The health economic impact of upper gastrointestinal symptoms in the general population: results from the Domestic/International Gastroenterology Surveillance Study (DIGEST).

BACKGROUND The Domestic/International Gastroenterology Surveillance Study (DIGEST) is the first large, multinational, population-based survey to assess the 3-month prevalence and economic/quality-of-life impact of upper gastrointestinal symptoms (UGIS). METHODS A total of 5581 subjects were interviewed in 10 countries (grouped into seven regions). Respondents were classified as having relevant or non-relevant upper gastrointestinal symptoms, and questioned about consumption of healthcare resources in terms of doctor consultations, prescribed and non-prescribed medications, hospital stays and investigations for both gastrointestinal and other health problems. The impact of symptoms in terms of time lost and reduced effectiveness at work or social activities was also recorded. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Twenty-eight percent of the total sample was defined as having clinically relevant UGIS (UGIS of at least moderate severity and with a frequency of at least once per week in the previous 3 months). During the period studied, 20% of these subjects had consulted a family practitioner (16.2%) and/ or a specialist (6.3%), primarily for UGIS. Of those with clinically relevant UGIS, 49% had taken over-the-counter medication, and 27% prescription medication for gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms. Two percent reported a hospital stay and 27% reported days of reduced or no work, school or domestic productivity due to UGIS. Four percent of all study subjects underwent investigations for UGIS during this period. Variations between countries in these parameters may be due to differences in healthcare systems and cultural attitudes towards UGIS, influencing both the healthcare-seeking behaviour of subjects with UGIS and their management.

[1]  D. Palli Gastric Cancer and Helicobacter pylori: A Critical Evaluation of the Epidemiological Evidence , 1997, Helicobacter.

[2]  J. Rovner The health care system evolves. , 1996, Lancet.

[3]  K. Bodger,et al.  Prescribing patterns for dyspepsia in primary care: a prospective study of selected general practitioners , 1996, Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics.

[4]  P. Pikkarainen,et al.  General practitioners' approach to dyspepsia. Survey of consultation frequencies, treatment, and investigations. , 1996, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology.

[5]  J. Londen Dutch health care—a study in purple , 1996, The Lancet.

[6]  R. Pounder,et al.  A survey of dyspepsia in Great Britain , 1996, Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics.

[7]  L. Agréus,et al.  Socio-economic factors, health care consumption and rating of abdominal symptom severity. A report from the abdominal symptom study. , 1993, Family practice.

[8]  C D Schleck,et al.  Dyspepsia and dyspepsia subgroups: a population-based study. , 1992, Gastroenterology.

[9]  F. Hobbs,et al.  Dyspepsia in England and Scotland. , 1990, Gut.

[10]  R. Jones,et al.  Factors affecting the decision to consult with dyspepsia: comparison of consulters and non-consulters. , 1989, The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[11]  J. Knottnerus,et al.  How well do general practitioners manage dyspepsia? , 1989, The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[12]  J. Galmiche,et al.  [Epigastric pain and regurgitation: descriptive epidemiology in a representative sample of the adult population of France]. , 1988, Gastroenterologie clinique et biologique.

[13]  R. Jones,et al.  Self-care and primary care of dyspepsia: a review. , 1987, Family practice.

[14]  C. Furberg,et al.  Assessment of quality of life in clinical trials of cardiovascular therapies. , 1984, The American journal of cardiology.

[15]  R. Jones Self-medication in a small community. , 1976, The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[16]  L. Levin The layperson as the primary health care practitioner. , 1976, Public health reports.

[17]  M Wood,et al.  Content of family practice. Part I. Rank order of diagnoses by frequency. Part II. Diagnoses by disease category and age/sex distribution. , 1976, The Journal of family practice.

[18]  J. Mills,et al.  Onset of action of antisecretory drugs: beneficial effects of a rapid increase in intragastric pH in acid reflux disease. , 1999, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology. Supplement.

[19]  D. Pathak,et al.  Productivity-cost controversies in cost-effectiveness analysis: review and research agenda. , 1999, Clinical therapeutics.

[20]  V. Stanghellini Three-month prevalence rates of gastrointestinal symptoms and the influence of demographic factors: results from the Domestic/International Gastroenterology Surveillance Study (DIGEST). , 1999, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology. Supplement.

[21]  Heading Rc Prevalence of upper gastrointestinal symptoms in the general population: a systematic review. , 1999, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology. Supplement.

[22]  A. Eggleston,et al.  The Domestic/International Gastroenterology Surveillance Study (DIGEST): design, subjects and methods. , 1999, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology. Supplement.

[23]  B. Levin,et al.  Cancers of the stomach and the duodenum. , 1995, The Gastroenterologist.

[24]  E. Krag Non-ulcer dyspepsia introduction: epidemiological data. , 1982, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology. Supplement.

[25]  D. Morrell,et al.  Symptoms in general practice. , 1971, The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.