1
|
Wald NJ, Hingorani AD, Vale SH, Bestwick JP, Morris J. Comparing screening based on the NHS Health Check and Polypill Prevention Programmes in the primary prevention of heart attacks and strokes. J Med Screen 2024; 31:59-65. [PMID: 38486473 PMCID: PMC11083722 DOI: 10.1177/09691413241235488] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2023] [Accepted: 02/07/2024] [Indexed: 05/12/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare the NHS Health Check Programme with the Polypill Prevention Programme in the primary prevention of heart attacks and strokes. DESIGN Use of published data and methodology to produce flow charts of the two programmes to determine screening performance and heart attacks and strokes prevented. SETTING The UK population. INTERVENTION The NHS Health Check Programme using a QRISK score on people aged 40-74 to select those eligible for a statin is compared with the Polypill Prevention Programme in people aged 50 or more to select people for a combination of a statin and three low-dose blood pressure lowering agents. In both programmes, people had no history of heart attack or stroke. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES In 1000 people, the number of heart attacks and strokes prevented in the two programmes. RESULTS In the hypothetical perfect situation with 100% uptake and adherence to the screening protocol, in every 1000 persons, the NHS Health Check would prevent 287 cases of a heart attack or stroke in individuals who would gain on average about 4 years of life without a heart attack or stroke amounting to 1148 years in total, the precise gain depending on the extent of treatment for those with raised blood pressure, and 136 would be prescribed statins with no benefit. The corresponding figures for the Polypill Prevention Programme are 316 individuals who would, on average, gain 8 years of life without a heart attack or stroke, amounting to 2528 years in total, and 260 prescribed the polypill with no benefit. Based on published estimates of uptake and adherence in the NHS Health Check Programme, in practice only 24 cases per 1000 are currently benefitting instead of 287, amounting to 96 years gained without a heart attack or stroke. CONCLUSIONS The Polypill Prevention Programme is by design simpler with the potential of preventing many more heart attacks and strokes than the NHS Health Check Programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicholas J Wald
- Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK
- Population Health Research Institute, St Georges University of London, London, UK
| | - Aroon D Hingorani
- Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK
- Institute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Jonathan P Bestwick
- Centre for Preventive Neurology, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Joan Morris
- Population Health Research Institute, St Georges University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Duddy C, Gadsby E, Hibberd V, Krska J, Wong G. What happens after an NHS Health Check? A survey and realist review. HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE DELIVERY RESEARCH 2023; 11:1-133. [PMID: 37830173 DOI: 10.3310/rgth4127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/14/2023]
Abstract
Background The National Health Service Health Check in England aims to provide adults aged 40 to 74 with an assessment of their risk of developing cardiovascular disease and to offer advice to help manage and reduce this risk. The programme is commissioned by local authorities and delivered by a range of providers in different settings, although primarily in general practices. This project focused on variation in the advice, onward referrals and prescriptions offered to attendees following their health check. Objectives (1) Map recent programme delivery across England via a survey of local authorities; (2) conduct a realist review to enable understanding of how the National Health Service Health Check programme works in different settings, for different groups; (3) provide recommendations to improve delivery. Design Survey of local authorities and realist review of the literature. Review methods Realist review is a theory-driven, interpretive approach to evidence synthesis that seeks to explain why, when and for whom outcomes occur. We gathered published research and grey literature (including local evaluation documents and conference materials) via searching and supplementary methods. Extracted data were synthesised using a realist logic of analysis to develop an understanding of important contexts that affect the delivery of National Health Service Health Checks, and underlying mechanisms that produce outcomes related to our project focus. Results Our findings highlight the variation in National Health Service Health Check delivery models across England. Commissioners, providers and attendees understand the programme's purpose in different ways. When understood primarily as an opportunity to screen for disease, responsibility for delivery and outcomes rests with primary care, and there is an emphasis on volume of checks delivered, gathering essential data and communicating risk. When understood as an opportunity to prompt and support behaviour change, more emphasis is placed on delivery of advice and referrals to 'lifestyle services'. Practical constraints limit what can be delivered within the programme's remit. Public health funding restricts delivery options and links with onward services, while providers may struggle to deliver effective checks when faced with competing priorities. Attendees' responses to the programme are affected by features of delivery models and the constraints they face within their own lives. Limitations Survey response rate lower than anticipated; review findings limited by the availability and quality of the literature. Conclusions and implications The purpose and remit of the National Health Service Health Check programme should be clarified, considering prevailing attitudes about its value (especially among providers) and what can be delivered within existing resources. Some variation in delivery is likely to be appropriate to meet local population needs, but lack of clarity for the programme contributes to a 'postcode lottery' effect in the support offered to attendees after a check. Our findings raise important questions about whether the programme itself and services that it may feed into are adequately resourced to achieve positive outcomes for attendees, and whether current delivery models may produce inequitable outcomes. Future work Policy-makers and commissioners should consider the implications of the findings of this project; future research should address the relative scarcity of studies focused on the end of the National Health Service Health Check pathway. Study registration PROSPERO registration CRD42020163822. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme (NIHR129209).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Duddy
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Erica Gadsby
- Centre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK
| | - Vivienne Hibberd
- Public Involvement in Pharmacy Studies Group, Medway School of Pharmacy, Universities of Greenwich and Kent, Chatham Maritime, UK
| | - Janet Krska
- Medway School of Pharmacy, Universities of Greenwich and Kent, Chatham Maritime, UK
| | - Geoff Wong
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ogunlayi F, Chauhan-Lall N, Hughes D, Myers P, Sitch A. A cross-sectional study examining the equitability of invitation, uptake and coverage for NHS Health Check. J Public Health (Oxf) 2022:6618070. [PMID: 35754318 DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdac064] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2021] [Revised: 05/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The evidence for access to NHS Health Check (NHSHC) varies considerably across the country. This study examined the equity in invitation, uptake and coverage of NHSHC and impact of different invitation methods. METHODS This patient-level cross-sectional study from 52 general practices in Walsall used adjusted logistic regressions to examine the association between patient characteristics (age, sex, ethnicity and deprivation) and NHSHC access. RESULTS Over the 5-year study period, 61 464 people were eligible for NHSHC, 66% were invited, uptake was 74% and coverage was 55%. Males had lower odds of: invitation (AOR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.75-0.81), uptake (0.73, 95% CI: 0.70-0.77) and coverage (0.69, 95% CI: 0.66-0.71). Compared with White, the 'Other' ethnicity group (mixed backgrounds, other Asians that are not South Asians and other ethnic groups) had lower odds of: invitation (0.74, 95% CI: 0.67-0.81), uptake (0.86, 95% CI: 0.75-0.98) and coverage (0.74, 95% CI: 0.68-0.81). The most deprived areas had lower odds of invitation, uptake and coverage. Opportunistic invitation had a 25-fold increase in odds of uptake. CONCLUSIONS The study has highlighted areas of inequities in access to NHSHC. The group most negatively affected were men, people from particular minority ethnic groups and people from deprived communities. Further actions are needed to reduce these inequities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fatai Ogunlayi
