Increasing uptake of National Health Service Health Checks in primary care: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of enhanced invitation letters in Northamptonshire, England.

BACKGROUND: Uptake of NHS Health Checks (NHSHCs) is sub-optimal. This study aimed to increase their uptake using behaviourally informed invitation letters. METHOD: Patients registered with 6 general practices in Northamptonshire, England who were eligible for an NHSHC between 10 February 2014 and 31 January 2015 were randomized monthly, using a random number generator, to three trial arms: control (standard invitation), sunk costs (resources already allocated) and counterargument (against common barriers to attendance). The outcome measure was uptake of NHSHC by 12 weeks after 31 January. RESULTS: In total, 6331 patients were randomized. After exclusions, due to ineligibility for the NHSHC, data were analysed for N = 6313 patients: N = 2123 control; N = 2085 counterargument; N = 2105 sunk costs. Overall, 2364 (37.45%) patients attended an NHSHC. Both intervention letters increased uptake compared to control, by 5.46% using counterargument (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.32, CI 1.162-1.51, p < 0.001) and 4.33% using sunk costs (AOR 1.246, CI 1.10-1.42, p < 0.001), with no significant difference between the two. CONCLUSION: Behaviourally informed invitation letters, containing sunk costs or counterargument messages, can improve the uptake of NHSHCs. The trial was registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Registration Number Scheme (ISRCTN57110614).

Telephone outreach by community workers to improve uptake of NHS Health Checks in more deprived localities and minority ethnic groups: a qualitative investigation of implementation.

BACKGROUND: NHS Health Checks is a national cardiovascular risk assessment and management programme in England. To improve equity of uptake in more deprived, and Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities, a novel telephone outreach intervention was developed. The outreach call included an invitation to an NHS Health Check appointment, lifestyle questions, and signposting to lifestyle services. We examined the experiences of staff delivering the intervention. METHODS: Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 10 community Telephone Outreach Workers (TOWs) making outreach calls, and 5 Primary Care Practice (PCP) staff they liaised with. Normalization Process Theory was used to examine intervention implementation. RESULTS: Telephone outreach was perceived as effective in engaging patients in NHS Health Checks and could reduce related administration burdens on PCPs. Successful implementation was dependent on support from participating PCPs, and tensions between the intervention and other PCP priorities were identified. Some PCP staff lacked clarity regarding the intervention aim and this could reduce the potential to capitalize on TOWs' specialist skills. CONCLUSIONS: To maximize the potential of telephone outreach to impact equity, purposeful recruitment and training of TOWs is vital, along with support and integration of TOWs, and the telephone outreach intervention, in participating PCPs.

Engaging with stakeholders to inform the development of a decision-support tool for the NHS health check programme: qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The NHS Health Check Programme is a risk-reduction programme offered to all adults in England aged 40-74 years. Previous studies mainly focused on patient perspectives and programme delivery; however, delivery varies, and costs are substantial. We were therefore working with key stakeholders to develop and co-produce an NHS Health Check Programme modelling tool (workHORSE) for commissioners to quantify local effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and equity. Here we report on Workshop 1, which specifically aimed to facilitate engagement with stakeholders; develop a shared understanding of current Health Check implementation; identify what is working well, less well, and future hopes; and explore features to include in the tool. METHODS: This qualitative study identified key stakeholders across the UK via networking and snowball techniques. The stakeholders spanned local organisations (NHS commissioners, GPs, and academics), third sector and national organisations (Public Health England and The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence). We used the validated Hovmand "group model building" approach to engage stakeholders in a series of pre-piloted, structured, small group exercises. We then used Framework Analysis to analyse responses. RESULTS: Fifteen stakeholders participated in workshop 1. Stakeholders identified continued financial and political support for the NHS Health Check Programme. However, many stakeholders highlighted issues concerning lack of data on processes and outcomes, variability in quality of delivery, and suboptimal public engagement. Stakeholders' hopes included maximising coverage, uptake, and referrals, and producing additional evidence on population health, equity, and economic impacts. Key model suggestions focused on developing good-practice template scenarios, analysis of broader prevention activities at local level, accessible local data, broader economic perspectives, and fit-for-purpose outputs. CONCLUSIONS: A shared understanding of current implementations of the NHS Health Check Programme was developed. Stakeholders demonstrated their commitment to the NHS Health Check Programme whilst highlighting the perceived requirements for enhancing the service and discussed how the modelling tool could be instrumental in this process. These suggestions for improvement informed subsequent workshops and model development.

