Heartwatch: a secondary prevention programme in primary care in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Heartwatch, a secondary prevention programme in primary care was initiated in 2003, based on the second European Joint Task Force recommendations for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD). The aim was to examine the effect of the first 2 years of the Heartwatch programme on cardiovascular risk factors and treatments. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of patients with established CHD enrolled into the Heartwatch programme. METHODS: Four hundred and seventy (20%) general practitioners nationwide participated in the programme, recruiting 11,542 patients with established CHD (earlier myocardial infarction, coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass surgery). Clinical data were electronically transferred by each general practitioner to a central database. Comparison of changes in risk factors and treatments at 1-year and 2-year follow-up from baseline were made using paired t-test for continuous and McNemar's test for categorical data. RESULTS: Statistically significant changes in systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, total and low-density lipoprotien cholesterol and smoking status at 1 and 2 years (P <0.0001) were observed. Little or no improvements were shown for exercise, BMI or waist circumference. Increases in the prescribing of statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers over the course of the study were observed. CONCLUSION: The Heartwatch programme has demonstrated significant improvements in the main risk factors and treatments for CHD. More effective interventions are required to reduce BMI, waist circumference and physical inactivity in this population. The increases in treatment uptake are approaching the optimal levels in this population.

Problems experienced by young men and attitudes to help-seeking in a rural Irish community.

OBJECTIVES: Suicide is now the commonest cause of death among young Irish males. The literature identifies a wide range of contributory risk factors in suicide. However, a number of realities have frustrated clinicians' efforts in the area, including the reluctance of young males to engage in mental health services. In this study, we sought to explore the problems experienced by young men in a rural setting and their attitudes towards seeking help. METHODS: Focus groups were employed to generate themes for a qualitative and quantitative questionnaire which was administered to a community sample of 71 young men (22.4% of the total number of males aged 16-30 years in the area) and 79 key informants. The questionnaires contained demographic items and examined available social outlets, types and extent of difficulties experienced by young men and perceptions of and access to potential sources of support. RESULTS: Both young men and key informants reported that peer pressure and alcohol misuse are areas of most difficulty, that friends and family are the preferred sources of support and that young men view much existing professional help as unacceptable. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a basis for the next stage in the research cycle and also supports the viability of building a partnership between the health services and the local community in developing future suicide prevention strategies for young men.

Assessment following deliberate self-harm: who are we seeing and are we following the guidelines?

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether assessments of patients admitted to a general hospital following deliberate self-harm (DSH) were in line with the Royal College of Psychiatrists guidelines. To examine the profile of cases and presentations and to make recommendations for improvements to the service. METHOD: Clinical and demographic data recorded on 70 admissions after DSH during 1997-98 were analysed retrospectively. A checklist was also developed, using factors shown by previous research to be associated with future risk of suicide, to determine the quality of assessments. RESULTS: The majority (70%) of assessments took place within 24 hours of admission thereby meeting College recommendations. Medical personnel performed all adult assessments. Circumstances of the overdose, recent stresses, psychiatric diagnosis, immediate risk and follow-up arrangements were documented in the majority of cases. Family psychiatric history, past suicidal behaviour, alcohol and drug abuse history, and previous violence, were frequently not documented. A copy of a discharge summary to the GP was found in 41% of charts. Overdoses accounted for 93% of cases of DSH. The most frequently recorded problem (37.5%) was adjustment disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence showing that non-psychiatric medical staff are competent in assessing DSH and guidelines encouraging multidisciplinary involvement, DSH assessments remain the preserve of the medical psychiatric team. Closer attention should be paid to all the risk factors associated with suicide by assessors; a checklist could prove helpful. There is room for improved communication between psychiatric services and GPs following DSH. The setting up of a self-harm service planning group could improve the co-ordination and efficiency of delivery of general hospital services to this patient group.