Effects of secondary prevention clinics on health status in patients with coronary heart disease: 4 year follow-up of a randomized trial in primary care

Background. The long-term effects of disease management programmes for coronary heart disease on health status are unknown. In a randomized trial of nurse-led secondary prevention clinics, we found significantly improved health status at 1 year. Participants were followed-up again at 4 years to dete...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Family practice 2004-10, Vol.21 (5), p.567-574
Hauptverfasser: Murchie, Peter, Campbell, Neil C, Ritchie, Lewis D, Deans, H George, Thain, Joan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 574
container_issue 5
container_start_page 567
container_title Family practice
container_volume 21
creator Murchie, Peter
Campbell, Neil C
Ritchie, Lewis D
Deans, H George
Thain, Joan
description Background. The long-term effects of disease management programmes for coronary heart disease on health status are unknown. In a randomized trial of nurse-led secondary prevention clinics, we found significantly improved health status at 1 year. Participants were followed-up again at 4 years to determine if improvements had been sustained. Objective. Our aim was to evaluate the effects on health of nurse-led clinics for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in primary care. Methods. A total of 1343 patients with coronary heart disease were randomized to nurse-led secondary prevention clinics or usual care, with follow-up at 1 and 4 years by review of medical case notes and national data sets, and postal questionnaires. The study involved a stratified, random sample of 19 general practices in north-east Scotland. Health status was measured by the SF-36 questionnaire, chest pain by the angina TyPE specification and anxiety and depression by the hospital anxiety and depression scale. Results. At 1 year, there were significant improvements in five of eight SF-36 domains (all functioning scales, pain and general health) in patients randomized to clinics. Role limitations attributed to physical problems improved the most [adjusted difference 8.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.16–12.9]. At 4 years, the intervention group scored higher than control in all domains, but differences were no longer significant. At 1 year, fewer patients in the intervention group reported worsening chest pain (odds ratio 0.59, 95% C1 0.37–0.94). At 4 years, there were no significant differences between the proportion of intervention or control group patients who reported chest pain in the last week or who reported worsening chest pain. No significant effects were observed on anxiety or depression at 1 or 4 years. Conclusion. We have demonstrated previously a significantly greater survival in attendees at nurse-led secondary prevention clinics. Despite this, improvements in health status achieved in the first year of the study were reduced at 4 years. The case for nurse-led clinics remains strong, but further research is required on ways to optimize current health status.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/fampra/cmh514
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66874814</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>66874814</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-968bffc1ec50418504a14572267d1970841fe31dff3d8cf309b0208264be84033</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU2LFDEQhoMo7rh69CrBg7d289VJ2pssqysMiqCweAmZdIXJ2p2MSdp1_SX-XDPO4IIXLwlUPXmKyovQU0peUjLwM2_nXbZnbt72VNxDKyok6Rhjw320IkzyjlEuT9CjUq4JIUr16iE6oT2XSmiyQr8uvAdXC04eF3Apjjbf4l2G7xBrSBG7KcTgWj_iLdipbnGpti4Fh4h3toaGFXwTWt2lnOL-deNyxWMoYAu8wgLftgL2aZrSTbfs9qMszjaOaQ4_YcQ1Bzv98eUw7wXOZniMHng7FXhyvE_R5zcXn84vu_WHt-_OX687J5io3SD1xntHwfVEUN0OS0WvGJNqpIMiWlAPnI7e81E7z8mwIYxoJsUGtCCcn6IXB-8up28LlGrmUBxMk42QlmKk1O2nqPgv2CsyDFyTBj7_B7xOS45tCUOHQSguGWtQd4BcTqVk8Oa4vKHE7IM1h2DNIdjGPztKl80M4x19TPJOGEqFH3_7Nn81UnHVm8urL0bLK_Vxzd4bxn8DPL-w0Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>199473622</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effects of secondary prevention clinics on health status in patients with coronary heart disease: 4 year follow-up of a randomized trial in primary care</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Murchie, Peter ; Campbell, Neil C ; Ritchie, Lewis D ; Deans, H George ; Thain, Joan</creator><creatorcontrib>Murchie, Peter ; Campbell, Neil C ; Ritchie, Lewis D ; Deans, H George ; Thain, Joan</creatorcontrib><description>Background. The long-term effects of disease management programmes for coronary heart disease on health status are unknown. In a randomized trial of nurse-led secondary prevention clinics, we found significantly improved health status at 1 year. Participants were followed-up again at 4 years to determine if improvements had been sustained. Objective. Our aim was to evaluate the effects on health of nurse-led clinics