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick Coventry, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK
| | | | - David Hughes
- Public Health, Walsall Council, Walsall, WS1 1TP, UK
| | | | - Alice Sitch
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.,NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
O'Flaherty M, Lloyd-Williams F, Capewell S, Boland A, Maden M, Collins B, Bandosz P, Hyseni L, Kypridemos C. Modelling tool to support decision-making in the NHS Health Check programme: workshops, systematic review and co-production with users. Health Technol Assess 2021; 25:1-234. [PMID: 34076574 PMCID: PMC8201571 DOI: 10.3310/hta25350] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Local authorities in England commission the NHS Health Check programme to invite everyone aged 40-74 years without pre-existing conditions for risk assessment and eventual intervention, if needed. However, the programme's effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and equity impact remain uncertain. AIM To develop a validated open-access flexible web-based model that enables local commissioners to quantify the cost-effectiveness and potential for equitable population health gain of the NHS Health Check programme. OBJECTIVES The objectives were as follows: (1) co-produce with stakeholders the desirable features of the user-friendly model; (2) update the evidence base to support model and scenario development; (3) further develop our computational model to allow for developments and changes to the NHS Health Check programme and the diseases it addresses; (4) assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and equity of alternative strategies for implementation to illustrate the use of the tool; and (5) propose a sustainability and implementation plan to deploy our user-friendly computational model at the local level. DESIGN Co-production workshops surveying the best-performing local authorities and a systematic literature review of strategies to increase uptake of screening programmes informed model use and development. We then co-produced the workHORSE (working Health Outcomes Research Simulation Environment) model to estimate the health, economic and equity impact of different NHS Health Check programme implementations, using illustrative-use cases. SETTING Local authorities in England. PARTICIPANTS Stakeholders from local authorities, Public Health England, the NHS, the British Heart Foundation, academia and other organisations participated in the workshops. For the local authorities survey, we invited 16 of the best-performing local authorities in England. INTERVENTIONS The user interface allows users to vary key parameters that represent programme activities (i.e. invitation, uptake, prescriptions and referrals). Scenarios can be compared with each other. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Disease cases and case-years prevented or postponed, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, net monetary benefit and change in slope index of inequality. RESULTS The survey of best-performing local authorities revealed a diversity of effective approaches to maximise the coverage and uptake of NHS Health Check programme, with no distinct 'best buy'. The umbrella literature review identified a range of effective single interventions. However, these generally need to be combined to maximally improve uptake and health gains. A validated dynamic, stochastic microsimulation model, built on robust epidemiology, enabled service options analysis. Analyses of three contrasting illustrative cases estimated the health, economic and equity impact of optimising the Health Checks, and the added value of obtaining detailed local data. Optimising the programme in Liverpool can become cost-effective and equitable, but simply changing the invitation method will require other programme changes to improve its performance. Detailed data inputs can benefit local analysis. LIMITATIONS Although the approach is extremely flexible, it is complex and requires substantial amounts of data, alongside expertise to both maintain and run. CONCLUSIONS Our project showed that the workHORSE model could be used to estimate the health, economic and equity impact comprehensively at local authority level. It has the potential for further development as a commissioning tool and to stimulate broader discussions on the role of these tools in real-world decision-making. FUTURE WORK Future work should focus on improving user interactions with the model, modelling simulation standards, and adapting workHORSE for evaluation, design and implementation support. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019132087. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 35. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martin O'Flaherty
- Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | | | - Simon Capewell
- Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Angela Boland
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Michelle Maden
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Brendan Collins
- Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Piotr Bandosz
- Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Lirije Hyseni
- Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Chris Kypridemos
- Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Peletidi A, Nabhani-Gebara S, Kayyali R. The Role of Pharmacists in Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: Qualitative Studies from the United Kingdom and Greece. J Res Pharm Pract 2019; 8:112-122. [PMID: 31728341 PMCID: PMC6830014 DOI: 10.4103/jrpp.jrpp_19_3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2019] [Accepted: 05/14/2019] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: In the United Kingdom (UK), cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the second main cause of death (27.4%) and the leading cause of death in Greece, accounting for 48% incidences. Pharmacists, the most accessible health-care professionals, can have a key role in all stages of CVD prevention. This study aimed to explore the current and future role of pharmacists in CVD prevention, focusing on two European countries, the United Kingdom and Greece. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 40 community pharmacists; 20 in the UK and 20 in Greece. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically. Findings: Five main themes were identified: current pharmacists' role, future pharmacists' role, communication, resources and tools, and knowledge. Whereas pharmacists in the UK use a patient-centered approach, Greek pharmacists use a paternalistic approach. Nevertheless, the majority found it difficult to initiate a consultation. Both the UK and Greek pharmacists primarily focus on secondary CVD prevention, while dispensing prescribed medications, which is their main current role. Greek pharmacists recognized a potential role in primary prevention and early screening of CVD through the initiation of CVD prevention services with a weight management program being proposed. Barriers identified for a role in CVD prevention included: high workload in Greece and reimbursement issues and interprofessional relations in the UK. Conclusion: Pharmacists in both countries perceive having a potential role in CVD prevention based on their accessibility and customer relations. The challenges include a closer working relationship with other clinicians, communication/consultation skills training, and developing a sustainable funding model for the service.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aliki Peletidi
- Department of Life and Health Sciences, Pharmacy Programme, School of Science and Engineering, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus
| | - Shereen Nabhani-Gebara
