Randomized Trial of Information for Older Women About Cessation of Breast Cancer Screening Invitations.

BACKGROUND: Older women receive no information about why Australia's breast screening program (BreastScreen) invitations cease after 74 years. We tested how providing older women with the rationale for breast screening cessation impacted informed choice (adequate knowledge; screening attitudes aligned with intention). METHODS: In a three-arm online randomized trial, eligible participants were females aged 70-74 years who had recently participated in breast screening (within 5 years), without personal breast cancer history, recruited through Qualtrics. Participants read a hypothetical scenario in which they received a BreastScreen letter reporting no abnormalities on their mammogram. They were randomized to receive the letter: (1) without any rationale for screening cessation (control); (2) with screening cessation rationale in printed-text form (e.g., downsides of screening outweigh the benefits after age 74); or (3) with screening cessation rationale presented in an animation video form. The primary outcome was informed choice about continuing/stopping breast screening beyond 74 years. RESULTS: A total of 376 participant responses were analyzed. Compared to controls (n = 122), intervention arm participants (text [n = 132] or animation [n = 122]) were more likely to make an informed choice (control 18.0%; text 32.6%, p = .010; animation 40.5%, p < .001). Intervention arm participants had more adequate knowledge (control 23.8%; text 59.8%, p < .001; animation 68.9%, p < .001), lower screening intentions (control 17.2%; text 36.4%, p < .001; animation 49.2%, p < .001), and fewer positive screening attitudes regarding screening for themselves in the animation arm, but not in the text arm (control 65.6%; text 51.5%, p = .023; animation 40.2%, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Providing information to older women about the rationale for breast cancer screening cessation increased informed decision-making in a hypothetical scenario. This study is an important first step in improving messaging provided by national cancer screening providers direct to older adults. Further research is needed to assess the impact of different elements of the intervention and the impact of providing this information in clinical practice, with more diverse samples. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTRN12623000033640.

Acceptability and optimisation of resources to support antidepressant cessation: a qualitative think-aloud study with patients in Australian primary care.

BACKGROUND: Stopping long-term (>12 months) antidepressant use can be difficult due to unpleasant withdrawal symptoms. Many people do not recognise withdrawal symptoms or understand how to minimise them while safely discontinuing antidepressants. To address the gaps, the authors developed the 'Redressing long-term antidepressant use' (RELEASE) resources, comprising a medicines information brochure, a decision aid, and drug- specific hyperbolic tapering protocols. AIM: To explore patients' acceptability of the RELEASE resources to optimise their use and impact. DESIGN AND SETTING: A think-aloud interview study among adults with lived experience of long-term antidepressant use conducted in south-east Queensland, Australia, between November 2021 and June 2022. METHOD: Participants were purposively sampled from general practices and interviewed face-to-face or via videoconferencing. Participants verbalised their thoughts, impressions, and feelings while engaging with each resource. Interviews were analysed using a deductive coding framework, including codes related to acceptability and optimisation. Interviews were analysed in a series of four tranches, with iterative modifications made to resources after each tranche. RESULTS: Participants (n = 14) reported the resources to be relevant, informative, motivational, and usable. Participants' comments informed modifications, including changes to wording, content order, and layout. Several participants expressed frustration that they had not had these resources earlier, with one reporting the information could have been 'life changing'. Many commented on the need for these resources to be widely available to both patients and doctors. CONCLUSION: The RELEASE resources were found to be acceptable, useful, and potentially life changing. The effectiveness of these consumer-informed resources in supporting safe cessation of long-term antidepressants is currently being tested in general practice.

How different countries respond to adverse events whilst patients' rights are protected.

Patient safety is high on the policy agenda internationally. Learning from safety incidents is a core component in achieving the important goal of increasing patient safety. This study explores the legal frameworks in the countries to promote reporting, disclosure, and supporting healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in safety incidents. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted to ascertain an overview of the legal frameworks at national level, as well as relevant policies. ERNST (The European Researchers' Network Working on Second Victims) group peer-reviewed data collected from countries was performed to validate information. Information from 27 countries was collected and analyzed, giving a response rate of 60%. A reporting system for patient safety incidents was in place in 85.2% (N = 23) of countries surveyed, though few (37%, N = 10) were focused on systems-learning. In about half of the countries (48.1%, N = 13) open disclosure depends on the initiative of HCPs. The tort liability system was common in most countries. No-fault compensation schemes and alternative forms of redress were less common. Support for HCPs involved in patient safety incidents was extremely limited, with just 11.1% (N = 3) of participating countries reporting that supports were available in all healthcare institutions. Despite progress in the patient safety movement worldwide, the findings suggest that there are considerable differences in the approach to the reporting and disclosure of patient safety incidents. Additionally, models of compensation vary limiting patients' access to redress. Finally, the results highlight the need for comprehensive support for HCPs involved in safety incidents.

Lessons from the Netherlands for Australia: cross-country comparison of trends in antidepressant dispensing 2013-2021 and contextual factors influencing prescribing.

BACKGROUND: There is concern internationally about increasing antidepressant use. Most antidepressants are prescribed in general practice. The aim of this study was to compare trends in antidepressant dispensing in Australia and the Netherlands over the 9years from 2013 to 2021, and to explore reasons for differences. METHODS: A convergent mixed methods study including analysis of publicly available antidepressant dispensing data obtained from Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and Repatriation Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and the Dutch Foundation for Pharmaceutical Statistics and a search of relevant literature to compare contextual factors influencing prescribing were undertaken. RESULTS: In 2013, antidepressant dispensing rates in Australia were nearly twice as high as those in the Netherlands (82.5 versus 44.3DDD/1000/day) and increased to be more than twice as high by 2021 (115.6 versus 48.8DDD/1000/day). Antidepressant dispensing increased by 40% in Australia over the nine study years, but by only 10% in the Netherlands. Our scan of the literature confirms that while population factors, health system structure, and clinical guideline recommendations are largely consistent across the two countries, a multifaceted approach in the Netherlands involving improved access to non-pharmacological alternatives, initiatives targeting safer antidepressant prescribing, and tight regulation of pharmaceutical industry influence on prescribers, has successfully curtailed increasing antidepressant use. CONCLUSIONS: Australia may learn from the Netherlands' approach to redress increasing antidepressant use.

Screening for cancer beyond recommended upper age limits: views and experiences of older people.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, screening programmes and clinical practice guidelines recommend when older adults should stop cancer screening using upper age limits, but it is unknown how older adults view these recommendations. OBJECTIVE: To examine older adults' views and experiences about continuing or stopping cancer screening beyond the recommended upper age limit for breast, cervical, prostate and bowel cancer. DESIGN: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Australia, telephone. SUBJECTS: A total of 29 community-dwelling older adults (≥70-years); recruited from organisation newsletters, mailing lists and Facebook advertisements. METHODS: Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: Firstly, older adults were on a spectrum between trusting recommendations and actively deciding about cancer screening, with some who were uncertain. Secondly, participants reported limited in-depth discussions with health professionals about cancer screening. In primary care, discussions were focused on checking they were up to date with screening or going over results. Discussions mostly only occurred if older adults initiated themselves. Finally, participants had a socially- and self-constructed understanding of screening recommendations and potential outcomes. Perceived reasons for upper age limits were cost, reduced cancer risk or ageism. Risks of screening were understood in relation to their own social experiences (e.g. shared stories about friends with adverse outcomes of cancer treatment or conversations with friends/family about controversy around prostate screening). CONCLUSIONS: Direct-to-patient information and clinician support may help improve communication about the changing benefit to harm ratio of cancer screening with increasing age and increase understanding about the rationale for an upper age limit for cancer screening programmes.

