Search

Background: In June 2016, Canada legalized medical assistance in dying (MAiD). From the outset, some healthcare institutions (including faith-based and non-faith-based hospitals, hospices, and residential aged care facilities) have refused to allow aspects of MAiD onsite, resulting in patient transfers for MAiD assessments and provision. There have been media reports highlighting the negative consequences of these "institutional objections", however, very little research has examined their nature and impact. Methods: This study reports on findings from 48 semi-structured qualitative interviews conducted with MAiD assessors and providers, MAiD team members (working to coordinate care and lead MAiD programs in institutions and health authorities), and family caregivers on their experiences with institutional objection. Participants were recruited from the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Themes identified were: (1) basis for institutional objection (with objections commonly rooted in religious values and a particular philosophy of palliative care); (2) scope of objection (demonstrating a wide range of practices objected to); (3) lack of transparency regarding institutional position; (4) impacts on patients; (5) impacts on health practitioners; and (6) catalysts for change. Participants reported that many institutions' objections had softened over time, lessening barriers to MAiD access and adverse impacts on patients and health practitioners. Participants attributed this positive change to a range of catalysts including advocacy by health practitioners and family members, policymaking by local health authorities, education, and relationship building. Nevertheless, some institutions, particularly faith-based ones, retained strong objections to MAiD, resulting in forced transfers and negative emotional and psychological impacts on patients, family members, and health practitioners. Conclusions: This paper adds to the limited evidence base about the impacts of institutional objection and can inform practical and regulatory solutions in Canada and abroad. Reform is needed to minimize the negative impacts on patients, their caregivers, and health practitioners involved in MAiD practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Screening for lung cancer with low dose CT can facilitate the detection of early-stage lung cancers that are amenable to treatment, reducing mortality related to lung cancer. Individuals are considered eligible for lung cancer screening if they meet specific high-risk criteria, such as age and smoking history. Population groups that are at highest risk of lung cancer, and therefore, the target of lung cancer screening interventions, are also the least likely to participate in lung cancer screening. This can lead to a widening of health inequities. Deliberate effort is needed to both reduce lung cancer risk (through upstream interventions that promote smoking cessation) as well as midstream interventions that promote equitable access to lung cancer screening. Methods: This protocol paper describes an equity-informed patient-oriented research study. Our study aims to promote equitable access to lung cancer screening by partnering with patients to co-design an e-learning module for healthcare providers. The learning module will describe the social context of lung cancer risk and promote access to lung cancer screening by increasing equity at the point of care. We have applied the Generative Co-Design Framework for Healthcare Innovation and detail our study processes in three phases and six steps: Pre-design (establishing a study governance structure); Co-design (identifying research priorities, gathering and interpreting data, co-developing module content); and Post-design (pilot testing the module and developing an implementation plan). Discussion: Patient engagement in research can promote the design and delivery of healthcare services that are accessible and acceptable to patients. This is particularly important for lung cancer screening as those at highest risk of developing lung cancer are also those who are least likely to participate in lung cancer screening. By detailing the steps of our participatory co-design journey, we are making visible the processes of our work so that they can be linked to future outcomes and related impact, and inform a wide range of patient co-led processes. Plain English summary: Lung cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in Canada and is responsible for a quarter of all cancer-related deaths in the country. Screening for lung cancer using tools such as a CT scan can allow us to find lung cancers when they are still small and curable. People can receive a lung CT scan depending on how old they are and for how long they have smoked cigarettes. Certain groups of people, particularly those who have fewer resources such as time and money, and those who experience injustice because of who they are and how they look are less likely to participate in lung cancer screening. We can increase participation in lung cancer screening by educating healthcare providers on appropriate and timely ways to talk to patients about lung cancer screening. In this paper, we outline the steps of a patient-partnered study in which many different stakeholders such as patients, providers and policy-makers have come together with a goal to improve equity in access to lung cancer screening. We will do this by jointly creating an online learning module that will educate healthcare providers on how life experiences shape smoking behaviour and lung cancer risk. The module will also impart key skills on how to deliver care which is timely, appropriate and safe. Once the module is ready it will be freely available to all healthcare providers to support the fair and just delivery of lung cancer screening in the province of Ontario and elsewhere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The federal government's role in Canadian health-care funding policy has historically been a matter of writing cheques to the provinces and territories, leaving the nuts and bolts of funding policy for the provinces and territories to work out. Unfortunately, provinces and territories are stuck in policies from the past that have