- Department of Pharmacy, School of Life Sciences, Pharmacy and Chemistry, Kingston University, London, United Kingdom
| | - Reem Kayyali
- Department of Pharmacy, School of Life Sciences, Pharmacy and Chemistry, Kingston University, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kennedy O, Su F, Pears R, Walmsley E, Roderick P. Evaluating the effectiveness of the NHS Health Check programme in South England: a quasi-randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e029420. [PMID: 31542745 PMCID: PMC6756325 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029420] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2019] [Revised: 08/12/2019] [Accepted: 08/14/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate uptake, risk factor detection and management from the National Health Service (NHS) Health Check (HC). DESIGN This is a quasi-randomised controlled trial where participants were allocated to five cohorts based on birth year. Four cohorts were invited for an NHS HC between April 2011 and March 2015. SETTING 151 general practices in Hampshire, England, UK. PARTICIPANTS 366 005 participants born 1 April 1940-31 March 1976 eligible for an NHS HC. INTERVENTION NHS HC invitation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES HC attendance and absolute percentage changes and ORs of (1) detecting cardiovascular disease (CVD) 10-year risk >10% and >20%, smokers, and total cholesterol (TC) >5.5 mmol/L and >7.5 mmol/L; (2) diagnosing hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease (CKD) and atrial fibrillation (AF); and (3) new interventions with statins, antihypertensives, antiglycaemics and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). RESULTS HC attendance rose from 12% to 30% between 2011/2012 and 2014/2015 (p<0.001). HC invitation increased detection of CVD risk >10% (2.0%-3.6, p<0.001) and >20% (0.1%-0.6%, p<0.001-0.392), TC >5.5 mmol/L (4.1%-7.0%, p<0.001) and >7.5 mmol/L (0.3%-0.4% p<0.001), hypertension (0.3%-0.6%, p<0.001-0.003), and interventions with statins (0.2%-0.9%, p<0.001-0.017) and antihypertensives (0.1%-0.6%, p<0.001-0.205). There were no consistent differences in detection of smokers, NRT, or diabetes, AF or CKD. Multivariate analyses showed associations between HC invitation and detecting CVD risk >10% (OR 8.01, 95% CI 7.34 to 8.73) and >20% (5.86, 4.83 to 7.10), TC >5.5 mmol/L (3.72, 3.57 to 3.89) and >7.5 mmol/L (2.89, 2.46 to 3.38), and diagnoses of hypertension (1.33, 1.20 to 1.47) and diabetes (1.34, 1.12 to 1.61). OR of CVD risk >10% plus statin and >20% plus statin, respectively, was 2.90 (2.36 to 3.57) and 2.60 (1.92 to 3.52), and for hypertension plus antihypertensive was 1.33 (1.18 to 1.50). There were no associations with AF, CKD, antiglycaemics or NRT. Detection of several risk factors varied inversely by deprivation. CONCLUSIONS HC invitation increased detection of cardiovascular risk factors, but corresponding increases in evidence-based interventions were modest.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oliver Kennedy
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Fangzhong Su
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Robert Pears
- Public Health Directorate, Hampshire County Council, Hampshire, UK
| | - Emily Walmsley
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Paul Roderick
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Hawking MKD, Timmis A, Wilkins F, Potter JL, Robson J. Improving cardiovascular disease risk communication in NHS Health Checks: a qualitative study. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e026058. [PMID: 31481364 PMCID: PMC6731822 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The NHS Health Check programme is a public screening and prevention initiative in England to detect early signs of cardiovascular ill health among healthy adults. We aimed to explore patient perspectives and experiences of a personalised Risk Report designed to improve cardiovascular risk communication in the NHS Health Check. DESIGN AND SETTING This is a qualitative study with NHS Health Check attendees in three general practices in the London Borough of Newham. INTERVENTION AND PARTICIPANTS A personalised Risk Report for the NHS Health Check was developed to improve communication of results and advice. The Risk Report was embedded in the electronic health record, printed with auto-filled results and used as a discussion aid during the NHS Health Check, and was a take-home record of information and advice on risk reduction for the attendees. 18 purposively sampled socially diverse participants took part in semistructured interviews, which were analysed thematically. RESULTS For most participants, the NHS Health Check was an opportunity for reassurance and assessment, and the Risk Report was an enduring record that supported risk understanding, with impact beyond the individual. For a minority, ambivalence towards the Risk Report occurred in the context of attending for other reasons, and risk and lifestyle advice were not internalised or acted on. CONCLUSION Our findings demonstrate the potential of a personalised Risk Report as a useful intervention in NHS Health Checks for enhancing patient understanding of cardiovascular risk and strategies for risk reduction. Also highlighted are the challenges that must be overcome to ensure transferability of these benefits to diverse patient groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT02486913.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Meredith K D Hawking
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Adam Timmis
- NIHR Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Unit, Barts Heart Centre, London, UK
| | - Fae Wilkins
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Jessica L Potter
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - John Robson
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Jumbe S, James WY, Madurasinghe V, Steed L, Sohanpal R, Yau TK, Taylor S, Eldridge S, Griffiths C, Walton R. Evaluating NHS Stop Smoking Service engagement in community pharmacies using simulated smokers: fidelity assessment of a theory-based intervention. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e026841. [PMID: 31110097 PMCID: PMC6530322 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026841] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2018] [Revised: 02/18/2019] [Accepted: 02/21/2019] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Smokers are more likely to quit if they use the National Health Service (NHS) Stop Smoking Service (SSS). However, community pharmacies experience low service uptake. The Smoking Treatment Optimisation in Pharmacies (STOP) programme aims to address this problem by enhancing staff training using a theory-based intervention. In this study, we evaluated intervention fidelity using simulated smokers (actors) to assess smoker engagement and enactment of key intervention components by STOP trained staff. DESIGN An observational pilot study. SETTINGS Five community pharmacies in North East London with an NHS SSS. METHODS Six actors, representative of East London's population, were recruited and trained to complete intervention fidelity assessments. Consenting pharmacy staff from five participating pharmacies received STOP Intervention training. Four weeks after the staff training, the actors visited the participating pharmacies posing as smokers eligible for smoking cessation support. Engagement behaviour by pharmacy staff and enactment of intervention components was assessed using a scoring tool derived from the STOP logic model (scoring range of 0-36), and contemporaneous field notes taken by actors. RESULTS 18 of 30 completed assessments were with STOP trained staff (10/18 were counter assistants). Mean score for smoker engagement was 24.4 (SD 9.0) points for trained and 16.9 (SD 7.8) for untrained staff, respectively. NHS SSS leaflets (27/30) were the most common smoking cessation materials seen on pharmacy visits. Most trained counter staff engaged with smokers using leaflets and a few proactively offered appointments with their cessation advisors. Appropriate use of body language was reported on 26/30 occasions alongside the use of key phrases from the STOP training session (n=8). Very few pharmacy staff wore STOP promotional badges (4/30). CONCLUSIONS STOP training may change client engagement behaviour in pharmacy staff and could improve the uptake of the NHS SSS. A cluster randomised controlled trial is currently in progress to evaluate its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN16351033.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Jumbe
