European General Practitioners perceptions on probiotics: Results of a multinational survey

Geest, A.M. van der; Flach, J.; Claassen, Eric; Sijlmans, A.W.; Burgwal, Linda van de; Larsen, Olaf F. A.

doi:10.1016/j.phanu.2020.100178

Cited by 12 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The intended health indications for which these products have previously been studied is also detailed in Table 1, accompanied by corresponding scientific publications, and include AAD, IBD, constipation and gastrointestinal complaints. Generally, HCPs are informed about probiotics through schooling sessions, scientific literature, information leaflets, colleague experiences or personal contact with producers ( Van der Geest et al, 2020). In this study, HCPs were informed about the products by the producer through means of information on the website of the producer, personal visits, conference meetings or telephone inquiries by the HCP.…”

Section: Probiotic Productsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…= not applicable. 3 Mean number of days with diarrhoea (defined as above) in week 2, in participants with diarrhoea in week 1. of probiotics to induce both general and specific health effects, as reported by Hill and colleagues (2014), might explain the wide variety of indications for which probiotics are used and why users and healthcare professionals are experiencing difficulties with choosing the right product for the right indication (Flach et al, 2017;Sanders et al, 2011;Van den Nieuwboer et al, 2016;Van der Geest et al, 2020). Additionally, restrictions on marketing health claims in absence of EFSA approval, make it challenging to communicate the intended health indications from producer to consumer.…”

Section: Week 1 N (%)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multispecies probiotics promote perceived human health and wellbeing: insights into the value of retrospective studies on user experiences

Geest

Vaart

Goede

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When taking a broader perspective on the societal impact of probiotics, engagement of end-users is important to discover unmet needs, define relevant health benefits and identify key considerations for successful implementation in daily practice. This study therefore takes a retrospective approach and analyses a database of user experiences to review the effects of four multispecies probiotic formulations. The user experiences were analysed in a dependent sample manner (without control group) and complement previous randomised controlled trials that have been performed with the formulations. The database consisted of 584 evaluable user experiences regarding the impact of probiotic supplementation on perceived quality of life (QoL), gastrointestinal (GIT) symptoms and reported stool consistency after two weeks of consumption. Two different scales were used (n=344 in a 5-point scale; n=240 in a 10-point scale), which are presented as separate analyses. In the combined population of the 5-point-scale questionnaire, a significant increase in perceived QoL and a significant reduction in perceived GIT symptoms was observed. Descriptive summaries also indicate that diarrhoea- and constipation-like stool patterns are reduced following supplementation. Moreover, half of participants indicated that probiotic supplementation had a positive effect on their unmet medical need, and 64% of users were likely to continue using the product. Similar results were observed in the 10-point scale questionnaire. Considering the clinical relevance of probiotic supplementation in specific target groups, subgroup analyses were performed on participants who consumed the products for diarrhoea, constipation, Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Irritable Bowel Syndrome, and antibiotic usage. Overall, findings support the potential of probiotics to advance perceived human health and support the daily wellbeing of users. This systematic analysis of user experiences thereby contributes to the external validity of studies evaluating clinical effects of probiotics and increases knowledge on their societal impact.

show abstract

Section: Probiotic Productsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Week 1 N (%)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multispecies probiotics promote perceived human health and wellbeing: insights into the value of retrospective studies on user experiences

Geest

Vaart

Goede

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, it can be concluded that the safe and effective use of probiotics, from pharmacological and toxicological aspects, seems to be undervalued. On the other hand, it can be often seen how many health professionals, including both, physicians and pharmacists, warmly recommend taking probiotics [26,27]. This is not surprising, considering how much they are advertised, especially to customers and patients, who often, as end-users, have difficulties distinguishing between high and poor-quality products.…”

Section: Probiotics Safetymentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety of Probiotics: Functional Fruit Beverages and Nutraceuticals

Žuntar

Petrić

Kovačević

2020

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last decade, fruit juice consumption has increased. Their rise in popularity can be attributed to the belief that they are a quick way to consuming a dietary portion of fruit. Probiotics added to fruit juices produce various bioactive compounds, thus probiotic fruit juices can be considered as a new type of functional foods. Such combinations could improve nutritional properties and provide health benefits of fruit juices, due to delivering positive health attributes from both sources (fruit juices and probiotics). However, this review discusses the other side of the same coin, i.e., the one that challenges general beliefs that probiotics are undoubtedly safe. This topic deserves more acknowledgments from the medical and nutritional literature, as it is highly important for health care professionals and nutritionists who must be aware of potential probiotic issues. Still, clinical trials have not adequately questioned the safety of probiotics, as they are generally considered safe. Therefore, this reviews aims to give an evidence-based perspective of probiotic safety, focusing on probiotic fruit beverages and nutraceuticals, by providing documented clinical case reports and studies. Finally, the paper deals with some additional insights from the pharmacological and toxicological point of views, such as pharmacological repercussions of probiotics on health.

show abstract

“…Addressing a wide variety of unmet health needs, probiotics are increasingly adopted by health professionals. 80% of the GPs in Western Europe recommend probiotics (Van der Geest et al, 2020). Several factors, such as the increasing fear of antibiotic resistance, the increasing demand of consumers for natural substitutes for drugs, and the emergence of scientific and clinical evidence showing the efficacy of probiotics, have contributed to many health professionals considering probiotics as an alternative to drug remedies (Reid et al, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing probiotic and drug interventions in irritable bowel syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Geest

Schukking

Brummer

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical decisions made by health professionals to recommend either drug or probiotic interventions for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) should be supported by proper knowledge of the efficacy rates of both types of interventions. In this article, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the efficacy of both probiotic- and drug interventions in IBS. Medline was searched between January 2015 – January 2021. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) recruiting participants > 18 years old with IBS and examining the effect of probiotics or drugs were eligible for inclusion. The data of the primary outcome, i.e. the persistence of IBS symptoms (dichotomous symptom data), were pooled to obtain a relative risk (RR), with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Secondary outcomes, abdominal pain- and bloating scores (continuous data), were pooled using a standardised mean difference with a 95% CI. The search identified 269 citations of which 32 RCTs were eligible. Our meta-analysis indicated that both probiotic and drug interventions are able to improve the persistence of IBS symptoms (RR 0.60 [0.51; 0.92] versus 0.87 [0.81; 0.92], respectively) and abdominal pain scores (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35 [-0.56; -0.14] versus -0.10 [-0.20; 0.00], respectively). However, determining the overall efficacy of both intervention types is inherently complex and such results should be interpreted with care, due to the large diversity of probiotic- and drug types and doses, which is also complicated by variety in IBS subtypes. Hence, as a first step, more large scale randomised double blind placebo-controlled trials focussing on a specific IBS subtype targeted with specific probiotic strains or specific pharmaceutical modalities should be executed, enabling a more proper comparison between trials.

show abstract

European General Practitioners perceptions on probiotics: Results of a multinational survey

Cited by 12 publications

References 22 publications

Multispecies probiotics promote perceived human health and wellbeing: insights into the value of retrospective studies on user experiences

Multispecies probiotics promote perceived human health and wellbeing: insights into the value of retrospective studies on user experiences

Safety of Probiotics: Functional Fruit Beverages and Nutraceuticals

Comparing probiotic and drug interventions in irritable bowel syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About