding of coeliac patients in primary care is no better than random testing of the population. Only 71% of patients with positive serology went on to have a duodenal biopsy in the following 12 months. CONCLUSION: More education of the population and of primary care physicians is needed around the indications for checking for coeliac disease. It may be that primary care is not the best place to case-find patients with coeliac disease.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6662879
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Royal College of General Practitioners
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66628792019-08-13 Determining whether coeliac disease case-finding in primary care is better than random testing: a retrospective study Chandler, Kim Robins, Gerry BJGP Open Research BACKGROUND: Over 75% of patients (approximately half a million) with coeliac disease in the UK have not been formally diagnosed. AIM: To determine if case-finding of coeliac disease is better than random testing in primary care. DESIGN & SETTING: A pragmatic study looked at all referrals across a 12-month period (December 2013–November 2014) for coeliac serology testing and the indications for testing across 38 GP practices in a well-defined geographical area in North Yorkshire. There was further follow-up for an additional 12 months to determine conversion of positive serology to duodenal biopsy. METHOD: All serology samples sent into York Hospital biochemistry department during the study period were analysed for the indication for testing. Positive results were cross-referenced for duodenal biopsies over the following 12 months on the York Hospital pathology database. RESULTS: Case-finding of coeliac patients in primary care is no better than random testing of the population. Only 71% of patients with positive serology went on to have a duodenal biopsy in the following 12 months. CONCLUSION: More education of the population and of primary care physicians is needed around the indications for checking for coeliac disease. It may be that primary care is not the best place to case-find patients with coeliac disease. Royal College of General Practitioners 2019-06-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6662879/ /pubmed/31366679 http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen19X101648 Text en Copyright © 2019, The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This article is Open Access: CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
spellingShingle Research
Chandler, Kim
Robins, Gerry
Determining whether coeliac disease case-finding in primary care is better than random testing: a retrospective study
title Determining whether coeliac disease case-finding in primary care is better than random testing: a retrospective study
title_full Determining whether coeliac disease case-finding in primary care is better than random testing: a retrospective study
title_fullStr Determining whether coeliac disease case-finding in primary care is better than random testing: a retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Determining whether coeliac disease case-finding in primary care is better than random testing: a retrospective study
title_short Determining whether coeliac disease case-finding in primary care is better than random testing: a retrospective study
title_sort determining whether coeliac disease case-finding in primary care is better than random testing: a retrospective study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6662879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31366679
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen19X101648
work_keys_str_mv AT chandlerkim determiningwhethercoeliacdiseasecasefindinginprimarycareisbetterthanrandomtestingaretrospectivestudy
AT robinsgerry determiningwhethercoeliacdiseasecasefindinginprimarycareisbetterthanrandomtestingaretrospectivestudy