for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in primary care. Methods. A total of 1343 patients with coronary heart disease were randomized to nurse-led secondary prevention clinics or usual care, with follow-up at 1 and 4 years by review of medical case notes and national data sets, and postal questionnaires. The study involved a stratified, random sample of 19 general practices in north-east Scotland. Health status was measured by the SF-36 questionnaire, chest pain by the angina TyPE specification and anxiety and depression by the hospital anxiety and depression scale. Results. At 1 year, there were significant improvements in five of eight SF-36 domains (all functioning scales, pain and general health) in patients randomized to clinics. Role limitations attributed to physical problems improved the most [adjusted difference 8.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.16–12.9]. At 4 years, the intervention group scored higher than control in all domains, but differences were no longer significant. At 1 year, fewer patients in the intervention group reported worsening chest pain (odds ratio 0.59, 95% C1 0.37–0.94). At 4 years, there were no significant differences between the proportion of intervention or control group patients who reported chest pain in the last week or who reported worsening chest pain. No significant effects were observed on anxiety or depression at 1 or 4 years. Conclusion. We have demonstrated previously a significantly greater survival in attendees at nurse-led secondary prevention clinics. Despite this, improvements in health status achieved in the first year of the study were reduced at 4 years. The case for nurse-led clinics remains strong, but further research is required on ways to optimize current health status.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0263-2136</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1460-2229</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1460-2229</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmh514</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15367480</identifier><identifier>CODEN: FAPREH</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Aged ; Ambulatory Care - organization &amp; administration ; Cardiovascular disease ; Chest Pain - epidemiology ; Chest Pain - prevention &amp; control ; Coronary Disease - epidemiology ; Coronary Disease - nursing ; Coronary Disease - prevention &amp; control ; Coronary diseases ; Coronary heart disease ; Family Practice - organization &amp; administration ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Health Promotion ; Health Status ; Humans ; Life Style ; Male ; Nurse led clinics ; Nurse Practitioners ; Nurses ; Patients ; Prevention ; Preventive medicine ; primary care ; Primary Health Care - organization &amp; administration ; Scotland ; Scotland - epidemiology ; secondary prevention ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Family practice, 2004-10, Vol.21 (5), p.567-574</ispartof><rights>Copyright Oxford University Press(England) Oct 2004</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-968bffc1ec50418504a14572267d1970841fe31dff3d8cf309b0208264be84033</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,31000</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15367480$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Murchie, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campbell, Neil C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ritchie, Lewis D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deans, H George</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thain, Joan</creatorcontrib><title>Effects of secondary prevention clinics on health status in patients with coronary heart disease: 4 year follow-up of a randomized trial in primary care</title><title>Family practice</title><addtitle>Family Practice</addtitle><description>Background. The long-term effects of disease management programmes for coronary heart disease on health status are unknown. In a randomized trial of nurse-led secondary prevention clinics, we found significantly improved health status at 1 year. Participants were followed-up again at 4 years to determine if improvements had been sustained. Objective. Our aim was to evaluate the effects on health of nurse-led clinics for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in primary care. Methods. A total of 1343 patients with coronary heart disease were randomized to nurse-led secondary prevention clinics or usual care, with follow-up at 1 and 4 years by review of medical case notes and national data sets, and postal questionnaires. The study involved a stratified, random sample of 19 general practices in north-east Scotland. Health status was measured by the SF-36 questionnaire, chest pain by the angina TyPE specification and anxiety and depression by the hospital anxiety and depression scale. Results. At 1 year, there were significant improvements in five of eight SF-36 domains (all functioning scales, pain and general health) in patients randomized to clinics. Role limitations attributed to physical problems improved the most [adjusted difference 8.