Krogsbøll Lasse T, Jørgensen Karsten Juhl, Gøtzsche Peter C
Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 7811, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2100.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Jan 31;1(1):CD009009. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009009.pub3.
General health checks are common elements of health care in some countries. They aim to detect disease and risk factors for disease with the purpose of reducing morbidity and mortality. Most of the commonly used individual screening tests offered in general health checks have been incompletely studied. Also, screening leads to increased use of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, which can be harmful as well as beneficial. It is therefore important to assess whether general health checks do more good than harm. This is the first update of the review published in 2012.
To quantify the benefits and harms of general health checks.
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases and two trials registers on 31 January 2018. Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts, assessed papers for eligibility and read reference lists. One review author used citation tracking (Web of Knowledge) and asked trial authors about additional studies.
We included randomised trials comparing health checks with no health checks in adults unselected for disease or risk factors. We did not include geriatric trials. We defined health checks as screening for more than one disease or risk factor in more than one organ system.
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the trials. We contacted trial authors for additional outcomes or trial details when necessary. When possible, we analysed the results with a random-effects model meta-analysis; otherwise, we did a narrative synthesis.
We included 17 trials, 15 of which reported outcome data (251,891 participants). Risk of bias was generally low for our primary outcomes. Health checks have little or no effect on total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.03; 11 trials; 233,298 participants and 21,535 deaths; high-certainty evidence, I = 0%), or cancer mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.12; 8 trials; 139,290 participants and 3663 deaths; high-certainty evidence, I = 33%), and probably have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.16; 9 trials; 170,227 participants and 6237 deaths; moderate-certainty evidence; I = 65%). Health checks have little or no effect on fatal and non-fatal ischaemic heart disease (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.03; 4 trials; 164,881 persons, 10,325 events; high-certainty evidence; I = 11%), and probably have little or no effect on fatal and non-fatal stroke (RR 1.05 95% CI 0.95 to 1.17; 3 trials; 107,421 persons, 4543 events; moderate-certainty evidence, I = 53%).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: General health checks are unlikely to be beneficial.
在一些国家,一般健康检查是医疗保健的常见组成部分。其目的是检测疾病及疾病风险因素,以降低发病率和死亡率。一般健康检查中提供的大多数常用个体筛查测试尚未得到充分研究。此外,筛查会导致诊断和治疗干预措施的使用增加,这些干预措施可能有害也可能有益。因此,评估一般健康检查是否利大于弊很重要。这是对2012年发表的综述的首次更新。
量化一般健康检查的益处和危害。
我们于2018年1月31日检索了Cochrane系统评价数据库、医学期刊数据库、Embase数据库以及另外两个数据库和两个试验注册库。两位综述作者独立筛选标题和摘要,评估论文的纳入资格并阅读参考文献列表。一位综述作者使用引文追踪(Web of Knowledge)并向试验作者询问其他研究。
我们纳入了比较健康检查与未进行健康检查的随机试验,试验对象为未被选定患有疾病或风险因素的成年人。我们未纳入老年试验。我们将健康检查定义为对一个以上器官系统中的一种以上疾病或风险因素进行筛查。
两位综述作者独立提取数据并评估试验中的偏倚风险。必要时,我们与试验作者联系以获取额外的结果或试验细节。如有可能,我们使用随机效应模型荟萃分析来分析结果;否则,我们进行叙述性综合分析。
我们纳入了17项试验,其中15项报告了结果数据(251,891名参与者)。我们主要结局的偏倚风险总体较低。健康检查对总死亡率几乎没有影响(风险比(RR)为1.00,95%置信区间(CI)为0.97至1.03;11项试验;233,298名参与者和21,535例死亡;高确定性证据,I² = 0%),对癌症死亡率也几乎没有影响(RR为1.01,95%CI为0.92至1.12;8项试验;139,290名参与者和3663例死亡;高确定性证据,I² = 33%),并且可能对心血管死亡率几乎没有影响(RR为1.05,95%CI为0.94至1.16;9项试验;170,227名参与者和6237例死亡;中等确定性证据;I² = 65%)。健康检查对致命和非致命性缺血性心脏病几乎没有影响(RR为0.98,95%CI为0.94至1.03;4项试验;164,881人,10,325例事件;高确定性证据;I² = 11%),并且可能对致命和非致命性中风几乎没有影响(RR为1.05,95%CI为0.95至1.17;3项试验;107,421人,4543例事件;中等确定性证据,I² = 53%)。
一般健康检查不太可能有益。