• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

NHS 健康检查在头 8 年的实施情况和影响:系统评价。

Delivery and impact of the NHS Health Check in the first 8 years: a systematic review.

机构信息

Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, and RAND Europe, Cambridge.

Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, and RAND Europe, Cambridge.

出版信息

Br J Gen Pract. 2018 Jul;68(672):e449-e459. doi: 10.3399/bjgp18X697649. Epub 2018 Jun 18.

DOI:10.3399/bjgp18X697649
PMID:29914882
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6014431/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Since 2009, all eligible persons in England have been entitled to an NHS Health Check. Uncertainty remains about who attends, and the health-related impacts.

AIM

To review quantitative evidence on coverage (the proportion of eligible individuals who attend), uptake (proportion of invitees who attend), and impact of NHS Health Checks.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A systematic review and quantitative data synthesis. Included were studies or data reporting coverage or uptake and studies reporting any health-related impact that used an appropriate comparison group or before- and-after study design.

METHOD

Eleven databases and additional internet sources were searched to November 2016.

RESULTS

Twenty-six observational studies and one additional dataset were included. Since 2013, 45.6% of eligible individuals have received a health check. Coverage is higher among older people, those with a family history of coronary heart disease, those living in the most deprived areas, and some ethnic minority groups. Just under half (48.2%) of those invited have taken up the invitation. Data on uptake and impact (especially regarding health-related behaviours) are limited. Uptake is higher in older people and females, but lower in those living in the most deprived areas. Attendance is associated with small increases in disease detection, decreases in modelled cardiovascular disease risk, and increased statin and antihypertensive prescribing.

CONCLUSION

Published attendance, uptake, and prescribing rates are all lower than originally anticipated, and data on impact are limited, with very few studies reporting the effect of attendance on health-related behaviours. High-quality studies comparing matched attendees and non-attendees and health economic analyses are required.

摘要

背景

自 2009 年以来,英格兰所有符合条件的人都有权接受国民保健制度健康检查。谁会参加,以及健康相关的影响仍存在不确定性。

目的

综述 NHS 健康检查的覆盖率(合格人群中参加者的比例)、参与率(受邀者中参加者的比例)和健康相关影响的定量证据。

设计和设置

系统评价和定量数据综合。包括报告覆盖率或参与率的研究或数据,以及使用适当对照或前后研究设计报告任何健康相关影响的研究。

方法

搜索了 11 个数据库和其他互联网资源,截至 2016 年 11 月。

结果

纳入了 26 项观察性研究和一个额外的数据集。自 2013 年以来,45.6%的合格者接受了健康检查。老年人、有冠心病家族史的人、生活在最贫困地区的人以及一些少数族裔群体的覆盖率较高。近一半(48.2%)的受邀者接受了邀请。关于参与率和影响(尤其是与健康相关行为)的数据有限。老年人和女性的参与率较高,但生活在最贫困地区的人较低。参加者与疾病检出率略有增加、心血管疾病风险模型降低以及他汀类药物和抗高血压药物处方增加有关。

结论

与最初预期相比,发表的参与率、参与率和处方率都较低,并且关于影响的数据有限,很少有研究报告参加对健康相关行为的影响。需要进行比较匹配的参与者和非参与者以及健康经济学分析的高质量研究。

