Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Nov 20:345:e7191.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.e7191.

General health checks in adults for reducing morbidity and mortality from disease: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations

General health checks in adults for reducing morbidity and mortality from disease: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis

Lasse T Krogsbøll et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objectives: To quantify the benefits and harms of general health checks in adults with an emphasis on patient-relevant outcomes such as morbidity and mortality rather than on surrogate outcomes.

Design: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. For mortality, we analysed the results with random effects meta-analysis, and for other outcomes we did a qualitative synthesis as meta-analysis was not feasible.

Data sources: Medline, EMBASE, Healthstar, Cochrane Library, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, EPOC register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP, supplemented by manual searches of reference lists of included studies, citation tracking (Web of Knowledge), and contacts with trialists.

Selection criteria: Randomised trials comparing health checks with no health checks in adult populations unselected for disease or risk factors. Health checks defined as screening general populations for more than one disease or risk factor in more than one organ system. We did not include geriatric trials.

Data extraction: Two observers independently assessed eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We contacted authors for additional outcomes or trial details when necessary.

Results: We identified 16 trials, 14 of which had available outcome data (182,880 participants). Nine trials provided data on total mortality (11,940 deaths), and they gave a risk ratio of 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.03). Eight trials provided data on cardiovascular mortality (4567 deaths), risk ratio 1.03 (0.91 to 1.17), and eight on cancer mortality (3663 deaths), risk ratio 1.01 (0.92 to 1.12). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not alter these findings. We did not find beneficial effects of general health checks on morbidity, hospitalisation, disability, worry, additional physician visits, or absence from work, but not all trials reported on these outcomes. One trial found that health checks led to a 20% increase in the total number of new diagnoses per participant over six years compared with the control group and an increased number of people with self reported chronic conditions, and one trial found an increased prevalence of hypertension and hypercholesterolaemia. Two out of four trials found an increased use of antihypertensives. Two out of four trials found small beneficial effects on self reported health, which could be due to bias.

Conclusions: General health checks did not reduce morbidity or mortality, neither overall nor for cardiovascular or cancer causes, although they increased the number of new diagnoses. Important harmful outcomes were often not studied or reported.

Systematic review registration: Cochrane Library, doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009009.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

None
Fig 1 Details of literature search and study selection
None
Fig 2 Summary of risk of bias in studies included in the analysis. Some cells contain assessments on multiple outcomes. (See corresponding Cochrane review for full details11)
None
Fig 3 Funnel plot for studies of effects of general health checks on total mortality
None
Fig 4 Funnel plot for studies of effects of general health checks on cardiovascular mortality
None
Fig 5 Funnel plot for studies of effects of general health checks on cancer mortality
None
Fig 6 Forest plot showing effect of general health checks on total mortality. Year indicates the year of trial start
None
Fig 7 Forest plot showing effect of general health checks on cardiovascular mortality. Year indicates the year of trial start
None
Fig 8 Forest plot showing effect of general health checks on cancer mortality. Year indicates the year of trial start

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Han PKJ. Historical changes in the objectives of the periodic health examination. Ann Intern Med 1997;127:910-7. - PubMed
    1. Holland W. Periodic health examination—a brief history and critical assessment. Eurohealth 2009;15:16-20.
    1. Larsen CG, Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC. Regular health checks: cross-sectional survey. PLoS One 2012;7:e33694. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Norris SL, Kansagara D, Bougatsos C, Fu R, for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening adults for type 2 diabetes: a review of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2008;148:855-68. - PubMed
    1. Sheridan S, Pignone M, Donahue K. Screening for high blood pressure: a review of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Am J Prev Med 2003;25:151-8. - PubMed

Publication types