Search

Rural and remote patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at risk for inequities in health outcomes based on differences in physical environments and health care access potential compared to urban populations. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize epidemiology, clinical outcomes, and health service use reported for global populations with RA residing in rural and remote locations.Medline, Embase, HealthStar, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to June 2019 using librarian-developed search terms for RA and rural and remote populations. Peer-reviewed published manuscripts were included if they reported on epidemiologic, clinical, or health service use outcomes.Fifty-four articles were included for data synthesis, representing studies from all continents. In 11 studies in which there was an appropriate urban population comparator, rural and remote populations were not at increased risk for RA; 1 study reported increased prevalence, and 5 studies reported decreased prevalence in rural and remote populations. Clinical characteristics of rural and remote populations in studies with an appropriate urban comparator showed no significant differences in disease activity measures or disability, but 1 study reported worse physical function and health-related quality of life in rural and remote populations. Studies reporting on health service use provided evidence that rural and remote residence adversely impacts diagnostic time, ongoing follow-up, access to RA-care-related practitioners and services, and variation in medication access and use, with prominent heterogeneity noted between countries.RA epidemiology and clinical outcomes are not necessarily different between rural/remote and urban populations within countries. Rural and remote patients face greater barriers to care, which increases the risk for inequities in outcomes.

ObjectiveHealth equity considerations have not been incorporated into prior Canadian Rheumatology Association guidelines. Our objective was to identify the challenges and possible solutions to mitigate threats to health equity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) care in Canada.MethodsA consultation process informed selection of priority populations, determined to be rural and remote, Indigenous, elderly with frailty, first-generation immigrant and refugee, low income and vulnerably housed, and diverse gender and sex populations. Semistructured interviews were completed with patients with lived experience, healthcare providers, and equity-oriented researchers. These interviews probed on population factors, initial and ongoing healthcare access issues, and therapeutic considerations influencing RA care. Known or proposed solutions to mitigate inequities during implementation of service models for the population group were requested. The research team used a phenomenological thematic analysis model and mapped the data into a logic model. Solutions applicable to several population groups were proposed.ResultsThirty-five interviews were completed to identify realities for each population in accessing RA care. Five themes emerged as primary solutions to population-based inequities, including actively improving the patient–practitioner relationship, increasing accessibility and coordination of care through alternative models of care, upholding autonomy in treatment selection while actively addressing logistical barriers and individualized therapy needs, collaborating with health supports valued by the patient, and being advocates for policy change and health system restructuring to ensure appropriate resource redistribution.ConclusionThe challenges for populations facing inequities in rheumatology care and promising solutions should inform guideline development and implementation, policy change, and health system restructuring.

BACKGROUND Public health professionals regularly engage in complex tasks involving data and models on large population segments, and use various tools to help support their data-driven decision-making. Human factors methods can be employed in the design of such tools to better support public health professionals in decision-making tasks. OBJECTIVE While human factors methods have been applied to the design of some individually-based clinical health tools, their applications are limited in the design of public health systems. We conducted focus groups with public health professionals in Ontario, Canada to understand their informational needs in decision support tools to support a human factors approach to designing data-based tools for public health. METHODS Three focus groups were completed, each consisting of a group of four participants. The discussion included a critique of pre-existing public health tools and their interfaces, a discussion of decision support tools and population risk tools familiar to the participants, and sought out insights on developing a chronic disease prediction dashboard as a use case. RESULTS Data was recorded, transcribed, and coded by three independent reviewers to extract themes using affinity diagramming. We present system features identified by public health professionals, and provide an example of how to use and prioritize these suggested features by applying them to our use case. CONCLUSIONS Focus groups revealed that users want a tool that identifies the end user early in the design process, has quality visualizations, provides transparency in data inputs and outputs, and incorporates equity considerations. This research provides a critical perspective on the potential for human factors to improve the use of data and analytics for public health applications.

When health systems are overwhelmed during a public health crisis regular care is often delayed and deaths result from lapses in routine care. Indigenous primary healthcare (PHC) can include a range of programmes that incorporate treatment and management, prevention and health promotion, as well as addressing the social determinants of health (SDoH) and a focus on redressing health inequities. We examined how Indigenous PHC mobilises and innovates during a public health crisis to address patient needs and the broader SDoH. A rapid review methodology conducted from January 2021 - March 2021 was purposefully chosen given the urgency with COVID-19, to understand the role of Indigenous PHC during a public health crisis. Our review identified five main themes that highlight the role of Indigenous PHC during a public health crisis: (1) development of culturally appropriate communication and education materials about vaccinations, infection prevention, and safety; (2) Indigenous-led approaches for the prevention of infection and promotion of health; (3) strengthening intergovernmental and interagency collaboration; (4) maintaining care continuity; and (5) addressing the SDoH. The findings highlight important considerations for mobilising Indigenous PHC services to meet the needs of Indigenous patients during a public health crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Connections between home life, level of family wealth, happiness and health are strong, yet these relationships are complex and for Canadian adolescents not well studied. The objective of this investigation was to explore associations between aspects of health and self-reported happy home life among Canadian adolescents aged 10-16 years and to determine if level of self-reported relative family wealth modified associations.This was a secondary analysis of Canadian data from the 2018 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study (n=21,745). Theory drove the selection of 26 health-related HBSC variables. Bivariate analyses and calculation of adjusted odds ratios, considering level of self-reported relative family wealth in a stratified analysis, were undertaken.Overall, proximal, micro-level factors were most strongly associated with reports of a happy home life, with distal, macro-level factors less strongly associated. Differences existed between the health and home-life associations for adolescents of different levels of self-reported relative family wealth indicating effect modification. Family support and levels of adolescent self-reported overall health and mental health were common factors that were strongly associated with reporting a happy home life.We believe happy home lives are central and critical for thriving youth and families. This was an exploratory analysis. Many of the factors and relationships in this study are potentially modifiable and represent important possible areas of future focus for adolescent and family health improvement.