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.16–12.9]. At 4 years, the intervention group scored higher than control in all domains, but differences were no longer significant. At 1 year, fewer patients in the intervention group reported worsening chest pain (odds ratio 0.59, 95% C1 0.37–0.94). At 4 years, there were no significant differences between the proportion of intervention or control group patients who reported chest pain in the last week or who reported worsening chest pain. No significant effects were observed on anxiety or depression at 1 or 4 years. Conclusion. We have demonstrated previously a significantly greater survival in attendees at nurse-led secondary prevention clinics. Despite this, improvements in health status achieved in the first year of the study were reduced at 4 years. The case for nurse-led clinics remains strong, but further research is required on ways to optimize current health status.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Ambulatory Care - organization &amp; administration</subject><subject>Cardiovascular disease</subject><subject>Chest Pain - epidemiology</subject><subject>Chest Pain - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Coronary Disease - epidemiology</subject><subject>Coronary Disease - nursing</subject><subject>Coronary Disease - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Coronary diseases</subject><subject>Coronary heart disease</subject><subject>Family Practice - organization &amp; administration</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Health Promotion</subject><subject>Health Status</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Life Style</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Nurse led clinics</subject><subject>Nurse Practitioners</subject><subject>Nurses</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Prevention</subject><subject>Preventive medicine</subject><subject>primary care</subject><subject>Primary Health Care - organization &amp; administration</subject><subject>Scotland</subject><subject>Scotland - epidemiology</subject><subject>secondary prevention</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0263-2136</issn><issn>1460-2229</issn><issn>1460-2229</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU2LFDEQhoMo7rh69CrBg7d289VJ2pssqysMiqCweAmZdIXJ2p2MSdp1_SX-XDPO4IIXLwlUPXmKyovQU0peUjLwM2_nXbZnbt72VNxDKyok6Rhjw320IkzyjlEuT9CjUq4JIUr16iE6oT2XSmiyQr8uvAdXC04eF3Apjjbf4l2G7xBrSBG7KcTgWj_iLdipbnGpti4Fh4h3toaGFXwTWt2lnOL-deNyxWMoYAu8wgLftgL2aZrSTbfs9qMszjaOaQ4_YcQ1Bzv98eUw7wXOZniMHng7FXhyvE_R5zcXn84vu_WHt-_OX687J5io3SD1xntHwfVEUN0OS0WvGJNqpIMiWlAPnI7e81E7z8mwIYxoJsUGtCCcn6IXB-8up28LlGrmUBxMk42QlmKk1O2nqPgv2CsyDFyTBj7_B7xOS45tCUOHQSguGWtQd4BcTqVk8Oa4vKHE7IM1h2DNIdjGPztKl80M4x19TPJOGEqFH3_7Nn81UnHVm8urL0bLK_Vxzd4bxn8DPL-w0Q</recordid><startdate>200410</startdate><enddate>200410</enddate><creator>Murchie, Peter</creator><creator>Campbell, Neil C</creator><creator>Ritchie, Lewis D</creator><creator>Deans, H George</creator><creator>Thain, Joan</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200410</creationdate><title>Effects of secondary prevention clinics on health status in patients with coronary heart disease: 4 year follow-up of a randomized trial in primary care</title><author>Murchie, Peter ; Campbell, Neil C ; Ritchie, Lewis D ; Deans, H George ; Thain, Joan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-968bffc1ec50418504a14572267d1970841fe31dff3d8cf309b0208264be84033</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Ambulatory Care - organization &amp; administration</topic><topic>Cardiovascular disease</topic><topic>Chest Pain - epidemiology</topic><topic>Chest Pain - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Coronary Disease - epidemiology</topic><topic>Coronary Disease - nursing</topic><topic>Coronary Disease - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Coronary diseases</topic><topic>Coronary heart disease</topic><topic>Family Practice - organization &amp; administration</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Health Promotion</topic><topic>Health Status</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Life Style</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Nurse led clinics</topic><topic>Nurse Practitioners</topic><topic>Nurses</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Prevention</topic><topic>Preventive medicine</topic><topic>primary care</topic><topic>Primary Health Care - organization &amp; administration</topic><topic>Scotland</topic><topic>Scotland - epidemiology</topic><topic>secondary prevention</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Murchie, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campbell, Neil C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ritchie, Lewis