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

ObjectiveTo synthesise data concerning the views of commissioners, managers and healthcare professionals towards the National Health Service (NHS) Health Check programme in general and the challenges faced when implementing it in practice.DesignA systematic review of surveys and interview studies with a descriptive analysis of quantitative data and thematic synthesis of qualitative data.Data sourcesAn electronic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Health Management Information Consortium, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Health, PsycInfo, Web of Science, OpenGrey, the Cochrane Library, NHS Evidence, Google Scholar, Google, ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry from 1 January 1996 to 9 November 2016 with no language restriction and manual screening of reference lists of all included papers.Inclusion criteriaPrimary research reporting views of commissioners, managers or healthcare professionals on the NHS Health Check programme and its implementation in practice.ResultsOf 18 524 citations, 15 articles met the inclusion criteria. There was evidence from both quantitative and qualitative studies that some commissioners and general practice (GP) healthcare professionals were enthusiastic about the programme, whereas others raised concerns around inequality of uptake, the evidence base and cost-effectiveness. In contrast, those working in pharmacies were all positive about programme benefits, citing opportunities for their business and staff. The main challenges to implementation were: difficulties with information technology and computer software, resistance to the programme from some GPs, the impact on workload and staffing, funding and training needs. Inadequate privacy was also a challenge in pharmacy and community settings, along with difficulty recruiting people eligible for Health Checks and poor public access to some venues.ConclusionsThe success of the NHS Health Check Programme relies on engagement by those responsible for its commissioning, management and delivery. Recognising and addressing the challenges identified in this review, in particular the concerns of GPs, are important for the future of the programme.

Download Full-text

Patient experience of NHS health checks: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017169 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 7 (8) ◽

pp. e017169 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

Juliet A Usher-Smith ◽

Emma Harte ◽

Calum MacLure ◽

Adam Martin ◽

Catherine L Saunders ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Behaviour Change ◽

Lifestyle Changes ◽

Qualitative Studies ◽

Health Check ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Inclusion Criteria ◽

Health Checks ◽

Nhs Health Checks ◽

Nhs Health Check

ObjectiveTo review the experiences of patients attending NHS Health Checks in England.DesignA systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies with a thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.Data sourcesAn electronic literature search of Medline, Embase, Health Management Information Consortium, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Health, PsycInfo, Web of Science, OpenGrey, the Cochrane Library, National Health Service (NHS) Evidence, Google Scholar, Google, Clinical Trials.gov and the ISRCTN registry to 09/11/16 with no language restriction and manual screening of reference lists of all included papers.Inclusion criteriaPrimary research reporting experiences of patients who have attended NHS Health Checks.Results20 studies met the inclusion criteria, 9 reporting quantitative data and 15 qualitative data. There were consistently high levels of reported satisfaction in surveys, with over 80% feeling that they had benefited from an NHS Health Check. Data from qualitative studies showed that the NHS Health Check had been perceived to act as a wake-up call for many who reported having gone on to make substantial lifestyle changes which they attributed to the NHS Health Check. However, some had been left with a feeling of unmet expectations, were confused about or unable to remember their risk scores, found the lifestyle advice too simplistic and non-personalised or were confused about follow-up.ConclusionsWhile participants were generally very supportive of the NHS Health Check programme and examples of behaviour change were reported, there are a number of areas where improvements could be made. These include greater clarity around the aims of the programme within the promotional material, more proactive support for lifestyle change and greater appreciation of the challenges of communicating risk and the limitations of relying on the risk score alone as a trigger for facilitating behaviour change.

Download Full-text

Influences on NHS Health Check behaviours: a systematic review

10.21203/rs.3.rs-16576/v3 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Lou Atkins ◽

Chryssa Stefanidou ◽

Tim Chadborn ◽

Katherine Thompson ◽

Susan Michie ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Behaviour Change ◽

National Health ◽

Health Check ◽

Behavioural Science ◽

Health Checks ◽

Digital Intervention ◽

Intervention Content ◽

Nhs Health Checks ◽

Nhs Health Check

Abstract Background National Health Checks were introduced in the English National Health Service (NHS) in 2009 to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risks and events. Following Public Health England’s (PHE’s) 2017 Digital review, NHS Health Checks were identified as a Digital Exemplar for PHE forming part of the Predictive Prevention programme, setting out the government’s vision for putting prevention at the heart of the nation’s health. This study applied behavioural science frameworks to: i) identify behaviours and actors relevant to uptake, delivery and follow up of NHS Health Checks and influences on these behaviours and; ii) signpost to example intervention content, with a focus on digital intervention development. Methods A systematic review of studies reporting NHS Health Check-related behaviours of patients, health care professionals (HCPs) and commissioners. Influences on behaviours were coded using theory-based models: COM-B and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Potential intervention types and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were suggested to target key influences. Results We identified 37 studies reporting nine behaviours and influences for eight of these. The most frequently identified influences were physical opportunity including HCPs having space and time to deliver NHS Health Checks and patients having money to adhere to recommendations to change diet and physical activity. Other key influences were motivational, such as beliefs about consequences about the value of NHS Health Checks and behaviour change, and social, such as influences of others on behaviour change. The following techniques are suggested for websites or smartphone apps: Adding objects to the environment, e.g. provide HCPs with electronic schedules to guide timely delivery of Health Checks to target physical opportunity, Social support (unspecified) , e.g. include text suggesting patients to ask a colleague to agree in advance to join them in taking the ‘healthy option’ lunch at work; Information about health consequences , e.g. quotes and/or videos from patients talking about the health benefits of changes they have made. Conclusions Through the application of behavioural science we identified key behaviours and their influences which informed recommendations for digital intervention content. To ascertain the extent to which this reflects existing interventions we recommend a review of relevant evidence.

Download Full-text

Influences on NHS Health Check behaviours: a systematic review

10.21203/rs.3.rs-16576/v4 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Lou Atkins ◽

Chryssa Stefanidou ◽

Tim Chadborn ◽

Katherine Thompson ◽

Susan Michie ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Behaviour Change ◽

Health Care Professionals ◽

Health Check ◽

Behaviour Change Techniques ◽

Behavioural Science ◽

Health Checks ◽

Intervention Content ◽

Nhs Health Checks ◽

Nhs Health Check

Abstract Background National Health Service Health Checks were introduced in 2009 to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risks and events. Since then, national evaluations have highlighted the need to maximise the programme’s impact by improving coverage and outputs. To address these challenges it is important to understand the extent to which positive behaviours are influenced across the NHS Health Check pathway and encourage the promotion or minimisation of behavioural facilitators and barriers respectively. This study applied behavioural science frameworks to: i) identify behaviours and actors relevant to uptake, delivery and follow up of NHS Health Checks and influences on these behaviours and; ii) signpost to example intervention content. Methods A systematic review of studies reporting behaviours related to NHS Health Check-related behaviours of patients, health care professionals (HCPs) and commissioners. Influences on behaviours were coded using theory-based models: COM-B and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Potential intervention types and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were suggested to target key influences. Results We identified 37 studies reporting nine behaviours and influences for eight of these. The most frequently identified influences were physical opportunity including HCPs having space and time to deliver NHS Health Checks and patients having money to adhere to recommendations to change diet and physical activity. Other key influences were motivational, such as beliefs about consequences about the value of NHS Health Checks and behaviour change, and social, such as influences of others on behaviour change. The following techniques are suggested for websites or smartphone apps: Adding objects to the environment, e.g. provide HCPs with electronic schedules to guide timely delivery of Health Checks to target physical opportunity, Social support (unspecified), e.g. include text suggesting patients to ask a colleague to agree in advance to join them in taking the ‘healthy option’ lunch at work; Information about health consequences, e.g. quotes and/or videos from patients talking about the health benefits of changes they have made.Conclusions Through the application of behavioural science we identified key behaviours and their influences which informed recommendations for intervention content. To ascertain the extent to which this reflects existing interventions we recommend a review of relevant evidence.

