Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of brjgenpracRCGP homepageJ R Coll Gen Pract at PubMed CentralBJGP at RCGPBJGP at RCGP
Br J Gen Pract. 1998 February; 48(427): 967–970.
PMCID: PMC1409987

Intensive cardiovascular risk factor intervention in a rural practice: a glimmer of hope?


BACKGROUND: Large trials of primary care-based health promotion to modify coronary heart disease risks have shown only modest benefits. Could more intensive intervention, with doctors sharing with practice nurses in health promotion, produce better health outcomes in the context of the small family practice? How cost-effective might these interventions be? AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness of an intensive programme of coronary heart disease (CHD) risk factor modification in a rural general practice in which doctors had a major input. METHOD: A longitudinal study of changes in risk factors in a group of adult patients identified as having one or more major CHD risk factor and monitored for one to seven years. Patients were recruited from and followed up in health promotion clinics, routine practice nurse appointments, or routine doctors' surgeries. All received the practice's routine interventions to modify risk, and changes in risk factors were recorded. Time spent by members of the primary health care team on CHD health promotion was recorded over a two-year period. RESULTS: From a practice list of 2040, 760 patients with one or more CHD risk factors were identified and followed up over a mean of 3.61 years (range six months to seven years). Significant improvements in each of the risk factors occurred, except in body mass index (BMI). Mean Dundee risk scores fell from 7.4 to 5.7 (by 23.3%). The annual cost to the practice (including doctor/nurse/secretarial time plus sundry practice expenses and laboratory costs, but excluding drug costs) was 6000 pounds. Cost per coronary death prevented was calculated as approximately 10,000 pounds. CONCLUSION: The results show an effect on risk factors broadly similar but slightly greater in magnitude than that achieved in the OXCHECK and British Family Heart Studies of nurse-delivered risk factor intervention in primary care. The results suggest that more intensive effort in lifestyle modification and health promotion, with more active involvement of doctors, could produce significant additional benefit. The cost-effectiveness of this approach compares favourably with many other accepted measures in coronary heart disease prevention.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (731K), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Gibbins RL, Riley M, Brimble P. Effectiveness of programme for reducing cardiovascular risk for men in one general practice. BMJ. 1993 Jun 19;306(6893):1652–1656. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lindholm LH, Ekbom T, Dash C, Eriksson M, Tibblin G, Scherstén B. The impact of health care advice given in primary care on cardiovascular risk. CELL Study Group. BMJ. 1995 Apr 29;310(6987):1105–1109. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hanlon P, McEwen J, Carey L, Gilmour H, Tannahill C, Tannahill A, Kelly M. Health checks and coronary risk: further evidence from a randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 1995 Dec 16;311(7020):1609–1613. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Cupples ME, McKnight A. Randomised controlled trial of health promotion in general practice for patients at high cardiovascular risk. BMJ. 1994 Oct 15;309(6960):993–996. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Sever P, Beevers G, Bulpitt C, Lever A, Ramsay L, Reid J, Swales J. Management guidelines in essential hypertension: report of the second working party of the British Hypertension Society. BMJ. 1993 Apr 10;306(6883):983–987. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Betteridge DJ, Dodson PM, Durrington PN, Hughes EA, Laker MF, Nicholls DP, Rees JA, Seymour CA, Thompson GR, Winder AF, et al. Management of hyperlipidaemia: guidelines of the British Hyperlipidaemia Association. Postgrad Med J. 1993 May;69(811):359–369. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Shepherd J, Betteridge DJ, Durrington P, Laker M, Lewis B, Mann J, Miller JP, Reckless JP, Thompson GR. Strategies for reducing coronary heart disease and desirable limits for blood lipid concentrations: guidelines of the British Hyperlipidaemia Association. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1987 Nov 14;295(6608):1245–1246. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • DiClemente CC, Prochaska JO, Fairhurst SK, Velicer WF, Velasquez MM, Rossi JS. The process of smoking cessation: an analysis of precontemplation, contemplation, and preparation stages of change. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1991 Apr;59(2):295–304. [PubMed]
  • Tunstall-Pedoe H. The Dundee coronary risk-disk for management of change in risk factors. BMJ. 1991 Sep 28;303(6805):744–747. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Chatellier G, Zapletal E, Lemaitre D, Menard J, Degoulet P. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful nomogram in its proper context. BMJ. 1996 Feb 17;312(7028):426–429. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Tunstall-Pedoe H. Coronary heart disease. BMJ. 1991 Sep 21;303(6804):701–704. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Shepherd J, Cobbe SM, Ford I, Isles CG, Lorimer AR, MacFarlane PW, McKillop JH, Packard CJ. Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1995 Nov 16;333(20):1301–1307. [PubMed]
  • Stott N. Screening for cardiovascular risk in general practice. BMJ. 1994 Jan 29;308(6924):285–286. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Mant D. Health checks--time to check out? Br J Gen Pract. 1994 Feb;44(379):51–52. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Toon PD. Health checks in general practice. BMJ. 1995 Apr 29;310(6987):1083–1084. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Reckless JP. The 4S study and its pharmacoeconomic implications. Pharmacoeconomics. 1996 Feb;9(2):101–105. [PubMed]

Articles from The British Journal of General Practice are provided here courtesy of Royal College of General Practitioners