Guideline / position statementindependent cross-checkabstract only checked I-PPI-03 standard review

AGA advice on long-term PPIs

The Risks and Benefits of Long-term Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors: Expert Review and Best Practice Advice From the American Gastroenterological Association.

Overview

Freedberg DE et al.. Gastroenterology 2017 · PMID 28257716 · DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.01.031

PPIs are justified for defined indications; risks do not require routine monitoring.

Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Risk–benefit guidance.

How was the study done?

Expert review.

What was actually found?

10 best practice statements.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Use for real indications at lowest dose.

What are the study's limitations?

Expert opinion.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Mixed: supports indication-based use.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Applicable.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Freedberg DE et al.
Journal
Gastroenterology
Year
2017
Identifier
PMID 28257716 DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.01.031
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-25
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

not stated in abstract

2. Research question

Risks and benefits of long-term PPI use for GERD, Barrett's oesophagus and NSAID bleeding prophylaxis

3. Study design and population

Study design
Guideline / position statement – Expert review and best practice advice (AGA), modified GRADE
Population

Long-term PPI users

Country

USA

Period

literature to July 2016

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Long-term PPI

Endpoints

Best practice advice

Statistical methods

Expert opinion + literature

5. Actual results

Results

BPA: PPIs for complicated GERD; attempt stop/reduce in uncomplicated GERD; long-term PPI in symptomatic Barrett's and consider in asymptomatic; PPI for high-risk NSAID users; periodic dose review; no routine probiotics, extra Ca/B12/Mg, or routine monitoring of BMD, creatinine, Mg, B12.

Absolute risks

not applicable

Authors' conclusion

Benefits outweigh risks for appropriate indications; use lowest effective dose.

6. Strengths

  • Society guidance

7. Weaknesses

  • Expert opinion
  • Abstract only

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
none applicable
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
not assessable
Rationale

Expert review.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Context for C-PPI-01–05, -10, -11.

11. Independent contrary findings

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

High.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Balanced society view: risks small, indications matter.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biasnot assessable
Precision of resultsnot applicable
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilityunknown
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

15. Linked fact checks