EBM

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER


[Advanced]
Evidence-Based Medicine 2007;12:118; doi:10.1136/ebm.12.4.118
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fletcher, R. H
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fletcher, R. H

Therapeutics

Review: periodic health examination increases delivery of some clinical preventive services and reduces patient worry

Boulware LE, Marinopoulos S, Phillips KA, et al. Systematic review: the value of the periodic health evaluation. Ann Intern Med 2007;146:289–300.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Q In adults, is the periodic health evaluation (PHE) beneficial in terms of delivering preventive services, improving clinical outcomes, and reducing healthcare costs?

Clinical impact ratings GP/FP/Primary care *****{star}{star} Public Health ****{star}{star}{star}

Key Words: physical examination • preventive health services

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

METHODS
Formula Data sources: Medline, Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment Database, National Health System Economic Evaluation Database, and CINAHL (to September 2006); hand searches of 24 periodicals; and reference lists.

Formula Study selection and assessment: English language studies that evaluated the benefits and harms of the PHE compared with usual care in adults. 10 RCTs and 23 observational studies met the selection criteria, but only the 21 "best evidence" studies (10 RCTs, 2 cohort studies, and 9 cross-sectional studies) were included in the analyses.

Formula Outcomes: delivery of clinical preventive services, short term clinical outcomes, and long term clinical outcomes and costs.

MAIN RESULTS
The strength and consistency of the evidence varied widely across outcomes, and the magnitude and even the direction of the treatment effect varied within some outcomes (tableGo). The PHE showed benefit in increasing use of the gynaecological examination or Papanicolaou smear, cholesterol screening, and colon cancer screening and decreasing patient . . . [Full text of this article]

Robert H Fletcher, MD, MSc

Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.