Driving delivery and uptake of catch-up vaccination among adolescent and adult migrants in UK general practice: a mixed methods pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Migrants in the UK and Europe face vulnerability to vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) due to missed childhood vaccines and doses and marginalisation from health systems. Ensuring migrants receive catch-up vaccinations, including MMR, Td/IPV, MenACWY, and HPV, is essential to align them with UK and European vaccination schedules and ultimately reduce morbidity and mortality. However, recent evidence highlights poor awareness and implementation of catch-up vaccination guidelines by UK primary care staff, requiring novel approaches to strengthen the primary care pathway. METHODS: The 'Vacc on Track' study (May 2021-September 2022) aimed to measure under-vaccination rates among migrants in UK primary care and establish new referral pathways for catch-up vaccination. Participants included migrants aged 16 or older, born outside of Western Europe, North America, Australia, or New Zealand, in two London boroughs. Quantitative data on vaccination history, referral, uptake, and sociodemographic factors were collected, with practice nurses prompted to deliver catch-up vaccinations following UK guidelines. Focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with staff and migrants explored views on delivering catch-up vaccination, including barriers, facilitators, and opportunities. Data were analysed using STATA12 and NVivo 12. RESULTS: Results from 57 migrants presenting to study sites from 18 countries (mean age 41 [SD 7.2] years; 62% female; mean 11.3 [SD 9.1] years in UK) over a minimum of 6 months of follow-up revealed significant catch-up vaccination needs, particularly for MMR (49 [86%] required catch-up vaccination) and Td/IPV (50 [88%]). Fifty-three (93%) participants were referred for any catch-up vaccination, but completion of courses was low (6 [12%] for Td/IPV and 33 [64%] for MMR), suggesting individual and systemic barriers. Qualitative in-depth interviews (n = 39) with adult migrants highlighted the lack of systems currently in place in the UK to offer catch-up vaccination to migrants on arrival and the need for health-care provider skills and knowledge of catch-up vaccination to be improved. Focus group discussions and interviews with practice staff (n = 32) identified limited appointment/follow-up time, staff knowledge gaps, inadequate engagement routes, and low incentivisation as challenges that will need to be addressed. However, they underscored the potential of staff champions, trust-building mechanisms, and community-based approaches to strengthen catch-up vaccination uptake among migrants. CONCLUSIONS: Given the significant catch-up vaccination needs of migrants in our sample, and the current barriers to driving uptake identified, our findings suggest it will be important to explore this public health issue further, potentially through a larger study or trial. Strengthening existing pathways, staff capacity and knowledge in primary care, alongside implementing new strategies centred on cultural competence and building trust with migrant communities will be important focus areas.

Co-designing a theory-informed, multicomponent intervention to increase vaccine uptake with Congolese migrants: A qualitative, community-based participatory research study (LISOLO MALAMU).

INTRODUCTION: Disparities in the uptake of routine and COVID-19 vaccinations have been observed in migrant populations, and attributed to issues of mistrust, access and low vaccine confidence. Participatory research approaches and behaviour change theory hold the potential for developing tailored vaccination interventions that address these complex barriers in partnership with communities and should be explored further. METHODS: This study used a theory-informed, community-based participatory research approach to co-design a culturally tailored behaviour change intervention aimed at increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake among Congolese migrants in London, United Kingdom (2021-2022). It was designed and led by a community-academic partnership in response to unmet needs in the Congolese community as the COVID-19 pandemic started. Barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination, information and communication preferences, and intervention suggestions were explored through qualitative in-depth interviews with Congolese migrants, thematically analysed, and mapped to the theoretical domains framework (TDF) and the capability, opportunity, motivation, behaviour model to identify target behaviours and strategies to include in interventions. Interventions were co-designed and tailored in workshops involving Congolese migrants. RESULTS: Thirty-two Congolese adult migrants (24 (75%) women, mean 14.3 (SD: 7.5) years in the United Kingdom, mean age 52.6 (SD: 11.0) years) took part in in-depth interviews and 16 (same sample) took part in co-design workshops. Fourteen barriers and 10 facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination were identified; most barrier data related to four TDF domains (beliefs about consequences; emotion; social influences and environmental context and resources), and the behavioural diagnosis concluded interventions should target improving psychological capability, reflective and automatic motivations and social opportunities. Strategies included culturally tailored behaviour change techniques based on education, persuasion, modelling, enablement and environmental restructuring, which resulted in a co-designed intervention comprising community-led workshops, plays and posters. Findings and interventions were disseminated through a community celebration event. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates how behavioural theory can be applied to co-designing tailored interventions with underserved migrant communities through a participatory research paradigm to address a range of health issues and inequalities. Future research should build on this empowering approach, with the goal of developing more sensitive vaccination services and interventions which respond to migrant communities' unique cultural needs and realities. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient and public involvement (PPI) were embedded in the participatory study design and approach, with community members co-producing all stages of the study and co-authoring this paper. An independent PPI board (St George's Migrant Health Research Group Patient and Public Involvement Advisory Board) comprising five adult migrants with lived experience of accessing healthcare in the United Kingdom were also consulted at significant points over the course of the study.

Associations between diagnostic time intervals and health-related quality of life, clinical anxiety and depression in adolescents and young adults with cancer: cross-sectional analysis of the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort.

BACKGROUND: The association of diagnostic intervals and outcomes is poorly understood in adolescents and young adults with cancer (AYA). We investigated associations between diagnostic intervals and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), anxiety and depression in a large AYA cohort. METHODS: Participants aged 12-24 completed interviews post-diagnosis, providing data on diagnostic experiences and the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) HRQoL, anxiety and depression. Demographic and cancer information were obtained from clinical and national records. Six diagnostic intervals were considered. Relationships between intervals and PROs were examined using regression models. RESULTS: Eight hundred and thirty participants completed interviews. In adjusted models, across 28 of 30 associations, longer intervals were associated with poorer PROs. Patient intervals (symptom onset to first seeing a GP) of ≥1 month were associated with greater depression (adjusted odds ratio (aOR):1.7, 95% Confidence Interval (CI):1.1-2.5) compared to <1 month. ≥3 pre-referral GP consultations were associated with greater anxiety (aOR:1.6, CI:1.1-2.3) compared to 1-2 consultations. Symptom onset to first oncology appointment intervals of ≥2 months was associated with impaired HRQoL (aOR:1.8, CI:1.2-2.5) compared to <2 months. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged diagnostic intervals in AYA are associated with an increased risk of impaired HRQoL, anxiety and depression. Identifying and delivering interventions for this high-risk group is a priority.

Patterns of anxiety and distress over 12 months following participation in HPV primary screening.

OBJECTIVES: Many countries are now using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening, testing for high-risk HPV and using cytology as triage. An HPV-positive result can have an adverse psychological impact, at least in the short term. In this paper, we explore the psychological impact of primary HPV screening over 12 months. METHODS: Women were surveyed soon after receiving their results (n=1133) and 6 (n=762) and 12 months (n=537) later. Primary outcomes were anxiety (Short-Form State Anxiety Inventory-6) and distress (General Health Questionnaire-12). Secondary outcomes included concern, worry about cervical cancer and reassurance. Mixed-effects regression models were used to explore differences at each time point and change over time across four groups according to their baseline result: control (HPV negative/HPV cleared/normal cytology and not tested for HPV); HPV positive with normal cytology; HPV positive with abnormal cytology; and HPV persistent (ie, second consecutive HPV-positive result). RESULTS: Women who were HPV positive with abnormal cytology had the highest anxiety scores at baseline (mean=42.2, SD: 15.0), but this had declined by 12 months (mean=37.0, SD: 11.7) and was closer to being within the 'normal' range (scores between 34 and 36 are considered 'normal'). This group also had the highest distress at baseline (mean=3.3, SD: 3.8, scores of 3+ indicate case-level distress), but the lowest distress at 12 months (mean=1.9, SD: 3.1). At 6 and 12 months, there were no between-group differences in anxiety or distress for any HPV-positive result group when compared with the control group. The control group were less concerned and more reassured about their result at 6 and 12 months than the HPV-positive with normal cytology group. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest the initial adverse impact of an HPV-positive screening result on anxiety and distress diminishes over time. Specific concerns about the result may be longer lasting and efforts should be made to address them.

