Search

Background: Primary care is often described as slow to change. But conceptualized through complexity theory, primary care is continually changing in unpredictable, non-linear ways through self-organization processes. Self-organization has proven hard to study directly. We aimed to develop a methodology to study self-organization and describe how a primary care clinic self-organizes over time. Methodology: We completed a virtual case study of an urban primary care clinic from May-Nov 2021, applying methodological insights from actor-network theory to examine the complexity theory concept of self-organization. We chose to focus our attention on self-organization activities that alter organizational routines. Data included fieldnotes of observed team meetings, document collection, interviews with clinic members, and notes from brief weekly discussions to detect actions to change clinical and administrative routines. Adapting schema analysis, we described changes to different organizational routines chronologically, then explored intersecting changes. We sought feedback on results from the participating clinic. Findings: Re-establishing equilibrium remained challenging well into the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary care clinic continued to self-organize in response to changing health policies, unintended consequences of earlier adaptations, staff changes, and clinical care initiatives. Physical space, technologies, external and internal policies, guidelines, and clinic members all influenced self-organization. Changing one created ripple effects, sometimes generating new, unanticipated problems. Member checking confirmed we captured most of the changes to organizational routines during the case study period. Conclusions: Through insights from actor-network theory, applied to studying actions taken that alter organizational routines, it is possible to operationalize the theoretical construct of self-organization. Our methodology illuminates the primary care clinic as a continually changing entity with co-existing and intersecting processes of self-organization in response to varied change pressures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

Context: Primary care clinics have experienced unprecedented changes to clinical and administrative routines to keep pace with changing pandemic requirements. Conceptualized as complex, adaptive systems, primary care clinics self-organize to maintain a workable balance. Self-organization varies and is not predictable; each clinic re-organizes routines by adapting its existing configurations of relationships among people, technologies, and material resources. Self-organization has proven hard to study, methodologically. Objective: Illuminate how a primary care clinic self-organizes over time in the face of multiple pressures, including those related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Study design/analysis: Virtual case study May - Nov 2021, including virtual meeting observations, document collection, interviews with clinic members, and brief weekly discussions to detect changes in clinical and administrative routines. Using schema analysis, and applying complexity theory and actor-network theory concepts, we described different adaptations chronologically, and then explored interrelationships. We sought feedback on early results from the participating clinic (member checking). Setting: Mid-sized urban city in Canada. Population studied: Primary care clinic. Intervention/instrument: Semi-structured interview guide; field notes. Outcome measures: N/A. Results: The pandemic caused disequilibrium in 2020, where former clinical and administrative routines no longer sufficed. In 2021, the clinic continued to self-organize in the face of changing health policies, unintended consequences of earlier adaptations, and quality improvement initiatives. The clinic developed new feedback methods to detect emerging problems. Physical space, staffing, and technology were obvious influences on self-organization; changing one created ripple effects, sometimes generating new problems. Member checking confirmed we captured most of selforganization occurring during the case study period. Conclusions: The virtual case study illuminates the complex self-organization occurring in primary care over a year into the pandemic. Rather than expecting a return to 'normal', primary care clinics should be approached as changing entities with unique people-technology-resources relationships that are under continual revision. The findings support reflection by clinics on their own processes, as well as for external bodies who support or seek further change within primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare equivalent population-level mental health indicators in Canada and Australia and articulate recommendations to support equitable mental health services. These are two somewhat similar resource-rich countries characterized by extensive non-metropolitan and rural regions as well as significant areas of socioeconomic deprivation. Methods: A cross-national epidemiology and equity study: primary outcome was Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) in recent national surveys. A secondary outcome was mental disorders rate since these surveys were 5-years apart. Results: Elevated distress, defined by K10 scores (0-40 range) of 12 and over, affected 11.1% Australians and 12.0% Canadians. Elevated distress in both countries affected more people in the lowest income quintile (21-27%) compared to the richest (6%). In the lowest income quintile, 1-in-4 Australians and 1-in-5 Canadians reported elevated distress - twice the national average in both countries. Australians in the lowest income quintile (over 5 million people) have a significantly higher risk by over a 5% for elevated distress compared to their low-income Canadian counterparts. After adjusting for effects of age and gender, the relative odds in the lowest quintile compared to richest was 6.4 for Australians and 3.5 for Canadians, which remained significantly different thus confirming greater inequity in Australia. Mental disorders affected approximately 1-in-10 people in both countries. Conclusions: This adds to the mental health prevalence monitoring in these two countries by supporting an overall prevalence of elevated distress in approximately 10-in-10 people. It supports large-scale public health interventions that target elevated distress in people with low incomes to order to achieve the biggest impact and to reduce the greater inequity in mental health indicators in Australians, policy-makers should consider eliminating gap-fees as they are illegal in Canada. As encouraged by World Health Organization, we highlight the importance of such population-level studies so that cross-national results can be reliably compared. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate the appropriateness of potential data sources for the population of performance indicators for primary care (PC) practices. Methods: This project was a cross sectional study of 7 multidisciplinary primary care teams in Ontario, Canada. Practices were recruited and 5-7 physicians per practice agreed to participate in the study. Patients of participating physicians (20-30) were recruited sequentially as they presented to attend a visit. Data collection included patient, provider and practice surveys, chart abstraction and linkage to administrative data sets. Matched pairs analysis was used to examine the differences in the observed results for each indicator obtained using multiple data sources. Results: Seven teams, 41 physicians, 94 associated staff and 998 patients were recruited. The survey response rate was 81% for patients, 93% for physicians and 83% for associated staff. Chart audits were successfully completed on all but 1 patient and linkage to administrative data was successful for all subjects. There were significant differences noted between the data collection methods for many measures. No single method of data collection was best for all outcomes. For most measures of technical quality of care chart audit was the most accurate method of data collection. Patient surveys were more accurate for immunizations, chronic disease advice/information dispensed, some general health promotion items and possibly for medication use. Administrative data appears useful for indicators including chronic disease diagnosis and osteoporosis/ breast screening. Conclusions: Multiple data collection methods are required for a comprehensive assessment of performance in primary care practices. The choice of which methods are best for any one particular study or quality improvement initiative requires careful consideration of the biases that each method might introduce into the results. In this study, both patients and providers were willing to participate in and consent to, the collection and linkage of information from multiple sources that would be required for such assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article presents a study which underscores the chronic illness care plans in Ontario, Canada. This study examined the experience of family physicians and patients with chronic illness management initiative that necessitated the joint formulation of comprehensive individual patient care plans. It was established that there are individual level-barriers to chronic illness management in primary care in this location.

Background: Primary healthcare services must respond to the healthcare-seeking needs of persons with a wide range of personal and social characteristics. In this study, examined whether socially vulnerable persons exhibit lower abilities to access healthcare. First, we examined how personal and social characteristics are associated with the abilities to access healthcare described in the patient-centered accessibility framework and with the likelihood of reporting problematic access. We then examined whether higher abilities to access healthcare are protective against problematic access. Finally, we explored whether social vulnerabilities predict problematic access after accounting for abilities to access healthcare., Methods: This is an exploratory analysis of pooled data collected in the Innovative Models Promoting Access-To-Care Transformation (IMPACT) study, a Canadian-Australian research program that aimed to improve access to primary healthcare for vulnerable populations. This specific analysis is based on 284 participants in four study regions who completed a baseline access survey. Hierarchical linear regression models were used to explore the effects of personal or social characteristics on the abilities to access care; logistic regression models, to determine the increased or decreased likelihood of problematic access., Results: The likelihood of problematic access varies by personal and social characteristics. Those reporting at least two social vulnerabilities are more likely to experience all indicators of problematic access except hospitalizations. Perceived financial status and accumulated vulnerabilities were also associated with lower abilities to access care. Higher scores on abilities to access healthcare are protective against most indicators of problematic access except hospitalizations. Logistic regression models showed that ability to access is more predictive of problematic access than social vulnerability., Conclusions: We showed that those at higher risk of social vulnerability are more likely to report problematic access and also have low scores on ability to seek, reach, pay, and engage with healthcare. Equity-oriented healthcare interventions should pay particular attention to enhancing people's abilities to access care in addition to modifying organizational processes and structures that reinforce social systems of discrimination or exclusion.

