That may be the case now, but it looks as if that wasn't what drove the increase in workload: see Br J Gen Pract. 2011 Feb;61(583):e81-8, The rise of cholesterol testing: how much is unnecessary. Doll H, Shine B, Kay J, James T, Glasziou P.
On frequency of monitoring it's worth reading:Ann Intern Med. 2008 May 6;148(9):656-61., Monitoring cholesterol levels: measurement error or true change? Glasziou PP, Irwig L, Heritier S, Simes RJ, Tonkin A; LIPID Study Investigators.
"The signal-noise ratio in cholesterol level monitoring is weak. The signal of a small increase in cholesterol level is difficult to detect against the background of a short-term variability of 7%. In annual rechecks in adherent patients, many apparent increases in cholesterol level may be false positive. Independent of the office visit schedule, the interval for monitoring patients who are receiving stable cholesterol-lowering treatment could be lengthened."
Jonathan
On 14 Dec 2011, at 09:11, Reynolds Tim (RJF) BHFT wrote:
The measurement of cholesterol has nothing to do with EBLM
and everyting to do with PCPI (Primary Care Practice Income - aka
QoF)
**************************************************************
Prof.
Tim Reynolds
The 15 also include annual measurement of plasma cholesterol. Finding
the evidence for that would be a good EBLM topic.
Jonathan