Anxiety and distress following receipt of results from routine HPV primary testing in cervical screening: The psychological impact of primary screening (PIPS) study.

We used a cross-sectional survey to examine short-term anxiety and distress in women receiving different results following routine human papillomavirus (HPV) primary testing at cervical screening. Participants were women aged 24-65 (n = 1,127) who had attended screening at one of five sites piloting HPV primary screening in England, including a control group with normal cytology who were not tested for HPV. Women completed a postal questionnaire ~2 weeks after receiving their screening result. Unadjusted mean anxiety scores ranged from 32.9 (standard deviation [SD] = 12.2) in HPV-negative women to 42.1 (SD = 14.9) in women who were HPV-positive with abnormal cytology. In adjusted analyses, anxiety was significantly higher in women testing HPV-positive with either normal cytology (mean difference [MD] = 3.5, CI: 0.6-6.4) or abnormal cytology (MD = 7.2, CI: 3.7-10.6), than the control group. Distress was slightly higher in women who tested HPV-positive with abnormal cytology (MD = 0.9, CI: 0.02-1.8), than the control group. We also found increased odds of very high anxiety in women who tested HPV-positive with normal or abnormal cytology compared to the control group. This pattern of results was only observed among women receiving their first HPV-positive result, not among women found to have persistent HPV at 12-month follow-up. Testing HPV-positive with normal cytology for the first time, is associated with elevated anxiety despite carrying very low immediate cervical cancer risk. However, receiving the same test result at 12-month early recall does not appear to be associated with higher anxiety, suggesting anxiety may normalise with repeated exposure and/or over time.

Factors Affecting Delivery of the HPV Vaccination: A Focus Group Study With NHS School-Aged Vaccination Teams in London.

This study sought to identify barriers and facilitators to delivery of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in schools. Four focus groups were conducted with 28 staff members, from four National Health Service school-aged vaccination (SAV) teams in London. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. School engagement and support, and understanding and education about the vaccination (or conversely, a lack of) were identified as both barriers and facilitators. Limited school and team resources, fear of the vaccination, and poor consent form return were identified as barriers. Explanations for why some girls do not complete the vaccination series were provided. Individualizing approaches used to promote and encourage the vaccination was identified as a facilitating factor. Optimal delivery of the HPV vaccination program is dependent on school engagement and the allocation of time for SAV teams to promote vaccination uptake. Immunization program providers should work with schools to improve understanding and support of the HPV vaccination program.

Psychosocial impact of human papillomavirus-related head and neck cancer on patients and their partners: A qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: Increasing numbers of patients face the psychosocial challenge of a diagnosis of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). We explored the psychosocial impact of an HPV-OSCC diagnosis for patients and their partners. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with patients (n = 20) and a subset of their partners (n = 12), identified through medical records at two UK hospitals. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic Framework Analysis. RESULTS: Only 12/20 patients interviewed (and five partners) were aware of their HPV status and the main analysis focused on this sub-sample. In discussing the cause of their cancer, patients and their partners talked about not wanting to know; whether they disclosed the cause of their cancer to others; their reactions to being diagnosed with HPV; the prognosis information they were given and the questions they had about HPV. Most concerns were cancer-related rather than HPV-related, but some patients (n = 3) described feelings of embarrassment and perceived stigma about HPV. CONCLUSION: Some patients and partners who are told HPV is the cause of their OSCC have questions about HPV and seek further information. Concerns and uncertainties about the sexually transmitted nature of HPV need to be addressed by health professionals.

Enhanced Invitations Using the Question-Behavior Effect and Financial Incentives to Promote Health Check Uptake in Primary Care.

