Table 3. Secondary end points.

Characteristic	Intervention group (n = 181)	Control group (n = 186)	p-value
Deterioration of knowledge/awareness of cardiovascular risk factors
Difference of follow-up and baseline questionnaires; MW (SD)*1	2.18 (1.26)	2.51 (1.40)	0.019*2
Improvement of disease-related knowledge/awareness
Evaluation of questionnaire; MW (SD)*3	1.5 (2.2)	0.33 (2.0)	<0.001*2
(Self-) Confidence in dealing with chest pain
Baseline evaluation (scale from 1= “very confident“ to 7= “very unconfident“); MW (SD)*4	3.2 (1.7)	3.1 (1.6)	0.001*2
Follow-up evaluation (scale from 1= “very confident“ to 7 = “very unconfident“); MW (SD)*4	2.5 (1.2)	2.9 (1.6)
Difference; MW (SD)*4	0.7 (1.5)	0.2 (1.4)
Inhibition threshold for calling the emergency doctor in case of chest pain
Baseline evaluation (scale from 1= “relatively low“ to 7= “relatively high“); MW (SD)*4	3.4 (2.0)	3.2 (1.9)	0.014*2
Follow-up (scale from 1= “relatively low“ to 7= “relatively high“); MW (SD)*4	2.7 (1.7)	2.9 (1.7)
Difference MW (SD)*4	0.7 (1.8)	0.3 (1.6)

^*1Bochum Evaluation Questionnaire for Cardiovascular Risk Factors

^*2t test for independent samples in two-tailed tests

^*3Disease-related knowledge questionnaire

^*4Questionnaire “General Disease Course“

MW. arithmetic mean; SD. standard deviation; n. number