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK
- Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Wai Y James
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK
| | | | - Liz Steed
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK
| | - Ratna Sohanpal
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Tammy K Yau
- Department of Medicine, California Northstate University, Elk Grove, California, USA
| | - Stephanie Taylor
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Sandra Eldridge
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Chris Griffiths
- Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK
| | - Robert Walton
- Centre for Health Sciences, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Chattopadhyay K, Biswas M, Moore R. NHS Health Check and healthy lifestyle in Leicester, England: analysis of a survey dataset. Perspect Public Health 2019; 140:27-37. [PMID: 31070547 DOI: 10.1177/1757913919834584] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
AIMS A major component of the National Health Service (NHS) Health Check in England is to provide lifestyle advice to eligible participants. The aims of the study were to explore the variations (in terms of uptake) in the NHS Health Check in Leicester and to determine its association with a healthy lifestyle. METHODS This cross-sectional study used data from the Leicester Health and Wellbeing Survey (2015). RESULTS The odds of having an NHS Health Check were found to be higher in Black and minority ethnic groups and in people of other religions. The odds were lower in people without a religion, residing in the fourth index of multiple deprivation quintile and in ex-smokers. No associations were found between having an NHS Health Check and describing a healthy lifestyle, following a healthy lifestyle, thinking of making lifestyle changes in the next 6 months, cutting down on/stopping smoking among current smokers, or amount of alcohol current drinkers would like to drink. CONCLUSIONS In Leicester, a few variations in having an NHS Health Check were found among different socio-economic, demographic and behavioural groups. No association was found between the NHS Health Check and a healthy lifestyle. Thus, the improvement work should focus on reducing these variations in having the NHS Health Check and bringing its benefits on promoting a healthy lifestyle.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Chattopadhyay
- Assistant Professor in Evidence Based Healthcare, Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Clinical Sciences Building, Nottingham City Hospital, Nottingham, UK
| | - M Biswas
- Research Fellow in Health Economics, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK
| | - R Moore
- Consultant in Public Health, Leicester City Council, Leicester, UK; Honorary Senior Lecturer, Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Martin A, Saunders CL, Harte E, Griffin SJ, MacLure C, Mant J, Meads C, Walter FM, Usher-Smith JA. Delivery and impact of the NHS Health Check in the first 8 years: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract 2018; 68:e449-e459. [PMID: 29914882 PMCID: PMC6014431 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp18x697649] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2017] [Accepted: 02/14/2018] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Since 2009, all eligible persons in England have been entitled to an NHS Health Check. Uncertainty remains about who attends, and the health-related impacts. AIM To review quantitative evidence on coverage (the proportion of eligible individuals who attend), uptake (proportion of invitees who attend), and impact of NHS Health Checks. DESIGN AND SETTING A systematic review and quantitative data synthesis. Included were studies or data reporting coverage or uptake and studies reporting any health-related impact that used an appropriate comparison group or before- and-after study design. METHOD Eleven databases and additional internet sources were searched to November 2016. RESULTS Twenty-six observational studies and one additional dataset were included. Since 2013, 45.6% of eligible individuals have received a health check. Coverage is higher among older people, those with a family history of coronary heart disease, those living in the most deprived areas, and some ethnic minority groups. Just under half (48.2%) of those invited have taken up the invitation. Data on uptake and impact (especially regarding health-related behaviours) are limited. Uptake is higher in older people and females, but lower in those living in the most deprived areas. Attendance is associated with small increases in disease detection, decreases in modelled cardiovascular disease risk, and increased statin and antihypertensive prescribing. CONCLUSION Published attendance, uptake, and prescribing rates are all lower than originally anticipated, and data on impact are limited, with very few studies reporting the effect of attendance on health-related behaviours. High-quality studies comparing matched attendees and non-attendees and health economic analyses are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam Martin
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, and RAND Europe, Cambridge
| | - Catherine L Saunders
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, and RAND Europe, Cambridge
| | | | - Simon J Griffin
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, and Medical Research Council (MRC) Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge
| | | | - Jonathan Mant
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge
| | - Catherine Meads
- RAND Europe, and Faculty of Health, Social Care and Education, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge
| | - Fiona M Walter
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge
| | - Juliet A Usher-Smith
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
NHS health checks: a cross- sectional observational study on equity of uptake and outcomes. BMC Health Serv Res 2018; 18:238. [PMID: 29615026 PMCID: PMC5883605 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3027-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2017] [Accepted: 03/16/2018] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The National Health Checks programme aims to reduce the incidence of cardiovascular diseases and health inequalities in England. We assessed equity of uptake and outcomes from NHS Health Checks in general practices in Bristol, UK. METHODS A cross-sectional study using patient-level data, from 38 general practices. We descriptively analysed the socioeconomic status (SES) of patients invited and the SES and ethnicity of those attending. Logistic regression was used to test associations between invitation and attendance, with population characteristics. RESULTS Between June 2010 to October 2014, 31,881 patients were invited, and 13,733 NHS Health Checks completed. 47% of patients invited from the three least and 39% from the two most-deprived index of multiple deprivation quintiles, completed a Check. Proportions of invited patients, by ethnicity were 64% non-black and Asian and 31% black and Asian. Men were less likely to attend than women (OR 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.80), as were patients ≤ 49 compared to ≥ 70 years (OR 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.83). After controlling for SES and population characteristics, compared to patients with low CVD risk, high risk patients were more likely to be prescribed cardiovascular drugs (OR 6.2, 95% confidence interval 4.51 to 8.40). Compared to men, women (OR 01.18, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.35) were more likely to be prescribed cardiovascular drugs, as were those ≤ 49 years (50-59 years, OR 1.42, 95% confidence intervals 1.13-1.79, 60-69 years, OR 1.60, 95% confidence intervals, 1.22-2.10, ≥ 70 years, OR 1.64, 95% confidence intervals, 1.14 to 2.35). Controlling for population characteristics, the following groups were most likely to be referred to lifestyle services: younger women (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.69 to 2.94), those in the most deprived IMD quintile (OR 3.22, 95% CI 1.63 to 6.36) and those at highest risk of CVD (OR, 2.77, 95% CI 1.91 to 4.02). CONCLUSIONS We found no statistically significant evidence of inequity in attendance for an NHS Health Check by SES. Being older or a woman were associated with better attendance. Targeting men, younger patients and ethnic minority groups may improve equity in uptake for NHS Health Checks.