Evaluating stakeholder involvement in building a decision support tool for NHS health checks: co-producing the WorkHORSE study.

BACKGROUND: Stakeholder engagement is being increasingly recognised as an important way to achieving impact in public health. The WorkHORSE (Working Health Outcomes Research Simulation Environment) project was designed to continuously engage with stakeholders to inform the development of an open access modelling tool to enable commissioners to quantify the potential cost-effectiveness and equity of the NHS Health Check Programme. An objective of the project was to evaluate the involvement of stakeholders in co-producing the WorkHORSE computer modelling tool and examine how they perceived their involvement in the model building process and ultimately contributed to the strengthening and relevance of the modelling tool. METHODS: We identified stakeholders using our extensive networks and snowballing techniques. Iterative development of the decision support modelling tool was informed through engaging with stakeholders during four workshops. We used detailed scripts facilitating open discussion and opportunities for stakeholders to provide additional feedback subsequently. At the end of each workshop, stakeholders and the research team completed questionnaires to explore their views and experiences throughout the process. RESULTS: 30 stakeholders participated, of which 15 attended two or more workshops. They spanned local (NHS commissioners, GPs, local authorities and academics), third sector and national organisations including Public Health England. Stakeholders felt valued, and commended the involvement of practitioners in the iterative process. Major reasons for attending included: being able to influence development, and having insight and understanding of what the tool could include, and how it would work in practice. Researchers saw the process as an opportunity for developing a common language and trust in the end product, and ensuring the support tool was transparent. The workshops acted as a reality check ensuring model scenarios and outputs were relevant and fit for purpose. CONCLUSIONS: Computational modellers rarely consult with end users when developing tools to inform decision-making. The added value of co-production (continuing collaboration and iteration with stakeholders) enabled modellers to produce a "real-world" operational tool. Likewise, stakeholders had increased confidence in the decision support tool's development and applicability in practice.

Patient experiences of telephone outreach to enhance uptake of NHS Health Checks in more deprived communities and minority ethnic groups: A qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: The NHS Health Checks preventative programme aims to reduce cardiovascular morbidity across England. To improve equity in uptake, telephone outreach was developed in Bristol, involving community workers telephoning patients amongst communities potentially at higher risk of cardiovascular disease and/or less likely to take up a written invitation, to engage them with NHS Health Checks. Where possible, caller cultural background/main language is matched with that of the patient called. The call includes an invitation to book an NHS Health Check appointment, lifestyle questions from the Health Check, and signposting to lifestyle services. OBJECTIVE: To explore the experiences of patients who received an outreach call. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 24 patients (15 female), from seven primary care practices, who had received an outreach call. RESULTS: The call increased participants' understanding of NHS Health Checks and overcame anticipated difficulties with making an appointment. Half reported that they would not have booked if only invited by letter. The cultural identity/language skills of the caller were important in facilitating the interaction for some who might otherwise encounter language or cultural barriers. The inclusion of lifestyle questions and signposting prompted a minority to make lifestyle changes. CONCLUSIONS: Participants valued easily generalizable aspects of the intervention-a telephone invitation with ability to book during the call-and reported that it prompted acceptance of an NHS Health Check. A caller who shared their main language/cultural background was important for a minority of participants, and improved targeting of this would be beneficial.

