Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

RCGP urges halt to NHS Health Checks until 'robust evidence' exists

The RCGP has called for the Government’s flagship vascular disease prevention scheme to be discontinued until there is ‘robust evidence in support of it’.

In a damning report sent to public health chiefs, the RCGP said the NHS Health Checks ‘should not be continued’ and called on the Government to commission an independent review by experts from the UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC).

However, experts in charge of the programme dismissed the call, claiming the Department of Health had already ruled out any UK NSC involvement.

The Health Check programme was originally introduced in 2009 and aims to give all adults aged 40-74 a five-yearly cardiovascular risk assessment, but has been dogged by criticisms ever since, with leading GPs warning it leads to overtreatment and primary care resources being diverted to the ‘worried well’ and several studies demonstrating poor uptake and that it fails to identify those people most at risk from heart disease.

Despite the criticisms, Public Health England relaunched the programme in 2013 with a commitment to reach an estimated 15 million eligible people in the population over the next five years, and began a programme of work to apply ‘greater rigour’ in evaluating it – including a consultation on ‘priorities for research’.

The RCGP’s response to the consultation – prepared by the College’s standing group on overtreatment and overdiagnosis and now published on the College website – claims Public Health England is ignoring evidence that continuing the programme at all may be doing more harm than good, while pursuing research that assumes it will be successful.

The report, published on the RCGP website, states: ‘The Health Checks programme has been mandated for some time, in the “absence of direct randomised controlled trials to guide it” – in the words of PHE.

‘Despite the evidence showing that this type of intervention… does not work, the programme of research does not acknowledge this. Public Health England is proposing further research that assumes the programme will work.’

It adds: ‘The programme should not be continued without robust evidence in support of it it. PHE should seek governmental approval to search for high quality evidence nof mortality and morbidity benefit… and seek assurances that the programme can be disbanded on the basis of evidence.’

The report goes on to cite the Commons Science and Technology Committee’s conclusion that the UK NSC should have been asked to review NHS Health Checks, and says the RCGP ‘supports the need for the independent expertise of the UK NSC to be involved in reviewing the current status and research needs of the programme’.

PHE did not comment on the specific criticisms outlined by the RCGP response but in its official response to feedback on the consultation, it said the government ‘has now published a response to the Commons Science and Technology Committee, confirming that the role of the NHS Health Check programme’s expert clinical and scientific panel is to keep the programme’s content under review’.

Dr Andrew Green, chair of the GPC’s clinical and prescribing subcommittee, said the GPC ‘fully supported’ the RCGP response and had raised similar concerns about the scheme, which he said was wasting public money.

Dr Green said: ‘The GPC fully supports the RCGP in their comments about this scheme, having raised similar concerns about the lack of an evidence base with NHS Health Checks directly, to which we have not received an adequate answer.

‘The argument that “as each part is based on NICE guidance then the exercise must be worthwhile as a whole”, which is the best that has been offered so far, is no justification for the spending of vast amounts of public money at  a time of austerity when the existing evidence is that health outcomes are not improved.’

In a statement to Pulse, Professor Kevin Fenton, Executive Director of Health and Wellbeing, Public Health England said: ‘There is clear evidence that key risk factors, such as smoking, and high blood pressure are leading to people developing preventable illness and premature death. This is not only devastating to those affected but is also a huge burden on NHS and social care services.

‘PHE is committed to bringing greater scientific oversight to the NHS Health Check programme and established the Expert Scientific and Clinical Advisory Panel (ESCAP) to review emerging evidence and to inform future policy and programme developments. Two national evaluations of the NHS Health Check will be reported on shortly and ESCAP will review these when available.’

Related images

  • Framingham charts CVD risk assessment  PPLJulain Claxton


Readers' comments (16)

  • I'm sorry if a drug co. pushed a product or intervention without any evidence we'd be rightly questioned about our motives.

    here limited public funds are being wasted on this..criminal

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    Mmnmm
    NHS Health Check programme’s expert clinical and scientific panel , such a long name!
    Who are the people on the panel?
    I suppose they are 'better' than those in UK NSC .?One thing UK NSC certainly has no expertise is called Propaganda . Of course , Ministry of Truth ruled out any UK NSC involvement.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • In addition, stop all these third parties from leeching payments and doing vague tests on cheap non-calibrated blood spots which give spurious readings only to be sent to the GP for another blood test and resource cost!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • why on earth did the profession allow this idiotic time wasting doctor dependency encouraging stupidity in the first place.
    in the name of god can the gp body have principled leadership in future and reject ignorant wasteful non evidence based schemery out of hand?...PLEASE.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Though at 15 minutes an apt. at least it generates a profit after staff costs :)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | GP Partner | 13 May 2015 9:17pm

    Though at 15 minutes an apt. at least it generates a profit after staff costs :)

    No it doesn't!

    It creates an enormous amount of follow up work, demands for retests of cholesterol every 3 months and patient dependency as they are classified as "ill or potentially I'll" for the rest of their lives.
    I have not yet found a patient willing to wait 5 years for a repeat cholesterol and they want it done again in 3 months to check that their lifestyle measures are working. These are the worried well and there is no funding for it.
    The amount of phlebotomy, lab and doctor time wasted on this is shocking.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Yes this makes people more dependent on us at a time when resources are being constantly reduced.

    In any other industry this would increase profits. The NHS should define VERY clearly what will be provided and allow everything else to be supplied by the market place, just like every other service

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Our surgery doesn't do these and we've resisted the pressure from the local authority.

    It's just poor medicine.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This principle could and should be extended to all the pointless things I do which simply get in the way of what I used to do for a living i.e. see patients

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • We stopped doing them some time ago

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say