Attitudes toward preventive services and lifestyle: the views of primary care patients in Europe. the EUROPREVIEW patient study.

BACKGROUND: For preventive interventions in general practice to succeed, patients' points of view must be taken into account in addition to those of GPs. OBJECTIVE: To explore patients' views and beliefs about the importance of lifestyle and preventive interventions, to assess their readiness to make changes to their lifestyle and their willingness to receive support from GPs. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey conducted by EUROPREV in primary care practices in 22 European countries. Patients were consecutively selected and interviewed from September 2008 to September 2009. RESULTS: Seven thousand nine hundred and forty-seven participants, 52.2% females. Only 30.5% of risky drinkers think they need to change, as opposed to 64% of smokers, 73.5% of patients with unhealthy eating habits and 73% with lack of physical activity. Risky drinkers reported that GPs initiated a discussion on alcohol consumption less often (42%) than on smoking (63%), eating habits (59%) or physical activity (55%). Seventy-five per cent, 66% and 63% of patients without hypertension, diabetes or hypercholesterolaemia, respectively, think blood pressure, blood sugar and serum cholesterol should be checked yearly. Women (80%) think they should be screened with the cervical smear test and 72.8% of women aged 30-49 years with mammography, yearly or every 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of patients attending primary care with unhealthy lifestyles (especially risky drinkers) do not perceive the need to change their habits, and about half the patients reported not having had any discussion on healthy lifestyles with their GPs. Patients overestimate their need to be screened for cardiovascular risk factors and for cancer.

Dietary advice in clinical practice: the views of general practitioners in Europe.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) can promote good nutrition to patients and advise them about desirable dietary practices for specific conditions. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess GPs' knowledge and attitudes in implementing preventive and health promotion activities and to describe tools used by European GPs in advising patients about dietary practices. DESIGN: A postal survey was mailed to 1976 GPs from 10 GP national colleges to obtain information about beliefs and attitudes in prevention and health promotion, and an e-mail survey was sent to 15 GPs representing national colleges to obtain information about dietary guidelines. RESULTS: In the postal survey, 45% of GPs reported estimating body mass in clinical practice, and 60% reported advising overweight patients to lose weight. Fifty-eight percent answered that they felt minimally effective or ineffective in helping patients achieve or maintain normal weight. In the e-mail survey, only 4 colleges out of 15 reported that they had published their own dietary tools, although 10 out of 15 answered that GPs use some nutritional/dietary recommendations in the office when seeing patients. Eleven out of 15 answered that both the nurse and the GP advise patients about dietary practices, with 4 answering that GPs were the only ones who advise patients. Only 5 delegates answered that they can refer their patients to trained nutrition specialists. CONCLUSIONS: GPs think that obesity is not easy to handle in practice. Most GPs have dietary tools in the office and think that nurses play an important role in advising patients.

Randomized clinical trial to assess the efficacy of a comprehensive programme of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in general practice: the PREseAP study.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of a comprehensive program of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in general practice. METHODS: A cluster randomized clinical trial was carried out in a regular general practice setting. Male and female patients aged under 86 years with a diagnosis of ischemic heart disease, stroke or peripheral artery disease were recruited between January 2004 and May 2005. Study participants were seen at 42 health centers throughout the whole of Spain. The primary endpoint was the combination of all-cause mortality and hospital cardiovascular readmission at 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 1224 patients were recruited: 624 in the intervention group and 600 in the control group. The primary endpoint was observed in 29.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 25.5-34.8%) in the intervention group and 25.6% (22.3-29.2%) in the control group (P=.15). At the end of follow-up, 8.5% (6.3-11.3%) in the intervention group and 11% (7.4-16%) in the control group were smokers (P=.07). The mean waist circumference of patients in the intervention and control groups was 100.44 cm (95% CI, 98.97-101.91 cm) and 102.58 cm (95% CI, 100.96-104.21 cm), respectively (P=.07). Overall, 20.9% (15.6-27.7%) of patients in the intervention group and 29.6% (23.9-36.1%) in the control group suffered from anxiety (P=.05), and 29.6% (22.4-37.9%) in the intervention group and 41.4% (35.8-47.3%) in the control group had depression (P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive program of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in general practice was not effective in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. However, some factors associated with a healthy lifestyle were improved and anxiety and depression were reduced.

