Search

Context: Aging and increasing comorbidities in the population are leading to more complex care for patients and primary healthcare providers. Community organizations (COs) may play a role in the services offered to support patients with chronic diseases (PCDs) but there are currently no clear guidelines to support primary healthcare providers in linking patients to COs. Objectives: The aim of this study was to describe the role of primary healthcare providers regarding linking PCDs to COs by: (1) describing linking activities; and (2) identifying the main facilitators and barriers associated with these activities. Methods: This scoping review was based on the Arksey and O'Malley method, completed by Levac, Colquhoun, and O'Brien. Related keywords were used in 7 databases to search relevant studies. After the initial screening, 135 full texts were assessed for eligibility by 2 reviewers using inclusion/exclusion criteria. Empirical studies describing activities performed by primary healthcare providers in linking PCDs to COs or describing facilitators or barriers to linking activities were included. Studies describing activities linking to other services than COs or located in emergency departments were excluded. Results: In total, 28 studies were included. Information reported in the studies was classified into 8 main linking activities: capacity development, patient identification, assessment, information, planning, referral, follow-up, and collaboration. Facilitators and barriers to these activities were related to intrapersonal characteristics of providers and patients, professional practice, work environment, relationships, and external influences. Healthcare providers' involvement was often adapted according to their field of practice. Conclusion: This scoping review details the role of primary healthcare providers when linking PCDs to COs in a collaborative and interdisciplinary context, which can be adapted to clinical practice by providers, experts, or stakeholders to support improvement in chronic care management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The case study design is particularly useful for implementation analysis of complex health care innovations in primary care that can be influenced by the context of dynamic environments. Case studies may be combined with participatory approaches where academics conduct joint research with nonacademic stakeholders, to foster translation of findings results into practice. The aim of this article is to clarify epistemological and methodological considerations of case studies with a participatory approach. It also aims to propose best practice recommendations when using this case study approach. We distinguish between the participatory case study with full co-construction and co-governance, and the case study with a participatory approach whereby stakeholders are consulted in certain phases of the research. We then compare the epistemological posture of 3 prominent case study methodologists, Yin, Stake, and Merriam, to present the epistemological posture of case studies with a participatory approach. The relevance, applications, and procedures of a case study with a participatory approach methodology are illustrated through a concrete example of a primary care research program (PriCARE). We propose 12 steps for designing and conducting a case study with a participatory approach that may help guide researchers in the implementation analysis of complex health care innovations in primary care. Key words: case study; participatory approach; implementation; health care innovation; change, organizational; health services research; primary care, BACKGROUND Over the last 40 years, case study research has become increasingly popular and has evolved rapidly in many disciplines. By allowing in-depth analysis of complex phenomena in real-world contexts, [...]

Aim Design Data Source Methods Results Conclusion Impact Map the existing health promotion nursing interventions for female breast cancer survivors (BCS) to describe the approaches used and the characteristics of these interventions in the available studies.A scoping review.Five electronic databases were systematically searched for eligible studies, published between 2002 and 2022.Following the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology, two reviewers independently used Covidence to screen the title, abstract and full text of evidence against the inclusion criteria and extracted data using an extraction table. The PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA‐ScR) guided the reporting. No patient or public contribution was necessary.This review included 22 studies on nursing health promotion interventions for BCSs, primarily conducted in specialized care centres. In 20 of 22 studies, nurses employed the educational approach to promote the health of BCSs. Many interventions aimed to support survivors in adopting healthy lifestyles, improving their sexual health, promoting overall well‐being and addressing their individual needs by equipping them with self‐care skills. Nurses utilized self‐monitoring, health education materials and technologies to support survivors' health.The review concludes that the nurse used various approaches and interventions with different characteristics to improve the health of BCSs. This review also emphasizes that a limited number of determinants of health have been considered by nurses in the development of health promotion interventions.The review highlights the important role that nurses can play in enhancing the health of female BCSs after cancer treatments. This review can guide future research for developing nursing health promotion interventions in primary care settings for female BCSs. Additionally, the review offers insights to support future research, education and training on diverse approaches and characteristics that nurses can utilize to establish interventions that enhance the health of female BCSs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE Case management (CM) is a promising intervention for frequent users of health care services. Our research question was how and under what circumstances does CM in primary care work to improve outcomes among frequent users with chronic conditions? METHODS We conducted a realist synthesis, searching MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO (1996 to September 2017) for articles meeting the following criteria: (1) population: adult frequent users with chronic disease, (2) intervention: CM in a primary care setting with a postintervention evaluation, and (3) primary outcomes: integration of services, health care system use, cost, and patient outcome measures. Academic and gray literature were evaluated for relevance and robustness. Independent reviewers extracted data to identify context, mechanism, and outcome (CMO) configurations. Analysis of CMO configurations allowed for the modification of an initial program theory toward a refined program theory. RESULTS Of the 9,295 records retrieved, 21 peer-reviewed articles and an additional 89 documents were retained. We evaluated 19 CM interventions and identified 11 CMO configurations. The development of a trusting relationship fostering patient and clinician engagement in the CM intervention was recurrent in many CMO configurations. CONCLUSION Our refined program theory proposes that in the context of easy access to an experienced and trusted case manager who provides comprehensive care while maintaining positive interactions with patients, the development of this relationship fosters the engagement of both individuals and yields positive outcomes when the following mechanisms are triggered: patients and clinicians feel supported, respected, accepted, engaged, and committed; and patients feel less anxious, more secure, and empowered to self-manage., INTRODUCTION Frequent users of health care services are a small proportion of the population who account for a disproportionate number of visits to emergency departments, thereby placing a heavy strain [...]