Download Full-text

Influences on NHS Health Check behaviours: a systematic review

10.21203/rs.3.rs-16576/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Lou Atkins ◽

Chryssa Stefanidou ◽

Tim Chadborn ◽

Katherine Thompson ◽

Susan Michie ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Behaviour Change ◽

Health Care Professionals ◽

Health Check ◽

Behaviour Change Techniques ◽

Behavioural Science ◽

Health Checks ◽

Intervention Content ◽

Nhs Health Checks ◽

Nhs Health Check

Abstract Background National Health Service Health Checks were introduced in 2009 to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risks and events. Since then, national evaluations have highlighted the need to maximise the programme’s impact by improving coverage and outputs. To address these challenges it is important to understand the extent to which positive behaviours are influenced across the NHS Health Check pathway and encourage the promotion or minimisation of behavioural facilitators and barriers respectively. This study applied behavioural science frameworks to: i) identify behaviours and actors relevant to uptake, delivery and follow up of NHS Health Checks and influences on these behaviours and; ii) signpost to example intervention content. Methods A systematic review of studies reporting behaviours related to NHS Health Check-related behaviours of patients, health care professionals (HCPs) and commissioners. Influences on behaviours were coded using theory-based models: COM-B and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Potential intervention types and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were suggested to target key influences. Results We identified 37 studies reporting nine behaviours and influences for eight of these. The most frequently identified influences were physical opportunity including HCPs having space and time to deliver NHS Health Checks and patients having money to adhere to recommendations to change diet and physical activity. Other key influences were motivational, such as beliefs about consequences about the value of NHS Health Checks and behaviour change, and social, such as influences of others on behaviour change. The following techniques are suggested for websites or smartphone apps: Adding objects to the environment, e.g. provide HCPs with electronic schedules to guide timely delivery of Health Checks to target physical opportunity, Social support (unspecified), e.g. include text suggesting patients to ask a colleague to agree in advance to join them in taking the ‘healthy option’ lunch at work; Information about health consequences, e.g. quotes and/or videos from patients talking about the health benefits of changes they have made.Conclusions Through the application of behavioural science we identified key behaviours and their influences which informed recommendations for intervention content. To ascertain the extent to which this reflects existing interventions we recommend a review of relevant evidence.

Download Full-text

Influences on NHS Health Check behaviours: a systematic review

BMC Public Health ◽

10.1186/s12889-020-09365-2 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Lou Atkins ◽

Chryssa Stefanidou ◽

Tim Chadborn ◽

Katherine Thompson ◽

Susan Michie ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Behaviour Change ◽

Health Care Professionals ◽

Health Check ◽

Behaviour Change Techniques ◽

Behavioural Science ◽

Health Checks ◽

Intervention Content ◽

Nhs Health Checks ◽

Nhs Health Check

Abstract Background National Health Service Health Checks were introduced in 2009 to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risks and events. Since then, national evaluations have highlighted the need to maximise the programme’s impact by improving coverage and outputs. To address these challenges it is important to understand the extent to which positive behaviours are influenced across the NHS Health Check pathway and encourage the promotion or minimisation of behavioural facilitators and barriers respectively. This study applied behavioural science frameworks to: i) identify behaviours and actors relevant to uptake, delivery and follow up of NHS Health Checks and influences on these behaviours and; ii) signpost to example intervention content. Methods A systematic review of studies reporting behaviours related to NHS Health Check-related behaviours of patients, health care professionals (HCPs) and commissioners. Influences on behaviours were coded using theory-based models: COM-B and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Potential intervention types and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were suggested to target key influences. Results We identified 37 studies reporting nine behaviours and influences for eight of these. The most frequently identified influences were physical opportunity including HCPs having space and time to deliver NHS Health Checks and patients having money to adhere to recommendations to change diet and physical activity. Other key influences were motivational, such as beliefs about consequences about the value of NHS Health Checks and behaviour change, and social, such as influences of others on behaviour change. The following techniques are suggested for websites or smartphone apps: Adding objects to the environment, e.g. provide HCPs with electronic schedules to guide timely delivery of Health Checks to target physical opportunity, Social support (unspecified), e.g. include text suggesting patients to ask a colleague to agree in advance to join them in taking the ‘healthy option’ lunch at work; Information about health consequences, e.g. quotes and/or videos from patients talking about the health benefits of changes they have made. Conclusions Through the application of behavioural science we identified key behaviours and their influences which informed recommendations for intervention content. To ascertain the extent to which this reflects existing interventions we recommend a review of relevant evidence.

