BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Over the long term a large percentage of patients exhibit inadequately managed cardiovascular risk factors following an acute cardiac event. It remains unclear whether the patients would accept a health pass and which sociodemographic variables have an effect on the number of its users. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 437 patients (25% women, 69 +/- 10 years; 75% men 63 +/- 10 years) with diagnosed coronary heart disease were issued a health pass before being discharged from in-patient rehabilitation care. Besides their medical history, the passes contained the patients' latest values for hypertension, glucose, lipids, body mass index (kg/m(2)), and smoking. How many patients actually use the health pass was checked by the patients' physicians after 3, 6, and 12 months. In addition, cardioprotective drugs and cardiac events were logged. RESULTS: 185 (44%) of the patients used the pass continually over the course of one year. These patients tended to be older (> or = 60 years vs. < 60 years, p = 0.023), to be white-collar workers (white-collar vs. blue-collar, p = 0.043), and to have a higher level of education (> 10th class vs. < or = 10th class, p = 0.039) compared to "non-users". CONCLUSION: The acceptance of a passport is low, because fewer than half the patients used it in connection with the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Therefore the health pass in its present form did not show up as a useful device in patient care, particularly in single persons and those of a low sociodemographic status.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Over the long term a large percentage of patients exhibit inadequately managed cardiovascular risk factors following an acute cardiac event. It remains unclear whether the patients would accept a health pass and which sociodemographic variables have an effect on the number of its users. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 437 patients (25% women, 69 +/- 10 years; 75% men 63 +/- 10 years) with diagnosed coronary heart disease were issued a health pass before being discharged from in-patient rehabilitation care. Besides their medical history, the passes contained the patients' latest values for hypertension, glucose, lipids, body mass index (kg/m(2)), and smoking. How many patients actually use the health pass was checked by the patients' physicians after 3, 6, and 12 months. In addition, cardioprotective drugs and cardiac events were logged. RESULTS: 185 (44%) of the patients used the pass continually over the course of one year. These patients tended to be older (> or = 60 years vs. < 60 years, p = 0.023), to be white-collar workers (white-collar vs. blue-collar, p = 0.043), and to have a higher level of education (> 10th class vs. < or = 10th class, p = 0.039) compared to "non-users". CONCLUSION: The acceptance of a passport is low, because fewer than half the patients used it in connection with the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Therefore the health pass in its present form did not show up as a useful device in patient care, particularly in single persons and those of a low sociodemographic status.