Search

Background: Despite recommendations for restrictive approaches to red blood cell transfusion in the intensive care unit (ICU), variation from best practices persists. The aim of this study was to explore potential facilitators of and barriers to practising a restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy among intensive care physicians using the theoretical domains framework., Methods: We conducted an online population-based cross-sectional survey of all intensive care physicians in 1 health care system (Alberta). Survey questions were based on 6 key theoretical domains of the theoretical domains framework: Knowledge, Social/professional roles and identity, Motivation and goals, Beliefs about consequences, Social influences and Beliefs about capabilities. The survey was administered between July 27 and Oct. 6, 2017. Descriptive statistics (demographic and Likert scale data) and conventional content analysis (open-ended responses) were conducted., Results: Forty-two intensive care physicians completed the survey (estimated response rate 56%). The respondents identified knowledge of published evidence, use of guidelines, improved outcomes, physician autonomy, and perceived culture of acceptance and collegial support as facilitators of practising a restrictive transfusion strategy. Identified barriers included potential impact on and cost to other clinical goals, conflicting practices and beliefs of physicians in other clinical specialties, deficits in medical trainees' skills and knowledge, and attitudinal barriers related to denial., Interpretation: Using the theoretical domains framework, we identified 9 key self-reported facilitators of and barriers to intensive care physicians' transfusion behaviour. Understanding these determinants will help inform development and implementation of interventions within ICUs to encourage optimal use of red blood cell transfusion practices for nonbleeding patients whose condition is stable., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (Copyright 2019, Joule Inc. or its licensors.)

Background: Research from 2006 documented substantial variation in medication coverage for residents across Canada. Since then, some provinces have implemented major medication plan reforms. We aimed to update the information on publicly funded medication insurance plans available across Canada and to compare out-of-pocket costs across the country., Methods: We compared provincial medication insurance plans using data from public websites and other public source documents. Using 2 hypothetical clinical examples, we determined the amount and type of a patient's out-of-pocket costs for 5 different patient subtypes that varied based on medication burden, age and income., Results: Each province offers a plan to all residents. Cost-sharing is employed across all provinces. Some residents must pay a premium to receive insurance or must pay 100% of their medication costs until they reach a deductible amount, above which government funding covers a portion of medication costs. With the scenario of low medication burden (medication cost about $500), out-of-pocket costs ranged from $250 to $2100 for higher-income residents and from $0 to $700 for lower-income residents. With the scenario of high medication burden (medication cost about $1800), the corresponding ranges were $250-$2500 and $0-$1100. The variation was due to province of residence, age and income., Interpretation: Variations in out-of-pocket payments continue to exist across the provinces, with some groups facing high expenses. Further work is required to understand the impact of different cost-sharing mechanisms, develop policies to limit out-of-pocket expenses and improve provincial drug plans., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (Copyright 2017, Joule Inc. or its licensors.)