Limited data suggest that systematic risk assessment for CVD has no statistically significant effects on clinical endpoints .
There is limited evidence to suggest that CVD systematic risk assessment may have some favourable effects on cardiovascular risk factors .
BACKGROUND Screening programmes can potentially identify people at high cardiovascular risk and reduce cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) morbidity and mortality .
However , there is currently not enough evidence showing clear clinical or economic benefits of systematic screening-like programmes over the widely practised opportunistic risk assessment of CVD in primary care setting s. OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this review was to assess the effectiveness , costs and adverse effects of systematic risk assessment compared to opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of CVD .
Preventive health screenings and health consultations in primary care increase life expectancy without increasing costs
Aims : The intention was to investigate whether preventive health checks and health discussion s are cost effective . Methods : In a r and omized trial the authors compared two intervention groups ( A and B ) and one control group . In 1991 2,000 30- to 49-year-old persons were invited and those who accepted were r and omized . Both intervention groups were offered a broad ( multiphasic ) screening including cardiovascular risk and a personal letter including screening results and advice on healthy living . Individuals in group A could contact their family physician for a normal consultation whereas group B were given fixed appointments for health consultations . The follow-up period was six years . Analysis was carried out on the ` ` intention to treat ' ' principle . Outcome parameters were life years gained , and direct and total health costs ( including productivity costs ) , discounted by 3 % annually . Costs were based on register data . Univariate sensitivity analysis was carried out . Results : Both intervention groups have significantly better life expectancy than the control group ( no intervention ) . Group B and ( A ) significantly gain 0.14 ( 0.08 ) life years more than the control group . There were no differences in average direct ( 3,255 ( 3,703 ) versus 4,186 ) and total costs ( 10,409 ( 9,399 ) versus 10,667 ) . The effect in group B is , however , better than in group A with no significant differences in costs . The results are insensitive to a range of assumptions regarding costs , effects , and discount rates . Conclusions : Preventive health screening and consultation in primary care in 30- to 49-year-olds produce significantly better life expectancy without extra direct and total costs over a six-year follow-up period
Limited data suggest that systematic risk assessment for CVD has no statistically significant effects on clinical endpoints .
There is limited evidence to suggest that CVD systematic risk assessment may have some favourable effects on cardiovascular risk factors .
BACKGROUND Screening programmes can potentially identify people at high cardiovascular risk and reduce cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) morbidity and mortality .
However , there is currently not enough evidence showing clear clinical or economic benefits of systematic screening-like programmes over the widely practised opportunistic risk assessment of CVD in primary care setting s. OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this review was to assess the effectiveness , costs and adverse effects of systematic risk assessment compared to opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of CVD .