BACKGROUND: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD, formerly NAFLD), emerges as major cause of morbidity and mortality globally, with chronic patients facing increased risk. Guidelines on MASLD management in primary care (PC) are limited. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a clinical care pathway for use in PC to improve MASLD screening and management, including early detection, communication and treatment, in three European countries (Greece, Spain, the Netherlands). METHODS: An international multidisciplinary panel of experts oversaw pathway development, which was designed as a two-step algorithm with defined and sequenced tasks. To evaluate algorithm implementation, a controlled pilot study was conducted. Patients at risk of MASLD were assigned to general practitioners (GPs) trained in algorithm implementation (active group) or usual care (control group) and followed for 4-8 weeks. Primary outcomes were the number of patients screened for MASLD, managed in PC and referred to specialists. RESULTS: In this algorithm, patients with metabolic or liver dysfunction, confirmed MASLD or cardiovascular disease are screened with FIB-4 and classified as having risk of low-level (FIB-4 < 1.3), intermediate-level (1.3 = FIB-4 < 2.67) or high-level MASLD (FIB-4 = 2.67). The algorithm provides evidence-based tools to support GPs manage patients with risk of low-level MASLD in PC, coordinate linkage of patients with risk of high-level MASLD to specialists and refer patients with risk of intermediate-level MASLD for elastography (low-risk if <7.9 kPa or intermediate/high-risk if =7.9 kPa). During pilot evaluation, N = 37 participants were recruited in Spain (54.1% women, median age: 63 years). Significantly higher rates of patients in the active group (n = 17) than the control group (n = 20) were screened with FIB-4 (94.1% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.004). Patients in the active group received significantly more frequently a PC intervention for weight loss (70.6% vs. 10.0%, p < 0.001), alcohol regulation (52.9% vs. 0%, p < 0.001) and smoking cessation (29.4% vs. 0%, p = 0.005). In Greece no algorithm implementation was observed in either the active or control group, while the evaluation was not conducted in the Netherlands for logistic reasons. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence on the development and implementation of a new PC algorithm for MASLD screening and management. Variations among participating settings in algorithm implementation are indicative of context-specific particularities. Further research is necessary for integrating such pathways in tailored interventions to tackle this emerging public health issue.

BACKGROUND: The knowledge and proficiency of primary care practitioners (PCPs) in diagnosing and managing irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) remain generally low and variable internationally. This variability is partly due to a lack of familiarity with the Rome Foundation diagnostic criteria and treatment guidelines for this condition. METHODS: We conducted an electronic survey of PCPs in the United States and nine European countries to assess their understanding of IBS pathophysiology; the use of Rome IV criteria in diagnosis, knowledge of and frequency in prescribing various recommended treatments; and the likelihood of referring patients with suspected IBS to subspecialists. RESULTS: Most PCPs in the United States and Europe perceive IBS as a diagnosis of exclusion rather than a definitive diagnosis. They also believe IBS is underdiagnosed in primary care and challenging to diagnose confidently. The majority of PCPs consider diet as a crucial component of IBS management. Notably, US PCPs reported greater confidence than their European counterparts in recommending dietary interventions such as increased dietary fiber, a low FODMAP diet, and gluten restriction. Conversely, both groups exhibited moderate to high confidence in recommending over-the-counter treatments. European PCPs showed greater confidence in treating IBS with antispasmodics and secretagogues, while US PCPs expressed greater confidence in prescribing neuromodulators. Additionally, US PCPs were more likely to refer patients with suspected IBS to a gastroenterologist, whereas both US and European PCPs showed similar referral patterns to dietitians and referred very few patients to mental health providers. Both US and European PCPs reported that IBS is moderately to extremely difficult to treat effectively and emphasized the importance of a strong and longitudinal doctor-patient relationship in managing the condition. CONCLUSION: Despite the Rome Foundation recommendations and criteria to support a positive diagnosis of IBS, most PCPs still rely on exclusionary investigations such as endoscopy and a serologic workup, while a significant percentage suggest referring patients to gastroenterologists.