Prevention and health promotion in clinical practice: the views of general practitioners in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Disease prevention and health promotion are important tasks in the daily practice of all general practitioners (GPs). The objective of this study was to explore the knowledge and attitudes of European GPs in implementing evidence-based health promotion and disease prevention recommendations in primary care, to describe GPs' perceived barriers to implementing these recommendations and to assess how GPs' own health behaviors affect their work with their patients. METHODS: A postal multinational survey was carried out from June to December 2000 in a random sample of GPs listed from national colleges of each country. RESULTS: Eleven European countries participated in the study, giving a total of 2082 GPs. Although GPs believe they should advise preventive and health promotion activities, in practice, they are less likely to do so. About 56.02% of the GPs answered that carrying-out prevention and health promotion activities are difficult. The two most important barriers reported were heavy workload/lack of time and no reimbursement. Associations between personal health behaviour and attitudes to health promotion or activities in prevention were found. GPs who smoked felt less effective in helping patients to reduce tobacco consumption than non-smoking GPs (39.34% versus 48.18%, P < 0.01). GPs who exercised felt that they were more effective in helping patients to practice regular physical exercise than sedentary GPs (59.14% versus 49.70%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Significant gaps between GP's knowledge and practices persist in the use of evidence-based recommendations for health promotion and disease prevention in primary care.

Ensayo clínico aleatorizado para evaluar la eficacia de un programa integral de prevención secundaria de las enfermedades cardiovasculares en atención primaria: estudio PREseAP / Randomized clinical trial to assess the efficacy of a comprehensive programme of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in general practice: the PREseAP study

Introducción y objetivos. Evaluar la eficacia de un programa integral de prevención secundaria de las enfermedades cardiovasculares en atención primaria. Métodos.Ensayo clínico aleatorizado, pragmático, por conglomerados realizado en atención primaria. Eran pacientes elegibles varones y mujeres menores de 86 años, diagnosticados de cardiopatía isquémica, accidente cerebrovascular o enfermedad arterial periférica entre enero de 2004 y mayo de 2005. Participaron en el estudio pacientes visitados en 42 centros de salud de todo el estado español. La variable de resultado fue la combinación de la mortalidad total y los reingresos hospitalarios por causa cardiovascular a los 3 años de seguimiento. Resultados. Se reclutó a 1.224 pacientes, 624 en el grupo intervención y 600 en el grupo control. La variable principal de resultado se observó en el 29,9% (intervalo de confianza del 95%, 25,5-34,8) en el grupo intervención y en el 25,6% (22,3-29,2) en el grupo control (p=0,15). Al final del seguimiento un 8,5% (6,3-11,3) del grupo intervención y un 11% (7,4-16) del grupo control eran fumadores (p=0,07). El perímetro abdominal del grupo intervención fue 100,44 (98,97-101,91) cm y el del grupo control, 102,58 (100,96-104,21) cm (p=0,07). El 20,9% (15,6-27,7) de los pacientes del grupo intervención y el 29,6% de los pacientes del grupo control (23,9-36,1) tenían ansiedad (p=0,05), y el 29,6% (22,4-37,9) del grupo intervención y el 41,4% (35,8-47,3) del grupo control tenían depresión (p=0,02). Conclusiones. Un programa integral de prevención secundaria no es eficaz para reducir la morbimortalidad cardiovascular, pero sí en mejorar algunos aspectos relacionados con los hábitos saludables y en reducir la ansiedad y la depresión (AU)

Introduction and objectives: To assess the efficacy of a comprehensive programof secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in general practice. Methods: A cluster randomized clinical trial was carried out in a regular general practice setting. Male and female patients aged under 86 years with a diagnosis of ischemic heart disease, stroke or peripheral artery disease were recruited between January 2004 and May 2005. Study participants were seen at 42 health centers throughout the whole of Spain. The primary endpoint was the combination of all-cause mortality and hospital cardiovascular readmission at 3-year follow-up. Results: In total, 1224 patients were recruited: 624 in the intervention group and 600 in the control group. The primary endpoint was observed in 29.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 25.5–34.8%) in the intervention group and 25.6% (22.3–29.2%) in the control group (P = .15). At the end of follow-up, 8.5% (6.3–11.3%) in the intervention group and 11% (7.4–16%) in the control group were smokers (P = .07). The mean waist circumference of patients in the intervention and control groups was 100.44 cm (95% CI, 98.97–101.91 cm) and 102.58 cm (95% CI, 100.96–104.21 cm), respectively (P = .07). Overall, 20.9% (15.6–27.7%) of patients in the intervention group and 29.6% (23.9–36.1%) in the control group suffered from anxiety (P = .05), and 29.6% (22.4–37.9%) in the intervention group and 41.4% (35.8–47.3%) in the control group had depression (P = .02). Conclusions: A comprehensive program of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in general practice was not effective in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. However, some factors associated with a healthy lifestyle were improved and anxiety and depression were reduced (AU)