Cardiovascular risk factor screening satisfaction in the Heart of New Ulm Project

Local authority commissioning of NHS Health Checks: A regression analysis of the first three years

In April 2013, the public health function was transferred from the NHS to local government, making local authorities (LAs) responsible for commissioning the NHS Health Check programme. The programme aims to reduce preventable mortality and morbidity in people aged 40-74. The national five-year ambition is to invite all eligible individuals and to achieve an uptake of 75%. This study evaluates the effects of LA expenditure on the programme's invitation rates (the proportion of the eligible population invited to a health check), coverage rates (the proportion of the eligible population who received a health check) and uptake rates (attendance by those who received a formal invitation letter) in the first three years of the reforms. We ran negative binomial panel models and controlled for a range of confounders. Over 2013/14-2015/16, the invitation rate, coverage rate and uptake rate averaged 57% 28% and 49% respectively. Higher per capita spend on the programme was associated with increases in both the invitation rate and coverage rate, but had no effect on the uptake rate. When we controlled for the LA invitation rate, the association between spend and coverage rate was smaller but remained statistically significant. This suggests that alternatives to formal invitation, such as opportunistic approaches in work places or sports centres, may be effective in influencing attendance.

Effectiveness of a community screening program for metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular risk factor identification in young South Asians adults

AIMS

Metabolic syndrome has been associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of a community-based screening program in identifying cardiovascular risk factors in healthy young South Asian population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2006 and 2011, 3314 patients of all ages were recruited as a part of a prospective cohort study investigating cardiovascular risk in South Asians. We analyzed 1537 patients between the ages of 18 and 40. Demographic and baseline characteristics including baseline laboratory markers and blood pressures were obtained at initial visit.

RESULTS

The total cohort of 1537 patients was 66.5% male, and the mean age was 35±5 years. Among participants who denied a history of hypercholesterolemia, 62% had elevated LDL-C (>100 mg/dL), and 8% had markedly elevated LDL-C (>160 mg/dL). Overall, diabetes was present in 4%, hypertension was present in 12% and hyperlipidemia was present in 46%. Low HDL-C (50% of men, 52% of women) and elevated triglycerides (44% of men, 18% of women) were the most prevalent components of metabolic syndrome. Metabolic syndrome was present in 14% of men and 8% of women and one-third (30%) of men and one-fifth (19%) of women had at least two component risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study to date assessing effectiveness of a community based screening program aiming to identify cardiovascular risk in young South Asians. We note significant modifiable risk at a young age. Such community based interventions can be effective at detecting and managing risk factors early in this vulnerable population.

General health checks in adults for reducing morbidity and mortality from disease

BACKGROUND

General health checks are common elements of health care in some countries. These aim to detect disease and risk factors for disease with the purpose of reducing morbidity and mortality. Most of the commonly used screening tests offered in general health checks have been incompletely studied. Also, screening leads to increased use of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, which can be harmful as well as beneficial. It is, therefore, important to assess whether general health checks do more good than harm.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to quantify the benefits and harms of general health checks with an emphasis on patient-relevant outcomes such as morbidity and mortality rather than on surrogate outcomes such as blood pressure and serum cholesterol levels.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Healthstar, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) to July 2012. Two authors screened titles and abstracts, assessed papers for eligibility and read reference lists. One author used citation tracking (Web of Knowledge) and asked trialists about additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials comparing health checks with no health checks in adults unselected for disease or risk factors. We did not include geriatric trials. We defined health checks as screening general populations for more than one disease or risk factor in more than one organ system.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the trials. We contacted authors for additional outcomes or trial details when necessary. For mortality outcomes we analysed the results with random-effects model meta-analysis, and for other outcomes we did a qualitative synthesis as meta-analysis was not feasible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 trials, 14 of which had available outcome data (182,880 participants). Nine trials provided data on total mortality (155,899 participants, 11,940 deaths), median follow-up time nine years, giving a risk ratio of 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.03). Eight trials provided data on cardiovascular mortality (152,435 participants, 4567 deaths), risk ratio 1.03 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.17) and eight trials on cancer mortality (139,290 participants, 3663 deaths), risk ratio 1.01 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.12). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not alter these findings.We did not find an effect on clinical events or other measures of morbidity but one trial found an increased occurrence of hypertension and hypercholesterolaemia with screening and one trial found an increased occurence of self-reported chronic disease. One trial found a 20% increase in the total number of new diagnoses per participant over six years compared to the control group. No trials compared the total number of prescriptions, but two out of four trials found an increased number of people using antihypertensive drugs. Two out of four trials found small beneficial effects on self-reported health, but this could be due to reporting bias as the trials were not blinded. We did not find an effect on admission to hospital, disability, worry, additional visits to the physician, or absence from work, but most of these outcomes were poorly studied. We did not find useful results on the number of referrals to specialists, the number of follow-up tests after positive screening results, or the amount of surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

General health checks did not reduce morbidity or mortality, neither overall nor for cardiovascular or cancer causes, although the number of new diagnoses was increased. Important harmful outcomes, such as the number of follow-up diagnostic procedures or short term psychological effects, were often not studied or reported and many trials had methodological problems. With the large number of participants and deaths included, the long follow-up periods used, and considering that cardiovascular and cancer mortality were not reduced, general health checks are unlikely to be beneficial.