RELEASE (REdressing Long-tErm Antidepressant uSE): protocol for a 3-arm pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial effectiveness-implementation hybrid type-1 in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Many people experience withdrawal symptoms when they attempt to stop antidepressants. Withdrawal symptoms are readily misconstrued for relapse or ongoing need for medication, contributing to long-term use (> 12 months). Long-term antidepressant use is increasing internationally yet is not recommended for most people. Long-term use is associated with adverse effects including weight gain, sexual dysfunction, lethargy, emotional numbing and increased risk of falls and fractures. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of two multi-strategy interventions (RELEASE and RELEASE+) in supporting the safe cessation of long-term antidepressants, estimate cost-effectiveness, and evaluate implementation strategies. METHODS: DESIGN: 3-arm pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial effectiveness-implementation hybrid type-1. SETTING: primary care general practices in southeast Queensland, Australia. POPULATION: adults 18 years or older taking antidepressants for longer than 1 year. Practices will be randomised on a 1.5:1:1 ratio of Usual care:RELEASE:RELEASE+. INTERVENTION: RELEASE for patients includes evidence-based information and resources and an invitation to medication review; RELEASE for GPs includes education, training and printable resources via practice management software. RELEASE+ includes additional internet support for patients and prescribing support including audit and feedback for GPs. OUTCOME MEASURES: the primary outcome is antidepressant use at 12 months self-reported by patients. Cessation is defined as 0 mg antidepressant maintained for at least 2 weeks. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: at 6 and 12 months are health-related quality of life, antidepressant side effects, well-being, withdrawal symptoms, emotional numbing, beliefs about antidepressants, depressive symptoms, and anxiety symptoms; and at 12 months 75% reduction in antidepressant dose; aggregated practice level antidepressant prescribing, and health service utilisation for costs. SAMPLE SIZE: 653 patients from 28 practices. A concurrent evaluation of implementation will be through mixed methods including interviews with up to 40 patients and primary care general practitioners, brief e-surveys, and study administrative data to assess implementation outcomes (adoption and fidelity). DISCUSSION: The RELEASE study will develop new knowledge applicable internationally on the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and implementation of two multi-strategy interventions in supporting the safe cessation of long-term antidepressants to improve primary health care and outcomes for patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR, ACTRN12622001379707p. Registered on 27 October 2022.

Treatment Harms in Paediatric Primary Care.

The aim of this study was to describe the epidemiology in children of harms detectable from general practice records, and to identify risk factors. The SHARP study examined 9076 patient records from 44 general practices in New Zealand, with an enrolled population of 210,559 patients. "Harm" was defined as disease, injury, disability, suffering, and death, arising from the health system. The age group studied was ≤20 years of age. There were 193 harms to 141 children and adolescents during the 3-year study period. Harms were reported in one (3.5%) patient aged <2 years, 80 (6.6%) aged 2 to <12 years, 36 (4.9%) aged 12 to <18 years, and 24 (7.5%) aged 18 to ≤20 years. The annualised rates of harm were 36/1000 child and adolescent population for all harms, 20/1000 for medication-related harm (MRH), 2/1000 for severe MRH, and 0.4/1000 for hospitalisation. For MRH, the drug groups most frequently involved were anti-infectives (51.9%), genitourinary (15.4%), dermatologicals (12.5%), and the nervous system (9.6%). Treatment-related harm in children was less common than in a corresponding adult population. MRH was the most common type of harm and was related to the most common treatments used. The risk of harm increased with the number of consultations.

3-Domains screening toolkit for medical assessment of older drivers: Feasibility study in Australian general practice.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Some general practitioners (GPs) find the older driver medical assessment challenging, citing clinical uncertainty and concerns about communicating the need for further testing or driving cessation while maintaining a trusting therapeutic relationship. A screening toolkit could help support GP decision making and communication about fitness to drive. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility, acceptability and utility of the 3-Domains screening toolkit for the medical assessment of older drivers in Australian general practice. METHOD: A prospective mixed-methods study was conducted in nine general practices in south-east Queensland. Participants were older drivers (age ≥75 years) attending annual driving licence medical assessment, GPs and practice nurses. The 3-Domains toolkit comprises three screening tests (Snellen chart visual acuity, functional reach, road signs recognition). We evaluated the feasibility, acceptability and utility of the toolkit. RESULTS: Practices used the toolkit in 43 older driver medical assessments (age 75-93 years; combined predictive score 13-96%). Twenty-two semistructured interviews were conducted. Older drivers felt reassured by the thorough assessment. GPs said the toolkit fitted into practice workflows, informed clinical judgement and supported conversations about fitness to drive while preserving therapeutic relationships. DISCUSSION: The 3-Domains screening toolkit is feasible, acceptable and useful for the medical assessment of older drivers in Australian general practice.