Download Full-text

Influences on NHS Health Check behaviours: a systematic review

10.21203/rs.3.rs-16576/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Lou Atkins ◽

Chryssa Stefanidou ◽

Tim Chadborn ◽

Katherine Thompson ◽

Susan Michie ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Behaviour Change ◽

National Health ◽

Health Check ◽

Behavioural Science ◽

Health Checks ◽

Digital Intervention ◽

Intervention Content ◽

Nhs Health Checks ◽

Nhs Health Check

Abstract Background National Health Checks were introduced in the English National Health Service (NHS) in 2009 to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risks and events. Following Public Health England’s (PHE’s) 2017 Digital review, NHS Health Checks were identified as a Digital Exemplar for PHE forming part of the Predictive Prevention programme, setting out the government’s vision for putting prevention at the heart of the nation’s health. This study applied behavioural science frameworks to: i) identify behaviours and actors relevant to uptake, delivery and follow up of NHS Health Checks and influences on these behaviours and; ii) signpost to example intervention content, with a focus on digital intervention development. Methods A systematic review of studies reporting NHS Health Check-related behaviours of patients, health care professionals (HCPs) and commissioners. Influences on behaviours were coded using theory-based models: COM-B and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Potential intervention types and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were suggested to target key influences. Results We identified 37 studies reporting nine behaviours and influences for eight of these. The most frequently identified influences were physical opportunity including HCPs having space and time to deliver NHS Health Checks and patients having money to adhere to recommendations to change diet and physical activity. Other key influences were motivational, such as beliefs about consequences about the value of NHS Health Checks and behaviour change, and social, such as influences of others on behaviour change. The following techniques are suggested for websites or smartphone apps: Adding objects to the environment, e.g. provide HCPs with electronic schedules to guide timely delivery of Health Checks to target physical opportunity, Social support (unspecified) , e.g. include text suggesting patients to ask a colleague to agree in advance to join them in taking the ‘healthy option’ lunch at work; Information about health consequences , e.g. quotes and/or videos from patients talking about the health benefits of changes they have made. Conclusions Through the application of behavioural science we identified key behaviours and their influences which informed recommendations for digital intervention content. To ascertain the extent to which this reflects existing interventions we recommend a review of relevant evidence.

Download Full-text

NHS Health Checks for people with mental ill-health 2013–2017: an observational study

Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences ◽

10.1017/s2045796020001006 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 29 ◽

Author(s):

C. Garriga ◽

J. Robson ◽

C. Coupland ◽

J. Hippisley-Cox

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Cardiovascular Events ◽

Health Check ◽

Health Checks ◽

Hazard Ratios ◽

Nationally Representative ◽

Nhs Health Checks ◽

Nhs Health Check

Abstract Aims People living with serious mental ill-health experience adverse cardiovascular outcomes causing some of the greatest health inequality gaps in England, UK. We describe uptake of the NHS Health Check programme in people with mental ill-health, and rates of new diagnoses and management of cardiovascular risk factors in those who attend NHS Health Checks in comparison to those people without mental ill-health. Methods We used a large nationally representative database of people registered with general practitioners in England (QResearch). Between 2013 and 2017, we analysed attendance at NHS Health Checks and outcomes in the succeeding 12 months, in people with serious mental illness (SMI) including psychoses and in people prescribed long-term antidepressant medications (LTAD), with comparison to attendees who did not have these conditions. Hazard ratios (HR) were used to describe the association between outcomes and SMI and LTAD adjusting for sociodemographic variables. Results In those eligible for the NHS Health Check programme, we found a higher percentage of people with SMI attended an NHS Health Check (65 490, 19.8%) than those without SMI (524 728, 16.6%); adjusted HR 1.05 [95% confidence interval 1.02–1.08]. We also observed a higher percentage of attendance in people on LTAD (46 437, 20.1%) compared to people who were not prescribed LTAD (543 781, 16.7%); adjusted HR 1.10 (1.08–1.13). People with SMI were more likely to be identified with chronic kidney disease (CKD, HR 1.23, 1.12–1.34) and type 2 diabetes (HR 1.14, 1.03–1.25) within the 12 months following their NHS Health Check compared with those without SMI. People on LTAD were more likely to be identified with CKD (HR 1.55, 1.42–1.70) and type 2 diabetes (HR 1.45, 1.31–1.60) and also hypertension, cardiovascular disease, non-diabetic hyperglycaemia, familial hypercholesterolemia and dementia within the 12 months following their NHS Health Check. Statins were more likely to be prescribed to NHS Health Check attendees with SMI and those on LTAD than those without these conditions; HR 1.31 (1.25–1.38) and 1.91 (1.82–2.01), respectively. Antihypertensives were more likely to be prescribed to those on LTAD; HR 1.21 (1.14–1.29). Conclusions We found evidence that people with SMI or on LTAD treatment were 5–10% more likely to access NHS Health Checks than people without these conditions. People with SMI or on LTAD treatment who attended NHS Health Checks had higher rates of diagnosis of CKD, type 2 diabetes and some other relevant co-morbidities and increased treatment with statins and also anti-hypertensive medication in people on LTAD. This is likely to contribute to equitable reduction in adverse cardiovascular events for people with mental ill-health.

