Key result
Blended training boosts layperson CV risk screening skills to ~97%.
Why the study?
Population-wide cardiovascular risk factor screening faces healthcare professional shortages, creating a need to evaluate whether laypeople can assist using a blended training programme.
Does a blended training programme enable laypeople to reliably assess cardiovascular risk factors compared to experts in individuals without prior cardiovascular disease?
Does a blended training programme enable laypeople to reliably assess cardiovascular risk factors compared to experts in individuals without prior cardiovascular disease?
Laypeople can reliably assess basic cardiovascular risk factors, with the exception of point-of-care triglycerides, after a blended training program, highlighting a potential strategy to expand population-wide screening capacity.
Population-wide screening for cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) is challenging, given the shortage of healthcare professionals. Laypeople may aid in CVRF screening. We therefore investigated a blended training programme to conduct a basic CVRF assessment, including point-of-care testing (PoC). We conducted a pre-experimental study with one-group pretest–posttest design with repeated measures between September and December 2024. Fourteen laypeople completed a training on measuring body mass index (BMI), blood pressure and PoC testing of blood glucose and lipids. Each tester conducted screenings on five different individuals, using a mobile application for guidance. We evaluated their practical skills and benchmarked their performance to experts. Feasibility was 100% for BMI and blood pressure assessment. From the first to the fifth screening, feasibility for blood glucose rose from 92.9 to 100% and for lipids from 78.6 to 92.9%. Average test time dropped from 20.7 to 16.9 min (P = 0.011), approaching the 16.6 min of the experts (P = 0.49). Practical skills improved from 88.8% at the first to 97.2% at the fifth screening (P = 0.004). Agreement with experts was excellent for BMI (mean relative bias: − 0.5%) and blood pressure (e.g. systolic: +2.9%), reasonable for blood glucose (− 0.1%), total cholesterol (+ 1.3%) and HDL cholesterol (+ 9.7%), but poor for triglycerides (− 16.8%). Self-rated confidence and skilfulness increased by the final session. In conclusion, laypeople reliably assessed CVRF with blended training, intuitive equipment and a mobile screening assistant. Within five sessions, agreement with experts was acceptable for all measurements but PoC-derived triglycerides. Future studies should assess the real-world scalability of citizen-conducted screenings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ntalianis et al. (2025) studied Cardiovascular risk assessment (n=14). Blended training program for cardiovascular risk assessment vs. First screening session (baseline) and expert benchmark was evaluated on Practical skills score (p=0.004). A blended training program enabled laypeople to reliably assess cardiovascular risk factors, with their practical skills score improving from 88.8% at the first screening to 97.2% by the fifth screening.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: