The management of lactose intolerance among primary care physicians and its correlation with management by gastroenterologists: The SEPD-SEMG national survey

Introduction and aims: The understanding of lactose intolerance (LI) is limited in some professional settings. Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva (SEPD) and Sociedad Española de Medicina General (SEMG) have developed a survey in order to: a) Analyze primary care physicians (PCPs) knowledge and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Argüelles Arias, Federico, Rodríguez-Ledo, Pilar, Tenías, José María, Otero, Mercedes, Casellas, Francesc, Blay-Cortés, Guadalupe, Lucendo, Alfredo J., Domínguez-Jiménez, José Luis, Mateo-Carballo, Fernando
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2015
País:España
Institución:Universidad de Sevilla (US)
Repositorio:idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla
OAI Identifier:oai:idus.us.es:11441/172667
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/11441/172667
https://doi.org/10.17235/reed.2015.3771/2015
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Lactose intolerance
SEPD
Family doctors
Primary care physicians
Survey
Lactose intolerance management
Hypolactasia
Descripción
Sumario:Introduction and aims: The understanding of lactose intolerance (LI) is limited in some professional settings. Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva (SEPD) and Sociedad Española de Medicina General (SEMG) have developed a survey in order to: a) Analyze primary care physicians (PCPs) knowledge and clinical management; and b) to compare results with those of a previous survey of Spanish gastroenterologists (GEs). Material and methods: An online questionnaire was sent to SEMG members with 27 items on various issues: Demographics, occupational characteristics, outlook on LI, diagnostic tests, treatment, and follow-up. Results were compared to those from a survey of GEs. Results: A total of 456 PCPs responded, versus 477 GEs. PCPs had an older mean age and longer professional experience. Level of understanding of LI was similar, albeit a higher proportion of PCPs lacked epidemiological awareness (p < 0.01). GEs tended to consider LI a “minor” condition (71.3 vs. 40.1%; p > 0.001), and LI symptoms as overlapping those of irritable bowel syndrome (93.5 vs. 88.2%; p = 0.005), although symptoms perceived as suspicious of LI were similar in both groups. Dietary recommendations were recognized as the primary therapeutic approach. Conclusion: This study reveals the outlook of PCPs on LI, and allows comparison with that of GEs, as a basis for the development of strategies aimed at improving LI understanding, approach and management in our setting.