Enhanced invitation methods and uptake of health checks in primary care: randomised controlled trial and cohort study using electronic health records (original) (raw)
Related papers
Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 2018
Uptake of health checks for cardiovascular risk assessment in primary care in England is lower than anticipated. The question-behavior effect (QBE) may offer a simple, scalable intervention to increase health check uptake. The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of enhanced invitation methods employing the QBE, with or without a financial incentive to return the questionnaire, at increasing uptake of health checks. We conducted a three-arm randomized trial including all patients at 18 general practices in two London boroughs, who were invited for health checks from July 2013 to December 2014. Participants were randomized to three trial arms: (i) Standard health check invitation letter only; (ii) QBE questionnaire followed by standard invitation letter; or (iii) QBE questionnaire with offer of a financial incentive to return the questionnaire, followed by standard invitation letter. In intention to treat analysis, the primary outcome of completion of health check within...
BMC family practice, 2016
The National Health Service Health Check (NHS HC) is a population level public health programme. It is a primary prevention initiative offering cardiovascular risk assessment and management for adults aged 40-74 years (every five years). It was designed to reduce the incidence of major vascular disease events by preventing or delaying the onset of diabetes, heart and kidney disease, stroke and vascular dementia . Effectiveness of the programme has been modelled on a national uptake of 75 % however in 2012/13 uptake, nationally, was 49 %. Ensuring a high percentage of those offered an NHS HC actually receive one is key to optimising the clinical and cost effectiveness of the programme. A pragmatic quasi-randomised controlled trial was conducted in four general practitioner practices in Medway, England with randomisation of 3511 patients. The aim was to compare attendance at the NHS HC using the standard national invitation template letter (control) compared to an enhanced invitation ...
BMC Public Health
Background: NHS Health Check is a primary prevention programme offering cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment to adults in England aged 40-74. Uptake remains a challenge and invitation method is a strong predictor of uptake. There is evidence of low uptake when using invitation letters. Telephone invitations might increase uptake, but are not widely used. We explored the potential to improve uptake through personalising letters to patient's CVD risk, and to compare this with generic letters and telephone invitations. Methods: HEalth Check TRial (HECTR) was a three-arm randomised controlled trial in nine general practices in Staffordshire (UK). Eligible patients were randomised to be invited to a NHS Health Check using one of three methods: standard letter (control); telephone invitation; letter personalised to the patient's CVD risk. The primary outcome was attendance/non-attendance. Data were collected on a range of patient-and practice-level factors (e.g., patient socio-demographics, CVD risk, practice size, Health Checks outside usual working hours). Multi-level logistic regression estimated the marginal effects to explore whether invitation method predicted attendance. Invitation costs were collated from practices to estimate cost benefit. Results: In total, 4614 patients were included in analysis (mean age 50.2 ± 8.0 yr.; 52.4% female). Compared with patients invited by standard letter (30.9%), uptake was significantly higher in those invited by telephone (47.6%, P < .001), but not personalised letter (31.3%, p = .812). In multi-level analysis, compared with the standard letter arm, likelihood of attendance was 18 percentage points higher in the telephone arm and 4 percentage points higher in the personalised letter arm. The effect of telephone calls appeared strongest in patients who were younger and had lower CVD risk. We estimated per 1000 patients invited, risk-personalised letters could result in 40 additional attended Health Checks (at no extra cost) and telephone invitations could result in 180 additional Health Checks at an additional cost of £240. Conclusions: Telephone invitations should be advocated to address the substantial deficit between current and required levels of NHS uptake, and could be targeted at younger and lower CVD risk adults. Risk-personalised letters should be explored further in a larger sample of high risk individuals.
Journal of Public Health, 2019
Background Uptake of NHS Health Checks (NHSHCs) is sub-optimal. This study aimed to increase their uptake using behaviourally informed invitation letters. Method Patients registered with 6 general practices in Northamptonshire, England who were eligible for an NHSHC between 10 February 2014 and 31 January 2015 were randomized monthly, using a random number generator, to three trial arms: control (standard invitation), sunk costs (resources already allocated) and counterargument (against common barriers to attendance). The outcome measure was uptake of NHSHC by 12 weeks after 31 January. Results In total, 6331 patients were randomized. After exclusions, due to ineligibility for the NHSHC, data were analysed for N = 6313 patients: N = 2123 control; N = 2085 counterargument; N = 2105 sunk costs. Overall, 2364 (37.45%) patients attended an NHSHC. Both intervention letters increased uptake compared to control, by 5.46% using counterargument (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.32, CI 1.162-1.51, p < 0.001) and 4.33% using sunk costs (AOR 1.246, CI 1.10-1.42, p < 0.001), with no significant difference between the two. Conclusion Behaviourally informed invitation letters, containing sunk costs or counterargument messages, can improve the uptake of NHSHCs.
