Patients' Experiences of Health Checks in General Practice: a Sample Survey

Abstract

The 1990 contract for general practitioners in the UK offered incentives for them to organize health promotion clinics and required them to perform 'lifestyle' checkups of their patients every 3 years, despite uncertainty about the impact of such checks on patient health. To address this lack of appropriate evaluation, a follow-up study to assess benefits in terms of patient behaviour and health resulting from the introduction of lifestyle checkups in general practice in a sample of more than 7000 patients aged 30-70 from 18 practices in three FHSA areas (in south London, Surrey and Yorkshire) has been performed. Eighteen per cent of the random sample of patients reported having a health check in the previous year. A full health check comprising measurement of blood pressure, height and weight, urinalysis and questioning about smoking habits, alcohol consumption, exercise, diet and family illnesses had been given to 29% of respondents reporting a health check of any kind. Respondents in less privileged socioeconomic groups were more likely to have had a health check, but less likely to have had a 'full' check. Reactions to the checks were mainly positive; 81% regarded the check as helpful, and only 6% reported it to be worrying and 6% a waste of time. The implications for the new health promotion banding system in the UK are discussed.

Barriers and facilitators to participation in a health check for cardiometabolic diseases in primary care: A systematic review

“…37,38 However in eight studies education was neither a facilitator nor a barrier. 19,20,[39][40][41][42][43][44] Overall, low SES was reported to be both a barrier and a facilitator, 45,46 and higher SES to be a facilitator. 47 In total, 18 studies (46%) reported about age, of which 12 (67%) reported it as a barrier or facilitator.…”

"You can't prevent everything anyway": A qualitative study of beliefs and attitudes about refusing health screening in general practice

“…Mange undersøgelser beskaeftiger sig med inviterede, der undlader at lade sig screene -men mest omkring hvilke organisatoriske tiltag, der vil kunne få så mange som muligt til at deltage og ofte med fokus på social ulighed (14)(15)(16). Kun få har beskaeftiget sig mere udførligt med enkeltindividets bagvedliggende begrundelse for at sige nej tak til at lade sig screene eller til blot at udeblive (17,18).…”

“…Her bruges mål som selvvurderet risiko eller helbred, General Health Questionnaires, livskvalitetsmål, et spørgeskema med få svarmuligheder eller få åbne spørgsmål som resultatmål til at beskrive, hvordan helbredsundersøgelser påvirker den screenede gruppe (17,18,45,65,101,102,(141)(142)(143)(144)(145)147).…”

“…). I West Yorkshire, south-west London og Surrey (67) fandt 6 % af deltagerne, at det var spild af tid, 6 % fandt det bekymrende og 81 % fandt, det var en hjaelp(18,67). I Ebeltoft-projektet rapporterede kun 2 % negativ virkning af deltagelse i projektet, mens 42-78 % rapporterede positiv virkning og efter et og fem år var der ingen forskel i psykologisk reaktion mellem interventions-og kontrolgruppe og ingen sammenhaeng mellem helbredsscreening og vedvarende dårligt selvvurderet helbred eller ringe velbefindende(45,101,102).…”