Background: Uptake of health checks for cardiovascular risk assessment in primary care in England is lower than anticipated. The question-behavior effect (QBE) may offer a simple, scalable intervention to increase health check uptake. Purpose: The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of enhanced invitation methods employing the QBE, with or without a financial incentive to return the questionnaire, at increasing uptake of health checks. Methods: We conducted a three-arm randomized trial including all patients at 18 general practices in two London boroughs, who were invited for health checks from July 2013 to December 2014. Participants were randomized to three trial arms: (i) Standard health check invitation letter only; (ii) QBE questionnaire followed by standard invitation letter; or (iii) QBE questionnaire with offer of a financial incentive to return the questionnaire, followed by standard invitation letter. In intention to treat analysis, the primary outcome of completion of health check within 6 months of invitation, was evaluated using a p value of .0167 for significance. Results: 12,459 participants were randomized. Health check uptake was evaluated for 12,052 (97%) with outcome data collected. Health check uptake within 6 months of invitation was: standard invitation, 590 / 4,095 (14.41%); QBE questionnaire, 630 / 3,988 (15.80%); QBE questionnaire and financial incentive, 629 / 3,969 (15.85%). Difference following QBE questionnaire, 1.43% (95% confidence interval -0.12 to 2.97%, p = .070); following QBE questionnaire and financial incentive, 1.52% (-0.03 to 3.07%, p = .054). Conclusions: Uptake of health checks following a standard invitation was low and not significantly increased through enhanced invitation methods using the QBE.

Public awareness and healthcare professional advice for obesity as a risk factor for cancer in the UK: a cross-sectional survey.

Background: Overweight and obesity is the second biggest preventable cause of cancer after smoking, causing ~3.4 million deaths worldwide. This study provides current UK data on awareness of the link between obesity and cancer by socio-demographic factors, including BMI, and explores to what degree healthcare professionals provide weight management advice to patients. Methods: Cross-sectional survey of 3293 adults completed an online survey in February/March 2016, weighted to be representative of the UK population aged 18+. Results: Public awareness of the link between obesity and cancer is low (25.4% unprompted and 57.5% prompted). Higher levels of awareness existed for least deprived groups (P < 0.001), compared to more deprived groups. Most respondents had seen a healthcare practitioner in the past 12 months (91.6%) and 17.4% had received advice about their weight, although 48.4% of the sample were overweight/obese. Conclusion: Cancer is not at the forefront of people's minds when considering health conditions associated with overweight or obesity. Socio-economic disparities exist in health knowledge across the UK population, with adults from more affluent groups being most aware. Healthcare professionals are uniquely positioned to provide advice about weight, but opportunities for intervention are currently under-utilized in healthcare settings.

Assessing the acceptability of incentivising HPV vaccination consent form return as a means of increasing uptake.

BACKGROUND: Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is high overall but there are disparities in uptake, particularly by ethnicity. Incentivising vaccination consent form return is a promising approach to increase vaccination uptake. As part of a randomised feasibility trial we qualitatively assessed the acceptability of increasing uptake of HPV vaccination by incentivising consent form return. METHODS: In the context of a two-arm, cluster randomised feasibility trial, qualitative free-text questionnaire responses were collected from adolescent girls (n = 181) and their parents (n = 61), assessing the acceptability of an incentive intervention to increase HPV vaccination consent form return. In the incentive intervention arm, girls who returned a signed consent form (regardless of whether consent was given or refused), had a 1-in-10 chance of winning a £50 shopping voucher. Telephone interviews were also conducted with members of staff from participating schools (n = 6), assessing the acceptability of the incentive. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Girls and parents provided a mix of positive, negative and ambivalent responses about the use of the incentive to encourage HPV vaccination consent form return. Both girls and parents held misconceptions about the nature of the incentive, wrongly believing that the incentive was dependent on vaccination receipt rather than consent form return. School staff members also expressed a mix of opinions on the acceptability of the incentive, including perceptions of effectiveness and ethics. CONCLUSIONS: The use of an incentive intervention to encourage the return of HPV vaccination consent forms was found to be moderately acceptable to those receiving and delivering the intervention, although a number of changes are required to improve this. In particular, improving communication about the nature of the incentive to reduce misconceptions is vital. These findings suggest that incentivising consent form return may be an acceptable means of improving HPV vaccination rates, should improvements be made. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry; ISRCTN72136061 , 26 September 2016, retrospectively registered.

Using affective judgement to increase physical activity in British adults.

