Search

Background Wait times at Canadian multidisciplinary pain clinics have been reported as excessive for nearly 2 decades.Aims The aim of this study was to gain insight into the patient experience of waiting for chronic pain specialty care.Methods A cross-sectional survey of new patients waiting for an appointment was conducted in six multidisciplinary pain clinics, including one pediatric clinic, in Ontario, Quebec, and Manitoba between February 2020 and October 2022. Participants were asked about the length of time they waited for their appointment since being referred, their quality of life, health care professionals seen while waiting, and an open-ended question, “Is there anything else you’d like to tell us?”Results Among the 493 adult and 100 pediatric respondents, 53% of adults and 82% of children reported wait times under 6 months, whereas 22% of adults and 4% of children waited longer than a year. Between 52% and 63% of adults and 29% to 48% of children reported being affected by chronic pain “quite a bit” or “extremely” on measures of quality of life. The most visited health care professionals while waiting for a pain clinic appointment were family doctors/nurse practitioners for adults and physiotherapists for children. Qualitative analysis of open-ended question responses revealed eight themes: system navigation issues, administrative issues, decreased quality of life, distress, self-advocacy, coping strategies, communication, and distrust.Conclusions Our findings provide real-time regional snapshots into the impact of long wait times experienced by Canadians living with chronic pain. There is an urgent need to better support patients during the waiting period. Expanding technologies such as electronic consultation hold great promise.

Abstract Background Frailty is a complex condition that primary care providers (PCPs) are managing in increasing numbers, yet there is no clear guidance or training for frailty care. Objectives The present study examined eConsult questions PCPs asked specialists about patients with frailty, the specialists’ responses, and the impact of eConsult on the care of these patients. Design Cross-sectional observational study. Setting ChamplainBASE™ eConsult located in Eastern Ontario, Canada. Participants Sixty one eConsult cases closed by PCPs in 2019 that use the terms “frail” or “frailty” to describe patients 65 years of age or older. Measurements The Taxonomy of Generic Clinical Questions (TGCQ) was used to classify PCP questions and the International Classification for Primary Care 3 (ICPC-3) was used to classify the clinical content of each eConsult. The impact of eConsult on patient care was measured by PCP responses to a mandatory survey. Results PCPs most frequently directed their questions to cardiology (n = 7; 11%), gastroenterology (n = 7; 11%), and endocrinology (n = 6; 10%). Specialist answers most often pertained to medications (n = 63, 46%), recommendations for clinical investigation (n = 24, 17%), and diagnoses (n = 22, 16%). Specialist responses resulted in PCPs avoiding referral in 57% (n = 35) of cases whereas referrals were still required in 15% (n = 9) of cases. Specialists responded to eConsults in a median 1.11 days (IQR = 0.3–4.7), and 95% (n = 58) of cases received a response within 7 days. Specialists recorded a median of 15 min to respond (IQR = 10–20), with a median cost of $50.00 CAD (IQR = 33.33 – 66.66) per eConsult. Conclusions Through the analysis of questions and responses submitted to eConsult, this study provides novel information on PCP knowledge gaps and approaches to care for patients living with frailty. Furthermore, these analyses provide evidence that eConsult is a feasible and valuable tool for improving care for patients with frailty in primary care settings.

Background Effective healthcare innovations are often not scaled up beyond their initial local context. Lack of practical knowledge on how to move from local innovations to large-system improvement hinders innovation and learning capacity in health systems. Studying scale-up processes can lead to a better understanding of how to facilitate the scale-up of interventions. eConsult is a digital health innovation that aims to connect primary care professionals with specialists through an asynchronous electronic consultation. The recent implementation of eConsult in the public health systems of four Canadian jurisdictions provides a unique opportunity to identify different enabling strategies and related factors that promote the scaling up of eConsult across jurisdictions.Methods We conducted a narrative case study in four Canadian provinces, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, and Newfoundland & Labrador, over a 3-year period (2018–2021). We observed provincial eConsult committee meetings (n = 65) and national eConsult forums (n = 3), and we reviewed internal documents (n = 93). We conducted semistructured interviews with key actors in each jurisdiction (eg, researchers, primary care professionals, specialists, policy-makers, and patient partners) (n = 40). We conducted thematic analysis guided by the literature on factors and strategies used to scale up innovations.Results We identified a total of 31 strategies related to six key enabling factors to scaling up eConsult, including: (1) multi-actor engagement; (2) relative advantage; (3) knowledge transfer; (4) strong evidence base; (5) physician leadership; and (6) resource acquisition (eg, human, material, and financial resources). More commonly used strategies, such as leveraging research infrastructure and bringing together various actors, were used to address multiple enabling factors.Conclusion Actors used various strategies to scale up eConsult within their respective contexts, and these helped address six key factors that seemed to be essential to the scale-up of eConsult.

ObjectivesTo evaluate the accessibility of multispecialty advice for primary care providers (PCPs) within correctional facilities, catering to the healthcare needs of individuals in federal custody in Ontario, Canada, through the utilization of electronic consultation (eConsult).DesignRetrospective, cross-sectional, descriptive analysis.SettingeConsults submitted by PCPs within federal correctional facilities through the Ontario eConsult Service between April 1st, 2019, and March 31st, 2023.Participants906 completed eConsults were submitted by 21 PCPs in correctional facilities.ResultsThe top three specialties sent to were cardiology (46%, N = 417), dermatology (14%, N = 128), and endocrinology and metabolism (8%, N = 68). The median specialist response time was 0.9 days. The median time specialists spent responding to each case was 15 minutes. PCPs received advice on a new or additional course of action in 34% of eConsult cases. In-person specialist appointments were avoided in 81% of cases.ConclusionsOntario eConsult provides an ideal venue to improve access to multispecialty advice for people who are incarcerated. This service reduces the need for face-to-face specialist visits, decreases cost-of-care, and avoids unnecessary transportation outside of correctional facilities with potential security issues.

Abstract Background The Champlain BASE™ and Ontario eConsult services are virtual platforms that serve to facilitate contact between primary care providers and specialists across Ontario, relaying patient-specific questions to relevant specialists via a secure web-based platform. Despite ample evidence regarding the general effectiveness of these platforms, their utility as it pertains to clinical concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccines has not yet been explored. Methods We performed a cross-sectional descriptive analysis of COVID-19 vaccine related eConsults on Ontario patients completed by five allergy specialists between February and October of 2021. 4318 COVID-19 vaccine-related eConsults were completed in total during this time; with 1857 completed by the five allergists participating in this analysis. Question types/content were categorized using a taxonomy developed through consensus on a weighted monthly sample of 499 total cases. Data regarding whether external resources were required to answer each eConsult, impact on primary care provider referral decisions, and allergy consultant response times were collected. A 2-question survey was completed by primary care providers following eConsultation and results were collected. Results 41.08% of eConsults received involved safety concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccine administration in the setting of prior allergic disease and another 36.1% involved a potential reaction the first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. 72.1% of eConsults were answered by specialist without needing external resources, and only 9.8% of all eConsults received resulted in a recommendation for formal in-person referral to Clinical Immunology & Allergy specialist or another subspecialty. Average time to complete eConsult was 16.4 min, and 79.7% of PCP eConsult queries which would have traditionally resulted in formal consultation were resolved based on advice provided in the eConsult without need for in-person assessment. Conclusions Our study demonstrates the utility of the eConsult service as it pertains to COVID-19 vaccine-related concerns. The eConsult platform proved an effective tool in diverting the need for in-person assessment by an Allergist or other medical specialty. This is significant given the large volume of eConsults completed by Allergists, and demonstrates the impact of an effective electronic delivery of care model during a time of strained resources and public health efforts directed at mass vaccination.

Abstract Aims and Objectives To describe characteristics of service utilization by advanced practice nurses (APNs) employing an electronic consultation (eConsult) service in their care for older adults. Background Canada's aging population is projected to place unprecedented demands on the healthcare system. APNs, which include clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) and nurse practitioners (NPs), are nurses with advanced knowledge who can independently provide age‐appropriate care. eConsult is a secure web‐based platform enabling asynchronous, provider‐to‐provider communication. APNs can send and receive eConsults to address patient‐specific concerns. Methods This is a retrospective analysis of eConsult utilization and user survey data for cases completed in 2019, reported in line with the STROBE guidelines. Eligible eConsults included those that had APN involvement (as a referrer or responder) and were concerning an older patient (≥65 years). Descriptive statistics were used to analyse service utilization and survey response data. Results Of 430 eligible eConsults, 421 (97.9%) were initiated by NPs and the rest by physicians. 23 (5.3%) were received by a CNS, of which 14 (3.3%) involved an NP‐to‐CNS exchange. Median specialist response interval was 0.9 days. 53% of eConsults was for dermatology, haematology, cardiology, gastroenterology and endocrinology. 73% of eConsults avoided a face‐to‐face referral after the consultation. In 90% of eConsults, APNs rated the service as helpful and/or educational. Conclusions Through eConsult, APNs can collaborate with each other and physicians to access and provide a breadth of advice facilitating timely specialist‐informed care for older patients, thus helping to alleviate some of the demands placed on the healthcare system. Relevance to Clinical Practice There is an opportunity for APNs to further adopt eConsult into their clinical practice, and this can, in turn, support the integration of the APN role in the health workforce. Patient or Public Contribution Current APN eConsult users were involved in the study design and interpretation of results.

Introduction Rapid population ageing and associated health issues such as frailty are a growing public health concern. While early identification and management of frailty may limit adverse health outcomes, the complex presentations of frailty pose challenges for clinicians. Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a potential solution to support the early identification and management of frailty. In order to provide a comprehensive overview of current evidence regarding the development and use of AI technologies including machine learning and deep learning for the identification and management of frailty, this protocol outlines a scoping review aiming to identify and present available information in this area. Specifically, this protocol describes a review that will focus on the clinical tools and frameworks used to assess frailty, the outcomes that have been evaluated and the involvement of knowledge users in the development, implementation and evaluation of AI methods and tools for frailty care in clinical settings.Methods and analysis This scoping review protocol details a systematic search of eight major academic databases, including Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Ageline, Web of Science, Scopus and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Xplore using the framework developed by Arksey and O’Malley and enhanced by Levac et al and the Joanna Briggs Institute. The search strategy has been designed in consultation with a librarian. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts, followed by full texts, for eligibility and then chart the data using a piloted data charting form. Results will be collated and presented through a narrative summary, tables and figures.Ethics and dissemination Since this study is based on publicly available information, ethics approval is not required. Findings will be communicated with healthcare providers, caregivers, patients and research and health programme funders through peer-reviewed publications, presentations and an infographic.Registration details OSF Registries (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/T54G8).

Healthcare providers have reported challenges with coordinating care for patients with cancer. Digital technology tools have brought new possibilities for improving care coordination. A web- and text-based asynchronous system (eOncoNote) was implemented in Ottawa, Canada for cancer specialists and primary care providers (PCPs). This study aimed to examine PCPs’ experiences of implementing eOncoNote and how access to the system influenced communication between PCPs and cancer specialists. As part of a larger study, we collected and analyzed system usage data and administered an end-of-discussion survey to understand the perceived value of using eOncoNote. eOncoNote data were analyzed for 76 shared patients (33 patients receiving treatment and 43 patients in the survivorship phase). Thirty-nine percent of the PCPs responded to the cancer specialist’s initial eOncoNote message and nearly all of those sent only one message. Forty-five percent of the PCPs completed the survey. Most PCPs reported no additional benefits of using eOncoNote and emphasized the need for electronic medical record (EMR) integration. Over half of the PCPs indicated that eOncoNote could be a helpful service if they had questions about a patient. Future research should examine opportunities for EMR integration and whether additional interventions could support communication between PCPs and cancer specialists.

Abstract Background Ontario Health Teams (OHTs) are an integrated care system introduced in Ontario, Canada in 2019 after the 14 Local Health Integrated Networks (LHINs) were dissolved. The objective of this study is to give an overview of the current state of the OHT model’s implementation, and what priority populations and transitions of care models were identified by OHTs. Methods This scan involved a structured search for each approved OHT of publicly available resources with three main sources: the full application submitted by the OHT, the OHT website, and a Google search with the name of the OHT. Results As of July 23, 2021, there were 42 approved OHTs and nine transitions of care programs were identified across nine OHTs. Of the approved OHTs, 38 had identified ten distinct priority populations, and 34 reported partnerships with organizations. Conclusions While the approved OHTs currently cover 86% of Ontario’s population, not all OHTs are at the same stage of activity. Several areas for improvement were identified, including public engagement, reporting, and accountability. Moreover, OHTs’ progress and outcomes should be measured in a standardized manner. These findings may be of interest to healthcare policy or decision-makers looking to implement similar integrated care systems and improve healthcare delivery in their jurisdictions.

Abstract Background Frailty is a complex age-related clinical condition that increases vulnerability to stressors. Early recognition of frailty is challenging. While primary care providers (PCPs) serve as the first point of contact for most older adults, convenient tools for identifying frailty in primary care are lacking. Electronic consultation (eConsult), a platform connecting PCPs to specialists, is a rich source of provider-to-provider communication data. Text-based patient descriptions on eConsult may provide opportunities for earlier identification of frailty. We sought to explore the feasibility and validity of identifying frailty status using eConsult data. Methods eConsult cases closed in 2019 and submitted on behalf of long-term care (LTC) residents or community-dwelling older adults were sampled. A list of frailty-related terms was compiled through a review of the literature and consultation with experts. To identify frailty, eConsult text was parsed to measure the frequency of frailty-related terms. Feasibility of this approach was assessed by examining the availability of frailty-related terms in eConsult communication logs, and by asking clinicians to indicate whether they can assess likelihood of frailty by reviewing the cases. Construct validity was assessed by comparing the number of frailty-related terms in cases about LTC residents with those about community-dwelling older adults. Criterion validity was assessed by comparing clinicians' ratings of frailty to the frequency of frailty-related terms. Results One hundred thirteen LTC and 112 community cases were included. Frailty-related terms identified per case averaged 4.55 ± 3.95 in LTC and 1.96 ± 2.68 in the community (p

Abstract Background The burden of waiting to access specialist expertise may contribute to poorer health outcomes and causes distress for patients and providers. One solution to improve access to specialist care is to use innovative tools such as remote asynchronous electronic consultation (eConsult). Modeled after the Champlain BASE™ (Building Access to Specialist Advice) eConsult service, BASE™ eConsult Manitoba was launched in 2017 to help address long waits for patients to access specialist advice. Objective We aimed to evaluate patients’ experiences after obtaining a BASE™ eConsult Manitoba service in their primary care setting. Methods Patients whose Primary Care Providers (PCPs) used BASE™ eConsult as part of their care were asked to participate and complete a telephone-based or online 29-question survey between January 2021 and October 2021. The survey questions were created in consultation with patient partners and based on questions asked in studies done in other jurisdictions. Results Of the 36 patients who chose to participate, 29 completed the entire survey (80%). Two-thirds (n = 22) agreed that eConsult has been helpful in their situation, and over 80% (n = 24) of participants agreed that eConsult was an acceptable way to access specialist care. During the visit when their PCP sent the eConsult, 7 patients were expecting to be referred to a specialist for a face-to-face consultation. Over half of all respondents (n = 15) reported that before the eConsult occurred, their PCP asked them what questions they wanted to be answered by the specialist. Almost all of these respondents’ questions were fully answered by the eConsult. All of the respondents were satisfied with the experience of receiving an eConsult. Conclusion Using eConsult is an acceptable way to improve access to specialist advice from patients’ perspectives. Consideration should be given to expanding the use of eConsult services to improve access to specialist expertise for PCPs and their patients.

Abstract Background Electronic consultation (eConsult) programs are crucial components of modern healthcare that facilitate communication between primary care providers (PCPs) and specialists. eConsults between PCPs and specialists. They also provide a unique opportunity to use real-world patient scenarios for reflective learning as part of professional development. However, tools that guide and document learning from eConsults are limited. The purpose of this study was to develop and pilot two eConsult reflective learning tools (RLTs), one for PCPs and one for specialists, for those participating in eConsults. Methods We performed a four-phase pragmatic mixed methods study recruiting PCPs and specialists from two public health systems located in two countries: eConsult BASE in Canada and San Francisco Health Network eConsult in the United States. In phase 1, subject matter experts developed preliminary RLTs for PCPs and specialists. During phase 2, a Delphi survey among 20 PCPs and 16 specialists led to consensus on items for each RLT. In phase 3, we conducted cognitive interviews with three PCPs and five specialists as they applied the RLTs on previously completed consults. In phase 4, we piloted the RLTs with eConsult users. Results The RLTs were perceived to elicit critical reflection among participants regarding their knowledge and practice habits and could be used for quality improvement and continuing professional development. Conclusion PCPs and specialists alike perceived that eConsult systems provided opportunities for self-directed learning wherein they were motivated to investigate topics further through the course of eConsult exchanges. We recommend the RLTs be subject to further evaluation through implementation studies at other sites.

Previous research has identified communication and care coordination problems for patients with cancer. Healthcare providers (HCPs) have reported communication issues due to the incompatibility of electronic medical records (EMR) software and not being consistently copied on patient reports. We evaluated an asynchronous web-based communication system (“eOncoNote”) for primary care providers and cancer specialists to improve cancer care coordination. The objectives were to examine patients’ perceptions of the role of eOncoNote in their healthcare, and HCPs’ experiences of implementing eOncoNote. Qualitative interviews were conducted with patients with breast and prostate cancer, primary care providers, and cancer specialists. Eighteen patients and fourteen HCPs participated. Six themes were identified from the patient interviews focusing on HCP and patient roles related to care coordination and patient awareness of communication among their HCPs. Four themes were identified from HCP interviews related to the context of care coordination and experience with eOncoNote. Both patients and HCPs described the important role patients and caregivers play in care coordination. The results show that patients were often unaware of the communication between their HCPs and assumed they were communicating. HCPs encountered challenges incorporating eOncoNote into their workflow.

Introduction The number of Canadians 75 years and older is expected to double over the next 20 years, putting continuing care systems such as long-term care (LTC) homes under increasing pressure. Health information technology (IT) has been found to improve the quality, safety and efficiency of care in numerous clinical settings and could help optimise LTC for residents. However, the level of health IT adoption in Ontario’s LTC homes is unknown and, as a result, requires an accurate assessment to provide a baseline understanding for future planning.Methods and analysis We will use a cross-sectional design to investigate the level of IT maturity in Ontario’s LTC homes. IT maturity will be assessed with the LTC IT Maturity Instrument, a validated survey examining IT capabilities, the extent of IT use and degree of internal/external IT integration across the domains of resident care, clinical support and administrative activities. All LTC homes in Ontario will be invited to participate. The Director of Care for each home will be directly contacted for recruitment. The survey will be distributed online (or by paper, if preferred) to LTC homes and completed by a staff member designated by the LTC to be knowledgeable about its IT systems. Analyses will consist of descriptive statistics characterising IT maturity across LTC homes and inferential statistics to examine the association between key facility-level characteristics (size, ownership, rurality) and IT maturity.Ethics and dissemination This study was reviewed by the Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board and was exempt from full ethics review. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and presentations to the scientific community and stakeholders. Dissemination of our findings will not only inform provincial planning for harnessing the potential of technology in LTC but may also enable quality improvement initiatives in individual LTC homes.

BackgroundCancer poses a significant global health burden. With advances in screening and treatment, there are now a growing number of cancer survivors with complex needs, requiring the involvement of multiple health care providers. Previous studies have identified problems related to communication and care coordination between primary care providers (PCPs) and cancer specialists. ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine whether a web- and text-based asynchronous system (eOncoNote) could facilitate communication between PCPs and cancer specialists (oncologists and oncology nurses) to improve patient-reported continuity of care among patients receiving treatment or posttreatment survivorship care. MethodsIn this pragmatic randomized controlled trial, a total of 173 patients were randomly assigned to either the intervention group (eOncoNote plus usual methods of communication between PCPs and cancer specialists) or a control group (usual communication only), including 104 (60.1%) patients in the survivorship phase (breast and colorectal cancer) and 69 (39.9%) patients in the treatment phase (breast and prostate cancer). The primary outcome was patient-reported team and cross-boundary continuity (Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire). Secondary outcome measures included the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire on Major Depression, and Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire. Patients completed the questionnaires at baseline and at 2 points following randomization. Patients in the treatment phase completed follow-up questionnaires at 1 month and at either 4 months (patients with prostate cancer) or 6 months following randomization (patients with breast cancer). Patients in the survivorship phase completed follow-up questionnaires at 6 months and at 12 months following randomization. ResultsThe results did not show an intervention effect on the primary outcome of team and cross-boundary continuity of care or on the secondary outcomes of depression and patient experience with their health care. However, there was an intervention effect on anxiety. In the treatment phase, there was a statistically significant difference in the change score from baseline to the 1-month follow-up for GAD-7 (mean difference −2.3; P=.03). In the survivorship phase, there was a statistically significant difference in the change score for GAD-7 between baseline and the 6-month follow-up (mean difference −1.7; P=.03) and between baseline and the 12-month follow-up (mean difference −2.4; P=.004). ConclusionsPCPs’ and cancer specialists’ access to eOncoNote is not significantly associated with patient-reported continuity of care. However, PCPs’ and cancer specialists’ access to the eOncoNote intervention may be a factor in reducing patient anxiety. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03333785; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03333785

To assess the effect of eConsultation in providing Orthopaedic Surgery specialist service to patients in Nunavut. A cross-sectional study of 161 Orthopaedic Surgery consultations received from primary care providers (PCPs) in Nunavut via the Champlain Building Access to Specialist service through eConsult (BASETM) service over the 2-year period from January 2017 to December 2018. Data captured were: reason for consultation, impact of advice on referral, perceived value to the PCPs and time spent. eConsult avoided unnecessary in-person consultation 62% of the time while catching 5% of the referrals that would have otherwise been missed. PCP referral behaviour was modified 48% of the time. 94% of eConsults were rated as valuable to PCPs in their practice and 100% of eConsults resulted in actionable advice. Further, eConsults took an average of 15.4 minutes of specialist time to complete, and the mean time from referral to response was 1.4 days. eConsultation spares unnecessary consultation to Orthopaedic Surgery, catches important referrals that would have otherwise been missed, decreases wait time, and may reduce cost in remote healthcare systems such as Nunavut.

Our study evaluates the impact of feedback sent to specialists participating in eConsult services. eConsult Specialists from two eConsult services in Ontario, Canada, received feedback on their use of eConsult via bi-annual specialist reports. An 11-item survey was developed to evaluate the impact, content, and distribution process of these specialist reports. We distributed 742 specialist reports in March 2021 and surveyed the specialists in July 2021. Our findings show that specialists largely felt that the feedback received validated their efforts (83%) and that receiving the report made them more likely to continue to participate in the eConsult service (59%). Most did not feel judged (74%) or distressed (79%) by the reports, and 72% said that reporting the median self-reported billing time did not impact their own billing times. Overall, eConsult services can capture, report and aggregate data valuable to specialists and is useful for Continuing Professional Development. Benefits and lack of risk implementing this type of feedback should encourage other services to consider similar processes.

Objective To provide an overview of the use of and evidence for eConsult in correctional facilities worldwide.Design Scoping review.Data sources Three academic databases (MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL) were searched to identify papers published between 1990 and 2020 that presented data on eConsult use in correctional facilities. The grey literature was also searched for any resources that discussed eConsult use in correctional facilities. Articles and resources were excluded if they discussed synchronous, patient-to-provider or unsecure communication. The reference lists of included articles were also hand searched.Results Of the 226 records retrieved from the academic literature search and 595 from the grey literature search, 22 were included in the review. Most study populations included adult male offenders in a variety of correctional environments. These resources identified 13 unique eConsult services in six countries. Six of these services involved multiple medical specialties, while the remaining services were single specialty. The available evidence was organised into five identified themes: feasibility, cost-effectiveness, access to care, provider satisfaction and clinical impact.Conclusions This study identified evidence that the use of eConsult in correctional facilities is beneficial and avoids unnecessary transportation of offenders outside of the facilities. It is feasible, cost-effective, increases access to care, has an impact on clinical care and has high provider satisfaction. Some gaps in the literature remain, and we suggest further research on patient satisfaction, enablers and barriers to implementation, and women, youth and transgender populations in this setting to inform service providers and stakeholders. Despite some gaps, eConsult is evidently an important tool to provide timely, high-quality care to offenders.

Abstract Background Access to transgender care in Canada is poor. Although primary care providers are ideally positioned to initiate care, many feel uncomfortable providing transgender care. This study aimed to explore the impact of an electronic consultation (eConsult) service between primary care providers and transgender care specialists on access to care and to explore the content of clinical questions that were asked. Methods This was a retrospective mixed methods analysis of 62 eConsults submitted between January 2017 and December 2018 by primary care providers to specialists in transgender care in a health region in eastern Ontario, Canada. A descriptive analysis was conducted to assess the average response time and the total time spent by the specialist for the eConsults. An inductive and deductive content analysis was carried out to identify common themes of clinical questions being asked to transgender specialists. A post-eConsult survey completed by primary care providers was assessed to gain insight into avoided face-to-face referrals and overall provider satisfaction. Results The median specialist response time was 1.2 days (range: 1 h to 5 days) and the average time spent by specialists per eConsult was 18 min (range: 10 to 40 min). The qualitative analysis identified six major themes: 1) interpretation/management of abnormal bloodwork, 2) change in management due to lack of desired effect/hormone levels not a target, 3) initiation of hormone therapy/initial work up, 4) management of adverse effects of hormone therapy, 5) transition related surgery counseling and post-op complications, and 6) management of patients with comorbidities. Approximately one-third of eConsults resulted in an avoided face-to-face referral and 95% of primary care providers rated the value of their eConsult as a 5 (excellent value) or 4. Conclusions This study demonstrated that a transgender eConsult service has potential to significantly improve access to care for transgender patients. Given the importance that timely access has on improving mental health and reducing suicide attempts, eConsult has the potential to make a substantial clinical impact on this population. Identified themes of eConsult questions provides insight into potential gaps in knowledge amongst primary care providers that could help inform future continuing education events.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the growing need for digital learning tools in postgraduate family medicine training. Family medicine departments must understand and recognize the use and effectiveness of digital tools in order to integrate them into curricula and develop effective learning tools that fill gaps and meet the learning needs of trainees. ObjectiveThis scoping review will aim to explore and organize the breadth of knowledge regarding digital learning tools in family medicine training. MethodsThis scoping review follows the 6 stages of the methodological framework outlined first by Arksey and O’Malley, then refined by Levac et al, including a search of published academic literature in 6 databases (MEDLINE, ERIC, Education Source, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science) and gray literature. Following title and abstract and full text screening, characteristics and main findings of the included studies and resources will be tabulated and summarized. Thematic analysis and natural language processing (NLP) will be conducted in parallel using a 9-step approach to identify common themes and synthesize the literature. Additionally, NLP will be employed for bibliometric and scientometric analysis of the identified literature. ResultsThe search strategy has been developed and launched. As of October 2021, we have completed stages 1, 2, and 3 of the scoping review. We identified 132 studies for inclusion through the academic literature search and 127 relevant studies in the gray literature search. Further refinement of the eligibility criteria and data extraction has been ongoing since September 2021. ConclusionsIn this scoping review, we will identify and consolidate information and evidence related to the use and effectiveness of existing digital learning tools in postgraduate family medicine training. Our findings will improve the understanding of the current landscape of digital learning tools, which will be of great value to educators and trainees interested in using existing tools, innovators looking to design digital learning tools that meet current needs, and researchers involved in the study of digital tools. Trial RegistrationOSF Registries osf.io/wju4k; https://osf.io/wju4k International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/34575

BackgroundThe Ontario electronic consultation (eConsult) service allows a primary care provider (PCP) to access specialist advice through 2 models: the direct-to-specialist (DTS) model, where PCPs select a specialist from a directory, and the Building Access to Specialists Through eConsultation (BASE)–managed specialty service, where PCPs choose a specialty group and are assigned a specialist from a qualified pool based on availability. ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to examine patterns of use between the 2 models of eConsult delivery. MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis of utilization data collected from eConsults completed between October 2018 and September 2019. Cases were grouped based on the model used for submission (ie, BASE or DTS). Each model was assessed for the number of cases over time, specialty distribution, proportion resulting in new or additional information, impact on PCPs’ decisions to refer, and billing time. ResultsPCPs submitted 26,121 eConsults during the study period. The monthly case volume increased by 43% over the duration of the study, primarily in the BASE model (66% compared to 6% for DTS). PCPs were able to confirm a course of action that they originally had in mind in 41.4% (6373/15,376) of BASE cases and 41.3% (3363/8136) of DTS cases and received advice for a new or additional course of action in 54.7% (8418/15,376) of BASE cases and 56.3% (4582/8136) of DTS cases. A referral was originally contemplated but avoided in 51.3% (7887/15,376) of BASE cases and 53.3% (4336/8136) of DTS cases, originally contemplated and still needed in 19.4% (2986/15,376) of BASE cases and 17.7% (1438/8136) of DTS cases, and neither originally contemplated nor needed in 21.7% (3334/15,376) of BASE cases and 21.9% (1781/8136) of DTS cases. ConclusionsBoth eConsult models had strong uptake. Use patterns varied between models, with the majority of growth occurring under BASE, but survey responses showed that both models provided similar outcomes in terms of new information offered and impact on decision to refer.

Abstract Background Expanding healthcare innovations from the local to national level is a complex pursuit requiring careful assessment of all relevant factors. In this study (a component of a larger eConsult programme of research), we aimed to identify the key factors involved in the spread and scale-up of a successful regional eConsult model across Canada. Methods We conducted a constant comparative thematic analysis of stakeholder discussions captured during a full-day National eConsult Forum meeting held in Ottawa, Canada, on 11 December 2017. Sixty-four participants attended, representing provincial and territorial governments, national organisations, healthcare providers, researchers and patients. Proceedings were recorded, transcribed and underwent qualitative analysis using the Framework for Applied Policy Research. Results This study identified four main themes that were critical to support the intentional efforts to spread and scale-up eConsult across Canada, namely (1) identifying population care needs and access problems, (2) engaging stakeholders who were willing to roll up their sleeves and take action, (3) building on current strategies and policies, and (4) measuring and communicating outcomes. Conclusions Efforts to promote innovation in healthcare are more likely to succeed if they are based on an understanding of the forces that drive the spread and scale-up of innovation. Further research is needed to develop and strengthen the conceptual and applied foundations of the spread and scale-up of healthcare innovations, especially in the context of emergent learning health systems across Canada and beyond.

Introduction eConsult allows primary care providers (PCPs) to access timely specialist advice and informs patient care. To understand the use of eConsult in long-term care (LTC) settings, we examined the clinical content and types of questions asked by LTC PCPs. Methods A descriptive, retrospective study of eConsults submitted through the Champlain BASE™ eConsult Service between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2018, by LTC PCPs was conducted. Cases were classified using validated taxonomies. Descriptive statistics were generated for content and question type classifications, service utilization data, and close-out survey responses. Results 22 LTC PCPs submitted 113 eConsults. They sought advice about drug treatment (58%), diagnosis (44%), and management (38%) in a breadth of clinical areas, often skin-related (39%). Long-term care PCPs frequently asked more than one question type (42%). They received advice within 1 week (91%) and rated eConsult as very helpful and educational. Three case examples are presented. Conclusion This study demonstrates the type of advice LTC PCPs are seeking through eConsult and its usefulness in this setting. Long-term care stakeholders are encouraged to consider implementing eConsult in other regions, as a means to improve access to timely specialist advice, support clinical decision-making, and improve residents’ quality of life.

Abstract Background Canada has been referred to as the land of ‘perpetual pilot projects’. Effective innovations often remain small in scale, with limited impact on health systems. Several innovations have been developed in Canada to tackle important challenges such as poor access to services and excessive wait times – one of the most promising innovations that has been piloted is eConsult, which is a model of asynchronous communication that allows primary care providers to electronically consult with specialists regarding their patients’ medical issues. eConsult pilot projects have been shown to reduce wait times for specialist care, prevent unnecessary referrals and reduce health system costs. eConsult has been spread throughout Ontario as well as to certain regions in Manitoba, Quebec, and Newfoundland and Labrador. Our aim is to understand and support the scale-up process of eConsult in Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba, and Newfoundland and Labrador. Our specific objectives are to (1) describe the main components of eConsult relevant to the scale-up process in each province; (2) understand the eConsult scale-up process in each province and compare across provinces; (3) identify policy issues and strategies to scaling up eConsult in each province; and (4) foster cross-level and cross-jurisdictional learning on scaling up eConsult. Methods We will conduct a qualitative multiple case study to investigate the scaling up of eConsult in four Canadian provinces using a grey literature review, key stakeholder interviews (10 interviews/province), non-participant observations, focus groups and deliberative dialogues. We will identify the main components of eConsult to be scaled up using logic models (obj. 1). Scaling up processes will be analysed using strategies adapted from process research (obj. 2). Policy issues and strategies to scale-up eConsult will be analysed thematically (obj. 3). Finally, a symposium will foster pan-Canadian learning on the process of scaling up eConsult (obj. 4). Discussion This study will likely increase learning and support evidence-based policy-making across participating provinces and may improve the capacity for a pan-Canadian scale-up of eConsult, including in provinces where eConsult has not yet been implemented. This work is essential to inform how similar innovations can reshape our health systems in the evolving information age.

Abstract Background Participants in voluntary research present a different demographic profile than those who choose not to participate, affecting the generalizability of many studies. Efforts to evaluate these differences have faced challenges, as little information is available from non-participants. Leveraging data from a recent randomized controlled trial that used health administrative databases in a jurisdiction with universal medical coverage, we sought to compare the quality of care provided by participating and non-participating physicians prior to the program’s implementation in order to assess whether participating physicians provided a higher baseline quality of care. Methods We conducted clustered regression analyses of baseline data from provincial health administrative databases. Participants included all family physicians who were eligible to participate in the Improved Delivery of Cardiovascular Care (IDOCC) project, a quality improvement project rolled out in a geographically defined region in Ontario (Canada) between 2008 and 2011. We assessed 14 performance indicators representing measures of access, continuity, and recommended care for cancer screening and chronic disease management. Results In unadjusted and patient-adjusted models, patients of IDOCC-participating physicians had higher continuity scores at the provider (Odds Ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval]: 1.06 [1.03–1.09]) and practice (1.06 [1.04–1.08]) level, lower risk of emergency room visits (Rate Ratio (RR): 0.93 [0.88–0.97]) and hospitalizations (RR:0.87 [0.77–0.99]), and were more likely to have received recommended diabetes tests (OR: 1.25 [1.06–1.49]) and cancer screening for cervical cancer (OR: 1.32 [1.08–1.61] and breast cancer (OR: 1.32 [1.19–1.46]) than patients of non-participating physicians. Some indicators remained statistically significant in the model after adjusting for provider factors. Conclusions Our study demonstrated a participation bias for several quality indicators. Physician characteristics can explain some of these differences. Other underlying physician or practice attributes also influence interest in participating in quality improvement initiatives and existing quality levels. The standard for addressing participation bias by controlling for basic physician and practice level variables is inadequate for ensuring that results are generalizable to primary care providers and practices.

Abstract Background Electronic consultation (eConsult) services are secure online applications facilitating provider-to-provider communication. They have been found to improve access to specialist care. However, little is known about eConsult’s impact on family physicians’ referral rates to specialty care. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of a multispecialty eConsult service on referral rates from primary care. Methods In this parallel-arm, randomized controlled trial, we recruited primary care providers across Ontario not previously enrolled with eConsult. We randomly assigned participants to intervention and control arms. Participants in the intervention arm received access to eConsult for a period of 1 year while those in the control arm received no access to eConsult. The main outcome was specialist referral rate, expressed as the total number of referrals to (1) specialties available through eConsult, and (2) all medical specialties, per 100 patients seen. Multivariable negative binomial regression analysis was used to evaluate the effect of the intervention before and after adjusting for provider characteristics, using health administrative data. Results One hundred and thirteen participants were randomized (56 to control and 57 to intervention). For the primary outcome (referrals to eConsult specialties), the results show a statistically significant reduction in the number of referrals in both arms (control-arm Rate Ratio (RR), 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.91; intervention-arm RR, 0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.85; unadjusted and adjusted RR values almost identical), as compared to the baseline data collected during the 12-month period before randomization, with a non-statistically significant 6% greater reduction in referrals in the intervention arm, compared to the control arm (unadjusted RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.03; adjusted RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.03). Conclusions Our randomized controlled trial of a multispecialty eConsult service demonstrated inconclusive results in terms of the impact of eConsult on physician referral rates. Findings are discussed in light of important limitations associated with conducting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of complex interventions in the primary care context with intent to inform the design and analysis of future trials. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT02053467. Registered prospectively on 3 February 2014.

Objective: To compare the content of traditional faxed referrals and electronic consultations (eConsults) and determine how many questions sent by traditional referral could be successfully addressed using eConsult. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, qualitative study of eConsults and faxed referrals sent to a tertiary diabetes and endocrinology clinic in Ottawa, Ontario. A convenience sample of 300 faxed referrals sent between March and July 2017 and 300 eConsults submitted between January and December 2017 were selected and coded using an established taxonomy to determine question type. Two endocrinologists reviewed the faxed referrals to assess whether they could have been addressed using eConsult. Responses to a mandatory closeout survey were reviewed for all eConsults, assessing the case’s outcome, impact on decision to refer, and educational value. Results: Most faxed consultations were requests for shared care in diabetes mellitus, whereas most eConsults requested help in diagnostic test interpretation. 25–27% of faxed consults were felt to be potentially amenable to eConsult. Referring provider behaviour was changed in 45.3% of eConsult cases through avoidance of face-to-face consultation. Conclusion: eConsult is a promising tool for PCPs to improve access to specialist opinion without necessitating a face-to-face visit.

Background: In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted competency-based medical education in Family Medicine programs across Canada. Faculty and residents identified a need for clear, relevant, and specific competencies to frame teaching, learning, supervision and feedback during the pandemic. Methods: A rapid, iterative, educational quality improvement process was launched. Phase 1 involved experienced educators defining gaps in our program’s existing competency-database, reviewing emerging public health and regulatory guidelines, and drafting competencies. Phase 2 involved translation, member-checking, and anonymous feedback and editing of draft competencies by residents and other educational leaders. Phase 3 involved wider dissemination, collaborative editing and feedback from residents and faculty throughout the department. Results: A total of 44 physicians including residents and faculty from multiple contexts provided detailed feedback, review, and editing of an ultimate list of 33 competencies organized by CanMEDS-FM roles. Broad agreement was obtained that the competencies form reasonable learning outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions: These competencies represent learning objectives reflecting the initial educational mindsets of a wide range of teachers and learners experiencing a global pandemic. The project illustrates a novel collaboration across educational portfolios as a rapid educational response to a public health crisis.

Plain English summary Increasingly, health researchers are conducting their research in partnership with non-researchers such as patients and caregivers, advocacy groups, clinicians, and policymakers. The idea behind this partnership is to make research more relevant and appropriate. However, so far there is not much evidence about how this partnership or engagement actually affects research. We conducted an online survey of 12 teams in Canada that have engaged patients and other stakeholders in community based health research, partly as a requirement to obtain funding. We found that in many cases, the teams have engaged a wide variety and large number of stakeholders, and have involved them in many different stages of their research. Teams reported that their overall experience of this approach to research has been positive, but some challenges have been encountered along the way. Some teams found that it was difficult to communicate appropriately with all the stakeholders, and to keep them informed when research was going slowly. Other teams had trouble finding government representatives to work with. Several teams noted that engagement is time-consuming, and requires a lot of effort. Nevertheless, all teams reported that they had learned from the experience, and found it valuable. As a result, Canadian health care researchers are better positioned to engage with patients and other stakeholders in the future. Abstract Background Patient and other stakeholder engagement in research is increasingly important, but there is limited evidence of its impact. In 2013, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research launched a five-year Community Based Primary Health Care (CBPHC) initiative that funded 12 teams for innovative approaches to primary health care involving engagement with patients, communities, decision-makers, and clinicians across jurisdictions in Canada. The present study examines the extent of engagement by these teams, and the factors that affected it, either as challenges or opportunities. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional web-based survey across the 12 CBPHC Innovation Teams, in which we were also participants. We used a data collection tool developed by the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute that included both closed and open-ended questions. Results The quantitative data showed that the CBPHC Innovation teams have engaged with diverse stakeholders at different levels and in different stages of research. Almost all teams surveyed engaged with policymakers, most with clinicians and health system representatives, and more than half with patients, mostly at the level of consultation or collaboration. There were very few instances of stakeholder-led research reported. There was a near universal recognition of the importance of communications processes/tools in facilitating engagement, whereas time was the most commonly identified challenge. In almost all cases, challenges encountered were partially if not fully resolved. The qualitative findings showed that each team’s engagement was contextualized by factors such as the jurisdictions and geographic scope of the project, the number and type of stakeholders engaged and their level of involvement. These intersected with the researchers’ motivations for engagement, to give rise to diverse experiences, but ones that the CBPHC teams assessed positively as an approach to research. Conclusions Over the past five years, primary health care researchers in Canada have been actively engaging with patients and other stakeholders. The wide range, extent and nature of that engagement shows that these researchers have anticipated developments in this approach to research and are thus in a position to support and strengthen future efforts to understand the impact of this engagement on health care outcomes.

Abstract Background Electronic consultation is an emerging mode of specialty care delivery that allows primary care providers and their patients to obtain specialist expertise without an in-person visit. While studies of individual programs have demonstrated benefits related to timely access to specialty care, electronic consultation programs have not achieved widespread use in the United States. The lack of common evaluation metrics across health systems and concerns related to the generalizability of existing evaluation efforts may be hampering further growth. We sought to identify gaps in knowledge related to the implementation of electronic consultation programs and develop a set of shared evaluation measures to promote further diffusion. Methods Using a case study approach, we apply the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) and the Quadruple Aim frameworks of evaluation to examine electronic consultation implementation across diverse delivery systems. Data are from 4 early adopter healthcare delivery systems (San Francisco Health Network, Mayo Clinic, Veterans Administration, Champlain Local Health Integration Network) that represent varied organizational structures, care for different patient populations, and have well-established multi-specialty electronic consultation programs. Data sources include published and unpublished quantitative data from each electronic consultation database and qualitative data from systems’ end-users. Results Organizational drivers of electronic consultation implementation were similar across the systems (challenges with timely and/or efficient access to specialty care), though unique system-level facilitators and barriers influenced reach, adoption and design. Effectiveness of implementation was consistent, with improved patient access to timely, perceived high-quality specialty expertise with few negative consequences, garnering high satisfaction among end-users. Data about patient-specific clinical outcomes are lacking, as are policies that provide guidance on the legal implications of electronic consultation and ideal remuneration strategies. Conclusion A core set of effectiveness and implementation metrics rooted in the Quadruple Aim may promote data-driven improvements and further diffusion of successful electronic consultation programs.

Abstract Background This study explores the effectiveness of an electronic consultation (eConsult) service between primary care providers and psychiatry, and the types and content of the clinical questions that were asked. Methods This is a retrospective eConsult review study. All eConsults directed to Psychiatry from July 2011 to January 2015 by Primary care providers were reviewed. Response time and the amount of time reported by the specialist to answer each eConsult was analyzed. Each eConsult was also categorized by clinical topic and question type in predetermined categories. Mandatory post-eConsult surveys for primary care providers were analyzed to determine the number of traditional consults avoided and to gain insight into the perceived value of eConsults. Results Of the 5597 eConsults, 169 psychiatry eConsults were completed during the study period. The average response time for a specialist to a primary care provider was 2.3 days. Eighty-seven percent of clinical responses were completed by the psychiatrist in less than 15 min. The primary care providers most commonly asked clinical questions were about depressive and anxiety disorders. 88.7% of PCPs rated the eConsult service a 5 (excellent value) or 4. Conclusions This study indicates that an eConsult psychiatry service has tremendous potential to improve access to psychiatric advice and expand the capacity to treat mental illness in primary care. Future research may include follow-up with PCPs regarding the implementation of specialist advice.

Practice facilitation can help family physicians adopt evidence-based guidelines. However, many practices struggle to effectively implement practice changes that result in meaningful improvement. Building on our previous research, we examined the barriers to and enablers of implementation perceived by practice facilitators (PF) in helping practices to adopt the Improved Delivery of Cardiovascular Care (IDOCC) program, which took place at 84 primary care practices in Ottawa, Canada between April 2008 and March 2012. We conducted a qualitative analysis of PFs’ narrative reports using a multiple case study design. We used a combined purposeful sampling approach to identify cases that 1) reflected experiences typical of the broader sample and 2) presented sufficient breadth of experience from each project step and family practice model. Sampling continued until data saturation was reached. Team members conducted a qualitative analysis of reports using an open and axial coding style and a constant comparative approach. Barriers and enablers were divided into five constructs: structural, organizational, provider, patient, and innovation. Narratives from 13 practice sites were reviewed. A total of 8 barriers and 11 enablers were consistently identified across practices. Barriers were most commonly reported at the organizational (n=3) and structural level, (n=2) while enablers were most common at the innovation level (n=6). While physicians responded positively to PFs’ presence and largely supported their recommendations for practice change, organizational and structural aspects such as lack of time, minimal staff engagement, and provider reimbursement remained too great for practices to successfully implement practice-level changes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00574808

Background: Patients with complex circumstances pertaining to geography, socioeconomic status, or functional health often face inequities in accessing care. Electronic consultation (eConsult) is a secure online application that allows primary care providers (PCPs) and specialists to communicate regarding a patient's care. eConsult has demonstrated an ability to improve access to specialist care, and may be of particular use in cases of inequitable access.Methods: We examined how eConsult is used to improve equity of access for patients in complex circumstances by conducting a multiple case study of eConsults from seven patient groups: addiction, frail elderly, homeless, long-term care, rural, special needs, and transgender. Cases from these groups were selected from all eConsult cases completed between January 1 and December 31, 2017 using a data collection strategy tailored to each group. An access framework by Levesque et al. was applied to the data to examine five dimensions of access, arranged in chronological order, that reflect the process of a patient seeking care: approachability, acceptability; availability, affordability, and appropriateness. Two reviewers analyzed the cases using an iterative approach, regularly presenting findings to the research team for discussion and interpretation.Results: Eight hundred and twenty-five cases emerged across the seven target groups. The selected cases highlighted a number of key factors, including the value of the patient-PCP relationship, the importance of considering patient perspectives when providing care, and efforts to accommodate patients facing particular challenges to accessing care. Examples emerged among all five dimensions of the Levesque et al. access framework, with the final dimension, appropriateness, emerging across all cases.Conclusions: By leveraging the eConsult platform, PCPs can help improve equitable access to specialist care. More research is needed to understand why patients with complex circumstances face a longer wait time compared to the general population, and the impact that eConsults can have in improving health outcomes and wait times for this population.

IntroductionElectronic consultation (eConsult)—provider-to-provider electronic asynchronous exchanges of patient health information at a distance—is emerging as a potential tool to improve the interface between primary care providers and specialists. Despite growing evidence that eConsult has clinical benefits, it is not widely adopted. We investigated factors influencing the adoption and implementation of eConsult services.MethodsWe applied established methods to guide the review, and the recently published Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews to report our findings. We searched five electronic databases and the grey literature for relevant studies. Two reviewers independently screened titles and full texts to identify studies that reported barriers to and/or facilitators of eConsult (asynchronous (store-and-forward) use of telemedicine to exchange patient health information between two providers (primary and secondary) at a distance using secure infrastructure). We extracted data on study characteristics and key barriers and facilitators were analysed thematically and classified using the Quadruple Aim framework taxonomy. No date or language restrictions were applied.ResultsAmong the 2579 publications retrieved, 130 studies met eligibility for the review. We identified and summarised key barriers to and facilitators of eConsult adoption and implementation across four domains: provider, patient, healthcare system and cost. Key barriers were increased workload for providers, privacy concerns and insufficient reimbursement for providers. Main facilitators were remote residence location, timely responses from specialists, utilisation of referral coordinators, addressing medicolegal concerns and incentives for providers to use eConsult.ConclusionThere are multiple barriers to and facilitators of eConsult adoption across the domains of Quadruple Aim framework. Our findings will inform the development of practice tools to support the wider adoption and scalability of eConsult implementation.

Background. Electronic consultation (eConsultation) is a potential strategy to improve access to specialist expertise and facilitate collaborative care models. The Champlain BASE eConsult service allows for asynchronous communication between primary care providers (PCP) and specialists on a secure, web-based system. HIV experts accessible include HIV physician specialists, HIV pharmacists, and social workers with expertise in HIV. Objective. This study aims to describe the use, value, and utility of this eConsultation service in the care of people living with HIV and to characterize the common question types and clinical topics asked by PCPs. Methods. We analyzed the data from eConsults sent to the HIV specialty group in Ontario’s Champlain Local Health Integration Network between February 2015 and December 2017. Usage data and close-out survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, eConsults were classified using a predefined list of validated taxonomy, and a thematic analysis was performed on the consultation logs to identify common clinical themes. Results. Among the 46 eConsults, the most common question type related to drug treatment (58.7%, n = 27) and management (19.6%, n = 9). The main clinical themes involved the care of significant complexities in people living with HIV, such as comorbidities and drug interactions, and suggestions of coordinated patient care. As well, eConsult was used for advice regarding pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV-negative patients at risk of HIV infection. PCPs highly valued the eConsult service (average rating 4.8/5). Conclusion. Overall, this study demonstrates that eConsult provides an efficient and valuable service to PCPs caring for patients living with or at risk for HIV by improving access to HIV specialists and facilitating the delivery of team-based comprehensive care.

With the advent of continuous antiretroviral therapy, HIV has become a complex chronic, rather than acute, condition. The Chronic Care Model (CCM) provides an integrated approach to the delivery of care for people with chronic conditions that could therefore be applied to the delivery of care for people living with HIV. Our objective was to assess the alignment of HIV care settings with the CCM. We conducted a mixed methods study to explore structures, organization and care processes of Canadian HIV care settings. The quantitative results of phase one are published elsewhere. For phase two, we conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants from 12 HIV care settings across Canada. Irrespective of composition of the care setting or its location, HIV care in Canada is well aligned with several components of the CCM, most prominently in the areas of linkage to community resources and delivery system design with inter-professional team-based care. We propose the need for improvements in the availability of electronic clinical information systems and self-management support services to support better care delivery and health outcomes among people living with HIV in Canada.

Objective The purpose of this study is to investigate determinants of primary care physician cardiology referrals by performing qualitative analysis of questions asked by primary care physicians in cardiology electronic consultation services (eConsults). Setting A health region in eastern Ontario, Canada, where primary care providers have had access to an eConsult service since 2010. Participants We included all consecutive cardiology eConsults initiated by registered primary care provider users of our eConsult service and who initiated one or more eConsult between July 2014 and January 2015. We excluded eConsults in which the primary care provider attached a document without asking a question. A convenience sample of 100 consecutive eConsults initiated by 61 primary care providers was analysed after excluding 14 eConsults. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Primary care provider eConsult questions are categorised into thematic categories based on the constant comparison method of qualitative analysis with external validation by content experts. Secondary outcomes include sample primary care provider eConsult questions to illustrate each theme and any emergent subthemes. Results Thematic saturation occurred after analysis of 30 eConsults. An additional 70 eConsults were coded with no new emergent themes. Themes include exceptions to clinical guidelines ( n =13), non-cardiac treatment in a cardiac patient ( n =13), specific investigation/management ( n =18), interpretation of diagnostic testing ( n =46), clinical concerns despite normal testing ( n =4) and screening for positive family history ( n =6). Subthemes include multiple comorbidities and mild abnormalities on cardiac tests. Conclusions We report categories of clinical questions that drive primary care provider cardiology eConsults. Multimorbidity leads to cardiology eConsults as primary care providers try to apply treatment guidelines in medically complex patients. Mild test abnormalities unrelated to clinical problems commonly lead to cardiology eConsult requests. Further research is needed to determine how guidelines can better account for multimorbidity, and how cardiologists can better communicate with primary care providers to put cardiac test results in clinical context.

Champlain BASE™ (Building Access to Specialists through eConsultation) is a web-based asynchronous electronic communication service that allows primary-care- practitioners (PCPs) to submit "elective" clinical questions to a specialist. For adults, PCPs have reported improved access and timeliness to specialist advice, averted face-to-face specialist referrals in up to 40% of cases and high provider satisfaction.To determine whether the expansion of eConsult to a pediatric setting would result in similar measures of improved healthcare system process and high provider acceptance reported in adults.Prospective observational cohort study.Single Canadian tertiary-care academic pediatric hospital (June 2014-16) servicing 1.2 million people.1. PCPs already using eConsult. 2.Volunteer pediatric specialists provided services in addition to their regular workload. 3.Pediatric patients (< 18 years-old) referred for none-acute care conditions.Specialty service utilization and access, impact on PCP course-of-action and referral-patterns and survey-based provider satisfaction data were collected.1064 eConsult requests from 367 PCPs were answered by 23 pediatric specialists representing 14 specialty-services. The top three specialties represented were: General Pediatrics 393 cases (36.9%), Orthopedics 162 (15.2%) and Psychiatry 123 (11.6%). Median specialist response time was 0.9 days (range 93.3%) of PCPs rated eConsult as very good/excellent value for both patients and themselves. All specialist survey-respondents indicated eConsult should be a continued service.Similar to adults, eConsult improves PCP access and timeliness to elective pediatric specialist advice and influences their care decisions, while reporting high end-user satisfaction. Further study is warranted to assess impact on resource utilization and clinical outcomes.