Pre-notification and reminder SMS text messages with behaviourally informed invitation letters to improve uptake of NHS Health Checks: a factorial randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The NHS Health Check (NHS HC) is a cardiovascular risk assessment to prevent cardiovascular disease. Public Health England (PHE) wants to increase uptake. METHODS: We explored the impact of behaviourally informed invitation letters and pre-notification and reminder SMS on uptake of NHS HCs. Patients at 28 General Practices in the London Borough of Southwark who were eligible to receive an NHS HC between 1st November 2013 and 31st December 2014 were included. A double-blind randomised controlled trial with a mixed 2 (pre-notification SMS - yes or no) × 4 (letter - national template control, open-ended, time-limited, social norm) × 2 (reminder SMS - yes or no) factorial design was used. The open-ended letter used simplification, behavioural instruction and a personalised planning prompt for patients to record the date and time of their NHS HC. The time-limited letter was similar but stated the NHS HC was due in a named forthcoming month. The social norms letter was similar to the open-ended letter but included a descriptive social norms message and testimonials from local residents and no planning prompt. The outcome measure was attendance at an NHS HC. RESULTS: Data for 12, 244 invites were analysed. Uptake increased in almost all letter and SMS combinations compared to the control letter without SMS (Uptake 18%), with increases of up to 12 percentage points for the time-limited letter with pre-notification and reminder (Uptake 30%; Adjusted Odds Ratio AOR 1.86; 95% CI 1.45-2.83; p < 0.00); 10 percentage points for the open-ended letter with reminder (Uptake 27%; AOR 1.68; 95% CI 1.31-2.17; p < 0.00) and a 9 percentage point increase using the time-limited letter with reminder (Uptake 27%; AOR 1.61; 95% CI 1.25-2.10; p < 0.00). The reminder SMS increased uptake for all intervention letters. The pre-notification did not add to this effect. CONCLUSIONS: This large randomised controlled trial adds support to the evidence that small, low cost behaviourally informed changes to letter-based invitations can increase uptake of NHS HCs. It also provides novel evidence on the effect of SMS reminders and pre-notification on NHS HC attendance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively Registered (24/01/2014) ISRCTN36027094 .

NHS health checks: a cross- sectional observational study on equity of uptake and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The National Health Checks programme aims to reduce the incidence of cardiovascular diseases and health inequalities in England. We assessed equity of uptake and outcomes from NHS Health Checks in general practices in Bristol, UK. METHODS: A cross-sectional study using patient-level data, from 38 general practices. We descriptively analysed the socioeconomic status (SES) of patients invited and the SES and ethnicity of those attending. Logistic regression was used to test associations between invitation and attendance, with population characteristics. RESULTS: Between June 2010 to October 2014, 31,881 patients were invited, and 13,733 NHS Health Checks completed. 47% of patients invited from the three least and 39% from the two most-deprived index of multiple deprivation quintiles, completed a Check. Proportions of invited patients, by ethnicity were 64% non-black and Asian and 31% black and Asian. Men were less likely to attend than women (OR 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.80), as were patients ≤ 49 compared to ≥ 70 years (OR 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.83). After controlling for SES and population characteristics, compared to patients with low CVD risk, high risk patients were more likely to be prescribed cardiovascular drugs (OR 6.2, 95% confidence interval 4.51 to 8.40). Compared to men, women (OR 01.18, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.35) were more likely to be prescribed cardiovascular drugs, as were those ≤ 49 years (50-59 years, OR 1.42, 95% confidence intervals 1.13-1.79, 60-69 years, OR 1.60, 95% confidence intervals, 1.22-2.10, ≥ 70 years, OR 1.64, 95% confidence intervals, 1.14 to 2.35). Controlling for population characteristics, the following groups were most likely to be referred to lifestyle services: younger women (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.69 to 2.94), those in the most deprived IMD quintile (OR 3.22, 95% CI 1.63 to 6.36) and those at highest risk of CVD (OR, 2.77, 95% CI 1.91 to 4.02). CONCLUSIONS: We found no statistically significant evidence of inequity in attendance for an NHS Health Check by SES. Being older or a woman were associated with better attendance. Targeting men, younger patients and ethnic minority groups may improve equity in uptake for NHS Health Checks.

Are cardiovascular disease risk assessment and management programmes cost effective? A systematic review of the evidence.

The World Health Organization recommends that countries implement population-wide cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment and management programmes. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review to evaluate whether this recommendation is supported by cost-effectiveness evidence. Published economic evaluations were identified via electronic medical and social science databases (including Medline, Web of Science, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database) from inception to March 2016. Study quality was evaluated using a modified version of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards. Fourteen economic evaluations were included: five studies based on randomised controlled trials, seven studies based on observational studies and two studies using hypothetical modelling synthesizing secondary data. Trial based studies measured CVD risk factor changes over 1 to 3years, with modelled projections of longer term events. Programmes were either not, or only, cost-effective under non-verified assumptions such as sustained risk factor changes. Most observational and hypothetical studies suggested programmes were likely to be cost-effective; however, study deigns are subject to bias and subsequent empirical evidence has contradicted key assumptions. No studies assessed impacts on inequalities. In conclusion, recommendations for population-wide risk assessment and management programmes lack a robust, real world, evidence basis. Given implementation is resource intensive there is a need for robust economic evaluation, ideally conducted alongside trials, to assess cost effectiveness. Further, the efficiency and equity impact of different delivery models should be investigated, and also the combination of targeted screening with whole population interventions recognising that there multiple approaches to prevention.