Introduction: Access to primary healthcare (PHC) has a fundamental influence on health outcomes, particularly for members of vulnerable populations. Innovative Models Promoting Access-to-Care Transformation (IMPACT) is a 5-year research programme built on community-academic partnerships. IMPACT aims to design, implement and evaluate organisational innovations to improve access to appropriate PHC for vulnerable populations. Six Local Innovation Partnerships (LIPs) in three Australian states (New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia) and three Canadian provinces (Ontario, Quebec and Alberta) used a common approach to implement six different interventions. This paper describes the protocol to evaluate the processes, outcomes and scalability of these organisational innovations., Methods and Analysis: The evaluation will use a convergent mixed-methods design involving longitudinal (pre and post) analysis of the six interventions. Study participants include vulnerable populations, PHC practices, their clinicians and administrative staff, service providers in other health or social service organisations, intervention staff and members of the LIP teams. Data were collected prior to and 3-6 months after the interventions and included interviews with members of the LIPs, organisational process data, document analysis and tools collecting the cost of components of the intervention. Assessment of impacts on individuals and organisations will rely on surveys and semistructured interviews (and, in some settings, direct observation) of participating patients, providers and PHC practices., Ethics and Dissemination: The IMPACT research programme received initial ethics approval from St Mary's Hospital (Montreal) SMHC #13-30. The interventions received a range of other ethics approvals across the six jurisdictions. Dissemination of the findings should generate a deeper understanding of the ways in which system-level organisational innovations can improve access to PHC for vulnerable populations and new knowledge concerning improvements in PHC delivery in health service utilisation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Inter-professional teamwork in primary care settings offers potential benefits for responding to the increasing complexity of patients' needs. While it is a central element in many reforms to primary care delivery, implementing inter-professional teamwork has proven to be more challenging than anticipated., Objective: The objective of this study was to better understand the dimensions and intensity of teamwork and the developmental process involved in creating fully integrated teams., Methods: Secondary analyses of qualitative and quantitative data from completed studies conducted in Australia, Canada and USA. Case studies and matrices were used, along with face-to-face group retreats, using a Collaborative Reflexive Deliberative Approach., Results: Four dimensions of teamwork were identified. The structural dimension relates to human resources and mechanisms implemented to create the foundations for teamwork. The operational dimension relates to the activities and programs conducted as part of the team's production of services. The relational dimension relates to the relationships and interactions occurring in the team. Finally, the functional dimension relates to definitions of roles and responsibilities aimed at coordinating the team's activities as well as to the shared vision, objectives and developmental activities aimed at ensuring the long-term cohesion of the team. There was a high degree of variation in the way the dimensions were addressed by reforms across the national contexts., Conclusion: The framework enables a clearer understanding of the incremental and iterative aspects that relate to higher achievement of teamwork. Future reforms of primary care need to address higher-level dimensions of teamwork to achieve its expected outcomes.

Background: Most Western nations have sought primary care (PC) reform due to the rising costs of health care and the need to manage long-term health conditions. A common reform-the introduction of inter-professional teams into traditional PC settings-has been difficult to implement despite financial investment and enthusiasm., Objective: To synthesize findings across five jurisdictions in three countries to identify common contextual factors influencing the successful implementation of teamwork within PC practices., Methods: An international consortium of researchers met via teleconference and regular face-to-face meetings using a Collaborative Reflexive Deliberative Approach to re-analyse and synthesize their published and unpublished data and their own work experience. Studies were evaluated through reflection and facilitated discussion to identify factors associated with successful teamwork implementation. Matrices were used to summarize interpretations from the studies., Results: Seven common levers influence a jurisdiction's ability to implement PC teams. Team-based PC was promoted when funding extended beyond fee-for-service, where care delivery did not require direct physician involvement and where governance was inclusive of non-physician disciplines. Other external drivers included: the health professional organizations' attitude towards team-oriented PC, the degree of external accountability required of practices, and the extent of their links with the community and medical neighbourhood. Programs involving outreach facilitation, leadership training and financial support for team activities had some effect., Conclusion: The combination of physician dominance and physician aligned fee-for-service payment structures provide a profound barrier to implement team-oriented PC. Policy makers should carefully consider the influence of these and our other identified drivers when implementing team-oriented PC.

The ratio of patients to physicians has long been used as a tool for measuring and planning healthcare resources in Canada. Some current changes in primary care, such as enrolment of patients with physicians, make this ratio easier to calculate, while others, such as changing practice structure, make it more complex to interpret. Based on information gleaned from a review of the literature, we argue that before panel size can be used as an accountability measure for individual physicians or practices in primary care, we must understand its relationship to quality and outcomes at individual and population levels, as well as the contextual factors that affect it.