Search

Background: Inequitable access to primary health care (PHC) remains a problem for most western countries. Failure to scale up effective interventions has been due, in part, to a failure to share the logic and essential elements of successful programs. The aim of this paper is to describe what we learned about improving access to PHC for vulnerable groups across multiple sites through use of a common theory-based program logic model and a common evaluation approach. This was the IMPACT initiative. Methods: IMPACT's evaluation used a mixed methods design with longitudinal (pre and post) analysis of six interventions. The analysis for this paper included four of the six sites that met study criteria. These sites were located in Canada (Alberta, Quebec and Ontario) and Australia (New South Wales). Using the overarching logic model, unexpected findings were reviewed, and alternative explanations were considered to understand how the mechanisms of each intervention may have contributed to results. Results: Each site addressed their local access problem with different strategies and from different starting points. All sites observed changes in patient abilities to access PHC and provider access capabilities. The combination of intended and observed consequences for consumers and providers was different at each site, but all sites achieved change in both consumer ability and provider capability, even in interventions where there was no activity targeting provider behaviors. Discussion: The model helped to identify, explore and synthesize intended and unintended consequences of four interventions that appeared to have more differences than similarities. Similar outcomes for different interventions and multiple impacts of each intervention on abilities were observed, implying complex causal pathways. Conclusions: All the interventions were a low-cost incremental attempt to address unmet health care needs of vulnerable populations. Change is possible; sustaining change may be more challenging. Access to PHC requires attention to both patient abilities and provider characteristics. The logic model proved to be a valuable heuristic tool for defining the objectives of the interventions, evaluating their impacts, and learning from the comparison of 'cases'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are meaningful gaps in equitable access to Primary Health Care (PHC), especially for vulnerable populations after widespread reforms in Western countries. The Innovative Models Promoting Access-to-Care Transformation (IMPACT) research program is a Canadian-Australian collaboration that aims to improve access to PHC for vulnerable populations. Relationships were developed with stakeholders in six regions across Canada and Australia where access-related needs could be identified. The most promising interventions would be implemented and tested to address the needs identified. This realist review was conducted to understand how community coalition and outreach (e.g., mobile or pop-up) services improve access for underserved vulnerable residents. Objective: To inform the development and delivery of an innovative intervention to increase access to PHC for vulnerable populations. Methods: A realist review was conducted in collaboration with the Local Innovative Partnership (LIP) research team and the IMPACT research members who conducted the review. We performed an initial comprehensive systematic search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library up to October 19, 2015, and updated it on August 8, 2020. Studies were included if they focused on interventions to improve access to PHC using community coalition, outreach services or mobile delivery methods. We included Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), and systematic reviews. Studies were screened by two independent reviewers and the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was used for data extraction and framework analysis to obtain themes. The LIP research team was also allowed to suggest additional papers not included at screening. Results: We included 43 records, comprising 31 RCTs, 11 systematic reviews, and 1 case control study that was added by the LIP research team. We identified three main themes of PHC interventions to promote access for vulnerable residents, including: 1) tailoring of materials and services decreases barriers to primary health care, 2) services offered where vulnerable populations gather increases the "reach" of the interventions, 3) partnerships and collaborations lead to positive health outcomes. In addition, implementation designs and reporting elements should be considered. Conclusion: Realist reviews can help guide the development of locally adapted primary health care interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Even in countries with universal healthcare systems, excess mortality rates due to physical chronic diseases in patients also suffering from serious mental illness like schizophrenia is such that their life expectancy could be lessened by up to 20 years. The possible explanations for this disparity include: unhealthy habits (i.e. smoking; lack of exercise); side-effects of psychotropic medication; delays in the detection or initial presentation leading to a more advanced disease at diagnosis; and inequity of access to services. The main objective of this paper is to explore the feasibility and acceptability of patient partnership for developing an interactive guide to improve access to primary care providers for chronic diseases management and health promotion among patients with severe mental illnesses. Methods: A participatory action research design was used to engage patients with mental illness as full research partners for a strategy for patient-oriented research in primary care for persons with schizophrenia who also have chronic physical illnesses. This strategy was also developed in partnership with a health and social services centre responsible for the health of the population of a territory with about 100,000 inhabitants in East-end Montreal, Canada. A new interactive guide was developed by patient research partners and used by 146 participating patients with serious mental illness who live on this territory, for them to be better prepared for their medical appointment with a General Practitioner by becoming more aware of their own physical condition. Results: Patient research partners produced a series of 33 short videos depicting signs and symptoms of common chronic diseases and risk factors for the leading causes of mortality and study participants were able to complete the corresponding 33-item questionnaire on an electronic touch screen tablet. What proved to be most relevant in terms of interactivity was the dynamic that has developed among the study participants during the small group learning sessions, a training technique designed for healthcare professionals that was adapted for this project for, and with patient partners. Conclusion: This research has shown the feasibility and acceptability of patient partnership and patient-oriented research approaches to the R&D process of a new medical tool and intervention for patients with serious mental illness, and its acceptability for addressing inequity of this disadvantaged population in terms of access to primary care providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite the Canadian healthcare system's commitment to equity, evidence for disparate access to primary care (PC) providers exists across individual social identities/positions. Intersectionality allows us to reflect the realities of how social power shapes healthcare experiences at an individual's interdependent and intersecting social identities/positions. The objectives of this study were to determine: (1) the extent to which intersections can be used classify those who had/did not have a PC provider; (2) the degree to which each social identity/position contributes to the ability to classify individuals as having a PC provider; and (3) predicted probabilities of having a PC provider for each intersection. Methods and findings: Using national cross-sectional data from 241,445 individuals in Canada aged ≥18, we constructed 320 intersections along the dimensions of gender, age, immigration status, race, and income to examine the outcome of whether one had a PC provider. Multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy, a multi-level model using individual-level data, was employed to address intersectional objectives. An intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) of 23% (95%CI: 21–26%) suggests that these intersections could, to a very good extent, explain individual variation in the outcome, with age playing the largest role. Not all between-intersection variance in this outcome could be explained by additive effects of dimensions (remaining ICC: 6%; 95%CI: 2–16%). The highest intersectional predicted probability existed for established immigrant, older South Asian women with high income. The lowest intersectional predicted probability existed for recently immigrated, young, Black men with low income. Conclusions: Despite a "universal" healthcare system, our analysis demonstrated a substantial amount of inequity in primary care across intersections of gender, age, immigration status, race, and income. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]