The heterogeneity of the studies limited the analysis , but together they showed that provision of risk information to patients improved the accuracy of risk perception without decreasing quality of life or increasing anxiety , but had little effect on lifestyle .
There seems evidence that providing CVD risk model estimates to professionals and patients improves perceived CVD risk and medical prescribing , with little evidence of harm on psychological well-being
OBJECTIVE To systematic ally review whether the provision of information on cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) risk to healthcare professionals and patients impacts their decision-making , behaviour and ultimately patient health .
The Psychological Impact of Screening for Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in Primary Care Settings
Aims A prospect i ve study was conducted to identify the psychological impact of labelling middle-aged men as having above average risk for coronary heart disease . A second aim was to find out the psychological effect of participation in a subsequent clinical trial . Methods 5813 men attended nine special screening clinics in Engl and and Scotl and for baseline measurement of psychological symptoms and coronary disease risk factors . Each man was later informed of his risk status by letter as either above average risk ( high-risk ) or no special risk ( low-risk ) . In three clinics some men also received an intermediate risk ( moderate-risk ) between high-risk and low-risk . Follow-up psychological measurements were made after labelling and 3 months later . Results Men who received either the high-risk label ( n = 838 ) or the low-risk label ( n = 3114 ) showed a decrease in reported psychological symptoms after labelling . Men receiving the unexpected intermediate risk ( moderate-risk ) label , which communicated specific test abnormalities , increased their psychological symptoms to ‘ case ’ levels on the General Health Question naire ; relative risk ( compared with low-risk ) was 1.80 ( 95 % confidence interval 1.19 - 2,71 ) after adjustment for confounding factors . Compliers with a subsequent clinical trial decreased their risk of becoming cases and , if ill at trial entry , increased their case remission rate . Conclusions The ascription of an ‘ above average risk ’ label for coronary disease to middle-aged men does not adversely affect the psychological state of those who receive it if they have received preparation for risk labelling . However , communicating abnormal coronary disease test results without adequate preparation confers short-term psychological harm . Non-specific support from familiar general practice professionals received by participants in a clinical trial reduces the risk of psychological ill-health . All coronary disease screening programmes should include adequate pre-labelling preparation for all risk labels and abnormal results
The heterogeneity of the studies limited the analysis , but together they showed that provision of risk information to patients improved the accuracy of risk perception without decreasing quality of life or increasing anxiety , but had little effect on lifestyle .
There seems evidence that providing CVD risk model estimates to professionals and patients improves perceived CVD risk and medical prescribing , with little evidence of harm on psychological well-being
OBJECTIVE To systematic ally review whether the provision of information on cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) risk to healthcare professionals and patients impacts their decision-making , behaviour and ultimately patient health .