• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Barriers and facilitators to participation in a health check for cardiometabolic diseases in primary care: A systematic review

AM. de Waard, PE. Wändell, MJ. Holzmann, JC. Korevaar, M. Hollander, C. Gornitzki, NJ. de Wit, FG. Schellevis, C. Lionis, J. Søndergaard, B. Seifert, AC. Carlsson, SPIMEU Research Group,

. 2018 ; 25 (12) : 1326-1340. [pub] 20180619

Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem, systematický přehled

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc19045407

Background Health checks for cardiometabolic diseases could play a role in the identification of persons at high risk for disease. To improve the uptake of these health checks in primary care, we need to know what barriers and facilitators determine participation. Methods We used an iterative search strategy consisting of three steps: (a) identification of key-articles; (b) systematic literature search in PubMed, Medline and Embase based on keywords; (c) screening of titles and abstracts and subsequently full-text screening. We summarised the results into four categories: characteristics, attitudes, practical reasons and healthcare provider-related factors. Results Thirty-nine studies were included. Attitudes such as wanting to know of cardiometabolic disease risk, feeling responsible for, and concerns about one's own health were facilitators for participation. Younger age, smoking, low education and attitudes such as not wanting to be, or being, worried about the outcome, low perceived severity or susceptibility, and negative attitude towards health checks or prevention in general were barriers. Furthermore, practical issues such as information and the ease of access to appointments could influence participation. Conclusion Barriers and facilitators to participation in health checks for cardiometabolic diseases were heterogeneous. Hence, it is not possible to develop a 'one size fits all' approach to maximise the uptake. For optimal implementation we suggest a multifactorial approach adapted to the national context with special attention to people who might be more difficult to reach. Increasing the uptake of health checks could contribute to identifying the people at risk to be able to start preventive interventions.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc19045407
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20200114083222.0
007      
ta
008      
200109s2018 xxk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1177/2047487318780751 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)29916723
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxk
100    1_
$a de Waard, Anne-Karien M $u 1 Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center, the Netherlands.
245    10
$a Barriers and facilitators to participation in a health check for cardiometabolic diseases in primary care: A systematic review / $c AM. de Waard, PE. Wändell, MJ. Holzmann, JC. Korevaar, M. Hollander, C. Gornitzki, NJ. de Wit, FG. Schellevis, C. Lionis, J. Søndergaard, B. Seifert, AC. Carlsson, SPIMEU Research Group,
520    9_
$a Background Health checks for cardiometabolic diseases could play a role in the identification of persons at high risk for disease. To improve the uptake of these health checks in primary care, we need to know what barriers and facilitators determine participation. Methods We used an iterative search strategy consisting of three steps: (a) identification of key-articles; (b) systematic literature search in PubMed, Medline and Embase based on keywords; (c) screening of titles and abstracts and subsequently full-text screening. We summarised the results into four categories: characteristics, attitudes, practical reasons and healthcare provider-related factors. Results Thirty-nine studies were included. Attitudes such as wanting to know of cardiometabolic disease risk, feeling responsible for, and concerns about one's own health were facilitators for participation. Younger age, smoking, low education and attitudes such as not wanting to be, or being, worried about the outcome, low perceived severity or susceptibility, and negative attitude towards health checks or prevention in general were barriers. Furthermore, practical issues such as information and the ease of access to appointments could influence participation. Conclusion Barriers and facilitators to participation in health checks for cardiometabolic diseases were heterogeneous. Hence, it is not possible to develop a 'one size fits all' approach to maximise the uptake. For optimal implementation we suggest a multifactorial approach adapted to the national context with special attention to people who might be more difficult to reach. Increasing the uptake of health checks could contribute to identifying the people at risk to be able to start preventive interventions.
650    12
$a postoj zdravotnického personálu $7 D001291
650    _2
$a kardiovaskulární nemoci $x epidemiologie $x prevence a kontrola $7 D002318
650    _2
$a celosvětové zdraví $7 D014943
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a plošný screening $x metody $7 D008403
650    _2
$a morbidita $x trendy $7 D009017
650    _2
$a služby preventivní péče $x organizace a řízení $7 D011314
650    _2
$a primární zdravotní péče $x metody $7 D011320
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
655    _2
$a systematický přehled $7 D000078182
700    1_
$a Wändell, Per E $u 2 Department of Neurobiology, Care Science and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden.
700    1_
$a Holzmann, Martin J $u 3 Functional Area of Emergency Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden. 4 Department of Internal Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
700    1_
$a Korevaar, Joke C $u 5 NIVEL (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), the Netherlands.
700    1_
$a Hollander, Monika $u 1 Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center, the Netherlands.
700    1_
$a Gornitzki, Carl $u 6 University Library, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden.
700    1_
$a de Wit, Niek J $u 1 Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center, the Netherlands.
700    1_
$a Schellevis, François G $u 5 NIVEL (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), the Netherlands. 7 Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, VU University Medical Center, the Netherlands.
700    1_
$a Lionis, Christos $u 8 Clinic of Social and Family Medicine, University of Crete, Greece.
700    1_
$a Søndergaard, Jens $u 9 Research Unit for General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark.
700    1_
$a Seifert, Bohumil $u 10 Department of General Practice, Charles University, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Carlsson, Axel C $u 2 Department of Neurobiology, Care Science and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden. 11 Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University, Sweden.
710    2_
$a SPIMEU Research Group
773    0_
$w MED00188754 $t European journal of preventive cardiology $x 2047-4881 $g Roč. 25, č. 12 (2018), s. 1326-1340
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29916723 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20200109 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20200114083555 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1483676 $s 1084080
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2018 $b 25 $c 12 $d 1326-1340 $e 20180619 $i 2047-4881 $m European journal of preventive cardiology $n Eur J Prev Cardiol $x MED00188754
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20200109

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace