Comparing the Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices on Oral Fluids, Electrolytes, and Energy Management in Non-diarrheal Illnesses across Different Physician Specialties in India

Abstract

Background: The management of non-diarrheal illnesses requires careful attention to maintaining the proper balance of fluids, electrolytes, and energy (FEE). Nevertheless, there is a limited amount of information accessible regarding the utilization of oral FEE formulations in the treatment of these conditions. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess and contrast the levels of knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) among various medical specialties in India when it comes to addressing FEE imbalances in non-diarrheal illnesses through the use of oral FEE formulations, as well as to examine how these approaches influence perceived patient outcomes. We also present a subgroup analysis of KAP in healthcare personnels (HCPs) whose practices include 25% or more diabetic or geriatric patients. Materials and methods: A cross-sectional online assessment was created and conducted among physicians (n = 494) representing different medical specialties in India, which include general practitioners (GPs) (n = 128), MD physicians (n = 121), gynecologists (n = 122), and pediatricians (n = 123). Results: A total of 494 physicians across specialties, including GPs, MDs (MD internal medicine physicians), obstetrics and gynecologists (OB-GYN), and pediatricians, participated in the online assessment from September to October 2021. Knowledge scores were moderate across specialties, and there was no significant difference in knowledge level across specialties. More pediatricians and GPs than other HCPs consider FEE deficit to have a high impact on recovery. Further, pediatrician prescribers consider FEE management to be of high importance compared to other specialties. A significantly higher percentage of pediatricians assess all their patients (100%) for hydration levels, and significantly more gynecologists spend >5 minutes providing hydration advice to their patients. Among all specialties, MD and gynecologist prescribers are more likely to recommend oral FEE for patient recovery. HCPs with diabetes practices agree slightly more than HCPs with geriatric practices that oral FEE management recommendations facilitate the speed of the recovery process from non-diarrheal illnesses in their patients. However, only approximately 30% of them recommend FEE to 70% of their eligible patients, of which approximately 70% of these HCPs give formal (written/electronic) prescriptions of ready-to-drink (RTD) fluids to their patients. Conclusion: Enhancing the understanding of physicians across diverse specialties in India regarding oral FEE management and formulating recommendations for the utilization of oral FEE formulations in non-diarrheal conditions could lead to better outcomes. While knowledge and awareness of oral FEE management are similar across specialties, their practice behaviors vary. Additional research into this disparity and the assessment of the clinical advantages of oral FEE formulations in non-diarrheal illnesses among various specialties should be conducted. How to cite this article: Sathe P, Chakravarty P, Tesado C, et al. Comparing the Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices on Oral Fluids, Electrolytes, and Energy Management in Non-diarrheal Illnesses across Different Physician Specialties in India. J Assoc Physicians India 2023;71(10):19-30.