What do we know about who does and does not attend general health checks? Findings from a narrative scoping review.

BACKGROUND: General and preventive health checks are a key feature of contemporary policies of anticipatory care. Ensuring high and equitable uptake of such general health checks is essential to ensuring health gain and preventing health inequalities. This literature review explores the socio-demographic, clinical and social cognitive characteristics of those who do and do not engage with general health checks or preventive health checks for cardiovascular disease. METHODS: An exploratory scoping study approach was employed. Databases searched included the British Nursing Index and Archive, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI). Titles and abstracts of 17463 papers were screened; 1171 papers were then independently assessed by two researchers. A review of full text was carried out by two of the authors resulting in 39 being included in the final review. RESULTS: Those least likely to attend health checks were men on low incomes, low socio-economic status, unemployed or less well educated. In general, attenders were older than non-attenders. An individual's marital status was found to affect attendance rates with non-attenders more likely to be single. In general, white individuals were more likely to engage with services than individuals from other ethnic backgrounds. Non-attenders had a greater proportion of cardiovascular risk factors than attenders, and smokers were less likely to attend than non-smokers. The relationship between health beliefs and health behaviours appeared complex. Non-attenders were shown to value health less strongly, have low self-efficacy, feel less in control of their health and be less likely to believe in the efficacy of health checks. CONCLUSION: Routine health check-ups appear to be taken up inequitably, with gender, age, socio-demographic status and ethnicity all associated with differential service use. Furthermore, non-attenders appeared to have greater clinical need or risk factors suggesting that differential uptake may lead to sub-optimal health gain and contribute to inequalities via the inverse care law. Appropriate service redesign and interventions to encourage increased uptake among these groups is required.

Fatal injuries while under the influence of psychoactive drugs: a cross-sectional exploratory study in England.

BACKGROUND: Studies of drug-related mortality rarely describe fatal injuries due to psychoactive drug intoxication (FIUI). The main aim of this study was to determine the nature, extent and pattern of FIUI. METHODS: This observational study covered the period January 1999 to December 2001. Data were provided by members of a study panel of coroners in England using a standard protocol. Sources of data for this study included autopsy protocols, death certificates, hospital records, police reports, toxicology reports and inquest transcripts. Inclusion criteria for this were (i) the mention of one or more psychoactive substances as contributing to fatality; and (ii) the presence of a Controlled Drug at post mortem. RESULTS: A total of 3,803 drug-related deaths of persons aged 16-64 years were reported by the study panel during the three-year period. The study panel accounted for 86% of drug-related deaths in England in this period. There were 147 FIUI cases (119 males, 28 females), giving a proportionate mortality ratio of approximately 4%. The majority of FIUI cases (84%) were aged 16-44 years, with a median age at death of 33 years (Quartile deviation = 7). Fifty-six percent of FIUI occurred in urban areas of England. The population of the study jurisdictions aged 16-64 years contributed 49,545,766 person-years (py) to the study, giving an annual crude rate of 3/1,000,000 person-years (py). Rates for male and females were 4.9 and 1.1/1,000,000 py respectively, giving a male/female rate ratio of 4.5 (95%CI = 2.9-6.8). The rates of intentional and unintentional FIUI were 2 and 1/1,000,000 py respectively. The leading mechanism for intentional FIUI was suffocation while the predominant mechanisms in unintentional FIUI were road traffic accidents and falls. There is a significant difference in the pattern of drug-specific risk between FIUI and fatal poisoning. Risks of intentional FIUI are elevated among Black and Minority Ethnic groups. CONCLUSION: There are differences in the nature, extent and pattern of intentional and unintentional FIUI that should necessitate targeted prevention strategies. Also, there is an opportunity for cross-discipline collaboration between injury prevention specialists and substance abuse/mental health specialists.

Do participants in adjuvant breast cancer trials reflect the breast cancer patient population?

AIM: To describe the proportion of women in Tayside, Scotland diagnosed with early breast cancer who would have been eligible for influential adjuvant breast cancer trials. METHODS: Phase III trials of adjuvant treatment for breast cancer referenced in five national guidelines were shortlisted by breast cancer specialists to identify the twelve considered most influential. Eligibility criteria were extracted from protocols and applied to a 16-year cohort of women who had received a diagnosis of breast cancer and the proportion meeting trial criteria calculated. The criteria used clinically in Tayside to make decisions about use of the trial treatments were also applied to the cohort. Finally, the proportion of women receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy as part of their care and who would have been eligible for the trial evaluating that therapy was calculated. RESULTS: Of the cohort's 4811 women, 3535 (73%) were eligible for at least one trial but eligibility for an individual trial rarely exceeded 45%. There were substantial differences between the proportion of women meeting trial eligibility criteria and the proportion considered clinically eligible for the same treatment. The proportion of women receiving an endocrine therapy as part of their care who would also have been eligible for the trial evaluating that treatment ranged from 17% to 56%. CONCLUSION: Clinical eligibility criteria may be at variance with trial criteria. For adjuvant endocrine therapy, a substantial proportion of women who would have been ineligible for a trial nevertheless received the trial treatment as part of their care.

A hard pill to swallow: a qualitative study of women's experiences of adjuvant endocrine therapy for breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To explore women's experiences of taking adjuvant endocrine therapy as a treatment for breast cancer and how their beliefs about the purpose of the medication, side effects experienced and interactions with health professionals might influence adherence. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured, one-to-one interviews. SETTING: 2 hospitals from a single health board in Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: 30 women who had been prescribed tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole or letrozole) and had been taking this medication for 1-5 years. RESULTS: Women clearly wished to take their adjuvant endocrine therapy medication as prescribed, believing that it offered them protection against breast cancer recurrence. However, some women missed tablets and did not recognise that this could reduce the efficacy of the treatment. Women did not perceive that healthcare professionals were routinely or systematically monitoring their adherence. Side effects were common and impacted greatly on the women's quality of life but did not always cause women to stop taking their medication, or to seek advice about reducing the side effects they experienced. Few were offered the opportunity to discuss the impact of side effects or the potential options available. CONCLUSIONS: Although most women in this study took adjuvant endocrine therapy as prescribed, many endured a range of side effects, often without seeking help. Advice, support and monitoring for adherence are not routinely offered in conventional follow-up settings. Women deserve more opportunity to discuss the pros, cons and impact of long-term adjuvant endocrine therapy. New service models are needed to support adherence, enhance quality of life and ultimately improve survival. These should ideally be community based, in order to promote self-management in the longer term.