相似文献

1
Delivery and impact of the NHS Health Check in the first 8 years: a systematic review.NHS 健康检查在头 8 年的实施情况和影响:系统评价。
Br J Gen Pract. 2018 Jul;68(672):e449-e459. doi: 10.3399/bjgp18X697649. Epub 2018 Jun 18.
2
Prescription of Controlled Substances: Benefits and Risks管制药品的处方:益处与风险
3
Stakeholders' perceptions and experiences of factors influencing the commissioning, delivery, and uptake of general health checks: a qualitative evidence synthesis.利益相关者对影响一般健康检查的委托、提供和接受因素的看法与体验:一项定性证据综合分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Mar 20;3(3):CD014796. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014796.pub2.
4
[Volume and health outcomes: evidence from systematic reviews and from evaluation of Italian hospital data].[容量与健康结果:来自系统评价和意大利医院数据评估的证据]
Epidemiol Prev. 2013 Mar-Jun;37(2-3 Suppl 2):1-100.
5
Sexual Harassment and Prevention Training性骚扰与预防培训
6
Housing improvements for health and associated socio-economic outcomes.改善住房对健康及相关社会经济成果的影响。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Feb 28(2):CD008657. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008657.pub2.
7
Falls prevention interventions for community-dwelling older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits, harms, and patient values and preferences.社区居住的老年人跌倒预防干预措施:系统评价和荟萃分析的益处、危害以及患者的价值观和偏好。
Syst Rev. 2024 Nov 26;13(1):289. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02681-3.
8
The Black Book of Psychotropic Dosing and Monitoring.《精神药物剂量与监测黑皮书》
Psychopharmacol Bull. 2024 Jul 8;54(3):8-59.
9
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer.对紫杉醇、多西他赛、吉西他滨和长春瑞滨在非小细胞肺癌中的临床疗效和成本效益进行的快速系统评价。
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(32):1-195. doi: 10.3310/hta5320.
10
Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.成人全身麻醉后预防术后恶心呕吐的药物:网状Meta分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 19;10(10):CD012859. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
The effectiveness of interventions used to improve general health check uptake by the older adult population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.用于提高老年人群体接受一般健康检查率的干预措施的有效性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2025 Mar 31;5(3):e0004362. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0004362. eCollection 2025.
2
Patterns of referrals to regional clinical genetics services for women potentially at above-population level risk of breast cancer.转诊至区域临床遗传学服务机构的模式,针对可能处于高于一般人群乳腺癌风险水平的女性。
BJC Rep. 2024 Jan 11;2(1):2. doi: 10.1038/s44276-023-00027-5.
3
A community health worker led approach to cardiovascular disease prevention in the UK-SPICES-Sussex (scaling-up packages of interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention in selected sites in Europe and Sub-saharan Africa): an implementation research project.在英国开展的由社区卫生工作者主导的心血管疾病预防方法——SPICES-苏塞克斯项目(在欧洲和撒哈拉以南非洲选定地点扩大心血管疾病预防干预措施包):一项实施研究项目。
Front Health Serv. 2024 May 7;4:1152410. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2024.1152410. eCollection 2024.
4
Re-thinking the role of primary care in dementia prevention.重新思考初级保健在痴呆症预防中的作用。
Br J Gen Pract. 2023 Dec 28;74(738):13. doi: 10.3399/bjgp24X735945. Print 2024 Jan.
5
The NHS Health Check programme: a survey of programme delivery in England before and after the Covid-19 pandemic response.英国国家医疗服务体系健康检查计划:对新冠疫情应对前后英格兰地区该计划实施情况的一项调查。
NIHR Open Res. 2023 Aug 25;3:32. doi: 10.3310/nihropenres.13436.2. eCollection 2023.
6
Exploring targeted preventive health check interventions - a realist synthesis.探索有针对性的预防保健检查干预措施 - 一个现实主义的综合研究。
BMC Public Health. 2023 Oct 5;23(1):1928. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-16861-8.
7
Prioritising cardiovascular disease risk assessment to high risk individuals based on primary care records.根据基层医疗记录,优先对高危个体进行心血管疾病风险评估。
PLoS One. 2023 Sep 29;18(9):e0292240. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0292240. eCollection 2023.
8
Using Polygenic Risk Scores for Prioritizing Individuals at Greatest Need of a Cardiovascular Disease Risk Assessment.利用多基因风险评分优先考虑心血管疾病风险评估需求最大的个体。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2023 Aug;12(15):e029296. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.122.029296. Epub 2023 Jul 25.
9
Cardiovascular disease risk assessment using a deep-learning-based retinal biomarker: a comparison with existing risk scores.使用基于深度学习的视网膜生物标志物进行心血管疾病风险评估:与现有风险评分的比较
Eur Heart J Digit Health. 2023 Mar 28;4(3):236-244. doi: 10.1093/ehjdh/ztad023. eCollection 2023 May.
10
Evaluating the clinical effectiveness of the NHS Health Check programme: a prospective analysis in the Genetics and Vascular Health Check (GENVASC) study.评估国民保健制度健康检查计划的临床效果:在遗传与血管健康检查(GENVASC)研究中的前瞻性分析。
BMJ Open. 2023 May 30;13(5):e068025. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068025.

本文引用的文献

1
Views of commissioners, managers and healthcare professionals on the NHS Health Check programme: a systematic review.专员、管理人员和医疗保健专业人员对国民健康服务健康检查计划的看法:一项系统综述。
BMJ Open. 2017 Nov 15;7(11):e018606. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018606.
2
Patient experience of NHS health checks: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis.英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)健康检查的患者体验:系统评价与定性综合分析
BMJ Open. 2017 Aug 11;7(8):e017169. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017169.
3
The cost-effectiveness of population Health Checks: have the NHS Health Checks been unfairly maligned?人群健康检查的成本效益:国民健康服务体系健康检查是否受到了不公正的诋毁?
Z Gesundh Wiss. 2017;25(4):425-431. doi: 10.1007/s10389-017-0801-8. Epub 2017 Apr 21.
4
Cost effective but unaffordable: an emerging challenge for health systems.成本效益高但难以负担:卫生系统面临的新挑战。
BMJ. 2017 Mar 22;356:j1402. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j1402.
5
Are cardiovascular disease risk assessment and management programmes cost effective? A systematic review of the evidence.心血管疾病风险评估与管理项目是否具有成本效益?证据的系统评价。
Prev Med. 2017 Jun;99:49-57. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.01.005. Epub 2017 Jan 11.
6
Cost effectiveness of case-finding strategies for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a modelling study.心血管疾病一级预防病例发现策略的成本效益:一项建模研究。
Br J Gen Pract. 2017 Jan;67(654):e67-e77. doi: 10.3399/bjgp16X687973. Epub 2016 Nov 7.
7
Cardiovascular screening to reduce the burden from cardiovascular disease: microsimulation study to quantify policy options.心血管疾病筛查以减轻心血管疾病负担:量化政策选项的微观模拟研究
BMJ. 2016 Jun 8;353:i2793. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i2793.
8
Identifying Barriers to Appropriate Use of Metabolic/Bariatric Surgery for Type 2 Diabetes Treatment: Policy Lab Results.识别代谢/减重手术在2型糖尿病治疗中合理应用的障碍:政策实验室结果
Diabetes Care. 2016 Jun;39(6):954-63. doi: 10.2337/dc15-2781.
9
Impact of the National Health Service Health Check on cardiovascular disease risk: a difference-in-differences matching analysis.国家卫生服务健康检查对心血管疾病风险的影响:差异分析匹配分析。
CMAJ. 2016 Jul 12;188(10):E228-E238. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.151201. Epub 2016 May 2.
10
The effectiveness of an enhanced invitation letter on uptake of National Health Service Health Checks in primary care: a pragmatic quasi-randomised controlled trial.强化邀请信对初级医疗中接受国民健康服务健康检查的效果:一项实用的半随机对照试验。
BMC Fam Pract. 2016 Mar 24;17:35. doi: 10.1186/s12875-016-0426-y.