Coping with uncertainty in clinical practice: a narrative review.

Clinicians must make decisions amid the uncertainty that is ubiquitous to clinical practice. Uncertainty in clinical practice can assume many forms depending on its source, such as insufficient personal knowledge or scientific evidence, limited practical understanding or competence, challenging interpersonal relationships, and complexity and ambiguity in clinical encounters. The level and experience of uncertainty varies according to personal traits, clinical context, affective factors and sociocultural norms. Clinicians vary in their tolerance of uncertainty, and maladaptive responses may adversely affect patient care and clinician wellbeing. Various strategies can be used to minimise and manage, but not eliminate, uncertainty and to share uncertainty with patients without compromising the clinician-patient relationship or clinician credibility.

General practitioners' views and experiences of communicating with older people about cancer screening: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Older adults should be supported to make informed decisions about cancer screening. However, it is unknown how general practitioners (GPs) in Australia communicate about cancer screening with older people. AIM: To investigate GPs' views and experiences of communicating about cancer screening (breast, cervical, prostate, and bowel) with older people (≥70 years). DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews, Australia. METHOD: Interviews were conducted with GPs practising in Australia (n = 28), recruited through practice-based research networks, primary health networks, social media, and email invitation. Interviews were audio-recorded and analysed thematically using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: Findings across GPs were organized into 3 themes: (i) varied motivation to initiate cancer screening discussions; some GPs reported that they only initiated screening within recommended ages (<75 years), others described initiating discussions beyond recommended ages, and some experienced older patient-initiated discussions; (ii) GPs described the role they played in providing screening information, whereby detailed discussions about the benefits/risks of prostate screening were more likely than other nationally funded screening types (breast, cervical, and bowel); however, some GPs had limited knowledge of recommendations and found it challenging to explain why screening recommendations have upper ages; (iii) GPs reported providing tailored advice and discussion based on personal patient preferences, overall health/function, risk of cancer, and previous screening. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to support conversations between GPs and older people about the potential benefits and harms of screening in older age and rationale for upper age limits to screening programmes may be helpful. Further research in this area is needed.

Costs to the Medicare Benefits Schedule for general practitioner consultations: A time-series analysis.

The COVID-19 pandemic was a catalyst for the introduction of additional telehealth funding (telehealth item numbers) for general practitioner (GP) consultations through the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) in Australia. This study evaluated the impact of telehealth funding on costs to the MBS for GP consultations from January 2017 to December 2021. An interrupted time series analysis assessed MBS costs (initial and monthly growth) for GP consultations (in-person, videoconference, telephone) before and after additional telehealth item numbers were introduced. From January 2017 to February 2020, total MBS costs for GP consultations were, on average, $545 million per month compared to $592 million per month from March 2020 to December 2021. There was an initial cost increase of approximately $39 million in the first month after additional telehealth funding was introduced (p = 0.0001). Afterwards, there was no significant change in monthly costs (p = 0.539). The introduction of additional MBS telehealth funding increased overall MBS costs for GP consultations. This increased cost for GP telehealth services could save costs to society if it translates into improved continuity of care, decreased hospitalisations, reduced productivity losses and improved patient outcomes. Future policy reform should incorporate a cost-benefit analysis to determine if increased MBS costs for GP consultations are a good investment.

Process evaluation of the Safer Prescribing and Care for the Elderly (SPACE) cluster randomised controlled trial in New Zealand general practice.

Introduction The Safer Prescribing and Care for the Elderly (SPACE) cluster randomised controlled trial in 39 general practices found that a search of the practice database to identify and generate for each general practitioner (GP) a list of patients with high-risk prescribing, pharmacist-delivered one-on-one feedback to GPs, and electronic tick-box for GPs to select action for each patient (Patient letter; No letter but possible medication review when patient next in; No action), prompted safer prescribing at 6 months but not at 1 year. Aim This process evaluation explores research participation, intervention uptake and effect on GPs. Methods Mixed methods were used including quantitative data (log of practice recruitment, demographic data, intervention delivery and GP responses including tick-box selections) and qualitative data (trial pharmacist reflective journal). Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and general inductive analysis, respectively. Results Recruitment of general practices was challenging, with only 39% of eligible practices agreeing to participate. Those who declined were often 'too busy'. Engagement was also challenging, especially in larger practices, with the trial pharmacist managing to meet with only 64% of GPs in the intervention group. The GPs who did engage were positive about the intervention, but elected to send letters to only 23% of patients with high-risk prescribing, either because the high-risk prescribing had already stopped, the GP did not agree the prescribing was 'high-risk' or the GP was concerned a letter would upset the patient. Conclusions Effectiveness of the SPACE cluster randomised controlled trial could be improved by changes including ensuring searches are current and relevant, repeating cycles of search and feedback, and integrating pharmacists into general practices.