Mobile phone apps have been shown to increase physical activity (PA), but existing apps fail to target the emotional aspects of PA, which influence whether individuals are active. We developed an app that encourages individuals to focus on the emotional aspects of PA. We aimed to assess the acceptability of this app, and conduct a preliminary evaluation of efficacy. The app was developed in collaboration with users through focus groups. Seven users tested the app over 4 months and provided feedback on acceptability, aesthetics and functionality in a follow-up focus group. Results were summarized descriptively. Before testing the app, participants completed a questionnaire assessing their current PA and psychological antecedents of PA. A second questionnaire was completed at the follow-up focus group. Change scores are reported for each participant and overall.The social and reminder aspects facilitated motivation to be active and many found it easy to integrate into their lives. Most suggested modifications. Small improvements in number of minutes spent walking per week were observed (overall mean change +25 min) and some psychological antecedents of PA (overall mean change for social support for PA +0.14, self-efficacy for PA +0.17, outcome expectations about PA +0.20; all five-point scales), but reductions were seen in other domains. The app was acceptable to users, although developments are required. Testing with a small number of individuals, offering preliminary evidence of efficacy of this app, provides justification for further evaluation on a larger scale.

A cluster randomised feasibility study of an adolescent incentive intervention to increase uptake of HPV vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is suboptimal among some groups. We aimed to determine the feasibility of undertaking a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of incentives to improve HPV vaccination uptake by increasing consent form return. METHODS: An equal-allocation, two-arm cluster RCT design was used. We invited 60 London schools to participate. Those agreeing were randomised to either a standard invitation or incentive intervention arm, in which Year 8 girls had the chance to win a £50 shopping voucher if they returned a vaccination consent form, regardless of whether consent was provided. We collected data on school and parent participation rates and questionnaire response rates. Analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: Six schools completed the trial and only 3% of parents opted out. The response rate was 70% for the girls' questionnaire and 17% for the parents'. In the intervention arm, 87% of girls returned a consent form compared with 67% in the standard invitation arm. The proportion of girls whose parents gave consent for vaccination was higher in the intervention arm (76%) than the standard invitation arm (61%). CONCLUSIONS: An RCT of an incentive intervention is feasible. The intervention may improve vaccination uptake but a fully powered RCT is needed.

Exploring human papillomavirus vaccination refusal among ethnic minorities in England: A comparative qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: In England, uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to prevent HPV-related cancer is lower among girls from ethnic minority backgrounds. We aimed to explore the factors that prevented ethnic minority parents from vaccinating, compared to White British nonvaccinating parents and vaccinating ethnic minority parents. METHODS: Interviews with 33 parents (n = 14 ethnic minority non-vaccinating, n = 10 White British nonvaccinating, and n = 9 ethnic minority vaccinating) explored parents' reasons for giving or withholding consent for HPV vaccination. Data were analysed using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: Concerns about the vaccine were raised by all nonvaccinating ethnic minority parents, and they wanted information to address these concerns. External and internal influences affected parents' decisions, as well as parents' perceptions that HPV could be prevented using means other than vaccination. Reasons were not always exclusive to nonvaccinating ethnic minority parents, although some were, including a preference for abstinence from sex before marriage. Only ethnic minority parents wanted information provided via workshops. CONCLUSIONS: Ethnic differences in HPV vaccination uptake may be partly explained by concerns that were only reported by parents from some ethnic groups. Interventions to improve uptake may need to tackle difficult topics like abstinence from sex before marriage, and use a targeted format.