led to underperformance of their health care systems even as their health budgets continue to grow. There are opportunities for the federal government to remove some of provinces' and territories' barriers to adopting new policies for funding health care. Episode-based payments could help break down barriers between and within sectors and providers. Episode-based payments create financial incentives by aligning care providers across settings, with physicians potentially engaging in financial risk-sharing partnerships. The American example, led by U.S. Medicare insurance, suggests that the use of episode-based payments can work for certain conditions even in siloed and fragmented settings. Similarly, capitation-based funding models create incentives for organizations to work together across sectors. Reducing fragmentation includes primary care-centred organizations that span physical and mental health, and requires improvements to the intersection between primary and secondary care. These new-to-Canada models allocate a pre-set budget to provider organizations for health care based on each resident's health. The goal of these primary care-focused models is to align funding with resident's long-term health outcomes. The federal government can use what leverage it has to remove provinces' and territories' barriers to funding policy reforms. The federal government can fund research into best practices, fund the development of new streams of data that better measure value from health care funding, and support ways to link social care data with health care data. On a per capita basis, combined provincial, territorial and federal spending on health care places Canada among the highest of wealthiest countries in the world. Progress on the quadruple aim is elusive and ill-measured. Frustratingly, money does not appear to be the primary reason for underperformance in health care; the problem is likely due to how it is spent. Ontario is experimenting, albeit narrowly and slowly, with some new initiatives in episode-based funding, without causing ruptures in Canadian society. Provincial and territorial funding policies involve costly trade-offs. COVID-induced pressures on health care may tip the balance of these trade-offs towards funding policies previously considered too dynamic. Even with the widespread aversion to use market forces that prevails in Canadian health care, the use of funding policies to shape new and different incentives or activities might work in Canada, too. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives This scoping review aims to systematically map the empirical evidence on publicly funded medication reviews provided by community pharmacists in Canada and identify gaps that could inform future research directions. Methods We used a scoping review framework and PRISMA guidelines for Scoping Reviews to conduct the study. Three electronic databases were searched for papers published between January 2000 until August 2020. Data was charted on study characteristics, and a thematic synthesis was performed. Key findings Of 41 original studies included, most were conducted in Ontario (n = 21). Majority of the studies employed quantitative designs (70%). Five major themes identified were program uptake, patient health outcomes, stakeholder beliefs and attitudes, processes and collaboration and pharmacy workplace culture, which varied considerably. At the individual, organizational and policy levels, many factors were interrelated and influenced the implementation of reimbursed medication reviews by community pharmacists. Gaps in eligibility policy highlighted some patients who may have complex needs are excluded. Variation in clinical outcomes may relate to different types of medication review and pharmacist practice across Canada. Few researchers evaluated eligibility criteria, the impact of policy changes, strategies to engage patients and healthcare professionals, patient–pharmacist communication or compared practice models of medication reviews. About 12% of the research applied a theoretical framework. Summary Publicly funded medication reviews in Canadian community pharmacies reduce medication-related problems and potentially improve patient health outcomes. Future research and policies could consider addressing barriers and exploring models for sustainable delivery of high-quality medication reviews internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The accurate identification and appropriate investigation of child maltreatment is a key priority for promoting the optimal health and development of children. Healthcare providers are often well-positioned professionals to report suspected child abuse and neglect, and, therefore, interact regularly with child welfare workers. Little research has examined the relationship between these two groups of professionals. Methods: We interviewed healthcare providers and child welfare workers in order to examine the referral and child welfare investigation processes to understand strengths and identify areas of improvement for future collaboration. Thirteen child welfare workers from child welfare agencies and eight healthcare providers from a pediatric tertiary care hospital in Ontario, Canada were interviewed to meet the study's objectives. Results: Healthcare providers spoke about positive experiences making reports, factors impacting reporting decisions, areas for improvement (e.g., difficulties communicating, lack of collaboration, and disruption of therapeutic alliance), training, and professional roles. For interviews with child welfare workers, identified themes included healthcare professionals' perceived expertise and understanding the role of child welfare. Both groups brought up the need for increased collaboration as well as systemic barriers and legacies of harm. Discussion: Our core finding was a reported lack of communication between the groups of professionals. Other identified barriers in collaboration included a lack of understanding of each other's roles, hesitation for healthcare providers making reports, as well as legacies of harm and systemic inequities in both institutions. Future research should build on this examination by including the voices of healthcare providers and child welfare workers to