Objectives Health equity is a priority for clinical and public health practice and promoted in GRADE's Evidence to Decision (EtD) Framework, yet there is still limited integration of specific equity considerations in chronic disease guideline development and implementation. Our objective was to embed equity considerations for upcoming Canadian Rheumatoid Arthritis treatment guidelines. Study Design and Setting In parallel with the Guidelines Committee process, considerations for six population groups (rural and remote residents, Indigenous Peoples, elderly persons with frailty, minority populations of first-generation immigrants and refugees, persons with low socioeconomic status or who are vulnerably housed, and sex and gender populations) based on literature reviews and key informant interviews were identified and contextualized to each step in the GRADE EtD framework. Results The EtD Framework domains relevant to rheumatoid arthritis treatment and management were analyzed through patient-centric, social determinant and economic lenses, while considering implementation feasibility. This determined tailored considerations relevant to recommendations for the priority populations to mitigate potential intervention-generated inequities. Conclusion This approach provides a demonstration of the process of incorporating equity in the evidence to decision process and can be applied in future rheumatic disease guidelines while also informing a research agenda for equity in rheumatology outcomes.

IntroductionPublic health professionals engage in complex cognitive tasks, often using evidence-based decision support tools to bolster their decision-making. Human factors methods take a user-centred approach to improve the design of systems, processes, and interfaces to better support planning and decision-making. While human factors methods have been applied to the design of clinical health tools, these methods are limited in the design of tools for population health. The objective of this scoping review is to develop a comprehensive understanding of how human factors techniques have been applied in the design of population health decision support tools.Methods and analysisThe scoping review will follow the methodology and framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley. We include English-language documents between January 1990 and August 2021 describing the development, validation or application of human factors principles to decision support tools in population health. The search will include Ovid MEDLINE: Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily and Ovid MEDLINE 1946–present; EMBASE, Scopus, PsycINFO, Compendex, IEEE Xplore and Inspec. The results will be integrated into Covidence. First, the abstract of all identified articles will be screened independently by two reviewers with disagreements being resolved by a third reviewer. Next, the full text for articles identified asincludeorinconclusivewill be reviewed by two independent reviewers, leading to a final decision regarding inclusion. Reference lists of included articles will be manually screened to identify additional studies. Data will be extracted by one reviewer, verified by a second, and presented according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this work as human participants are not involved. The completed review will be published in a peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary journal.

Background: Rural and remote patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at risk for inequities in health outcomes based on differences in physical environments and healthcare access potential compared to urban populations. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize epidemiology, clinical outcomes and health service use reported for global populations with RA residing in rural/remote locations. Methods: Medline, EMBASE, Healthstar, CINAHL and Cochrane were searched from inception to June 2019 using librarian-developed search terms for RA and rural/remote populations. Peer-reviewed published manuscripts were included if they reported on epidemiology, clinical or health service use outcomes. Findings: Fifty-four articles were included for data synthesis, representing studies from all continents. In 11 studies where there was an appropriate urban population comparator, rural/remote populations were not at increased risk for RA, 1 study reported increased and 5 studies reported decreased prevalence in rural/remote populations. Clinical characteristics of rural/remote populations in studies with an appropriate urban comparator showed no significant differences in disease activity measures or disability, but 1 study reported worse physical function and health-related quality of life in rural/remote populations. Studies reporting on health service use provided evidence that rural/remote residence adversely impacts diagnostic time, ongoing follow-up, access to RA-care related practitioners and services, and variation in medication access and use. Interpretation: This synthesis highlights that RA epidemiology and clinical outcomes are not necessarily different between rural/remote and urban populations; however, rural/remote patients face greater barriers to care, which increases the risk for inequities in outcomes. Funding Statement: Pianarosa was supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Institute of Musculoskeletal Health and Arthritis (IMHA) Undergraduate Summer Studentship; Chomistek is supported by an Alberta Children’s Hospital Graduate Award; Umaefulam is supported by a University of Calgary Eyes High Postdoctoral Scholarship; Barnabe is supported by a CIHR Canada Research Chair (Tier 2) in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Autoimmune Diseases, and a CIHR Foundation Scheme Grant. Declaration of Interests: The authors declare no competing interests.