Programme no. 260-P
The value of including spirometry in health checks
- a randomized controlled study in primary health care
Lene Maria Ørts*1, Anne-Louise Smidt Hansen2, Helle Terkildsen Maindal3, Anders Løkke4, Annelli Sandbæk5
1Department of Public Health,Section for General Practice, Aarhus University,Aarhus,Denmark, 2Department of Public Health,Section for General Practice, Aarhus University,Aarhus,Denmark, 3Department of Public Health,Section of Health promotion and Health Services,Aarhus,Denmark, 4Department of Respiratory Diseases,Aarhus University Hospital,Aarhus,Denmark, 5Department of Public Health,Section for General Practice, Aarhus University,Aarhus,Denmark
* = Presenting author
Objectives: To examine whether focused information on spirometry in the invitation material will influence the attendance in preventive health checks.
Background: Lung diseases are among the most frequent and most serious ailments in Denmark. Preventive health checks including spirometry can be used to detect lung diseases earlier. Over time the attendance at preventive health checks has decreased and at present the response rate is approximately 50%. Little is known about initiatives that can influence the attendance rate.
Results: This is a presentation of the method, therefore we do not have any results yet.
Design: A randomized controlled study on information on spirometry embedded in “Check your health Prevention Program, CHPP” from 2015-16. CHPP is a house-hold cluster randomized controlled trial offering a preventive health check to 30-49 year olds in a Danish municipality during the years 2012 through to 2017 (n= 26,216), carried out in collaboration between Central Denmark Region, general practitioners in Randers and the Department of Public Health, University of Aarhus. The health checks are performed at a local health care center with a subsequent health interview at the participants own general practitioner.
Intervention: During 2015-16, 5,200 citizens aged 30-49 years will be randomized into two groups: The intervention group receives an invitation which highlights the value of spirometry as part of a health check and information about lung diseases. The control group will receive a standard invitation.
Primary outcome measure is effect on attendance. The characteristics of the 2 groups will be described according to sex, age, smoking history, spirometry values and lung symptoms.
Conclusion: The results from the present study are expected to contribute with important knowledge about the value of information on spirometry in invitations to health checks measured at different levels of attendance – as described above.
Points for discussion: The study is part of a Ph.D. project evaluating the use of spirometry as an element in preventive health checks. Further studies in the Ph.D. project will evaluate whether early spirometry measurements can be used to predict future lung disease and describe the follow up of patients with abnormal spirometry measurements at their general practitioner.