A crisis is also an opportunity: GP teachers' views on continuing clinical placements in general practice during the evolving COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, some universities suspended student placements in general practice. The aim of this study was to explore the views of general practitioners (GPs) teaching in clinical practice ('GP teachers'). METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were held with 15 GP teachers in southeast Queensland from June to August 2020. RESULTS: Challenges included lack of masks and space, and concerns about infection control, medico-legal liability and student learning. Telehealth created more time for reflection and accessing information, increased student access to sensitive consultations, and provided opportunities to think-through rather than rote-do physical examinations. Students could be an extra pair of hands, also accessing and implementing the latest public health advice. GP teachers wanted clear communication and guidance from universities and for students to be trained in infection control and telehealth skills. DISCUSSION: Findings suggest that many GP teachers can be supported to continue clinical placements during an evolving crisis. The pandemic presented many challenges for general practice but also new opportunities for students to learn and contribute in practice.

Older peoples' views on cardiovascular disease medication: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence for the potential benefits and harms of cardiovascular disease (CVD) medications in older people (>75 years) prompting updating of clinical guidelines. We explored the views of older people about CVD medication to inform guideline development. METHODS: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews and focus groups. An ethnically diverse group of community dwelling older people were purposefully recruited from northern New Zealand using flyers in primary care clinics, local libraries, social groups, and places of worship, and by word of mouth. Interviews and focus groups were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using an iterative and inductive approach to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-nine participants from 4 ethnic groups were recruited (mean 74 years; range 61-91 years; Maori (7), South Asian (8), European (9), and Pasifika (15)). Most participants were taking CVD medication/s. Four main themes emerged: (i) emphasizing the benefits of CVD medication and downplaying the harms; (ii) feeling compelled to take medication; (iii) trusting "my" doctor; and (iv) expecting medication to be continued. CONCLUSION: Findings raise questions about older people's agency in decision-making regarding CVD medication. CVD risk management guidelines for older people could include strategies to support effective communication of the potential benefits and harms of CVD medication in older people, balancing life expectancy, and the expected duration of therapy.

We explored the views of older people about cardiovascular disease (CVD) medication. Qualitative study using semistructured interviews and focus groups. An ethnically diverse group of community dwelling older people were purposefully recruited from northern New Zealand. Interviews and focus groups were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed. Thirty-nine participants from 4 ethnic groups were recruited (mean 74 years; range 61­91 years; Maori (7), South Asian (8), European (9), and Pasifika (15)). Most participants were taking CVD medication/s. Participants emphasized the benefits of medication and downplayed the harms; they did not want to take medication but felt compelled to; they trusted their doctor to know best regarding medication; and they believed their doctor wanted them to keep taking medication. Findings raise questions about older people's agency in decision-making regarding medication. Work is needed to identify strategies to support effective communication of the potential benefits and harms of medication in older people, balancing life expectancy, and the expected duration of therapy.