D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deans, H George</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thain, Joan</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Family practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Murchie, Peter</au><au>Campbell, Neil C</au><au>Ritchie, Lewis D</au><au>Deans, H George</au><au>Thain, Joan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effects of secondary prevention clinics on health status in patients with coronary heart disease: 4 year follow-up of a randomized trial in primary care</atitle><jtitle>Family practice</jtitle><addtitle>Family Practice</addtitle><date>2004-10</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>567</spage><epage>574</epage><pages>567-574</pages><issn>0263-2136</issn><issn>1460-2229</issn><eissn>1460-2229</eissn><coden>FAPREH</coden><abstract>Background. The long-term effects of disease management programmes for coronary heart disease on health status are unknown. In a randomized trial of nurse-led secondary prevention clinics, we found significantly improved health status at 1 year. Participants were followed-up again at 4 years to determine if improvements had been sustained. Objective. Our aim was to evaluate the effects on health of nurse-led clinics for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in primary care. Methods. A total of 1343 patients with coronary heart disease were randomized to nurse-led secondary prevention clinics or usual care, with follow-up at 1 and 4 years by review of medical case notes and national data sets, and postal questionnaires. The study involved a stratified, random sample of 19 general practices in north-east Scotland. Health status was measured by the SF-36 questionnaire, chest pain by the angina TyPE specification and anxiety and depression by the hospital anxiety and depression scale. Results. At 1 year, there were significant improvements in five of eight SF-36 domains (all functioning scales, pain and general health) in patients randomized to clinics. Role limitations attributed to physical problems improved the most [adjusted difference 8.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.16–12.9]. At 4 years, the intervention group scored higher than control in all domains, but differences were no longer significant. At 1 year, fewer patients in the intervention group reported worsening chest pain (odds ratio 0.59, 95% C1 0.37–0.94). At 4 years, there were no significant differences between the proportion of intervention or control group patients who reported chest pain in the last week or who reported worsening chest pain. No significant effects were observed on anxiety or depression at 1 or 4 years. Conclusion. We have demonstrated previously a significantly greater survival in attendees at nurse-led secondary prevention clinics. Despite this, improvements in health status achieved in the first year of the study were reduced at 4 years. The case for nurse-led clinics remains strong, but further research is required on ways to optimize current health status.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>15367480</pmid><doi>10.1093/fampra/cmh514</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0263-2136
ispartof Family practice, 2004-10, Vol.21 (5), p.567-574
issn 0263-2136
1460-2229
1460-2229
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66874814
source MEDLINE; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Aged
Ambulatory Care - organization & administration
Cardiovascular disease
Chest Pain - epidemiology
Chest Pain - prevention & control
Coronary Disease - epidemiology
Coronary Disease - nursing
Coronary Disease - prevention & control
Coronary diseases
Coronary heart disease
Family Practice - organization & administration
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Health Promotion
Health Status
Humans
Life Style
Male
Nurse led clinics
Nurse Practitioners
Nurses
Patients
Prevention
Preventive medicine
primary care
Primary Health Care - organization & administration
Scotland
Scotland - epidemiology
secondary prevention
Studies
title Effects of secondary prevention clinics on health status in patients with coronary heart disease: 4 year follow-up of a randomized trial in primary care
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T23%3A24%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effects%20of%20secondary%20prevention%20clinics%20on%20health%20status%20in%20patients%20with%20coronary%20heart%20disease:%204%20year%20follow-up%20of%20a%20randomized%20trial%20in%20primary%20care&rft.jtitle=Family%20practice&rft.au=Murchie,%20Peter&rft.date=2004-10&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=567&rft.epage=574&rft.pages=567-574&rft.issn=0263-2136&rft.eissn=1460-2229&rft.coden=FAPREH&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/fampra/cmh514&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E66874814%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=199473622&rft_id=info:pmid/15367480&rfr_iscdi=true