高收入国家和中低收入国家在乳糜泻护理方面存在显著差异:对来自 63 个国家的乳糜泻专家进行的全球调查。

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Pub Date : 2024-11-11 DOI:10.1111/jgh.16793
Samagra Agarwal, Shubham Prasad, Ashish Agarwal, Raja A Raja Ali, Daniel A Leffler, Peter H R Green, David S Sanders, Robert P Anderson, Vineet Ahuja, Chris J J Mulder, Govind K Makharia
{"title":"高收入国家和中低收入国家在乳糜泻护理方面存在显著差异:对来自 63 个国家的乳糜泻专家进行的全球调查。","authors":"Samagra Agarwal, Shubham Prasad, Ashish Agarwal, Raja A Raja Ali, Daniel A Leffler, Peter H R Green, David S Sanders, Robert P Anderson, Vineet Ahuja, Chris J J Mulder, Govind K Makharia","doi":"10.1111/jgh.16793","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>Celiac disease (CeD) is increasingly diagnosed but significant disparities exist in awareness, practices, resources, and legislation worldwide. We conducted a global online survey with CeD experts to assess this disparity internationally.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 55 questions survey encompassing nine domains relevant to CeD care (awareness, gluten-free [GF] foods availability/cost/quality, GF labeling, CeD dietician availability, insurance for CeD patients, medical training, research funding, patient support groups, and unmet needs) was generated and sent to CeD experts worldwide electronically. Countries were stratified based on per capita income as high-income (HIC) and lower-income countries (LIC) (including upper-middle-, lower-middle-, and low-income countries). Survey responses were summarized as a single score using principal component analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Valid responses were obtained from 131(37.4%) [HIC: 71; LIC: 60] of contacted CeD experts from 63 countries. Compared with HIC, LIC experts perceived worse availability (HIC:80% vs LIC: 47%; P < 0.001), quality (52% vs 20%; P < 0.001), and legislation for labeling of GF foods (82% vs 37%; P < 0.001), with unfavorable reimbursement policies (27% vs 12%; P = 0.002), subsidies (32% vs 13%; P < 0.001), and insurance (76% vs 43%; P < 0.001) for CeD patients. LIC also lacked awareness about CeD among general physicians (69% vs 32%; P < 0.001), trained celiac dieticians (39% vs 12%; P = 0.002), and active CeD patient support groups (93% vs 50%; P < 0.001). All experts believed that GF foods were costly (94% vs 87%), frequently contaminated (27% vs 32%), and unfavorably taxed (97% and 93%). The experts agreed on key unmet needs and better research funding. Overall CeD preparedness score (median 58.3 vs 33.0; P < 0.001) was also associated with income.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present survey highlights the opinion of global experts on the challenges, opportunities, and preparedness related to CeD and differences worldwide by income.</p>","PeriodicalId":15877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Celiac disease care differs significantly between high- and low-middle-income countries: a global survey of celiac experts from 63 countries.\",\"authors\":\"Samagra Agarwal, Shubham Prasad, Ashish Agarwal, Raja A Raja Ali, Daniel A Leffler, Peter H R Green, David S Sanders, Robert P Anderson, Vineet Ahuja, Chris J J Mulder, Govind K Makharia\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jgh.16793\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>Celiac disease (CeD) is increasingly diagnosed but significant disparities exist in awareness, practices, resources, and legislation worldwide. We conducted a global online survey with CeD experts to assess this disparity internationally.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 55 questions survey encompassing nine domains relevant to CeD care (awareness, gluten-free [GF] foods availability/cost/quality, GF labeling, CeD dietician availability, insurance for CeD patients, medical training, research funding, patient support groups, and unmet needs) was generated and sent to CeD experts worldwide electronically. Countries were stratified based on per capita income as high-income (HIC) and lower-income countries (LIC) (including upper-middle-, lower-middle-, and low-income countries). Survey responses were summarized as a single score using principal component analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Valid responses were obtained from 131(37.4%) [HIC: 71; LIC: 60] of contacted CeD experts from 63 countries. Compared with HIC, LIC experts perceived worse availability (HIC:80% vs LIC: 47%; P < 0.001), quality (52% vs 20%; P < 0.001), and legislation for labeling of GF foods (82% vs 37%; P < 0.001), with unfavorable reimbursement policies (27% vs 12%; P = 0.002), subsidies (32% vs 13%; P < 0.001), and insurance (76% vs 43%; P < 0.001) for CeD patients. LIC also lacked awareness about CeD among general physicians (69% vs 32%; P < 0.001), trained celiac dieticians (39% vs 12%; P = 0.002), and active CeD patient support groups (93% vs 50%; P < 0.001). All experts believed that GF foods were costly (94% vs 87%), frequently contaminated (27% vs 32%), and unfavorably taxed (97% and 93%). The experts agreed on key unmet needs and better research funding. Overall CeD preparedness score (median 58.3 vs 33.0; P < 0.001) was also associated with income.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present survey highlights the opinion of global experts on the challenges, opportunities, and preparedness related to CeD and differences worldwide by income.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15877,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.16793\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.16793","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:乳糜泻(Celiac disease,CeD)的诊断率越来越高,但全世界在认识、实践、资源和立法方面存在着巨大差异。我们对乳糜泻专家进行了一次全球在线调查,以评估国际上的这种差异:方法:我们制作了一份 55 个问题的调查问卷,涵盖与 CeD 护理相关的九个领域(意识、无麸质食品的可用性/成本/质量、无麸质食品标签、CeD 营养师的可用性、CeD 患者的保险、医疗培训、研究经费、患者支持团体和未满足的需求),并通过电子方式发送给世界各地的 CeD 专家。根据人均收入将各国划分为高收入国家 (HIC) 和低收入国家 (LIC)(包括中上收入国家、中低收入国家和低收入国家)。调查结果:来自 63 个国家的 131 位(37.4%)[高收入国家:71 位;低收入国家:60 位] CeD 专家做出了有效回答。与高收入国家相比,低收入国家的专家认为可用性更差(高收入国家:80%;低收入国家:47%;P 结论:本调查突出了全球 CeD 专家的意见:本调查强调了全球专家对与 CeD 相关的挑战、机遇和准备情况的看法,以及不同收入国家的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Celiac disease care differs significantly between high- and low-middle-income countries: a global survey of celiac experts from 63 countries.

