Search

General internal medicine (GIM), like other generalist specialties, has struggled to maintain its identity in the face of mounting sub-specialization over the past few decades. In Canada, the path to licensure for general internists has been through the completion of an extra year of training after three core years of internal medicine. Until very recently, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) did not recognize GIM as a distinct entity. In response to a societal need to train generalist practitioners who could care for complex patients in an increasingly complex health care setting, the majority of universities across Canada voluntarily developed structured GIM training programs independent of RCPSC recognition. However, interest amongst trainees in GIM was declining, and the GIM workforce in Canada, like that in many other countries, was in danger of serious shortfalls. After much deliberation and consultation, in 2010, the RCPSC recognized GIM as a distinct subspecialty of internal medicine. Since this time, despite the challenges in the educational implementation of GIM as a distinct discipline, there has been a resurgence of interest in this field of medicine. This paper outlines the journey of the Canadian GIM to educational implementation as a distinct discipline, the impact on the discipline, and the implications for the international GIM community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Public health systems in Canada have undergone significant policy renewal over the last decade in response to threats to the public's health, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome. There is limited research on how public health policies have been implemented or what has influenced their implementation. This paper explores policy implementation in two exemplar public health programs -chronic disease prevention and sexually-transmitted infection prevention - in Ontario, Canada. It examines public health service providers', managers' and senior managements' perspectives on the process of implementation of the Ontario Public Health Standards 2008 and factors influencing implementation.Methods: Public health staff from six health units representing rural, remote, large and small urban settings were included. We conducted 21 focus groups and 18 interviews between 2010 (manager and staff focus groups) and 2011 (senior management interviews) involving 133 participants. Research assistants coded transcripts and researchers reviewed these; the research team discussed and resolved discrepancies. To facilitate a breadth of perspectives, several team members helped interpret the findings. An integrated knowledge translation approach was used, reflected by the inclusion of academics as well as decision-makers on the team and as co-authors.Results: Front line service providers often were unaware of the new policies but managers and senior management incorporated them in operational and program planning. Some participants were involved in policy development or provided feedback prior to their launch. Implementation was influenced by many factors that aligned with Greenhalgh and colleagues' empirically-based Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations Framework. Factors and related components that were most clearly linked to the OPHS policy implementation were: attributes of the innovation itself; adoption by individuals; diffusion and dissemination; the outer context - interorganizational networks and collaboration; the inner setting - implementation processes and routinization; and, linkage at the design and implementation stage.Conclusions: Multiple factors influenced public health policy implementation. Results provide empirical support for components of Greenhalgh et al's framework and suggest two additional components - the role of external organizational collaborations and partnerships as well as planning processes in influencing implementation. These are important to consider by government and public health organizations when promoting new or revised public health policies as they evolve over time. A successful policy implementation process in Ontario has helped to move public health towards the new vision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Different categories of services present different policy issues for financing health care. This conceptual paper suggests four categories: (1) public health services for the entire population; (2) basic health care to individuals, where anticipated costs are small and relatively homogeneous; (3) potentially catastrophically expensive services to individuals, where costs are skewed but not predictable; and (4) potentially catastrophically expensive services to individuals, where anticipated costs are both skewed and predictable. Using Canadian and Manitoba data to illustrate some implications of the distribution of health expenditures, we suggest policies suitable for one category of services may not necessarily work for others. The small proportion responsible for incurring high health expenditures are not attractive candidates for voluntary risk pools, particularly in competitive markets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides an overview of the current state of TB in Canada by referencing information presented at the workshop, "Tuberculosis: Detection, Prevention, and Compliance." The workshop took place on November 14 and 15, 2012 in Ottawa. The workshop was organized by the Centre for Disease Modeling and the Public Health Agency of Canada as a two-day knowledge translation event that was comprised of scientific and policy focused presentations designed to address four key objectives: (1) Evaluate the success of current tuberculosis (TB) health policies and control strategies in Canada and for specific Canadian sub-populations; (2) Determine the impact of detection, intervention, compliance, and education strategies in terms of TB incidence and prevalence; (3) Develop targets for future interventions by identifying key characteristics of TB epidemics that impact the success of TB health policies and control strategies; (4) Leverage our existing ties with public health decision makers, aboriginal health organizations, and organizations serving the homeless to develop a research community that is based on close collaboration, and will foster national TB control efforts. The workshop elicited robust discussions between experts from a variety of academic disciplines and government officials. A summary of the information presented, comments shared, and questions posed, will provide a comprehensive understanding of the status of TB in Canada and future directions to be taken for improved control of the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]