Download Full-text

Neurocognitive Deficits Associated With ADHD in Athletes: A Systematic Review

Sports Health A Multidisciplinary Approach ◽

10.1177/1941738117751387 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 10 (4) ◽

pp. 317-326 ◽

Cited By ~ 12

Author(s):

Poyrung Poysophon ◽

Ashwin L. Rao

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Stimulant Medication ◽

Adolescent And Young Adult ◽

Symptom Reporting ◽

Cognitive Test ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Neurocognitive Deficits ◽

Inclusion Criteria ◽

Increased Risk ◽

The Impact

Context: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common childhood disorder and is frequently diagnosed in young adults. Emerging studies suggest a relationship between ADHD and concussion. Objective: To determine whether athletes with ADHD are at increased risk for neurocognitive deficits related to concussion risk, symptom reporting, and recovery. Data Sources: A comprehensive search of PubMed, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and Cochrane Library databases was performed. Studies conducted between 2006 and 2017 were reviewed, although only those between 2013 and 2017 met inclusion criteria. Study Selection: Studies that examined neurocognitive deficits in adolescent and young adult athletes aged 15 to 19 years who had ADHD and reported using notable neuropsychological evaluation tools were included. Study Design: Systematic review. Level of Evidence: Level 2. Results: A total of 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of ADHD in athletes varied between 4.2% and 8.1%. Overall, athletes with ADHD demonstrated lower scores on neurocognitive testing such as the ImPACT (Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Test), increased risk for concussion, and increased symptom reporting. There was no evidence that treatment with stimulant medication changed these risks. Conclusion: ADHD is associated with increased neurocognitive deficits in athletes, although pathophysiology remains unclear. Evidence for stimulant treatment in athletes with ADHD continues to be sparse.

Download Full-text

Burden of tinea capitis among children in Africa: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies, 1990–2020

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041230 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (9) ◽

pp. e041230

Author(s):

Felix Bongomin ◽

Ronald Olum ◽

Lauryn Nsenga ◽

Joseph Baruch Baluku

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Tinea Capitis ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Trend Test ◽

Qualitative Synthesis ◽

Institutional Review ◽

Ethical Approval ◽

Study Characteristics ◽

The Impact

IntroductionTinea capitis is the most common form of dermatophytosis among children, contributing significantly to the global burden of skin and hair infections. However, an accurate account of its burden in Africa, where most cases are thought to occur, is lacking. We aim to systematically evaluate the burden, aetiology and epidemiological trend of tinea capitis among children over a 30-year period in Africa.Methods and analysisA systematic review will be conducted using Embase, PubMed, African Journals Online, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library of Systematic Review. These resources will be used to identify studies published between 1990 and December 2020, which report the prevalence, aetiology and trend of tinea capitis among children younger than 18 years in Africa. Articles in English and French will be considered. Two independent reviewers will screen the articles for eligibility, and any discrepancies will be resolved by discussion and consensus between the authors. Methodological quality of all studies will be assessed and critically appraised. We will perform a metaregression to assess the impact of study characteristics on heterogeneity and also to correct the meta-analytical estimates for biases. A qualitative synthesis will be performed, and STATA V.16.0 software will be used to estimate the pooled prevalence and aetiology of tinea capitis. The Mann-Kendall trend test will be use to evaluate the trend in the prevalence of tinea capitis over the study period.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval from an institutional review board or research ethics committee is not required for this systematic review and meta-analysis. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented in conferences.

Download Full-text