Secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in different primary healthcare systems with and without pay-for-performance
- 1Public Health Medicine and Primary Care, Queen’s University, Belfast, UK
- 2Department of General Practice, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
- 3Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland
- Margaret E Cupples, Department of General Practice and Primary Care, Dunluce Health Centre, 1 Dunluce Avenue, Belfast BT9 7HR, UK;
- Accepted 10 June 2008
- Published Online First 13 August 2008
Objective: To compare baseline cardiovascular risk management between people from two different healthcare systems recruited to a research trial of an intervention to optimise secondary prevention.
Design: Cross-sectional study.
Setting: 16 randomly selected general practices in Northern Ireland (NI) (UK NHS, strong infrastructure, pay-for-performance) and 32 in the Republic of Ireland (RoI) (mixed healthcare economy, less infrastructure, no pay-for-performance).
Patients: 903 (mean age 67.5 years; 69.9% male) randomly selected patients with known coronary heart disease.
Main outcome measures: Blood pressure (BP), cholesterol, medications; validated questionnaires for diet (DINE), exercise (Godin) and quality of life (SF-12); healthcare usage.
Results: More RoI than NI participants had systolic BP >140 mm Hg (37% vs 28%, p = 0.01) and cholesterol >5 mmol/l (24% vs 17%, p = 0.02). RoI mean systolic BP was higher (139 vs 132 mm Hg). More RoI participants reported a high fibre intake (35% vs 23%), higher levels of physical activity (62% vs 44%) and better physical and mental health (SF-12); they also had more GP (5.6 vs 4.4) and fewer nurse visits (1.6 vs 2.1) in the previous year. Fewer participants in the RoI (55% vs 70%) were prescribed β blockers. ACE inhibitor prescribing was similar for both groups (41%; 48%); high proportions were prescribed statins (84%; 85%) and aspirin (83%; 77%).
Conclusions: BP and cholesterol are better controlled among patients in a primary healthcare system with a strong infrastructure supporting computerisation and rewarding measured performance, but this is not associated with healthier lifestyle or better quality of life. Further exploration of differences in professionals’ and patients’ engagement in secondary prevention in different healthcare systems is needed.
Funding: The study was funded by the Health Research Board, Ireland and the Irish Heart Foundation.
Competing interests: None.
Ethics approval: Ethics approval was given for the study by the Irish College of General Practitioners (RoI) and Queen’s University Research Ethics Committee (NI).