Experiences of cervical screening and barriers to participation in the context of an organised programme: a systematic review and thematic synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: As uptake of cervical screening continues to decline, this systematic review synthesises the qualitative literature on women's perceptions and experiences of cervical screening in the context of an organised call-recall programme, in order to understand the barriers to informed uptake. METHODS: We searched nine databases for English language peer-reviewed publications reporting on qualitative data from screening-eligible women, exploring barriers to cervical screening in countries that offer a nationally organised call-recall programme. Evidence was integrated using thematic synthesis. RESULTS: Thirty-nine papers from the UK, Australia, Sweden and Korea were included. The majority of participants had attended screening at least once. Two broad themes were identified: (a) should I go for screening? and (b) screening is a big deal. In considering whether to attend, women discussed the personal relevance and value of screening. Women who had previously attended described how it was a big deal, physically and emotionally, and the varied threats that screening presents. Practical barriers affected whether women translated screening intentions into action. CONCLUSIONS: The variation in women's understanding and perceptions of cervical screening suggests that interventions tailored to decisional stage may be of value in increasing engagement with the invitation and uptake of screening in those who wish to take part. There is also a need for further research with women who have never attended screening, especially those who remain unaware or unengaged, as their perspectives are lacking in the existing literature. © 2016 The Authors. Psycho-Oncology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Promoting early presentation of breast cancer in older women: sustained effect of an intervention to promote breast cancer awareness in routine clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Older women have poorer survival from breast cancer, which may be at least partly due to poor breast cancer awareness leading to delayed presentation and more advanced stage at diagnosis. In a randomised trial, an intervention to promote early presentation of breast cancer in older women increased breast cancer awareness at 1 year compared with usual care (24 versus 4%). We examined its effectiveness in routine clinical practice. METHODS: We piloted the intervention delivered by practising health professionals to women aged about 70 in four breast screening services. We measured the effect on breast cancer awareness at 1 year compared with comparison services, where women did not receive the intervention. RESULTS: At 1 year, 25% of women in pilot services were breast cancer aware compared with 4% in comparison services (p = 0.001). The components of breast cancer awareness were knowledge of breast cancer non-lump symptoms (pilot: 63% vs comparison: 82% at 1 year; OR = 2.56, 95% CI 1.92-3.42), knowledge of age related risk (pilot: 8% vs comparison: 36% at 1 year; OR = 5.56, 95% CI 4.0-7.74) and reported breast checking (pilot: 70% vs comparison: 78% at 1 year; OR = 1.49, 95% CI 1.13-1.96). CONCLUSION: The intervention may be as effective in routine clinical practice as in a randomised controlled trial. This intervention has the potential to reduce patient delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer in older women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PEP trial was registered with the International Standard Registered Clinical/soCial sTudy Number (ISRCTN) as a clinical trial ( ISRCTN31994827 ) on 3rd October 2007.

Do health checks improve risk factor detection in primary care? Matched cohort study using electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of NHS Health Checks on cardiovascular risk factor detection and inequalities. METHODS: Matched cohort study in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, including participants who received a health check in England between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2013, together with matched control participants, with linked deprivation scores. RESULTS: There were 91 618 eligible participants who received a health check, of whom 75 123 (82%) were matched with 182 245 controls. After the health check, 90% of men and 92% of women had complete data for blood pressure, total cholesterol, smoking and body mass index; a net 51% increase (P < 0.001) over controls. After the check, gender and deprivation inequalities in recording of all risk factors were lower than for controls. Net increase in risk factor detection was greater for hypercholesterolaemia (men +33%; women +32%) than for obesity (men +8%; women +4%) and hypertension in men only (+5%) (all P < 0.001). Detection of smoking was 5% lower in health check participants than controls (P < 0.001). Over 4 years, statins were prescribed to 11% of health -check participants and 7.6% controls (hazard ratio 1.58, 95% confidence interval 1.53-1.63, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: NHS Health Checks are associated with increased detection of hypercholesterolaemia, and to a lesser extent obesity and hypertension, but smokers may be under-represented.

Estimating the yield of NHS Health Checks in England: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the yield of the NHS Health Checks programme. METHODS: A cohort study, conducted in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink in England. Electronic health records were analysed for patients aged 40-74 receiving an NHS Health Check between 2010 and 2013. RESULTS: There were 65 324 men and 75 032 women receiving a health check. For every 1000 men assessed, there were 205 smokers (95% confidence interval 195-215), 355 (340-369) with hypertension (≥140/90 mmHg) and 633 (607-658) with elevated cholesterol (≥5 mmol/l). Among 1000 women, there were 161 (151-171) smokers, 247 (238-257) with hypertension and 668 (646-689) with elevated cholesterol. In the 12 months following the check, statins were prescribed to 18% of men and 21% of women with ≥20% cardiovascular risk and antihypertensive drugs to 11% of men and 16% of women with ≥20% cardiovascular risk. Slight reductions in risk factor values were observed in the minority of participants with follow-up values recorded in the 15 months following the check. CONCLUSIONS: A universal primary prevention programme identifies substantial risk factor burden in a population without known cardiovascular disease. Research is needed to monitor interventions, and intermediate- and long-term outcomes, in those identified at high risk.