AIM: To evaluate the longitudinal association of sedentary behavior, light and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) participation with depressive symptoms and whether their possible association changed depending on the pandemic phase. METHODS: This longitudinal study conducted secondary analysis from the Spanish cohort of the Remote Assessment of Disease and Relapse – Major Depressive Disorder (RADAR-MDD) study. Depressive symptoms were assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8). Sedentary behavior and physical activity were estimated via wrist-worn devices. Linear mixed models evaluated the longitudinal associations of sedentary behavior and physical activity (light and moderate-to-vigorous intensities) with depressive symptoms. RESULTS: In total, 95 participants (67.5% women, 53.0 [±10.5] years of age on average) were monitored pre-COVID-19 and included in the analyses. Pre-COVID-19, 73.7% of participants presented depression, and, on average, participated in 13.2 (±1.08) hours/day of sedentary behavior, 2.42 (±0.90) hours/day of light physical activity and 23.6 (±19.80) minutes/day of MVPA. Considering all the observations (from November 2019 to October 2020), an additional hour/day of sedentary behavior was longitudinally associated with higher depressive symptoms [ßstd = 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.47], whereas an additional hour/day in light physical activity was associated with lower depressive symptoms (ßstd = -0.06, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.15). Time in MVPA was not associated with depressive symptomatology. The association of sedentary behavior and light physical activity with depressive symptoms was significant only during pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 relaxation periods, whereas during the strictest periods of the pandemic with regards to the restrictions (lockdown and de-escalation), the association was not observed. CONCLUSION: Sedentary behavior and light physical activity were longitudinally associated with depressive symptoms in participants with a history of MDD. The incorporation of light physical activity should be stimulated in adults with a history of MDD. Neither sedentary behavior nor light physical activity were associated with depressive symptoms during the most restrictive COVID-19 phases, whereas sedentary behavior (positively) and light physical activity (negatively) were associated with depressive symptoms in persons with MDD before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Social prescribing has become a global phenomenon. A Delphi study was recently conducted with 48 social prescribing experts from 26 countries to establish global agreement on the definition of social prescribing. We reflect on the use and utility of the outputs of this work, and where we go from here.

Background: Despite its high prevalence and impact on health, metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is inadequately addressed in European primary care (PC), with a large proportion of cases going undiagnosed or diagnosed too late. A multi-country European research consortium led a project to design and evaluate a patient-centered, integrated model for MASLD screening, diagnosis, and linkage to specialty care for European PC settings. Based on the lessons from this project, the latest research evidence, and existing guidelines for the management of MASLD, we sought to develop a set of practice recommendations for screening, referral, and management of MASLD in PC. Methods: The Rand/UCLA modified Delphi panel method, with two rounds, was used to reach consensus on practice recommendations. The international panel consisted of experts from six countries, representing family medicine, gastroenterology, hepatology, cardiology, and public health. Initially, fifteen statements were drafted based on a synthesis of evidence from the literature and earlier findings from our consortium. Prior to the consensus meeting, the statements were rated by the experts in the first round. Then, in a hybrid meeting, the experts discussed findings from round one, adjusted the statements, and reassessed the updated recommendations in a second round. Results: In round one, there was already a high level of consensus on 10 out of 15 statements. After round 2, there were fourteen statements with a high degree of agreement (>90%). One statement was not endorsed. The approved recommendations addressed the following practice areas: risk screening and diagnosis, management of MASLD-lifestyle interventions, pharmacological treatment of MASLD/MASH, pharmacological treatment for co-morbidity, integrated care, surgical management, and other referrals to specialists. Conclusions: The final set of 14 recommendations focuses on increasing comprehensive care for MASLD in PC. The recommendations provide practical evidence-based guidance tailored to PC practitioners. We expect that these recommendations will contribute to the ongoing discussion on systematic approaches to tackling MASLD and supporting European PC providers by integrating the latest evidence into practice.