Suppr超能文献

NHS 健康检查后会发生什么?一项调查和现实主义综述。

What happens after an NHS Health Check? A survey and realist review.

机构信息

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Centre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.

出版信息

Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2023 Jul;11(12):1-133. doi: 10.3310/RGTH4127.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The National Health Service Health Check in England aims to provide adults aged 40 to 74 with an assessment of their risk of developing cardiovascular disease and to offer advice to help manage and reduce this risk. The programme is commissioned by local authorities and delivered by a range of providers in different settings, although primarily in general practices. This project focused on variation in the advice, onward referrals and prescriptions offered to attendees following their health check.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Map recent programme delivery across England via a survey of local authorities; (2) conduct a realist review to enable understanding of how the National Health Service Health Check programme works in different settings, for different groups; (3) provide recommendations to improve delivery.

DESIGN

Survey of local authorities and realist review of the literature.

REVIEW METHODS

Realist review is a theory-driven, interpretive approach to evidence synthesis that seeks to explain why, when and for whom outcomes occur. We gathered published research and grey literature (including local evaluation documents and conference materials) via searching and supplementary methods. Extracted data were synthesised using a realist logic of analysis to develop an understanding of important contexts that affect the delivery of National Health Service Health Checks, and underlying mechanisms that produce outcomes related to our project focus.

RESULTS

Our findings highlight the variation in National Health Service Health Check delivery models across England. Commissioners, providers and attendees understand the programme's purpose in different ways. When understood primarily as an opportunity to screen for disease, responsibility for delivery and outcomes rests with primary care, and there is an emphasis on volume of checks delivered, gathering essential data and communicating risk. When understood as an opportunity to prompt and support behaviour change, more emphasis is placed on delivery of advice and referrals to 'lifestyle services'. Practical constraints limit what can be delivered within the programme's remit. Public health funding restricts delivery options and links with onward services, while providers may struggle to deliver effective checks when faced with competing priorities. Attendees' responses to the programme are affected by features of delivery models and the constraints they face within their own lives.

LIMITATIONS

Survey response rate lower than anticipated; review findings limited by the availability and quality of the literature.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The purpose and remit of the National Health Service Health Check programme should be clarified, considering prevailing attitudes about its value (especially among providers) and what can be delivered within existing resources. Some variation in delivery is likely to be appropriate to meet local population needs, but lack of clarity for the programme contributes to a 'postcode lottery' effect in the support offered to attendees after a check. Our findings raise important questions about whether the programme itself and services that it may feed into are adequately resourced to achieve positive outcomes for attendees, and whether current delivery models may produce inequitable outcomes.

FUTURE WORK

Policy-makers and commissioners should consider the implications of the findings of this project; future research should address the relative scarcity of studies focused on the end of the National Health Service Health Check pathway.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration CRD42020163822.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme (NIHR129209).

摘要

背景

英国国民保健制度健康检查旨在为 40 至 74 岁的成年人评估其患心血管疾病的风险,并提供帮助管理和降低风险的建议。该计划由地方当局委托,并由不同环境中的一系列提供商提供,尽管主要是在全科医生诊所。本项目重点关注健康检查后向参与者提供的建议、转介和处方方面的差异。

目的

(1) 通过对地方当局的调查,绘制英格兰最近的计划实施情况图;(2) 进行现实主义审查,以了解国民保健制度健康检查计划在不同环境中、针对不同群体的运作方式;(3) 提供改进实施的建议。

设计

对地方当局的调查和文献的现实主义审查。

审查方法

现实主义审查是一种理论驱动的、解释性的综合证据方法,旨在解释为什么、何时以及为何发生结果。我们通过搜索和补充方法收集了已发表的研究和灰色文献(包括地方评估文件和会议材料)。使用现实主义逻辑分析综合提取的数据,以了解影响国民保健制度健康检查实施的重要背景,并了解产生与我们项目重点相关结果的潜在机制。

结果

我们的研究结果突出了英格兰国民保健制度健康检查实施模式的差异。委托方、服务提供方和参与者对该计划的目的有不同的理解。当主要将其理解为筛查疾病的机会时,提供和结果的责任在于初级保健,重点是检查数量、收集基本数据和传达风险。当将其理解为促进和支持行为改变的机会时,更多地强调提供建议和转介到“生活方式服务”。实际限制限制了计划范围内可以提供的服务。公共卫生资金限制了交付选项和与后续服务的联系,而提供者在面临竞争优先事项时可能难以提供有效的检查。参与者对该计划的反应受到交付模式的特征及其在自身生活中面临的限制的影响。

局限性

调查响应率低于预期;审查结果受到文献的可用性和质量的限制。

结论和意义

应明确国民保健制度健康检查计划的目的和范围,同时考虑到其价值的普遍态度(特别是在服务提供方中)以及现有资源内可提供的内容。交付方面的一些差异可能适合满足当地人口的需求,但计划缺乏明确性导致为检查后参与者提供的支持出现“邮政编码彩票”效应。我们的研究结果提出了一些重要问题,即该计划本身以及它可能纳入的服务是否有足够的资源为参与者带来积极的结果,以及当前的交付模式是否会产生不公平的结果。

未来工作

政策制定者和委托方应考虑本项目研究结果的意义;未来的研究应解决关注国民保健制度健康检查途径终点的研究相对稀缺的问题。

研究注册

PROSPERO 注册 CRD42020163822。

资金

该项目由英国国家卫生与保健研究署(NIHR)健康服务和交付研究计划(NIHR129209)资助。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验