BACKGROUND: Health checks are promoted to evaluate individuals' risk of developing disease and to initiate health promotion and disease prevention interventions. The NHS Health Check is a cardiovascular risk assessment programme introduced in the UK aimed at preventing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Uptake of health checks is lower than anticipated. This study aimed to explore influences on people's decisions to take up the offer of a health check. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with people registered at four general practices in South London. The interview schedule was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. Data were analysed qualitatively using the Framework method using NVivo for data management. RESULTS: Twenty-seven participants invited for a health check were included in the study. Seventeen received the health check while 10 either did not attend or failed to complete the check. Five themes emerging from the data included a lack of awareness of the health check programme, beliefs about susceptibility to CVD, beliefs about civic responsibility, issues concerning access to appointments, and beliefs about the consequences of having a check. CONCLUSIONS: Health check programmes need to raise public awareness to ensure that people are informed about the objectives and nature of the programme in order to reach an informed decision about taking up the invitation. Emphasizing the benefits of prevention and early detection might encourage attendance in those who are reluctant to burden the public health-care systems. Extending outreach initiatives and increasing 'out of hours' provision at local community sites could facilitate access.
BACKGROUND: Health checks are promoted to evaluate individuals' risk of developing disease and to initiate health promotion and disease prevention interventions. The NHS Health Check is a cardiovascular risk assessment programme introduced in the UK aimed at preventing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Uptake of health checks is lower than anticipated. This study aimed to explore influences on people's decisions to take up the offer of a health check. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with people registered at four general practices in South London. The interview schedule was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. Data were analysed qualitatively using the Framework method using NVivo for data management. RESULTS: Twenty-seven participants invited for a health check were included in the study. Seventeen received the health check while 10 either did not attend or failed to complete the check. Five themes emerging from the data included a lack of awareness of the health check programme, beliefs about susceptibility to CVD, beliefs about civic responsibility, issues concerning access to appointments, and beliefs about the consequences of having a check. CONCLUSIONS: Health check programmes need to raise public awareness to ensure that people are informed about the objectives and nature of the programme in order to reach an informed decision about taking up the invitation. Emphasizing the benefits of prevention and early detection might encourage attendance in those who are reluctant to burden the public health-care systems. Extending outreach initiatives and increasing 'out of hours' provision at local community sites could facilitate access.
Authors: Andrew R H Dalton; Alex Bottle; Cyprian Okoro; Azeem Majeed; Christopher Millett Journal: J Public Health (Oxf) Date: 2011-05-05 Impact factor: 2.341
Authors: Christopher Harkins; Rebecca Shaw; Michelle Gillies; Heather Sloan; Kate Macintyre; Anne Scoular; Caroline Morrison; Fiona Mackay; Heather Cunningham; Paul Docherty; Paul Macintyre; Iain N Findlay Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-07-02 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: J Offman; M Wilson; M Lamont; H Birke; E Kutt; S Marriage; Y Loughrey; S Hudson; A Hartley; J Smith; B Eckersley; F Dungey; D Parmar; J Patnick; S W Duffy Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-07-18 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: I Groenenberg; M R Crone; S van Dijk; J Ben Meftah; B J C Middelkoop; W J J Assendelft; A M Stiggelbout Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2016-04-30
Authors: Abigail Clifton; Caroline Burgess; Sarah Clement; Ruth Ohlsen; Pras Ramluggun; Jackie Sturt; Paul Walters; Elizabeth A Barley Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2016-07-12 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Alice S Forster; Caroline Burgess; Hiten Dodhia; Frances Fuller; Jane Miller; Lisa McDermott; Martin C Gulliford Journal: J Public Health (Oxf) Date: 2015-09-07 Impact factor: 2.341