Collapse
|
12
|
The current and potential health benefits of the National Health Service Health Check cardiovascular disease prevention programme in England: A microsimulation study. PLoS Med 2018; 15:e1002517. [PMID: 29509767 PMCID: PMC5839536 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002517] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2017] [Accepted: 01/25/2018] [Indexed: 01/20/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The National Health Service (NHS) Health Check programme was introduced in 2009 in England to systematically assess all adults in midlife for cardiovascular disease risk factors. However, its current benefit and impact on health inequalities are unknown. It is also unclear whether feasible changes in how it is delivered could result in increased benefits. It is one of the first such programmes in the world. We sought to estimate the health benefits and effect on inequalities of the current NHS Health Check programme and the impact of making feasible changes to its implementation. METHODS AND FINDINGS We developed a microsimulation model to estimate the health benefits (incident ischaemic heart disease, stroke, dementia, and lung cancer) of the NHS Health Check programme in England. We simulated a population of adults in England aged 40-45 years and followed until age 100 years, using data from the Health Survey of England (2009-2012) and the English Longitudinal Study of Aging (1998-2012), to simulate changes in risk factors for simulated individuals over time. We used recent programme data to describe uptake of NHS Health Checks and of 4 associated interventions (statin medication, antihypertensive medication, smoking cessation, and weight management). Estimates of treatment efficacy and adherence were based on trial data. We estimated the benefits of the current NHS Health Check programme compared to a healthcare system without systematic health checks. This counterfactual scenario models the detection and treatment of risk factors that occur within 'routine' primary care. We also explored the impact of making feasible changes to implementation of the programme concerning eligibility, uptake of NHS Health Checks, and uptake of treatments offered through the programme. We estimate that the NHS Health Check programme prevents 390 (95% credible interval 290 to 500) premature deaths before 80 years of age and results in an additional 1,370 (95% credible interval 1,100 to 1,690) people being free of disease (ischaemic heart disease, stroke, dementia, and lung cancer) at age 80 years per million people aged 40-45 years at baseline. Over the life of the cohort (i.e., followed from 40-45 years to 100 years), the changes result in an additional 10,000 (95% credible interval 8,200 to 13,000) quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and an additional 9,000 (6,900 to 11,300) years of life. This equates to approximately 300 fewer premature deaths and 1,000 more people living free of these diseases each year in England. We estimate that the current programme is increasing QALYs by 3.8 days (95% credible interval 3.0-4.7) per head of population and increasing survival by 3.3 days (2.5-4.1) per head of population over the 60 years of follow-up. The current programme has a greater absolute impact on health for those living in the most deprived areas compared to those living in the least deprived areas (4.4 [2.7-6.5] days of additional quality-adjusted life per head of population versus 2.8 [1.7-4.0] days; 5.1 [3.4-7.1] additional days lived per head of population versus 3.3 [2.1-4.5] days). Making feasible changes to the delivery of the existing programme could result in a sizable increase in the benefit. For example, a strategy that combines extending eligibility to those with preexisting hypertension, extending the upper age of eligibility to 79 years, increasing uptake of health checks by 30%, and increasing treatment rates 2.5-fold amongst eligible patients (i.e., 'maximum potential' scenario) results in at least a 3-fold increase in benefits compared to the current programme (1,360 premature deaths versus 390; 5,100 people free of 1 of the 4 diseases versus 1,370; 37,000 additional QALYs versus 10,000; 33,000 additional years of life versus 9,000). Ensuring those who are assessed and eligible for statins receive statins is a particularly important strategy to increase benefits. Estimates of overall benefit are based on current incidence and management, and future declines in disease incidence or improvements in treatment could alter the actual benefits observed in the long run. We have focused on the cardiovascular element of the NHS Health Check programme. Some important noncardiovascular health outcomes (e.g., chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] prevention from smoking cessation and cancer prevention from weight loss) and other parts of the programme (e.g., brief interventions to reduce harmful alcohol consumption) have not been modelled. CONCLUSIONS Our model indicates that the current NHS Health Check programme is contributing to improvements in health and reducing health inequalities. Feasible changes in the organisation of the programme could result in more than a 3-fold increase in health benefits.
