Nationwide survey reveals certified specialists prescribe more combination therapy in hypothyroid cases, highlighting educational needs.
Thyroid hormone (TH) prescribing practices, particularly on hypothyroid and euthyroid patients, were compared between Japan Thyroid Association (JTA)-certified thyroid specialists and non-certified members. A nationwide questionnaire survey (Treatment of Hypothyroidism in Europe by Specialists: An International Survey) was conducted among all 2,938 JTA members, including 874 certified specialists and 2,064 non-certified members, to assess self-reported TH prescription choices in various clinical scenarios. Responses from certified specialists and non-certified members were statistically compared. A total of 207 certified specialists (23.7%) and 129 non-certified members (6.3%) responded and completed the questionnaire. Although all certified specialists and non-certified members selected levothyroxine (LT4) as first-line therapy for hypothyroidism, certified specialists more often used liothyronine (LT3) plus LT4 combination therapy than non-certified members (28% vs. 12%, p < 0.001), particularly for LT4-treated patients with persistent hypothyroid-like symptoms (9% vs. 2%, p = 0.02). For euthyroid individuals, 71% of certified specialists and 60% of non-certified members considered TH treatment (p = 0.043). Non-certified members who see >100 hypothyroid patients per year were more inclined to use combination therapy for hypothyroid patients and TH for euthyroid patients than those of ≤100 patients (p < 0.049 and 0.001, respectively). In conclusion, JTA-certified thyroid specialists and non-certified members exhibit distinct TH prescribing patterns. Certified specialists are more open to combination therapy and treating selected euthyroid patients, whereas non-certified members favor guideline-based LT4 monotherapy. These differences underscore the impact of specialization on clinical practice and suggest a need for updated guidelines and targeted education to rationalize thyroid care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nagayama et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: