Search

Objective: Recent research identified that workplace factors play a role in the development of diabetes mellitus (DM). This study examines the longitudinal association of work-related overqualification with the incidence of DM over a 14-year follow-up period., Methods: We used data from the 2003 Canadian Community Health Survey linked to the Ontario Health Insurance Plan and the Canadian Institute for Health Information Discharge Abstract databases. Cox proportional hazards regression models were performed to evaluate the relationship between overqualification and the incidence of DM., Results: Over the study period, there were 91,835 person-years of follow-up (median follow-up = 13.7 years). The final sample included 7026 respondents (mean [standard deviation] age at baseline = 47.1 [8.2]; 47% female). An elevated risk of DM was associated with substantial overqualification (hazard ratio = 1.58, 95% confidence interval = 1.01-2.49) after adjustment for sociodemographic, health, and work variables. Additional adjustment for body mass index and health behaviors attenuated this risk (hazard ratio = 1.30, 95% confidence interval = 0.81-2.08). Underqualification was not associated with the incidence of DM in adjusted regression models. We did not observe any statistical difference in the effects of overqualification on DM risk across sex or education groups., Conclusions: This study adds to the growing body of research literature uncovering the relationships between work exposures and DM risk. The results from the study suggest that higher body mass index and, to a lesser extent, health behaviors may be mediating factors in the association between overqualification and incident DM. Further research on the association of overqualification with DM is warranted., (Copyright © 2022 by the American Psychosomatic Society.)

Objectives: To examine the relationship between job strain and incident myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure in a representative population of men and women in Ontario, Canada, over a 15-year period., Methods: A total of 14,508 respondents having provided responses to either the 2000/2001, 2002, or 2003 cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) were aged 35 and older at the time and working. After removing respondents with pre-existing heart disease and missing data, our sample totaled 13,291 respondents. Responses were linked to administrative health care and hospitalization data to capture incident cases of myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure up to March 31, 2017. Job control and psychological demands were assessed using 5 items and 2 items respectively. A series of time-to-event regression models were run, adjusting sequentially for socio-demographic variables and health, other psychosocial work exposures, and health behaviours and body mass index., Results: Over the study period, there were 199,583 person-years of follow-up (median follow-up: 15 years, 233 days). Higher incidence rates were observed for men (6.69 per 100 persons) than for women (2.77 per 100 persons). No clear relationship was observed for demand-control exposures and incidence of myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure in either men or women. After adjustment for socio-demographic factors, pre-existing health conditions, and other psychosocial exposures, the hazard ratio for high strain exposure (compared with low strain exposure) was 0.92 (0.46-1.84) for women and 0.75 (0.44-1.27) for men., Conclusion: In this large prospective cohort in Canada, we observed no relationship between components of the demand-control model and incident myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure over a 15-year period.

Introduction: This study examines the separate and combined relationships between occupational physical activity (characterized by nonaerobic activities such as heavy lifting and prolonged standing) and leisure time physical activity on future diabetes incidence., Methods: Data from Ontario respondents aged 35-74 years from the 2003 Canadian Community Health Survey (N=40,507) were prospectively linked to the Ontario Diabetes Database for diabetes cases until 2017, with statistical analysis performed in 2019. Leisure time physical activity was self-reported and occupational physical activity estimated from occupation titles. The analytical sample consisted of 7,026 employed people without previous diabetes diagnoses, with 846 diabetes cases recorded. Cox proportional hazard models were constructed to evaluate relationships over a median follow-up time of 13.7 years., Results: No relationships were observed between occupational physical activity and diabetes. High leisure time physical activity was associated with lower diabetes risk for low occupational physical activity and stationary jobs (hazard ratio=0.63, 95% CI=0.47, 0.85). No association was found for high leisure time physical activity on diabetes risk for high occupational physical activity (hazard ratio=1.07, 95% CI=0.73, 1.56) or low occupational physical activity with movement (hazard ratio=0.92, 95% CI=0.55, 1.55)., Conclusions: This study suggests that physical activity recommendations exclusively recommending increased physical activity may only be effective for the sedentary part of the working population in reducing diabetes risk. Findings await confirmation in comparable prospective studies in other populations., (Copyright © 2020 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The American Diabetes Association recently called for research on social and environmental determinants of diabetes to intensify primary prevention. Recent epidemiological evidence suggests that frequent and modifiable psychosocial stressors at work might contribute to the development of diabetes, but more prospective studies are needed. We evaluated the relationship between job strain and diabetes incidence in 12,896 workers followed up over a 13-year period in Ontario, Canada. We also examined the modifying effect of body mass index in this relationship., Methods: Data from Ontario respondents (35-74 years of age) to the 2000-2001, 2002, and 2003 cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey were prospectively linked to the Ontario Health Insurance Plan database for physician services and the Canadian Institute for Health Information Discharge Abstract Database for hospital admissions. The sample consisted of actively employed participants with no previous diagnosis for diabetes. Cox proportional hazard regression models were performed to evaluate the relationship between job strain, obesity, and the incidence of diabetes., Results: Overall, job strain was not associated with the incidence of diabetes (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.83-1.34). Among women, job strain was associated with an elevated risk of diabetes, although this finding did not reach statistical significance (HR = 1.36; 95% CI = 0.94-1.96). Among men, no association was observed (HR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.65-1.22). Also, job strain increased the risk of diabetes among women with obesity (HR = 1.88; 95% CI = 1.14-3.08), whereas these stressors reduced the risk among men with obesity (HR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.36-0.95)., Conclusions: The current study suggests that lowering job strain might be an effective strategy for preventing diabetes among women, especially the high-risk group comprising women with obesity., (Copyright © 2020 by the American Psychosomatic Society.)

While a growing body of research is examining the impacts of prolonged occupational sitting on cardiovascular and other health risk factors, relatively little work has examined the effects of occupational standing. The objectives of this paper were to examine the relationship between occupations that require predominantly sitting and those that require predominantly standing and incident heart disease. A prospective cohort study combining responses to a population health survey with administrative health-care records, linked at the individual level, was conducted in Ontario, Canada. The sample included 7,320 employed labor-market participants (50% male) working 15 hours a week or more and free of heart disease at baseline. Incident heart disease was assessed using administrative records over an approximately 12-year follow-up period (2003-2015). Models adjusted for a wide range of potential confounding factors. Occupations involving predominantly standing were associated with an approximately 2-fold risk of heart disease compared with occupations involving predominantly sitting. This association was robust to adjustment for other health, sociodemographic, and work variables. Cardiovascular risk associated with occupations that involve combinations of sitting, standing, and walking differed for men and women, with these occupations associated with lower cardiovascular risk estimates among men but elevated risk estimates among women., (© The Author(s) 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.)

Background: We developed an evidence service that draws inputs from Health Systems Evidence (HSE), which is a comprehensive database of research evidence about governance, financial and delivery arrangements within health systems and about implementation strategies relevant to health systems. Our goal was to evaluate whether, how and why a 'full-serve' evidence service increases the use of synthesized research evidence by policy analysts and advisors in the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care as compared to a 'self-serve' evidence service., Methods: We attempted to conduct a two-arm, 10-month randomized controlled trial (RCT), along with a follow-up qualitative process evaluation, but we terminated the RCT when we failed to reach our recruitment target. For the qualitative process evaluation we modified the original interview guide to allow us to explore the (1) factors influencing participation in the trial; (2) usage of HSE, factors explaining usage patterns, and strategies to increase usage; (3) participation in training workshops and use of other supports; and (4) views about and experiences with key HSE features., Results: We terminated the RCT given our 15% recruitment rate. Six factors were identified by those who had agreed to participate in the trial as encouraging their participation: relevance of the study to participants' own work; familiarity with the researchers; personal view of the importance of using research evidence in policymaking; academic background; support from supervisors; and participation of colleagues. Most reported that they never, infrequently or inconsistently used HSE and suggested strategies to increase its use, including regular email reminders and employee training. However, only two participants indicated that employee training, in the form of a workshop about finding and using research evidence, had influenced their use of HSE. Most participants found HSE features to be intuitive and helpful, although registration/sign-in and some page formats (particularly the advanced search page and detailed search results page) discouraged their use or did not optimize the user experience., Conclusions: The qualitative findings informed a re-design of HSE, which allows users to more efficiently find and use research evidence about how to strengthen or reform health systems or in how to get cost-effective programs, services and drugs to those who need them. Our experience with RCT recruitment suggests the need to consider changing the unit of allocation to divisions instead of individuals within divisions, among other lessons., Trial Registration: This protocol for this study is published in Implementation Science and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( HHS/FHS REB 10-267 ).

Background: Mobilizing research evidence for daily decision-making is challenging for health system decision-makers. In a previous qualitative paper, we showed the current mix of supports that Canadian health-care organizations have in place and the ones that are perceived to be helpful to facilitate the use of research evidence in health system decision-making. Factors influencing the implementation of such supports remain poorly described in the literature. Identifying the barriers to and facilitators of different interventions is essential for implementation of effective, context-specific, supports for evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) in health systems. The purpose of this study was to identify (a) barriers and facilitators to implementing supports for EIDM in Canadian health-care organizations, (b) views about emerging development of supports for EIDM, and (c) views about the priorities to bridge the gaps in the current mix of supports that these organizations have in place., Methods: This qualitative study was conducted in three types of health-care organizations (regional health authorities, hospitals, and primary care practices) in two Canadian provinces (Ontario and Quebec). Fifty-seven in-depth semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with senior managers, library managers, and knowledge brokers from health-care organizations that have already undertaken strategic initiatives in knowledge translation. The interviews were taped, transcribed, and then analyzed thematically using NVivo 9 qualitative data analysis software., Results: Limited resources (i.e., money or staff), time constraints, and negative attitudes (or resistance) toward change were the most frequently identified barriers to implementing supports for EIDM. Genuine interest from health system decision-makers, notably their willingness to invest money and resources and to create a knowledge translation culture over time in health-care organizations, was the most frequently identified facilitator to implementing supports for EIDM. The most frequently cited views about emerging development of supports for EIDM were implementing accessible and efficient systems to support the use of research in decision-making (e.g., documentation and reporting tools, communication tools, and decision support tools) and developing and implementing an infrastructure or position where the accountability for encouraging knowledge use lies. The most frequently stated priorities for bridging the gaps in the current mix of supports that these organizations have in place were implementing technical infrastructures to support research use and to ensure access to research evidence and establishing formal or informal ties to researchers and knowledge brokers outside the organization who can assist in EIDM., Conclusions: These results provide insights on the type of practical implementation imperatives involved in supporting EIDM.

Background: This protocol builds on the development of a) a framework that identified the various supports (i.e. positions, activities, interventions) that a healthcare organisation or health system can implement for evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) and b) a qualitative study that showed the current mix of supports that some Canadian healthcare organisations have in place and the ones that are perceived to facilitate the use of research evidence in decision-making. Based on these findings, we developed a web survey to collect cross-sectional data about the specific supports that regional health authorities and hospitals in two Canadian provinces (Ontario and Quebec) have in place to facilitate EIDM., Methods/design: This paper describes the methods for a cross-sectional web survey among 32 regional health authorities and 253 hospitals in the provinces of Quebec and Ontario (Canada) to collect data on the current mix of organisational supports that these organisations have in place to facilitate evidence-informed decision-making. The data will be obtained through a two-step survey design: a 10-min survey among CEOs to identify key units and individuals in regard to our objectives (step 1) and a 20-min survey among managers of the key units identified in step 1 to collect information about the activities performed by their unit regarding the acquisition, assessment, adaptation and/or dissemination of research evidence in decision-making (step 2). The study will target three types of informants: CEOs, library/documentation centre managers and all other key managers whose unit is involved in the acquisition, assessment, adaptation/packaging and/or dissemination of research evidence in decision-making. We developed an innovative data collection system to increase the likelihood that only the best-informed respondent available answers each survey question. The reporting of the results will be done using descriptive statistics of supports by organisation type and by province., Discussion: This study will be the first to collect and report large-scale cross-sectional data on the current mix of supports health system organisations in the two most populous Canadian provinces have in place for evidence-informed decision-making. The study will also provide useful information to researchers on how to collect organisation-level data with reduced risk of self-reporting bias.

Background: Decisions regarding health systems are sometimes made without the input of timely and reliable evidence, leading to less than optimal health outcomes. Healthcare organizations can implement tools and infrastructures to support the use of research evidence to inform decision-making., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to profile the supports and instruments (i.e., programs, interventions, instruments or tools) that healthcare organizations currently have in place and which ones were perceived to facilitate evidence-informed decision-making., Methods: In-depth semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with individuals in three different types of positions (i.e., a senior management team member, a library manager, and a 'knowledge broker') in three types of healthcare organizations (i.e., regional health authorities, hospitals and primary care practices) in two Canadian provinces (i.e., Ontario and Quebec). The interviews were taped, transcribed, and then analyzed thematically using NVivo 9 qualitative data analysis software., Results: A total of 57 interviews were conducted in 25 organizations in Ontario and Quebec. The main findings suggest that, for the healthcare organizations that participated in this study, the following supports facilitate evidence-informed decision-making: facilitating roles that actively promote research use within the organization; establishing ties to researchers and opinion leaders outside the organization; a technical infrastructure that provides access to research evidence, such as databases; and provision and participation in training programs to enhance staff's capacity building., Conclusions: This study identified the need for having a receptive climate, which laid the foundation for the implementation of other tangible initiatives and supported the use of research in decision-making. This study adds to the literature on organizational efforts that can increase the use of research evidence in decision-making. Some of the identified supports may increase the use of research evidence by decision-makers, which may then lead to more informed decisions, and hopefully to a strengthened health system and improved health.

Background: Health-system policy makers need timely access to synthesised research evidence to inform the policy-making process. No efforts to address this need have been evaluated using an experimental quantitative design. We developed an evidence service that draws inputs from Health Systems Evidence, which is a database of policy-relevant systematic reviews. The reviews have been (a) categorised by topic and type of review; (b) coded by the last year searches for studies were conducted and by the countries in which included studies were conducted; (c) rated for quality; and (d) linked to available user-friendly summaries, scientific abstracts, and full-text reports. Our goal is to evaluate whether a "full-serve" evidence service increases the use of synthesized research evidence by policy analysts and advisors in the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) as compared to a "self-serve" evidence service., Methods/design: We will conduct a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT), along with a follow-up qualitative process study in order to explore the findings in greater depth. For the RCT, all policy analysts and policy advisors (n = 168) in a single division of the MOHLTC will be invited to participate. Using a stratified randomized design, participants will be randomized to receive either the "full-serve" evidence service (database access, monthly e-mail alerts, and full-text article availability) or the "self-serve" evidence service (database access only). The trial duration will be ten months (two-month baseline period, six-month intervention period, and two month cross-over period). The primary outcome will be the mean number of site visits/month/user between baseline and the end of the intervention period. The secondary outcome will be participants' intention to use research evidence. For the qualitative study, 15 participants from each trial arm (n = 30) will be purposively sampled. One-on-one semi-structured interviews will be conducted by telephone on their views about and their experiences with the evidence service they received, how helpful it was in their work, why it was helpful (or not helpful), what aspects were most and least helpful and why, and recommendations for next steps., Discussion: To our knowledge, this will be the first RCT to evaluate the effects of an evidence service specifically designed to support health-system policy makers in finding and using research evidence., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01307228.