Health and Lifespan Psychology Group, School of Life & Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, UK.
BMJ Open. 2013 Nov 7;3(11):e003428. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003428.
To evaluate behavioural components and strategies associated with increased uptake and effectiveness of screening for coronary heart disease and diabetes with an implementation science focus.
Realist review.
PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and reference chaining. Searches limited to English language studies published since 1990.
Eligible studies evaluated interventions designed to increase the uptake of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes screening and examined behavioural and/or strategic designs. Studies were excluded if they evaluated changes in risk factors or cost-effectiveness only.
In 12 eligible studies, several different intervention designs and evidence-based strategies were evaluated. Salient themes were effects of feedback on behaviour change or benefits of health dialogues over simple feedback. Studies provide mixed evidence about the benefits of these intervention constituents, which are suggested to be situation and design specific, broadly supporting their use, but highlighting concerns about the fidelity of intervention delivery, raising implementation science issues. Three studies examined the effects of informed choice or loss versus gain frame invitations, finding no effect on screening uptake but highlighting opportunistic screening as being more successful for recruiting higher CVD and diabetes risk patients than an invitation letter, with no differences in outcomes once recruited. Two studies examined differences between attenders and non-attenders, finding higher risk factors among non-attenders and higher diagnosed CVD and diabetes among those who later dropped out of longitudinal studies.
If the risk and prevalence of these diseases are to be reduced, interventions must take into account what we know about effective health behaviour change mechanisms, monitor delivery by trained professionals and examine the possibility of tailoring programmes according to contexts such as risk level to reach those most in need. Further research is needed to determine the best strategies for lifelong approaches to screening.
从实施科学的角度评估与增加冠心病和糖尿病筛查的采用率和效果相关的行为因素和策略。
现实主义综述。
PubMed、Web of Knowledge、Cochrane 系统评价数据库、Cochrane 对照试验登记处和参考文献链接。检索仅限于自 1990 年以来以英文发表的研究。
符合条件的研究评估了旨在增加心血管疾病(CVD)和糖尿病筛查采用率的干预措施,并检查了行为和/或策略设计。如果研究仅评估了危险因素或成本效益的变化,则将其排除在外。
在 12 项符合条件的研究中,评估了几种不同的干预设计和基于证据的策略。突出的主题是反馈对行为改变的影响或健康对话相对于简单反馈的益处。这些干预成分的效果存在混合证据,这些证据表明它们是特定于情况和设计的,广泛支持其使用,但强调了对干预实施保真度的关注,提出了实施科学问题。三项研究考察了知情选择或损失与收益框架邀请的效果,发现对筛查采用率没有影响,但强调机会性筛查对于招募更高 CVD 和糖尿病风险患者比邀请信更成功,一旦招募,结果没有差异。两项研究考察了参与者和非参与者之间的差异,发现非参与者的风险因素更高,而那些后来退出纵向研究的参与者的 CVD 和糖尿病诊断率更高。
如果要降低这些疾病的风险和患病率,干预措施必须考虑到我们对有效健康行为改变机制的了解,由经过培训的专业人员监测实施情况,并研究根据风险水平等情况定制方案的可能性,以满足最有需要的人群。需要进一步研究以确定终生筛查策略的最佳策略。