identify sustainable solutions for increased collaboration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a widespread commitment to implementing anti-Indigenous racism with health organizations in Canada by introducing cultural safety staff training. In partnership with a public health unit in Ontario, Canada, we developed an evaluation tool to assess the performance of staff who completed an online Indigenous cultural safety education course. Aims: To develop an accountability checklist that could be used for annual employee performance reviews to assess the use and level of knowledge received in professional cultural safety training. Intervention: We co-created a professional development accountability checklist. Five areas of interest were identified: terminology, knowledge, awareness, skills, and behaviours. The checklist comprises of 37 indicators linked to our community collaborators' intended goals as defined in our partnership agreement. Outcomes: The Indigenous Cultural Safety Evaluation Checklist (ICSEC) was shared with public health managers to use during regularly scheduled staff performance evaluations. The public health managers provided feedback on the design, checklist items, and useability of the ICSEC. The pilot of the checklist is in the preliminary stage and data is unavailable about effectiveness. Implications: Accountability tools are important to sustain the long-term effects of cultural safety education and prioritize the wellbeing of Indigenous communities. Our experience can provide guidance to health professionals in creating and measuring the efficacy of Indigenous cultural safety education to foster an anti-racist work culture as well as improved health outcomes among Indigenous communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are significant income‐related inequities in oral health and access to oral health care. Public dental programs generally aim to increase access to oral health care for individuals with financial barriers through government payments for appointments. Low engagement from both oral health care providers and intended patients are common challenges in delivery of public dental programs, and are impediments to program impact and outcomes. Still, these programs rarely address the systemic issues that affect the experiences of intended users. This accentuates the importance of monitoring of program delivery to refine or adapt programs to better meet needs of service providers and users. As such, specifying program goals and developing a related monitoring strategy are critical as Canada begins to implement a national public dental program. Drawing on an example of a pediatric public dental program for children from low‐income families or with severe disabilities in Ontario, Canada, this article illustrates how an implementation and evaluation framework could be applied to measure implementation and impact of the national program. The RE‐AIM framework measures performance across five domains: (1) Reach, (2) Effectiveness (patient level), (3) Adoption, (4) Implementation (provider, setting, and policy levels), and (5) Maintenance (all levels). Given the disparities in oral disease and access to oral health care, the results can be used most effectively to adapt programs if relevant stakeholders participate in reviewing data, investigating quality gaps, and developing improvement strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chiropractors have diverse views of practice, but the impact on their patient profiles and treatment approaches remains unclear. We assessed the association between chiropractors' view of practice (unorthodox versus orthodox) and patient encounter-level characteristics among chiropractors who practice in Ontario, Canada. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study using Ontario Chiropractic Observation and Analysis STudy (O-COAST) data. In O-COAST, Ontario chiropractors were randomly recruited from a list of registered chiropractors in 2015 and recorded up to 100 consecutive patient encounters. We classified chiropractors' response regarding their views of practice as unorthodox when viewing "vertebral subluxation as an encumbrance to health that is corrected to benefit overall well-being"; other views were considered orthodox. Patient encounter-level characteristics included: (1) non-musculoskeletal reason-for-encounter; (2) subluxation as diagnosis; (3) duration of encounter (log-transformed for modeling); (4) unimodal manipulative treatment; and (5) patient health characteristics (good health status, some activity limitations). We conducted multilevel logistic regression to assess the association between view of practice and aforementioned characteristics, accounting for potential confounders and clustering of encounters within chiropractors. The multilevel models had two levels (level 1—patient encounter level; level 2—chiropractor level), with level 1 patient encounters nested within level 2 chiropractors. Results: We included 40 chiropractors (mean age = 43.4 years, SD = 11.5) and 3,378 chiropractor-patient encounters. The 2,332 unique patients identified had a mean age of 48.5 years (SD = 18.5). Chiropractors with unorthodox views had higher odds of having patients with a non-musculoskeletal reason-for-encounter (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 16.5, 95% CI 3.2–84.0) and subluxation as diagnosis (aOR 63.0, 95% CI 4.2–949.1). Encounters of chiropractors with unorthodox views were 0.6 times shorter than those with orthodox views (95% CI 0.4–0.9). Chiropractor level explained 32%, 75%, and 49% of the variability in non-musculoskeletal reason-for-encounter, subluxation as diagnosis, and encounter duration, respectively. We observed no association between unorthodox view and unimodal manipulative treatment or patient health characteristics. Conclusions: Chiropractors' unorthodox view of practice was associated with treating non-musculoskeletal conditions, subluxation as diagnosis, and shorter duration of encounter. Chiropractor level explained a high proportion of variability in these outcomes. Findings have implications for understanding chiropractic practice and informing interprofessional collaboration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]