Influences on individuals' decisions to take up the offer of a health check: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Health checks are promoted to evaluate individuals' risk of developing disease and to initiate health promotion and disease prevention interventions. The NHS Health Check is a cardiovascular risk assessment programme introduced in the UK aimed at preventing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Uptake of health checks is lower than anticipated. This study aimed to explore influences on people's decisions to take up the offer of a health check. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with people registered at four general practices in South London. The interview schedule was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. Data were analysed qualitatively using the Framework method using NVivo for data management. RESULTS: Twenty-seven participants invited for a health check were included in the study. Seventeen received the health check while 10 either did not attend or failed to complete the check. Five themes emerging from the data included a lack of awareness of the health check programme, beliefs about susceptibility to CVD, beliefs about civic responsibility, issues concerning access to appointments, and beliefs about the consequences of having a check. CONCLUSIONS: Health check programmes need to raise public awareness to ensure that people are informed about the objectives and nature of the programme in order to reach an informed decision about taking up the invitation. Emphasizing the benefits of prevention and early detection might encourage attendance in those who are reluctant to burden the public health-care systems. Extending outreach initiatives and increasing 'out of hours' provision at local community sites could facilitate access.

Girls' explanations for being unvaccinated or under vaccinated against human papillomavirus: a content analysis of survey responses.

BACKGROUND: In England HPV vaccination is offered to all girls age 12-13 years, free-at-the-point-of-receipt, mostly in schools. Coverage is good, but around 20% of girls remain unvaccinated. This research sought to explore reasons for being un-/under vaccinated. METHODS: An ethnically diverse sample of girls aged 15-16 years attending one of twelve London schools completed a survey three years after being offered HPV vaccination. Girls reported their HPV vaccine status and those who were unvaccinated (had not received any doses of the vaccine) or under vaccinated (had not completed the recommended 3-dose course) recorded reasons for their un-/under vaccinated status. Reasons were reported using free-text and content analysis was used to analyse responses. RESULTS: Around 74% of un-/under vaccinated girls provided a reason for their vaccination status (n = 259). Among unvaccinated girls, the most common reasons related to lack of perceived need for vaccination, concerns about safety and lack of parental consent. Girls who were under vaccinated gave practical reasons, including the need for more information (e.g. not knowing that multiple doses were needed), administrative issues (e.g. school absence), health and procedural concerns (e.g. fear of needles). Descriptively, there were few differences in the reasons given between girls from different ethnic backgrounds. Girls from Black and Asian backgrounds more commonly thought that the vaccine was not needed. Lack of parental consent without providing further explanation was most often cited by girls from Black backgrounds. CONCLUSIONS: Safety concerns and lack of perceived need should be addressed to encourage informed uptake of HPV vaccination. Immunisation programme coordinators may be able to increase series completion by tackling practical problems facing under vaccinated girls.

Predicting human papillomavirus vaccination behaviour among adolescent girls in England: results from a prospective survey.

BACKGROUND: To maximise the benefits of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, uptake needs to be high. We examined psychosocial predictors of HPV vaccine uptake and the association between vaccine intention and uptake 1 year later in adolescent girls (aged 16-17 years) in England. METHOD: Adolescent girls in the catch-up cohort were recruited from colleges in the South East of England in 2009 and 2010. Participants completed a questionnaire 6 months before (n=606) and 6 months after (n=214) being offered the vaccine, which assessed vaccine intention, vaccine uptake, demographics and attitudes based on the Health Belief Model and Theory of Planned Behaviour. RESULTS: A number of demographic and psychological factors, including intention, showed associations with vaccine uptake in uni-variable analyses. In multi-variable analyses, only ethnicity was independently associated with vaccine uptake. Participants from Black or 'Other' ethnic backgrounds were less likely to have received the HPV vaccine than White participants. CONCLUSIONS: More research is needed to help understand variation in vaccine coverage between ethnic groups.