Feasibility of a men’s health promotion programme in Irish primary care

Original Paper



To assess the feasibility of offering health promotion and preventive medicine initiatives in primary care.


A pilot study aimed at men in general practice to establish the uptake, acceptability and effectiveness of interventions in health initiatives.


One thousand men aged 18–65 were selected at random from five general practices in the Western Health Board area. Practices were randomly allocated to one of four brief interventions: cardiovascular screening, cancer screening, stress management or general lifestyle advice.


Fifty-five per cent of men responded, with 35.7% actually attending. There were minor but significant short-term changes in health status and behaviours. Participants expressed high levels of satisfaction, but tended to prefer interventions with an explicit clinical component.


It is at least as feasible to offer health promotion for men in primary care as it is for other demographic groups, but adequate training and resources are required.


Irish Journal Health Check Health Promotion Programme General Medical Service Stress Management Intervention 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Western Health Board (2000,a), Us Men, Our Health. Men’s Health Strategy.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Western Health Board (2000,b), Draft Strategy for Primary Care.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jacobsen B, Thelle D. The Tromso Health Study: responders and nonresponders to a health questionnaire, do they differ?Scand J Social Med 1988; 16: 101–4.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lauritzen T, Leboeuf-Yde C, Lunde I, Bach Neilsen K. Ebeltoft project: baseline data from a five year randomised, controlled, prospective health promotion study in a Danish population.Br J Gen Tract 1995; 45: 542–7.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Norman P. Predicting the uptake of health checks in general practice: invitation methods and patients’ health beliefs.Soc Sci Med 1993; 37: 53–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thorogood M, Coulter A, Jones L et al. Factors affecting response to an invitation to attend for a health check.J Epidem Com Health 1993; 47: 224–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jacobsen B, Stensvold I, Fylkesnes K, Kristiansen IS, Thelle D. The Nordland Health Study. Design of the study, description of the population, attendance and questionnaire response.Scand J Sociol Med 1992; 20: 184–7.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pill R, French J, Harding K, Stott N. Invitation to attend a health check in a general practice setting: comparison of attenders and non-attenders.J Royal Coll Gen Pract 1988; 38: 53–6.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pullen E, Nutbeam D, Moore L. Demographic characteristics and health behaviours of consenters to medical examination. Results from the Welsh Heart Health Survey.J Epidem Com Health 1992; 46: 455–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thomas K, Nicholl J, Fall M, Lowy A, Williams B. Case against targeting long-term non-attenders in general practice for a health check.Br J Gen Pract 1993; 43: 285–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Waller D, Agass M, Mant D et al. Health checks in general practice: another example of the inverse care law?Br Med J 1990; 300: 1115–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Imperial Cancer Research Fund OXCHECK Study Group. Effectiveness of health checks conducted by nurses in primary care: final results of the OXCHECK study.Br Med J 1995; 310: 1099–104.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Davies G, Pyke S, Kinmonth A on behalf of the Family Heart Study Group. Effect of non-attenders on the potential of a primary care programme to reduce cardiovascular risk in the population.Br Med J 1996; 309: 1553–6.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jacobsen B, Thelle D. The Tromso Heart Study: responders and nonresponders to a health questionnaire, do they differ?Scand J Sociol Med 1988; 16: 101–4.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fallon U, Kelleher C, Shannon W, McDonnell M, Shryane E. Randomised, controlled trial of hormone replacement therapy in Irish general practice: a feasibility study.J Ir Coll Phys Surg 1999: 28: 86–90.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kelleher C, Fallon U, McCarthy E et al. Feasibility of a lifestyle cardiovascular health promotion programme for 8–15 year olds in Irish general practice: results of the Galway Health Project.Health Prom Int 1999; 14: 221–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fife-Shaw. Quasi-Experimental Designs. In Research Methods in Psychology. Eds G Breakwell, S Hammond, C Fife-Shaw. Sage, London 1985.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Friel S, NicGabhainn S, Kelleher C. The National Health and Lifestyle Surveys 1999.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nupponen R. Clients’ views on periodic health examinations and personal experience.J Adv Nursing 1996: 23: 521–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Family Heart Study Group. Randomised control trial evaluating cardiovascular screening and intervention in general practice: principal results of British Family Heart Study.Br Med J 1994; 308: 313–20.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Norman P, Conner M. Health checks in general practice: the patient’s response. Family Practice 1992; 9: 481–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pill R, Stott N. Invitation to attend a health check in a general practice setting: the views of a cohort of non-attenders.J Royal Coll Gen Pract 1988; 38: 57–60.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Health PromotionNUIGalwayIreland

Personalised recommendations