Safer Prescribing and Care for the Elderly (SPACE): a cluster randomised controlled trial in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Safer prescribing in general practice may help to decrease preventable adverse drug events (ADE) and related hospitalisations. AIM: To test the effect of the Safer Prescribing and Care for the Elderly (SPACE) intervention on high-risk prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and/or antiplatelet medicines and related hospitalisations. DESIGN & SETTING: A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial in general practice. Participants were patients at increased risk of ADEs from NSAIDs and/or antiplatelet medicines at baseline. SPACE comprises automated search to generate for each GP a list of patients with high-risk prescribing; pharmacist outreach to provide education and one-on-one review of list with GP; and automated letter inviting patients to seek medication review with their GP. METHOD: The primary outcome was the difference in high-risk prescribing of NSAIDs and/or antiplatelet medicines at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were high-risk prescribing for gastrointestinal, renal, or cardiac ADEs separately, 12-month outcomes, and related ADE hospitalisations. RESULTS: Thirty-nine practices were recruited with 205 GPs and 191 593 patients, of which 21 877 (11.4%) were participants. Of the participants, 1479 (6.8%) had high-risk prescribing. High-risk prescribing improved in both groups at 6 and 12 months compared with baseline. At 6 months, there was no significant difference between groups (odds ratio [OR] 0.99; 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 0.87 to 1.13) although SPACE improved more for gastrointestinal ADEs (OR 0.81; 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.96). At 12 months, the control group improved more (OR 1.29; 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.49). There was no significant difference for related hospitalisations. CONCLUSION: Further work is needed to identify scalable interventions that support safer prescribing in general practice. The use of automated search and feedback plus letter to patient warrants further exploration.

Epidemiology of healthcare harm in New Zealand general practice: a retrospective records review study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the epidemiology of healthcare harm observable in general practice records. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort records review study. SETTING: 72 general practice clinics were randomly selected from all 988 New Zealand clinics stratified by rurality and size; 44 clinics consented to participate. PARTICIPANTS: 9076 patient records were randomly selected from participating clinics. INTERVENTION: Eight general practitioners examined patient records (2011-2013) to identify harms, harm severity and preventability. Analyses were weighted to account for the stratified sampling design and generalise findings to all New Zealand patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Healthcare harm, severity and preventability. RESULTS: Reviewers identified 2972 harms affecting 1505 patients aged 0-102 years. Most patients (82.0%, weighted) experienced no harm. The estimated incidence of harm was 123 per 1000 patient-years. Most harms (2160; 72.7%, 72.4% weighted) were minor, 661 (22.2%, 22.8% weighted) were moderate, and 135 (4.5%, 4.4% weighted) severe. Eleven patients died, five following a preventable harm. Of the non-fatal harms, 2411 (81.6%, 79.4% weighted) were considered not preventable. Increasing age and number of consultations were associated with increased odds of harm. Compared with patients aged ≤49 years, patients aged 50-69 had an OR of 1.77 (95% CI 1.61 to 1.94), ≥70 years OR 3.23 (95% CI 2.37 to 4.41). Compared with patients with ≤3 consultations, patients with 4-12 consultations had an OR of 7.14 (95% CI 5.21 to 9.79); ≥13 consultations OR 30.06 (95% CI 21.70 to 41.63). CONCLUSIONS: Strategic balancing of healthcare risks and benefits may improve patient safety but will not necessarily eliminate harms, which often arise from standard care. Reducing harms considered 'not preventable' remains a laudable challenge.

Cardiovascular disease risk prediction in older people: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Despite cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction equations becoming more widely available for people aged ≥75 years, views of older people on CVD risk assessment are unknown. AIM: To explore older people's views on CVD risk prediction and its assessment. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study of community-dwelling older people in New Zealand. METHOD: A diverse group of older people was purposively recruited. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Thirty-nine participants (mean age 74 years) of Maori, Pacific, South Asian, and European ethnicities participated in one of 26 interviews or one of three focus groups. Three key themes emerged: poor knowledge and understanding of CVD and its risk assessment; acceptability and perceived benefit of knowing and receiving advice on managing personal CVD risk; and distinguishing between CVD outcomes - stroke and heart attack are not the same. Most participants did not understand CVD terms, but were familiar with the terms 'heart attack' and 'stroke', and understood lifestyle risk factors for these events. Participants valued CVD outcomes differently, fearing stroke and disability - which might adversely affect independence and quality of life - but were less concerned about a heart attack, which was perceived as causing less disability or swifter death. These findings and preferences were similar across ethnic groups. All but two participants wanted to know their CVD risk, how to manage it, and distinguish between CVD outcomes. Those who did not wish to know perceived this as something only their God could decide. CONCLUSION: To inform clinical decision making for older people, consideration of an individual's wish to know their risk is important, and risk prediction tools should provide separate event types rather than just composite outcomes.