Collapse
|
13
|
McDermott L, Wright AJ, Cornelius V, Burgess C, Forster AS, Ashworth M, Khoshaba B, Clery P, Fuller F, Miller J, Dodhia H, Rudisill C, Conner MT, Gulliford MC. Enhanced invitation methods and uptake of health checks in primary care: randomised controlled trial and cohort study using electronic health records. Health Technol Assess 2018; 20:1-92. [PMID: 27846927 DOI: 10.3310/hta20840] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND A national programme of health checks to identify risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is being rolled out but is encountering difficulties because of low uptake. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effectiveness of an enhanced invitation method using the question-behaviour effect (QBE), with or without the offer of a financial incentive to return the QBE questionnaire, at increasing the uptake of health checks. The research went on to evaluate the reasons for the low uptake of invitations and compare the case mix for invited and opportunistic health checks. DESIGN Three-arm randomised trial and cohort study. PARTICIPANTS All participants invited for a health check from 18 general practices. Individual participants were randomised. INTERVENTIONS (1) Standard health check invitation only; (2) QBE questionnaire followed by a standard invitation; and (3) QBE questionnaire with offer of a financial incentive to return the questionnaire, followed by a standard invitation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was completion of the health check within 6 months of invitation. A p-value of 0.0167 was used for significance. In the cohort study of all health checks completed during the study period, the case mix was compared for participants responding to invitations and those receiving 'opportunistic' health checks. Participants were not aware that several types of invitation were in use. The research team were blind to trial arm allocation at outcome data extraction. RESULTS In total, 12,459 participants were included in the trial and health check uptake was evaluated for 12,052 participants for whom outcome data were collected. Health check uptake was as follows: standard invitation, 590 out of 4095 (14.41%); QBE questionnaire, 630 out of 3988 (15.80%); QBE questionnaire and financial incentive, 629 out of 3969 (15.85%). The increase in uptake associated with the QBE questionnaire was 1.43% [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.12% to 2.97%; p = 0.070] and the increase in uptake associated with the QBE questionnaire and offer of financial incentive was 1.52% (95% CI -0.03% to 3.07%; p = 0.054). The difference in uptake associated with the offer of an incentive to return the QBE questionnaire was -0.01% (95% CI -1.59% to 1.58%; p = 0.995). During the study period, 58% of health check cardiovascular risk assessments did not follow a trial invitation. People who received an 'opportunistic' health check had greater odds of a ≥ 10% CVD risk than those who received an invited health check (adjusted odds ratio 1.70, 95% CI 1.45 to 1.99; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Uptake of a health check following an invitation letter is low and is not increased through an enhanced invitation method using the QBE. The offer of a £5 incentive did not increase the rate of return of the QBE questionnaire. A high proportion of all health checks are performed opportunistically and not in response to a standard invitation letter. Participants receiving opportunistic checks are at higher risk of CVD than those responding to standard invitations. Future research should aim to increase the accessibility of preventative medical interventions to increase uptake. Research should also explore the wider use of electronic health records in delivering efficient trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42856343. FUNDING This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 84. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa McDermott
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Alison J Wright
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Victoria Cornelius
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Caroline Burgess
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Alice S Forster
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Mark Ashworth
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Bernadette Khoshaba
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Philippa Clery
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Frances Fuller
- Public Health Directorate, Lewisham Borough Council, London, UK
| | - Jane Miller
- Public Health Directorate, Lewisham Borough Council, London, UK
| | - Hiten Dodhia
- Public Health Directorate, Lambeth Borough Council, London, UK
| | - Caroline Rudisill
- Department of Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Mark T Conner
- School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Martin C Gulliford
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.,NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals, Guy's Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Woringer M, Cecil E, Watt H, Chang K, Hamid F, Khunti K, Dubois E, Evason J, Majeed A, Soljak M. Evaluation of community provision of a preventive cardiovascular programme - the National Health Service Health Check in reaching the under-served groups by primary care in England: cross sectional observational study. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:405. [PMID: 28615019 PMCID: PMC5471843 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2346-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2016] [Accepted: 05/31/2017] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of premature mortality and a major contributor of health inequalities in England. Compared to more affluent and white counterparts, deprived people and ethnic minorities tend to die younger due to preventable CVD associated with lifestyle. In addition, deprived, ethnic minorities and younger people are less likely to be served by CVD prevention services. This study assessed the effectiveness of community-based outreach providers in delivering England’s National Health Services (NHS) Health Check programme, a CVD preventive programme to under-served groups. Methods Between January 2008 and October 2013, community outreach providers delivered a preventive CVD programme to 50,573 individuals, in their local communities, in a single consultation without prescheduled appointments. Community outreach providers operated on evenings and weekends as well as during regular business hours in venues accessible to the general public. After exclusion criteria, we analysed and compared socio-demographic data of 43,177 Health Check attendees with the general population across 38 local authorities (LAs). We assessed variation between local authorities in terms of age, sex, deprivation and ethnicity structures using two sample t-tests and within local authority variation in terms of ethnicity and deprivation using Chi squared tests and two sample t-tests respectively. Results Using Index of Multiple Deprivation, the mean deprivation score of the population reached by community outreach providers was 6.01 higher (p < 0.05) than the general population. Screened populations in 29 of 38 LAs were significantly more deprived (p < 0.05). No statistically significant difference among ethnic minority groups was observed between LAs. Nonetheless some LAs – namely Leicester, Thurrock, Sutton, South Tyneside, Portsmouth and Gateshead were very successful in recruiting ethnic minority groups. The mean proportion of men screened was 11.39% lower (p < 0.001) and mean proportion of 40–49 and 50–59 year olds was 9.98% and 3.58% higher (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.01 respectively) than the general population across 38 LAs. Conclusions Community-based outreach providers effectively reach under-served groups by delivering preventive CVD services to younger, more deprived populations, and a representative proportion of ethnic minority groups. If the programme is successful in motivating the under-served groups to improve lifestyle, it may reduce health inequalities therein.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Woringer
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Campus, The Reynolds Building, St Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RP, UK.
