↓ Skip to main content

The Safety of Appropriate Use of Over-the-Counter Proton Pump Inhibitors: An Evidence-Based Review and Delphi Consensus

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
Title
The Safety of Appropriate Use of Over-the-Counter Proton Pump Inhibitors: An Evidence-Based Review and Delphi Consensus
Published in
Drugs, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40265-017-0712-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

David A. Johnson, Philip O. Katz, David Armstrong, Henry Cohen, Brendan C. Delaney, Colin W. Howden, Peter Katelaris, Radu I. Tutuian, Donald O. Castell

Abstract

The availability of over-the-counter (OTC) proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the short-term (2 weeks) management of frequent heartburn (≥2 days/week) has increased markedly, yet evidence-based recommendations have not been developed. A panel of nine international experts in gastroesophageal reflux disease developed consensus statements regarding the risks and benefits of OTC PPIs using a modified Delphi process. Consensus (based on ≥80% approval) was reached through multiple rounds of remote voting and a final round of live voting. To identify relevant data, the available literature was searched and summarized. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system terminology was used to rate the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations; consensus was based on ≥2/3 agreement. After 4 rounds of review, consensus was achieved for 18 statements. Notably, the available data did not directly reflect OTC use, but instead, prescription use; therefore, extrapolations to the OTC setting were often necessary. This limitation is regrettable, but it justifies performing this exercise to provide evidence-based expert opinion on a widely used class of drugs. The panel determined that using OTC PPIs according to label instructions is unlikely to mask the symptoms of esophageal or gastric cancer or adversely impact the natural history of related precursor conditions. OTC PPIs are not expected to substantially affect micronutrient absorption or bone mineral density or cause community-acquired pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, or cardiovascular adverse events. However, OTC PPI use may be associated with slightly increased risks for infectious diarrhea, certain idiosyncratic reactions, and cirrhosis-related spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. The available evidence does not suggest that OTC PPI use consistent with label instructions is associated with substantial health risks. To minimize potential risks, healthcare professionals and consumers must actively participate in decision making when managing reflux-related symptoms in the self-care setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 111 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 20%
Researcher 19 17%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Other 11 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 6%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 23 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 28%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 19 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 26 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2022.
All research outputs
#1,515,973
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from Drugs
#128
of 3,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,676
of 311,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs
#8
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,912 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.