OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of general health screenings and discussions with general practitioners on the cardiovascular risk profile of a random population of patients. STUDY DESIGN: A population-based, randomized, controlled, 5-year follow-up trial conducted in a primary care setting. POPULATION: The study group consisted of 2000 patients, randomly selected middle-aged men and women aged 30 to 50 years from family practices in the district of Ebeltoft, Denmark. Of these patients, 1507 (75.4%) agreed to participate. Patients were randomized into (1) a control group who did not receive health screenings, (2) an intervention group that received 2 health screenings, (3) an intervention group that received both the 2 screenings and a 45-minute follow-up consultation annually with their general practitioner. OUTCOMES MEASURED: Cardiovascular risk score (CRS), body mass index (BMI), blood pressure, serum cholesterol, carbon monoxide in expiratory air, and tobacco use. RESULTS: After 5 years, the CRS, BMI, and serum cholesterol levels were lower in the intervention groups compared with the control group. The improved outcome was greater in the baseline risk groups. The number of patients with elevated CRS in the intervention groups was approximately half the number of patients with elevated CRS in the control group. The difference was not a result of medication use. There was no difference between the group that received consultations after the screenings and the group that had health screenings alone. CONCLUSIONS: Health screenings reduced the CRS in the intervention groups. After 5 years of follow-up, the number of persons at elevated cardiovascular risk was about half that expected, based on the prevalence/proportion in a population not receiving the health checks (the control group). The impact of intervention was higher among at-risk individuals. Consultations about health did not appear to improve the cardiovascular profile of the study population.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of general health screenings and discussions with general practitioners on the cardiovascular risk profile of a random population of patients. STUDY DESIGN: A population-based, randomized, controlled, 5-year follow-up trial conducted in a primary care setting. POPULATION: The study group consisted of 2000 patients, randomly selected middle-aged men and women aged 30 to 50 years from family practices in the district of Ebeltoft, Denmark. Of these patients, 1507 (75.4%) agreed to participate. Patients were randomized into (1) a control group who did not receive health screenings, (2) an intervention group that received 2 health screenings, (3) an intervention group that received both the 2 screenings and a 45-minute follow-up consultation annually with their general practitioner. OUTCOMES MEASURED: Cardiovascular risk score (CRS), body mass index (BMI), blood pressure, serum cholesterol, carbon monoxide in expiratory air, and tobacco use. RESULTS: After 5 years, the CRS, BMI, and serum cholesterol levels were lower in the intervention groups compared with the control group. The improved outcome was greater in the baseline risk groups. The number of patients with elevated CRS in the intervention groups was approximately half the number of patients with elevated CRS in the control group. The difference was not a result of medication use. There was no difference between the group that received consultations after the screenings and the group that had health screenings alone. CONCLUSIONS: Health screenings reduced the CRS in the intervention groups. After 5 years of follow-up, the number of persons at elevated cardiovascular risk was about half that expected, based on the prevalence/proportion in a population not receiving the health checks (the control group). The impact of intervention was higher among at-risk individuals. Consultations about health did not appear to improve the cardiovascular profile of the study population.
Authors: R K Simmons; M Rahman; R W Jakes; M F Yuyun; A R Niggebrugge; S H Hennings; D R R Williams; N J Wareham; S J Griffin Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2010-10-27 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Kunal N Karmali; Stephen D Persell; Pablo Perel; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Mark A Berendsen; Mark D Huffman Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-03-14
Authors: Signe S Rasmussen; Charlotte Glümer; Annelli Sandbaek; Torsten Lauritzen; Knut Borch-Johnsen Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2008 Impact factor: 2.581