M1912 Do Socioeconomic Status and Lifestyle Factors Predict Symptomatic Improvement Over 8 Weeks in Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Symptoms in the Routine Clinical Setting? - the MAPSOMAL Study

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a chronic condition with a high prevalence in western countries. Transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation episodes and a decreased lower esophageal sphincter pressure are the main mechanisms involved. Currently used drugs are efficient on reflux symptoms, but only as long as they are administered, because they do not modify the reflux barrier. Certain nutrients or foods are generally considered to increase the frequency of gastroesophageal reflux symptoms, therefore physicians recommend changes in diet and some patients avoid bothering foods. This review summarizes current knowledge regarding food and gastroesophageal reflux. For example, fat intake increases the perception of reflux symptoms. Regular coffee and chocolate induce gastroesophageal reflux and increase the lower esophageal exposure to acid. Spicy foods might induce heartburn, but the exact mechanism is not known. Beer and wine induce gastroesophageal reflux, mainly in the first hour after intake. For other foods, like fried food or carbonated beverages data on gastroesophageal reflux is scarce. Similarly, there are few data about the type of diet and gastroesophageal reflux. Mediterranean diet and a very low carbohydrate diet protect against reflux. Regarding diet-related practices, consistent data showed that a “short-meal-to-sleep interval” favors reflux episodes, therefore some authors recommend that dinner should be at least four hours before bedtime. All these recommendations should consider patient’s weight, because several meta-analyses showed a positive association between increased body mass index and gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Download Full-text

P25 The relationship between ARV drug levels, drug resistance, adherence and treatment failure in a routine clinical setting

HIV Medicine ◽

10.1046/j.1468-1293.2000.00024-97.x ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 1 (3) ◽

pp. 180-180

Author(s):

J Lloyd ◽

C Sabin ◽

D Pillay ◽

T Jones ◽

P Hoggard ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Drug Resistance ◽

Treatment Failure ◽

Clinical Setting ◽

Drug Levels ◽

Routine Clinical Setting ◽

The Relationship

Download Full-text

Effectiveness of a brief form of group dialectical behavior therapy for binge‐eating disorder: Case series in a routine clinical setting

International Journal of Eating Disorders ◽

10.1002/eat.23470 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Gillian Adams ◽

Hannah Turner ◽

Jessica Hoskins ◽

Alice Robinson ◽

Glenn Waller

Keyword(s):

Eating Disorder ◽

Binge Eating ◽

Behavior Therapy ◽

Dialectical Behavior Therapy ◽

Binge Eating Disorder ◽

Clinical Setting ◽

Case Series ◽

Routine Clinical Setting

Download Full-text

Association between socioeconomic status and self-reported, tested and diagnosed COVID-19 status during the first wave in the Northern Netherlands: a general population-based cohort from 49 474 adults

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048020 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (3) ◽

pp. e048020

Author(s):

Yinjie Zhu ◽

Ming-Jie Duan ◽

Hermien H. Dijk ◽

Roel D. Freriks ◽

Louise H. Dekker ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Socioeconomic Status ◽

General Population ◽

Low Income ◽

Smoking Status ◽

Sleep Time ◽

Population Based ◽

Lifestyle Factors ◽

Self Report ◽

Low Education ◽

Tv Watching

ObjectivesStudies in clinical settings showed a potential relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and lifestyle factors with COVID-19, but it is still unknown whether this holds in the general population. In this study, we investigated the associations of SES with self-reported, tested and diagnosed COVID-19 status in the general population.Design, setting, participants and outcome measuresParticipants were 49 474 men and women (46±12 years) residing in the Northern Netherlands from the Lifelines cohort study. SES indicators and lifestyle factors (i.e., smoking status, physical activity, alcohol intake, diet quality, sleep time and TV watching time) were assessed by questionnaire from the Lifelines Biobank. Self-reported, tested and diagnosed COVID-19 status was obtained from the Lifelines COVID-19 questionnaire.ResultsThere were 4711 participants who self-reported having had a COVID-19 infection, 2883 participants tested for COVID-19, and 123 positive cases were diagnosed in this study population. After adjustment for age, sex, lifestyle factors, body mass index and ethnicity, we found that participants with low education or low income were less likely to self-report a COVID-19 infection (OR [95% CI]: low education 0.78 [0.71 to 0.86]; low income 0.86 [0.79 to 0.93]) and be tested for COVID-19 (OR [95% CI]: low education 0.58 [0.52 to 0.66]; low income 0.86 [0.78 to 0.95]) compared with high education or high income groups, respectively.ConclusionOur findings suggest that the low SES group was the most vulnerable population to self-reported and tested COVID-19 status in the general population.

Download Full-text

Understanding the influence of socioeconomic status on the association between combinations of lifestyle factors and adverse health outcomes: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042212 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (5) ◽

pp. e042212

Author(s):

Hamish Foster ◽

Peter Polz ◽

Frances Mair ◽

Jason Gill ◽

Catherine A O'Donnell

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Socioeconomic Status ◽

Health Outcomes ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Lifestyle Factors ◽

Lifestyle Factor ◽

Unhealthy Lifestyle ◽

Adverse Health ◽

Adverse Health Outcomes ◽

The Impact

IntroductionCombinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors are strongly associated with mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer. It is unclear how socioeconomic status (SES) affects those associations. Lower SES groups may be disproportionately vulnerable to the effects of unhealthy lifestyle factors compared with higher SES groups via interactions with other factors associated with low SES (eg, stress) or via accelerated biological ageing. This systematic review aims to synthesise studies that examine how SES moderates the association between lifestyle factor combinations and adverse health outcomes. Greater understanding of how lifestyle risk varies across socioeconomic spectra could reduce adverse health by (1) identifying novel high-risk groups or targets for future interventions and (2) informing research, policy and interventions that aim to support healthy lifestyles in socioeconomically deprived communities.Methods and analysisThree databases will be searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL) from inception to March 2020. Reference lists, citations and grey literature will also be searched. Inclusion criteria are: (1) prospective cohort studies; (2) investigations of two key exposures: (a) lifestyle factor combinations of at least three lifestyle factors (eg, smoking, physical activity and diet) and (b) SES (eg, income, education or poverty index); (3) an assessment of the impact of SES on the association between combinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors and health outcomes; (4) at least one outcome from—mortality (all cause, CVD and cancer), CVD or cancer incidence. Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts and full texts of included studies. Data extraction will focus on cohort characteristics, exposures, direction and magnitude of SES effects, methods and quality (via Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). If appropriate, a meta-analysis, pooling the effects of SES, will be performed. Alternatively, a synthesis without meta-analysis will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication, professional networks, social media and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020172588.

Download Full-text