Increasing uptake of NHS Health Checks: a randomised controlled trial using GP computer prompts
British Journal of General Practice
BackgroundPublic Health England wants to increase the uptake of the NHS Health Check (NHSHC), a cardiovascular disease prevention programme. Most invitations are sent by letter, but opportunistic invitations may be issued and verbal invitations have a higher rate of uptake. Prompting staff to issue opportunistic invitations might increase uptake.AimTo assess the effect on uptake of automated prompts to clinical staff to invite patients to NHSHC, delivered via primary care computer systems.Design and settingPseudo-randomised controlled trial of patients eligible for the NHSHC attending GP practices in Southwark, London.MethodEligible patients were allocated into one of two conditions, (a) Prompt and (b) No Prompt, to clinical staff. The primary outcome was attendance at an NHSHC.ResultsFifteen of 43 (34.88%) practices in Southwark were recruited; 7564 patients were eligible for an NHSHC, 3778 (49.95%) in the control and 3786 (50.05%) in the intervention. Attendance in the interventio...
Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2017
A population-based programme of health checks has been established in England. Participants receive postal invitations through a population-based call-recall system but health check providers may also offer health checks opportunistically. We compared cardiovascular risk scores for 'invited' and 'opportunistic' health checks. Cohort study of all health checks completed at 18 general practices from July 2013 to June 2015. For each general practice, cardiovascular (CVD) risk scores were compared by source of check and pooled using meta-analysis. Effect estimates were compared by gender, age-group, ethnicity and fifths of deprivation. There were 6184 health checks recorded (2280 invited and 3904 opportunistic) with CVD risk scores recorded for 5359 (87%) participants. There were 17.0% of invited checks and 22.2% of opportunistic health checks with CVD risk score ≥10%; a relative increment of 28% (95% confidence interval: 14-44%, P < 0.001). In the most deprived quint...
BMJ, 2010
Objective To compare the effect of an invitation promoting informed choice for screening with a standard invitation on attendance and motivation to engage in preventive action.Design Randomised controlled trial.Setting Four English general practices.Participants 1272 people aged 40-69 years, at risk for diabetes, identified from practice registers using a validated risk score and invited to attend for screening.Intervention Intervention was a previously validated invitation to inform the decision to attend screening, presenting diabetes as a serious potential problem, and providing details of possible costs and benefits of screening and treatment in text and pie charts. This was compared with a brief, standard invitation simply describing diabetes as a serious potential problem.Main outcome measures The primary end point was attendance for screening. The secondary outcome measures were intention to make changes to lifestyle and satisfaction with decisions made among attenders.Results The primary end point was analysed for all 1272 participants. 55.8% (353/633) of those in the informed choice group attended for screening, compared with 57.6% (368/639) in the standard invitation group (mean difference −1.8%, 95% confidence interval −7.3% to 3.6%; P=0.51). Attendance was lower among the more deprived group (most deprived third 47.5% v least deprived third 64.3%; P<0.001). Interaction between deprivation and effect of invitation type on attendance was not significant. Among attenders, intention to change behaviour was strong and unaffected by invitation type.Conclusions Providing information to support choice did not adversely affect attendance for screening for diabetes. Those from more socially deprived groups were, however, less likely to attend, regardless of the type of invitation received. Further attention to invitation content alone is unlikely to achieve equity in uptake of preventive services.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 73125647.
BMC Public Health, 2009
Background: Screening invitations have traditionally been brief, providing information only about population benefits. Presenting information about the limited individual benefits and potential harms of screening to inform choice may reduce attendance, particularly in the more socially deprived. At the same time, amongst those who attend, it might increase motivation to change behavior to reduce risks. This trial assesses the impact on attendance and motivation to change behavior of an invitation that facilitates informed choices about participating in diabetes screening in general practice. Three hypotheses are tested: