Literature DB >> 27846927

Enhanced invitation methods and uptake of health checks in primary care: randomised controlled trial and cohort study using electronic health records.

Lisa McDermott1, Alison J Wright1, Victoria Cornelius1, Caroline Burgess1, Alice S Forster1, Mark Ashworth1, Bernadette Khoshaba1, Philippa Clery1, Frances Fuller2, Jane Miller2, Hiten Dodhia3, Caroline Rudisill4, Mark T Conner5, Martin C Gulliford1,6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A national programme of health checks to identify risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is being rolled out but is encountering difficulties because of low uptake.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of an enhanced invitation method using the question-behaviour effect (QBE), with or without the offer of a financial incentive to return the QBE questionnaire, at increasing the uptake of health checks. The research went on to evaluate the reasons for the low uptake of invitations and compare the case mix for invited and opportunistic health checks.
DESIGN: Three-arm randomised trial and cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: All participants invited for a health check from 18 general practices. Individual participants were randomised.
INTERVENTIONS: (1) Standard health check invitation only; (2) QBE questionnaire followed by a standard invitation; and (3) QBE questionnaire with offer of a financial incentive to return the questionnaire, followed by a standard invitation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was completion of the health check within 6 months of invitation. A p-value of 0.0167 was used for significance. In the cohort study of all health checks completed during the study period, the case mix was compared for participants responding to invitations and those receiving 'opportunistic' health checks. Participants were not aware that several types of invitation were in use. The research team were blind to trial arm allocation at outcome data extraction.
RESULTS: In total, 12,459 participants were included in the trial and health check uptake was evaluated for 12,052 participants for whom outcome data were collected. Health check uptake was as follows: standard invitation, 590 out of 4095 (14.41%); QBE questionnaire, 630 out of 3988 (15.80%); QBE questionnaire and financial incentive, 629 out of 3969 (15.85%). The increase in uptake associated with the QBE questionnaire was 1.43% [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.12% to 2.97%; p = 0.070] and the increase in uptake associated with the QBE questionnaire and offer of financial incentive was 1.52% (95% CI -0.03% to 3.07%; p = 0.054). The difference in uptake associated with the offer of an incentive to return the QBE questionnaire was -0.01% (95% CI -1.59% to 1.58%; p = 0.995). During the study period, 58% of health check cardiovascular risk assessments did not follow a trial invitation. People who received an 'opportunistic' health check had greater odds of a ≥ 10% CVD risk than those who received an invited health check (adjusted odds ratio 1.70, 95% CI 1.45 to 1.99; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Uptake of a health check following an invitation letter is low and is not increased through an enhanced invitation method using the QBE. The offer of a £5 incentive did not increase the rate of return of the QBE questionnaire. A high proportion of all health checks are performed opportunistically and not in response to a standard invitation letter. Participants receiving opportunistic checks are at higher risk of CVD than those responding to standard invitations. Future research should aim to increase the accessibility of preventative medical interventions to increase uptake. Research should also explore the wider use of electronic health records in delivering efficient trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42856343. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 84. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27846927      PMCID: PMC5124783          DOI: 10.3310/hta20840

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Technol Assess        ISSN: 1366-5278            Impact factor:   4.014


  11 in total

1.  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

Review 2.  Views of commissioners, managers and healthcare professionals on the NHS Health Check programme: a systematic review.

Authors:  Katie Mills; Emma Harte; Adam Martin; Calum MacLure; Simon J Griffin; Jonathan Mant; Catherine Meads; Catherine L Saunders; Fiona M Walter; Juliet A Usher-Smith
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Bias due to MEasurement Reactions In Trials to improve health (MERIT): protocol for research to develop MRC guidance.

Authors:  Lisa M Miles; Diana Elbourne; Andrew Farmer; Martin Gulliford; Louise Locock; Jim McCambridge; Stephen Sutton; David P French
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 2.279

4.  Automated recruitment and randomisation for an efficient randomised controlled trial in primary care.

Authors:  Victoria R Cornelius; Lisa McDermott; Alice S Forster; Mark Ashworth; Alison J Wright; Martin C Gulliford
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  Cardiovascular risk at health checks performed opportunistically or following an invitation letter. Cohort study.

Authors:  Martin C Gulliford; Bernadette Khoshaba; Lisa McDermott; Victoria Cornelius; Mark Ashworth; Frances Fuller; Jane Miller; Hiten Dodhia; Alison J Wright
Journal:  J Public Health (Oxf)       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 2.341

6.  Patient experiences of telephone outreach to enhance uptake of NHS Health Checks in more deprived communities and minority ethnic groups: A qualitative interview study.

Authors:  Emer Brangan; Tracey J Stone; Amanda Chappell; Vivienne Harrison; Jeremy Horwood
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2018-12-25       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 7.  Recruitment, consent and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a review of trials published in the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Journals Library (1997-2020).

Authors:  Richard M Jacques; Rashida Ahmed; James Harper; Adya Ranjan; Isra Saeed; Rebecca M Simpson; Stephen J Walters
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-02-14       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Reasons why people do not attend NHS Health Checks: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis.

Authors:  Emma Harte; Calum MacLure; Adam Martin; Catherine L Saunders; Catherine Meads; Fiona M Walter; Simon J Griffin; Jonathan Mant; Juliet A Usher-Smith
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  Enhanced Invitations Using the Question-Behavior Effect and Financial Incentives to Promote Health Check Uptake in Primary Care.

Authors:  Lisa McDermott; Victoria Cornelius; Alison J Wright; Caroline Burgess; Alice S Forster; Mark Ashworth; Bernadette Khoshaba; Philippa Clery; Frances Fuller; Jane Miller; Hiten Dodhia; Caroline Rudisill; Mark T Conner; Martin C Gulliford
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2018-05-31

10.  Influences on NHS Health Check behaviours: a systematic review.

Authors:  Lou Atkins; Chryssa Stefanidou; Tim Chadborn; Katherine Thompson; Susan Michie; Fabi Lorencatto
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2020-09-17       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.