Literature DB >> 15179107

No long-term psychological reaction to information about increased risk of coronary heart disease in general practice.

Bo Christensen1, Marianne Engberg, Torsten Lauritzen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Randomised, controlled trials focusing on long-term psychological reactions to information about increased risk of coronary heart disease are scarce.
DESIGN: A population-based randomised, controlled, 5-year follow-up trial was conducted in general practice.
METHODS: In 1991, invitations were sent to 2,000 middle-aged people registered in the general practices in the district of Ebeltoft, Denmark. A total of 1,507 (75.4%) agreed to participate and were randomised into a control group and two intervention groups: one included health screening, a written feedback and an optional follow-up visit with the general practitioner; the other included health screening, written feedback and a planned 45-min follow-up visit with the general practitioner. The participants were informed at screening about their risk of developing coronary heart disease. Psychological distress was measured by the GHQ-12 before screening and at the 1 and the 5-year follow-up.
RESULTS: Before the screening (0 year), 1 and 5 years after there were no significant differences in the GHQ-12 score between the control group and the two intervention groups. Nor were there any differences related to information about increased risk of coronary heart disease between scores obtained at the 1 and the 5-year follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Middle-aged persons had no long-term psychological reaction after information about increased risk of developing coronary heart disease following a health screening in general practice evaluated by the GHQ-12, 1 year and 5 years after the examinations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15179107     DOI: 10.1097/01.hjr.0000129739.30593.23

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil        ISSN: 1741-8267


  11 in total

Review 1.  Effectiveness of general practice-based health checks: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Si Si; John R Moss; Thomas R Sullivan; Skye S Newton; Nigel P Stocks
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 2.  Risk scoring for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

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

3.  2016 European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice : The Sixth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited experts).

Authors:  Massimo F Piepoli
Journal:  Int J Behav Med       Date:  2017-06

4.  2016 European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: The Sixth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited experts)Developed with the special contribution of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR).

Authors:  Massimo F Piepoli; Arno W Hoes; Stefan Agewall; Christian Albus; Carlos Brotons; Alberico L Catapano; Marie-Therese Cooney; Ugo Corrà; Bernard Cosyns; Christi Deaton; Ian Graham; Michael Stephen Hall; F D Richard Hobbs; Maja-Lisa Løchen; Herbert Löllgen; Pedro Marques-Vidal; Joep Perk; Eva Prescott; Josep Redon; Dimitrios J Richter; Naveed Sattar; Yvo Smulders; Monica Tiberi; H Bart van der Worp; Ineke van Dis; W M Monique Verschuren; Simone Binno
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2016-05-23       Impact factor: 29.983

5.  Self-reported cognitive and emotional effects and lifestyle changes shortly after preventive cardiovascular consultations in general practice.

Authors:  Dea Kehler; Morten Bondo Christensen; Mette Bech Risør; Torsten Lauritzen; Bo Christensen
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.581

Review 6.  Emotional impact of screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ruth E Collins; Laureen M Lopez; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-07-28       Impact factor: 3.295

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

Authors:  Lasse T Krogsbøll; Karsten Juhl Jørgensen; Peter C Gøtzsche
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-01-31

8.  Psychological impact of lifestyle-related disease disclosure at general checkup: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Tomokazu Tominaga; Masato Matsushima; Takuya Nagata; Akinari Moriya; Takamasa Watanabe; Yuko Nakano; Yoko Hirayama; Yasuki Fujinuma
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2015-05-14       Impact factor: 2.497

Review 9.  Systematic versus opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Mariana Dyakova; Saran Shantikumar; Jill L Colquitt; Christian M Drew; Morag Sime; Joanna MacIver; Nicola Wright; Aileen Clarke; Karen Rees
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-01-29

Review 10.  Does the routine use of global coronary heart disease risk scores translate into clinical benefits or harms? A systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Stacey L Sheridan; Eric Crespo
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-03-20       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.