| | - Elizabeth Cecil
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Campus, The Reynolds Building, St Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RP, UK
| | - Hillary Watt
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Campus, The Reynolds Building, St Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RP, UK
| | - Kiara Chang
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Campus, The Reynolds Building, St Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RP, UK
| | - Fozia Hamid
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Campus, The Reynolds Building, St Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RP, UK
| | - Kamlesh Khunti
- Diabetes Research Centre, Leicester Diabetes Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE5 4PW, UK
| | - Elizabeth Dubois
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Campus, The Reynolds Building, St Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RP, UK
| | - Julie Evason
- Health Diagnostics Ltd., Suite C, The Quadrant,, Sealand Road,, Chester, CH1 4QR, UK
| | - Azeem Majeed
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Campus, The Reynolds Building, St Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RP, UK
| | - Michael Soljak
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Campus, The Reynolds Building, St Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RP, UK
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
George J, Mathur R, Shah AD, Pujades-Rodriguez M, Denaxas S, Smeeth L, Timmis A, Hemingway H. Ethnicity and the first diagnosis of a wide range of cardiovascular diseases: Associations in a linked electronic health record cohort of 1 million patients. PLoS One 2017; 12:e0178945. [PMID: 28598987 PMCID: PMC5466321 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178945] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2017] [Accepted: 05/22/2017] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND While the association of ethnic group with individual cardiovascular diseases has been studied, little is known about ethnic differences in the initial lifetime presentation of clinical cardiovascular disease in contemporary populations. METHODS AND RESULTS We studied 1,068,318 people, aged ≥30 years and free from diagnosed CVD at baseline (90.9% White, 3.6% South Asian and 2.9% Black), using English linked electronic health records covering primary care, hospital admissions, acute coronary syndrome registry and mortality registry (CALIBER platform). During 5.7 years median follow-up between 1997-2010, 95,224 people experienced an incident cardiovascular diagnosis. 69.9% (67.2%-72.4%) of initial presentation in South Asian <60 yrs were coronary heart disease presentations compared to 47.8% (47.3%-48.3%) in White and 40.1% (36.3%-43.9%) in Black patients. Compared to White patients, Black patients had significantly lower age-sex adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for initial lifetime presentation of all the coronary disease diagnoses (stable angina HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.68-0.93); unstable angina- 0.75 (0.59-0.97); myocardial infarction 0.49 (0.40-0.62)) while South Asian patients had significantly higher HRs (stable angina- 1.67 (1.52-1.84); unstable angina 1.82 (1.56-2.13); myocardial infarction- 1.67 (1.49-1.87). We found no ethnic differences in initial presentation with heart failure (Black 0.97 (0.79-1.20); S Asian 1.04(0.87-1.26)). Compared to White patients, Black patients were more likely to present with ischaemic stroke (1.24 (0.97-1.58)) and intracerebral haemorrhage (1.44 (0.97-2.12)). Presentation with peripheral arterial disease was less likely for Black (0.63 (0.50-0.80)) and South Asian patients (0.70 (0.57-0.86)) compared with White patients. DISCUSSION While we found the anticipated substantial predominance of coronary heart disease presentations in South Asian and predominance of stroke presentations in Black patients, we found no ethnic differences in presentation with heart failure. We consider the public health and research implications of our findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT02176174, www.clinicaltrials.gov.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julie George
- The Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research and the National Institute for Health Research, Biomedical Research Centre, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Rohini Mathur
- Electronic Health Records Group, Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Anoop Dinesh Shah
- The Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research and the National Institute for Health Research, Biomedical Research Centre, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Mar Pujades-Rodriguez
- The Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research and the National Institute for Health Research, Biomedical Research Centre, University College London, London, United Kingdom
- Leeds Institute of Biomedical and Clinical Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Spiros Denaxas
- The Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research and the National Institute for Health Research, Biomedical Research Centre, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Liam Smeeth
- Electronic Health Records Group, Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Adam Timmis
- NIHR Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Unit, Barts Heart Centre, London, United Kingdom
| | - Harry Hemingway
- The Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research and the National Institute for Health Research, Biomedical Research Centre, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
External validation of a COPD prediction model using population-based primary care data: a nested case-control study. Sci Rep 2017; 7:44702. [PMID: 28304375 PMCID: PMC5356333 DOI: 10.1038/srep44702] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2016] [Accepted: 02/13/2017] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Emerging models for predicting risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) require external validation in order to assess their clinical value. We validated a previous model for predicting new onset COPD in a different database. We randomly drew 38,597 case-control pairs (total N = 77,194) of individuals aged ≥35 years and matched for sex, age, and general practice from the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink database. We assessed accuracy of the model to discriminate between COPD cases and non-cases by calculating area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROCAUC) for the prediction scores. Analogous to the development model, ever smoking (OR 6.70; 95%CI 6.41–6.99), prior asthma (OR 6.43; 95%CI 5.85–7.07), and higher socioeconomic deprivation (OR 2.90; 95%CI 2.72–3.09 for highest vs. lowest quintile) increased the risk of COPD. The validated prediction scores ranged from 0–5.71 (ROCAUC 0.66; 95%CI 0.65–0.66) for males and 0–5.95 (ROCAUC 0.71; 95%CI 0.70–0.71) for females. We have confirmed that smoking, prior asthma, and socioeconomic deprivation are key risk factors for new onset COPD. Our model seems externally valid at identifying patients at risk of developing COPD. An impact assessment now needs to be undertaken to assess whether this prediction model can be applied in clinical care settings.
Collapse
|
17
|
Robson J, Dostal I, Madurasinghe V, Sheikh A, Hull S, Boomla K, Griffiths C, Eldridge S. NHS Health Check comorbidity and management: an observational matched study in primary care. Br J Gen Pract 2017; 67:e86-e93. [PMID: 27993901 PMCID: PMC5308122 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp16x688837] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2016] [Accepted: 09/22/2016] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The NHS Health Check programme completed its first 5 years in 2014, identifying those at highest risk of cardiovascular disease and new comorbidities, and offering behavioural change support and treatment. AIM To describe the coverage and impact of this programme on cardiovascular risk management and identification of new comorbidities. DESIGN AND SETTING Observational 5-year study from April 2009 to March 2014, in 139 of 143 general practices in three clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in east London. METHOD A matched analysis compared comorbidity in NHS Health Check attendees and non-attendees. RESULTS A total of 252 259 adults aged 40-74 years were eligible for an NHS Health Check and, of these, 85 122 attended in 5 years. Attendance increased from 7.3% (10 900/149 867) in 2009 to 17.0% (18 459/108 525) in 2013 to 2014, representing increasing coverage from 36.4% to 85.0%. Attendance was higher in the more deprived quintiles and among South Asians. Statins were prescribed to 11.5% of attendees and 8.2% of non-attendees. In a matched analysis, newly-diagnosed comorbidity was more likely in attendees than non-attendees, with odds ratios for new diabetes 1.30 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.21 to 1.39), hypertension 1.50 (95% CI = 1.43 to 1.57), and chronic kidney disease 1.83 (95% CI = 1.52 to 2.21). CONCLUSION The NHS Health Check programme provision in these CCGs was equitable, with recent coverage of 85%. Statins were 40% more likely to be prescribed to attendees than non-attendees, providing estimated absolute benefits of public health importance. More new cases of diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease were identified among attendees than a matched group of non-attendees.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John Robson