Background: The Champlain BASE™ (Building Access to Specialists through eConsultation) eConsult service allows primary care providers (PCPs) to submit patient-specific clinical questions to specialists via a secure web service. Objective: Our objective was to describe the types of nephrology questions asked through an eConsult service based in eastern Ontario and assess the service’s impact on the need for face-to-face consultations. Design: Cross-sectional study using descriptive statistics was conducted using nephrology cases submitted between May 2011 and January 2015. Specialist response times and referral avoidance were collected. Validated taxonomies were used to categorize cases based on question type and content. Setting: Patient cases were collected from PCPs in Ottawa, Ontario, and its surrounding communities and submitted to nephrologists at the Ottawa Hospital. Patients: During the study period, 155 eConsults were submitted to nephrology. Measurement: Utilization and survey data were collected for all eConsults. Questions were categorized by subject matter and question type. Results: A traditional consult visit was avoided in 45% of cases based on the specialist’s advice; 21% cases required referral. Thirty-two percent of eConsults took specialists less than 10 minutes to complete, 55% took 10 to 15 minutes, 11% took 15 to 20 minutes, and only 2% took more than 20 minutes. Twenty-five percent of cases were related to proteinuria, 18% to chronic kidney disease (CKD), 17% to imaging, and 12% to drug use in CKD. Common question types included general management (37%), interpretation of laboratory test (17%), interpretation of an image report (13%), and need for nephrology referral (11%). Limitations: Some consults contained multiple categories and question types. Our analyses required a single classification, which may underestimate the number of questions in each category. Our study had a small sample size using cases completed in a single health jurisdiction, limiting generalizability. Conclusions: The Champlain BASE™ eConsult service provided guidance to PCPs and reduced the number of face-to-face nephrology consultations.

HIV treatment in Canada has rapidly progressed with the advent of new drug therapies and approaches to care. With this evolution, there is increasing interest in Canada in understanding the current delivery of HIV care, specifically where care is delivered, how, and by whom, to inform the design of care models required to meet the evolving needs of the population. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of Canadian care settings identified as delivering HIV care between June 2015 and January 2016. Given known potential differences in delivery approaches, we stratified settings as primary care or specialist settings, and described their structure, geographic location, populations served, health human resources, technological resources, and available clinical services. We received responses from 22 of 43 contacted care settings located in seven Canadian provinces (51.2% response rate). The total number of patients and HIV patients served by the participating settings was 38,060 and 17,678, respectively (mean number of HIV patients in primary care settings = 1,005, mean number of HIV patients in specialist care settings = 562). Settings were urban for 20 of the 22 (90.9%) clinics and 14 (63.6%) were entirely HIV focused. Primary care settings were more likely to offer preventative services (e.g., cervical smear, needle exchange, IUD insertion, chronic disease self-management program) than specialist settings. The study illustrates diversity in Canadian HIV care settings. All settings were team based, but primary care settings offered a broader range of preventative services and comprehensive access to mental health services, including addictions and peer support.

This study aims to examine patients' patterns of health care utilization before and after participation in a Chronic Disease Self-Management Program (CDSMP). We conducted a pre-post study using health care administrative data from 186 individuals in the Ottawa region who participated in our CDSMP between September 2009 and January 2011. We collected the number of general practitioner/specialist visits, planned/unplanned emergency department visits, and hospitalizations, measured 6 months and 1 year before and after participation in the CDSMP. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify associations between patient characteristics and pre-post CDSMP health care utilization. CDSMP participation showed no effect on number of physician visits, hospitalizations, or emergency department visits. Individuals with >5 chronic conditions were more likely to visit a physician and the emergency department following the CDSMP than those with 1 chronic condition. Among individuals >61 years of age, those with the marital status widowed were more likely to visit their physician and the emergency department following the CDSMP than married individuals. To conclude, the CDSMP appeared not to decrease health care utilization. Low baseline utilization rates, short-term follow-ups, and a relatively healthy patient population may have contributed to the program's low impact.

Background: Residents of remote communities face inequities in access to specialists, excessive wait times, and poorly coordinated care. The Champlain BASETM (Building Access to Specialists through eConsultation) service facilitates asynchronous communication between primary care providers (PCP) and specialists. The service was extended to several PCPs in Nunavut in 2014. Objective: To (1) describe the use of eConsult services in Nunavut, and (2) conduct a costing evaluation. Design: A cross-sectional study and cost analysis of all eConsult cases submitted between August 2014 and April 2016. Results: PCPs from Nunavut submitted 165 eConsult cases. The most popular specialties were dermatology (16%), cardiology (8%), endocrinology (7%), otolaryngology (7%), and obstetrics/gynaecology (7%). Specialists provided a response in a median of 0.9 days (IQR=0.3–3.0, range=0.01–15.02). In 35% of cases, PCPs were able to avoid the face-to-face specialist visits they had originally planned for their patients. Total savings associated with eConsult in Nunavut are estimated at $180,552.73 or $1,100.93 per eConsult. Conclusions: The eConsult service provided patients in Nunavut’s remote communities with prompt access to specialist advice. The service’s chief advantage in Canada’s northern communities is its ability to offer electronic access to a breadth of specialties far greater than could be supported locally. Our findings suggest that a territory-wide adoption of eConsult would generate enormous savings.

Objective: The objective of the study is to examine the Champlain. BASE TM ( B uilding A ccess to S pecialists through e Consultation) eConsult service’s impact on access to care for older persons. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of all eConsult cases submitted between April 15, 2011, and July 31, 2015, in which the patient was above the age of 65 years. Study data consisted of utilization data collected automatically by the service and responses to surveys completed by primary care providers at the conclusion of all eConsult cases. Results: A total of 1,796 cases were submitted for older persons between April 15, 2011, and July 31, 2015, accounting for 21.3% of all cases submitted during the study period. Specialists responded to cases in a median of 0.8 days. In 94% of cases, providers rated eConsult as having great or excellent value for themselves and their patients. Sixty-eight percent of eConsults did not require a face-to-face visit; only 28% of all cases resulted in a referral. Discussion: As they suffer from higher than average rates of comorbid disease and mobility issues, older persons stand to benefit from shorter wait times and better access to care, which the eConsult service can provide.

The healthcare of people with HIV is transitioning from specialty care to the primary healthcare (PHC) system. However, many of the performance indicators used to measure the quality of HIV care pre-date this transition. The goal of this work was to examine how existing HIV care performance indicators measure the comprehensive and longitudinal care offered in a PHC setting. A scoping review consisting of peer-reviewed and grey literature searches was performed. Two reviewers evaluated study eligibility and indicators in documents meeting inclusion criteria were extracted into a database. Indicators were matched to a PHC performance measurement framework to determine their applicability for evaluating quality of care in the PHC setting. The literature search identified 221 publications, of which 47 met inclusion criteria. 1184 indicators were extracted and removal of duplicates left 558 unique indicators. A majority of the 558 indicators fell under the 'secondary prevention' (12%) and 'care of chronic conditions' (33%) domains when indicators were matched to the PHC performance framework. Despite the imbalance, nearly all performance domains in the PHC framework were populated by at least one indicator with significant concentrations in domains such as patient-provider relationship, patient satisfaction, population and community characteristics, and access to care. Existing performance frameworks for the care of people with HIV provide a comprehensive set of indicators that align well with a PHC performance framework. Nonetheless, some important elements of care, such as patient-reported outcomes, are poorly covered by existing indicators. Advancing our understanding of how the experience of care for people with HIV is impacted by changes in health services delivery, specifically more care within the PHC system, will require performance indicators to capture this aspect of HIV care.

Electronic consultation (eConsult) is an innovative solution that allows specialists and primary care providers to communicate electronically, improving access to specialist care. Understanding the cost implications of different remuneration models available to pay specialists is of critical importance as adoption of these services continues to increase. We used data collected through the Champlain BASE (Building Access to Specialists through eConsultation) eConsult service to simulate the cost implications of different remuneration models in Canada. The prorated hourly rate model averaged $45.72 CAD (Canadian Dollar) per eConsult while the prorated hourly rate with incentive averaged $51.90 CAD per eConsult, and the fee for service cost $60.50 CAD per eConsult. Paying all specialty groups to block three hours per week for eConsults averaged $337.44 CAD per eConsult and paying for 1-h blocks averaged $133.41 CAD per eConsult. As the remuneration of specialists is the largest cost driver of an established eConsult service, our findings can inform policymakers considering the implementation of eConsult or wishing to further develop an existing service.