A process evaluation of the NHS Health Check care pathway in a primary care setting.

BACKGROUND: More evidence is needed concerning the implementation of the NHS Health Check programme in order to identify areas for improvement. The aim of the study was to investigate the way in which the Gloucestershire NHS Health Check programme care pathway was followed and interpreted compared with national programme indicators. METHODS: A cross sectional review of Gloucestershire's Health Checks was undertaken to assess programme performance via a primary care audit of key indicators within a cohort of 83 GP practices and an eligible population of 210 513. Data were assessed to compare differences between practices and to compare county data with national indicators. RESULTS: The annual programme uptake was 49.8% and a total of 1031 patients were diagnosed with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Variations in the detection of modifiable risk factors in relation to the NHS Ready Reckoner were identified: diabetes (-0.04%), CKD (-0.9%), hypertension (-19.9%); obesity (-7.1%); low physical activity (-57.7%) and smoking (-14.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in uptake and implementation of the care pathway demonstrate inconsistencies in the application of processes and knowledge. There appears to be an overestimation of CVD risk by the Ready Reckoner tool likely to be attributable to a failure to adjust for existing local early identification efforts in primary care and prevention.

Cardiovascular risk assessment of South Asian populations in religious and community settings: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of mortality, and South Asian groups experience worse outcomes than the general population in the UK. Regular screening for CVD risk factors is recommended, but we do not know the best settings in which to deliver this for ethnically diverse populations. Health promotion in religious and community settings may reduce inequalities in access to cardiovascular preventative health care. OBJECTIVES: To use stakeholders' and attendees' experiences to explore the feasibility and potential impact of cardiovascular risk assessment targeting South Asian groups at religious and community venues and how health checks in these settings might compare with general practice assessments. METHOD: Qualitative semi-structured interviews were used. The settings were two Hindu temples, one mosque and one Bangladeshi community centre in central and north-west London. Twenty-four participants (12 stakeholders and 12 attendees) were purposively selected for interview. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Themes from the data were generated using thematic framework analysis. RESULTS: All attendees reported positive experiences of the assessments. All reported making lifestyle changes after the check, particularly to diet and exercise. Barriers to lifestyle change, e.g. resistance to change from family members, were identified. Advantages of implementing assessments in religious and community settings compared with general practice included accessibility and community encouragement. Disadvantages included reduced privacy, organizational difficulties and lack of follow-up care. CONCLUSION: Cardiovascular risk assessment in religious and community settings has the potential to trigger lifestyle change in younger participants. These venues should be considered for future health promotional activities.

The cost-effectiveness of population Health Checks: have the NHS Health Checks been unfairly maligned?

AIM: The English NHS currently has a policy of providing Health Checks to all 40-74 year olds. Administered in primary care, they aim to identify patients at risk of a range of diseases, including diabetes and heart disease, and facilitate care. This study is the first to use observed data on the effectiveness of the Checks to consider whether they represent a cost-effective use of limited NHS resources. SUBJECT AND METHODS: Using a publicly available evaluation tool we conducted an analysis of the Checks to establish the long-term cost and health-related outcomes of a cohort of patients. The primary focus of the analysis was to establish whether the impact of the Checks on BMI was sufficient to justify their cost. RESULTS: The Checks were associated with a reduction in mean BMI of 0.27 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.34) compared to no Check. When applied to the evaluative tool, a small but positive QALY gain of 0.05 per participant was observed, coupled with a reduction in disease-related care costs of £170 ($210 USD). When the estimated cost per Check (£179, $220 USD) is taken into account, we estimate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £900/QALY ($1109 USD/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Much of the criticism of the Health Checks has focussed on the relatively small average change in risk factors such as BMI. However, this analysis suggests that the significant health and cost-saving benefits from even a modest reduction in mean BMI, coupled with the low costs of the Checks, combine to result in a potentially highly cost-effective policy.