Comparing screening based on the NHS Health Check and Polypill Prevention Programmes in the primary prevention of heart attacks and strokes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the NHS Health Check Programme with the Polypill Prevention Programme in the primary prevention of heart attacks and strokes. DESIGN: Use of published data and methodology to produce flow charts of the two programmes to determine screening performance and heart attacks and strokes prevented. SETTING: The UK population. INTERVENTION: The NHS Health Check Programme using a QRISK score on people aged 40-74 to select those eligible for a statin is compared with the Polypill Prevention Programme in people aged 50 or more to select people for a combination of a statin and three low-dose blood pressure lowering agents. In both programmes, people had no history of heart attack or stroke. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In 1000 people, the number of heart attacks and strokes prevented in the two programmes. RESULTS: In the hypothetical perfect situation with 100% uptake and adherence to the screening protocol, in every 1000 persons, the NHS Health Check would prevent 287 cases of a heart attack or stroke in individuals who would gain on average about 4 years of life without a heart attack or stroke amounting to 1148 years in total, the precise gain depending on the extent of treatment for those with raised blood pressure, and 136 would be prescribed statins with no benefit. The corresponding figures for the Polypill Prevention Programme are 316 individuals who would, on average, gain 8 years of life without a heart attack or stroke, amounting to 2528 years in total, and 260 prescribed the polypill with no benefit. Based on published estimates of uptake and adherence in the NHS Health Check Programme, in practice only 24 cases per 1000 are currently benefitting instead of 287, amounting to 96 years gained without a heart attack or stroke. CONCLUSIONS: The Polypill Prevention Programme is by design simpler with the potential of preventing many more heart attacks and strokes than the NHS Health Check Programme.

The polypill in the primary prevention of heart attacks and strokes: Overcoming barriers to implementation.

This commentary, linked to our paper in the same issue of the Journal of Medical Screening, discusses the reluctance to consider and adopt the polypill in the primary prevention of heart attacks and strokes, access to the polypill as a public health service, the formulation of the polypill in current use, its prescription as an unlicensed medicine, and what can be done to facilitate the adoption of the polypill approach as a routine public health service.

Antenatal screening for Down's syndrome: Revised nuchal translucency upper truncation limit due to improved precision of measurement.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the improved precision of nuchal translucency (NT) measurement used in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome observed over time as evidenced by a decrease in the multiple of the median (MoM) standard deviation requires a modification to the NT MoM truncation limits to maintain accurate risk estimation. METHODS: Probability plots were derived from the measurements of NT MoM values used in a 2018 audit of 22,362 unaffected pregnancies. The plots were used to determine whether the NT MoM upper truncation limit should be lowered. Validation plots were used to assess the screening accuracy of Down's syndrome risk estimates calculated from observed NT MoM values in the 22,362 unaffected pregnancies and 69 Down's syndrome pregnancies for original and revised NT MoM truncation limits. RESULTS: Probability plots indicated that with improved precision of NT measurements, there was deviation from a Gaussian distribution at less high MoM values than with less precise measurements. Validation plots showed that using the current NT MoM upper truncation limit of 2.5 MoM with improved precision NT measurements overestimates the Down's syndrome risk (median risk in highest risk category expressed as an odds was 53.3:1 and observed prevalence was 1:1.1). The large discrepancy was corrected by changing the NT upper truncation limit to 2.0 MoM (median risk in highest risk category expressed as an odds was 1:1.78 and observed prevalence 1:2.7). CONCLUSION: The NT MoM upper truncation limit should be reduced from 2.5 to 2.0 MoM.