Background and aim: Celiac disease (CeD) is increasingly diagnosed but significant disparities exist in awareness, practices, resources, and legislation worldwide. We conducted a global online survey with CeD experts to assess this disparity internationally.

Methods: A 55 questions survey encompassing nine domains relevant to CeD care (awareness, gluten-free [GF] foods availability/cost/quality, GF labeling, CeD dietician availability, insurance for CeD patients, medical training, research funding, patient support groups, and unmet needs) was generated and sent to CeD experts worldwide electronically. Countries were stratified based on per capita income as high-income (HIC) and lower-income countries (LIC) (including upper-middle-, lower-middle-, and low-income countries). Survey responses were summarized as a single score using principal component analysis.

Results: Valid responses were obtained from 131(37.4%) [HIC: 71; LIC: 60] of contacted CeD experts from 63 countries. Compared with HIC, LIC experts perceived worse availability (HIC:80% vs LIC: 47%; P < 0.001), quality (52% vs 20%; P < 0.001), and legislation for labeling of GF foods (82% vs 37%; P < 0.001), with unfavorable reimbursement policies (27% vs 12%; P = 0.002), subsidies (32% vs 13%; P < 0.001), and insurance (76% vs 43%; P < 0.001) for CeD patients. LIC also lacked awareness about CeD among general physicians (69% vs 32%; P < 0.001), trained celiac dieticians (39% vs 12%; P = 0.002), and active CeD patient support groups (93% vs 50%; P < 0.001). All experts believed that GF foods were costly (94% vs 87%), frequently contaminated (27% vs 32%), and unfavorably taxed (97% and 93%). The experts agreed on key unmet needs and better research funding. Overall CeD preparedness score (median 58.3 vs 33.0; P < 0.001) was also associated with income.

Conclusions: The present survey highlights the opinion of global experts on the challenges, opportunities, and preparedness related to CeD and differences worldwide by income.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
326
审稿时长
2.3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology is produced 12 times per year and publishes peer-reviewed original papers, reviews and editorials concerned with clinical practice and research in the fields of hepatology, gastroenterology and endoscopy. Papers cover the medical, radiological, pathological, biochemical, physiological and historical aspects of the subject areas. All submitted papers are reviewed by at least two referees expert in the field of the submitted paper.
期刊最新文献
Comparative Success Rate and Adverse Effects of Endoscopic Sphincterotomy Versus Endoscopic Papillary Large Balloon Dilation in Large Common Bile Duct Stones Removal. A Propensity Scores Inverse Weighting Analysis. Incidence of Cholecystitis After Endoscopic Biliary Drainage Using a Low Axial Force Covered Self-Expandable Metallic Stent in Patients With Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Multicenter Prospective Study. PANoptosis-related genes: Molecular insights into immune dysregulation in ulcerative colitis. Bowel Colonization With Carbapenem-Resistant Bacteria Is Associated With Short-Term Outcomes in Patients With Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure. Cardiometabolic risk factors and coronary atherosclerosis progression in patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: the influential role of quantity over type.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1