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London
| | - Isabel Dostal
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London
| | | | - Aziz Sheikh
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, eHealth Research Group, Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh
| | - Sally Hull
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London
| | - Kambiz Boomla
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London
| | - Chris Griffiths
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London
| | - Sandra Eldridge
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Lang SJ, Abel GA, Mant J, Mullis R. Impact of socioeconomic deprivation on screening for cardiovascular disease risk in a primary prevention population: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2016; 6:e009984. [PMID: 27000783 PMCID: PMC4809080 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009984] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2015] [Revised: 10/22/2015] [Accepted: 11/16/2015] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Investigate the association between socioeconomic deprivation and completeness of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor recording in primary care, uptake of screening in people with incomplete risk factor recording and with actual CVD risk within the screened subgroup. DESIGN Cross-sectional study. SETTING Nine UK general practices. PARTICIPANTS 7987 people aged 50-74 years with no CVD diagnosis. METHODS CVD risk was estimated using the Framingham equation from data extracted from primary care electronic health records. Where there was insufficient information to calculate risk, patients were invited to attend a screening assessment. ANALYSIS Proportion of patients for whom clinical data were sufficiently complete to enable CVD risk to be calculated; proportion of patients invited to screening who attended; proportion of patients who attended screening whose 10-year risk of a cardiovascular event was high (>20%). For each outcome, a set of logistic regression models were run. Crude and adjusted ORs were estimated for person-level deprivation, age, gender and smoking status. We included practice-level deprivation as a continuous variable and practice as a random effect to account for clustering. RESULTS People who had lower Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) scores (less deprived) had significantly worse routine CVD risk factor recording (adjusted OR 0.97 (0.95 to 1.00) per IMD decile; p=0.042). Screening attendance was poorer in those with more deprivation (adjusted OR 0.89 (0.86 to 0.91) per IMD decile; p<0.001). Among those who attended screening, the most deprived were more likely to have CVD risk >20% (OR 1.09 (1.03 to 1.15) per IMD decile; p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS Our data suggest that those who had the most to gain from screening were least likely to attend, potentially exacerbating existing health inequalities. Future research should focus on tailoring the delivery of CVD screening to ensure engagement of socioeconomically deprived groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah-Jane Lang
- General Practice & Primary Care Research Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jonathan Mant
- General Practice & Primary Care Research Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Ricky Mullis
- General Practice & Primary Care Research Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Robson J, Dostal I, Sheikh A, Eldridge S, Madurasinghe V, Griffiths C, Coupland C, Hippisley-Cox J. The NHS Health Check in England: an evaluation of the first 4 years. BMJ Open 2016; 6:e008840. [PMID: 26762161 PMCID: PMC4735215 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008840] [Citation(s) in RCA: 109] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2015] [Revised: 09/01/2015] [Accepted: 09/28/2015] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To describe implementation of a new national preventive programme to reduce cardiovascular morbidity. DESIGN Observational study over 4 years (April 2009--March 2013). SETTING 655 general practices across England from the QResearch database. PARTICIPANTS Eligible adults aged 40-74 years including attendees at a National Health Service (NHS) Health Check. INTERVENTION NHS Health Check: routine structured cardiovascular check with support for behavioural change and in those at highest risk, treatment of risk factors and newly identified comorbidity. RESULTS Of 1.68 million people eligible for an NHS Health Check, 214 295 attended in the period 2009-12. Attendance quadrupled as the programme progressed; 5.8% in 2010 to 30.1% in 2012. Attendance was relatively higher among older people, of whom 19.6% of those eligible at age 60-74 years attended and 9.0% at age 40-59 years. Attendance by population groups at higher cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, such as the more socially disadvantaged 14.9%, was higher than that of the more affluent 12.3%. Among attendees 7844 new cases of hypertension (38/1000 Checks), 1934 new cases of type 2 diabetes (9/1000 Checks) and 807 new cases of chronic kidney disease (4/1000 Checks) were identified. Of the 27,624 people found to be at high CVD risk (20% or more 10-year risk) when attending an NHS Health Check, 19.3% (5325) were newly prescribed statins and 8.8% (2438) were newly prescribed antihypertensive therapy. CONCLUSIONS NHS Health Check coverage was lower than expected but showed year-on-year improvement. Newly identified comorbidities were an important feature of the NHS Health Checks. Statin treatment at national scale for 1 in 5 attendees at highest CVD risk is likely to have contributed to important reductions in their CVD events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John Robson
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Isabel Dostal
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Aziz Sheikh
- Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Sandra Eldridge
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | | | - Chris Griffiths
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Carol Coupland
- School of Community Health Sciences, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Julia Hippisley-Cox
- School of Community Health Sciences, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Usher-Smith JA, Pritchard J, Poole S, Griffin SJ. Offering statins to a population attending health checks with a 10-year cardiovascular disease risk between 10% and 20. Int J Clin Pract 2015; 69:1457-64. [PMID: 26422446 DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.12742] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In 2014 the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommended reducing the threshold for offering statin therapy to patients from a 10-year modelled risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) of 20% to 10%. AIM To describe the response of patients in UK primary care with a CVD risk between 10% and 20% to an invitation to attend a consultation to discuss statins. DESIGN AND SETTING Review of electronic medical records at one GP practice in the East of England. METHOD We invited all patients who had attended an NHS Health Check at the practice, had a QRisk(®) score between 10% and 20%, and were not prescribed statins to attend designated clinics in the practice to discuss starting statins. We reviewed the medical records to identify those who had attended the clinics and those who had chosen to start a statin. RESULTS Of 410 patients invited, 100 (24.4%) patients attended the designated clinics and 45 (11%) chose to start a statin. Those who chose to start a statin were older and with a higher QRisk(®) than those who did not. Among those who attended, individuals who started a statin had a higher QRisk(®) than those who did not and were more likely to be current or ex-smokers. CONCLUSIONS The proportion choosing to start a statin was substantially lower than previously estimated. Large population-based studies with long-term follow-up are needed to assess the impact on health and workload of this change in guidance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J A Usher-Smith
- The Primary Care Unit, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Firs House Surgery, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - S Poole
- Firs House Surgery, Cambridge, UK
| | - S J Griffin
- The Primary Care Unit, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|