Observational study assesses effectiveness and tolerance of iron supplementation in adults aged 19-70, indicating positive outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: Iron deficiency is a common nutritional deficiency. Improved laboratory results, good tolerance, and improvement in deficiency symptoms are associated with patients' decisions to start or continue supplementation. The aim of the study was to assess the tolerance of iron preparation and the impact of supplementation on the laboratory test results and symptoms of iron deficiency in patients aged 19-70. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 119 patients with iron deficiency who started supplementation with micronized and emulsified ferric pyrophosphate. After signing informed consent, patients completed iron deficiency symptoms questionnaire. A follow-up visit was scheduled after 3 months (+/-14 days) of supplementation. During follow-up visit laboratory results were reviewed, patients completed the iron deficiency symptoms questionnaire and tolerance questionnaire. RESULTS: Of 63 women, an increased iron levels were observed in 39 patients (61.9%; p < 0.001), an increase in ferritin levels in 38 from among 66 patients (57.6%; p < 0.001). Decreased total score for iron deficiency symptoms was reported by 103 patients of 108 (95.4%). In this group, 41 (38%) reported discomfort during supplementation. Overall, 83.2% of participants rated the preparation as good or very good. At the follow-up visit regular medical history was collected from the patients, no hospitalizations nor deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Dietary supplementation with micronized and emulsified ferric pyrophosphate is effective in iron deficiency, in terms of improving laboratory test results and reducing the severity of deficiency symptoms. Good tolerance with few - and mainly low grade - side effects encourage patients to continue supplementation as recommended.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Świątkowska-Freund et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: