General practitioner assessment of lifestyle risk factors for chronic disease: a cross-sectional study in urban, rural and remote South Australia.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Australian journal of primary health Pub Date : 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1071/PY23035
Antoinette Liddell, Lucy Brown, Susan Williams, David Gonzalez-Chica
{"title":"General practitioner assessment of lifestyle risk factors for chronic disease: a cross-sectional study in urban, rural and remote South Australia.","authors":"Antoinette Liddell, Lucy Brown, Susan Williams, David Gonzalez-Chica","doi":"10.1071/PY23035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The assessment and management of the SNAP lifestyle risk factors (smoking, nutrition, alcohol intake and physical activity) is fundamental to primary prevention of chronic disease. This study investigates the prevalence of SNAP assessments conducted in South Australian general practice, according to patient risk profiles, and across urban, rural and remote locations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional population-based survey was conducted in South Australia in 2017. Survey data included information on health characteristics, lifestyle risks and general practitioner (GP) assessments for 2775 participants, aged ≥18years, who visited a GP in the past 12months. The main outcome measure was assessment for two or more (≥2) SNAP risks in this time. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the prevalence of ≥2 SNAP assessments by remoteness area, using the Modified Monash Model (MMM) classifications for urban (MMM), rural (MMM3-4) and remote (MMM5-6), and adjusting for sociodemographic, SNAP lifestyle risks and clinical variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 2775 participants (mean age 49.1±18.7years; 52.7% women), 32% were assessed for ≥2 SNAP in the past 12months. The adjusted prevalence of assessments was higher in rural (43.8%; 95% CI 36.4-51.2%) than urban (29.7%; 95% CI 27.2-32.2%) or remote (34.7%; 95% CI 28.4-41.0%) areas. Depending on rurality, ≥2 SNAP assessments were 2.5-3.4times more likely among participants with existing cardiovascular disease, and two to seven times more likely among participants with three or four SNAP risk factors (P <0.05 in all cases).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Greater attention to GP SNAP assessments is warranted to match the prevalence of SNAP risks across South Australia.</p>","PeriodicalId":8651,"journal":{"name":"Australian journal of primary health","volume":" ","pages":"613-624"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian journal of primary health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/PY23035","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The assessment and management of the SNAP lifestyle risk factors (smoking, nutrition, alcohol intake and physical activity) is fundamental to primary prevention of chronic disease. This study investigates the prevalence of SNAP assessments conducted in South Australian general practice, according to patient risk profiles, and across urban, rural and remote locations.

Methods: A cross-sectional population-based survey was conducted in South Australia in 2017. Survey data included information on health characteristics, lifestyle risks and general practitioner (GP) assessments for 2775 participants, aged ≥18years, who visited a GP in the past 12months. The main outcome measure was assessment for two or more (≥2) SNAP risks in this time. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the prevalence of ≥2 SNAP assessments by remoteness area, using the Modified Monash Model (MMM) classifications for urban (MMM), rural (MMM3-4) and remote (MMM5-6), and adjusting for sociodemographic, SNAP lifestyle risks and clinical variables.

Results: Of the 2775 participants (mean age 49.1±18.7years; 52.7% women), 32% were assessed for ≥2 SNAP in the past 12months. The adjusted prevalence of assessments was higher in rural (43.8%; 95% CI 36.4-51.2%) than urban (29.7%; 95% CI 27.2-32.2%) or remote (34.7%; 95% CI 28.4-41.0%) areas. Depending on rurality, ≥2 SNAP assessments were 2.5-3.4times more likely among participants with existing cardiovascular disease, and two to seven times more likely among participants with three or four SNAP risk factors (P <0.05 in all cases).

Conclusion: Greater attention to GP SNAP assessments is warranted to match the prevalence of SNAP risks across South Australia.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
全科医生对慢性病生活方式风险因素的评估:南澳大利亚州城市、农村和偏远地区的横断面研究。
背景:SNAP生活方式风险因素(吸烟、营养、酒精摄入和体育锻炼)的评估和管理是慢性病初级预防的基础。本研究调查了南澳大利亚州全科医生根据患者风险特征,在城市、农村和偏远地区进行 SNAP 评估的普遍程度:2017年在南澳大利亚州开展了一项基于人群的横断面调查。调查数据包括健康特征、生活方式风险和全科医生(GP)评估等信息,调查对象为2775名年龄≥18岁、在过去12个月内就诊于全科医生的参与者。主要结果测量指标是在此期间对两种或两种以上(≥2)SNAP 风险的评估。采用修正的莫纳什模型(MMM)对城市(MMM)、农村(MMM3-4)和偏远地区(MMM5-6)进行分类,并根据社会人口学、SNAP生活方式风险和临床变量进行调整,利用逻辑回归模型估算出偏远地区≥2项SNAP评估的发生率:在 2775 名参与者(平均年龄为 49.1±18.7 岁;52.7% 为女性)中,32% 的人在过去 12 个月中接受了≥2 次 SNAP 评估。经调整后,农村地区的评估率(43.8%;95% CI 36.4-51.2%)高于城市地区(29.7%;95% CI 27.2-32.2%)或偏远地区(34.7%;95% CI 28.4-41.0%)。在不同的偏远地区,对已有心血管疾病的参与者进行≥2次SNAP评估的可能性是其他地区的2.5-3.4倍,对有3-4个SNAP风险因素的参与者进行≥2次SNAP评估的可能性是其他地区的2-7倍(P 结论:对全科医生进行≥2次SNAP评估是一项非常重要的工作:应更加重视全科医生 SNAP 评估,以了解南澳大利亚州 SNAP 风险的流行情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Australian journal of primary health
Australian journal of primary health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
15.40%
发文量
136
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australian Journal of Primary Health integrates the theory and practise of community health services and primary health care. The journal publishes high-quality, peer-reviewed research, reviews, policy reports and analyses from around the world. Articles cover a range of issues influencing community health services and primary health care, particularly comprehensive primary health care research, evidence-based practice (excluding discipline-specific clinical interventions) and primary health care policy issues. Australian Journal of Primary Health is an important international resource for all individuals and organisations involved in the planning, provision or practise of primary health care. Australian Journal of Primary Health is published by CSIRO Publishing on behalf of La Trobe University.
期刊最新文献
Australian healthcare professionals’ beliefs and practice behaviours in management of chronic pelvic pain: a cross-sectional survey General practice registrars’ practice in outer metropolitan Australia: a cross-sectional comparison with rural and inner metropolitan areas Hepatitis C elimination: amplifying the role of primary care nurses in Australia Abstracts of the Australasian Association for Academic Primary Care (AAAPC) Annual Research Conference Older patients want to talk about sexual health in Australian primary care
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1