PURPOSE Case management (CM) interventions are effective for frequent users of health care services, but little is known about which intervention characteristics lead to positive outcomes. We sought to identify characteristics of CM that yield positive outcomes among frequent users with chronic disease in primary care. METHODS For this systematic review of both quantitative and qualitative studies, we searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO (1996 to September 2017) and included articles meeting the following criteria: (1) population: adult frequent users with chronic disease, (2) intervention: CM in a primary care setting with a postintervention evaluation, and (3) primary outcomes: integration of services, health care system use, cost, and patient outcome measures. Independent reviewers screened abstracts, read full texts, appraised methodologic quality (Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool), and extracted data from the included studies. Sufficient and necessary CM intervention characteristics were identified using configurational comparative methods. RESULTS Of the 10,687 records retrieved, 20 studies were included; 17 quantitative, 2 qualitative, and 1 mixed methods study. Analyses revealed that it is necessary to identify patients most likely to benefit from a CM intervention for CM to produce positive outcomes. High-intensity intervention or the presence of a multidisciplinary/interorganizational care plan was also associated with positive outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Policy makers and clinicians should focus on their case-finding processes because this is the essential characteristic of CM effectiveness. In addition, value should be placed on high-intensity CM interventions and developing care plans with multiple types of care providers to help improve patient outcomes. Key words: case management; frequent users; primary health care; systematic review, INTRODUCTION In developed countries, the bulk of health care system expenses is attributable to a small proportion of the population. Specifically, frequent users of health care services account for approximately [...]

Case management (CM) is an intervention for improving integrated care for patients with complex care needs. The implementation of this complex intervention often raises opportunities for change and collective leadership has the potential to optimize the implementation. However, the application of collective leadership in real-world is not often described in the literature. This commentary highlights challenges faced during the implantation of a CM intervention in primary care for people with complex care needs, including stakeholders' buy-in and providers' willingness to change their practice, selection of the best person for the case manager position and staff turnover. Based on lessons learned from PriCARE research program, this paper encourages researchers to adopt collective leadership strategies for the implementation of complex interventions, including promoting a collaborative approach, fostering stakeholders' engagement in a trusting and fair environment, providing a high level of communication, and enhancing collective leadership attitudes and skills. The learnings from the PriCARE program may help guide researchers for implementing complex healthcare interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Growing evidence supports patient engagement (PE) in health implementation research to improve the quality, relevance and uptake of research. However, more guidance is needed to plan and operationalize PE before and throughout the research process. The aim of the study was to develop a logic model illustrating the causal links between context, resources, activities, outcomes and impact of PE in an implementation research programme. Methods: The Patient Engagement in Health Implementation Research Logic Model (hereafter the Logic Model) was developed using a descriptive qualitative design with a participatory approach, in the context of the PriCARE programme. This programme aims to implement and evaluate case management for individuals who frequently use healthcare services in primary care clinics across five Canadian provinces. Participant observation of team meetings was performed by all team members involved in the programme and in‐depth interviews were conducted by two external research assistants with team members (n = 22). A deductive thematic analysis using components of logic models as coding categories was conducted. Data were pooled in the first version of the Logic Model, which was refined in research team meetings with patient partners. The final version was validated by all team members. Results: The Logic Model highlights the importance of integrating PE into the project before its commencement, with appropriate support in terms of funding and time allocation. The governance structure and leadership of both principal investigators and patient partners have significant effects on PE activities and outcomes. As an empirical and standardized illustration that facilitates a shared understanding, the Logic Model provides guidance for maximizing the impact of patient partnership in various contexts for research, patients, providers and health care. Conclusion: The Logic Model will help academic researchers, decision makers and patient partners plan, operationalize, and assess PE in implementation research for optimal outcomes. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient partners from the PriCARE research programme contributed to developing the research objectives and designing, developing and validating data collection tools, producing data, developing and validating the Logic Model and reviewing the manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To identify indicators sensitive to the practice of primary healthcare nurse practitioners (PHCNPs). Materials and methods: A review of systematic reviews was undertaken to identify indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice. Published and grey literature was searched from January 1, 2010 to December 2, 2022. Titles/abstracts (n = 4251) and full texts (n = 365) were screened independently by two reviewers, with a third acting as a tie-breaker. Reference lists of relevant publications were reviewed. Risk of bias was examined independently by two reviewers using AMSTAR-2. Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer to describe study characteristics, indicators, and results. Indicators were recoded into categories. Findings were summarized using narrative synthesis. Results: Forty-four systematic reviews were retained including 271 indicators that were recoded into 26 indicator categories at the patient, provider and health system levels. Nineteen reviews were assessed to be at low risk of bias. Patient indicator categories included activities of daily living, adaptation to health conditions, clinical conditions, diagnosis, education-patient, mortality, patient adherence, quality of life, satisfaction, and signs and symptoms. Provider indicator categories included adherence to best practice-providers, education-providers, illness prevention, interprofessional team functioning, and prescribing. Health system indicator categories included access to care, consultations, costs, emergency room visits, healthcare service delivery, hospitalizations, length of stay, patient safety, quality of care, scope of practice, and wait times. Discussion: Equal to improved care for almost all indicators was found consistently for the PHCNP group. Very few indicators favoured the control group. No indicator was identified for high/low fidelity simulation, cultural safety and cultural sensitivity with people in vulnerable situations or Indigenous Peoples. Conclusion: This review of systematic reviews identified patient, provider and health system indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice. The findings help clarify how PHCNPs contribute to care outcomes. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020198182. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Despite nurses' substantial role in care coordination, few education programs exist to better support them in this role. Identification of a set of core care coordination activities across heterogeneous care coordination programs would facilitate the development of a standard of practice. We sought to examine care coordination activities across two care coordination programs in Family Medicine Groups in Quebec, and their relationship to the program design. Methods: We performed a comparative case study of two care coordination programs in primary care targeting frequent users of healthcare services and people with Alzheimer's disease and related disorders. Data collection included documents and semi-structured interviews with key informants. Results: Several activities were common to both programs, such as patient identification; assessment, development of an individualized service plan; and linking patients and caregivers with professionals and services. However, their components were different due to the impact of the integrated care program design, policy environment, and the target patient populations' complex needs. Discussion: The homogeneity or heterogeneity of patients' complex needs shapes their care trajectory and the intensity of their care coordination needs. As the complexity of these needs grows, so does the necessity to build the care coordinators' capacity for integrated care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies have highlighted common challenges and barriers to patient engagement in research, but most were based on patient partners' or academic researchers' experiences. A better understanding of how both groups differentially experience their partnership could help identify strategies to improve collaboration in patient engagement research. Aim: This study aimed to describe and compare patient partners' and academic researchers' experiences in patient engagement research. Methods: Based on a participatory approach, a descriptive qualitative study was conducted with patient partners and academic researchers who are involved in the PriCARE research programme in primary health care to examine their experience of patient engagement. Individual semi‐structured interviews with patient partners (n = 7) and academic researchers (n = 15) were conducted. Academic researchers' interview verbatims, deidentified patient partners' summaries of their interviews and summaries of meetings with patient partners were analysed using inductive thematic analysis in collaboration with patient partners. Results: Patient partners and academic researchers' experiences with patient engagement are captured within four themes: (1) evolving relationships; (2) creating an environment that fosters patient engagement; (3) striking a balance; and (4) impact and value of patient engagement. Evolving relationships refers to how partnerships grew and improved over time with an acceptance of tensions and willingness to move beyond them, two‐way communication and leadership of key team members. Creating an environment that fosters patient engagement requires appropriate structural support, such as clear descriptions of patient partner roles; adequate training for all team members; institutional guidance on patient engagement; regular and appropriate translation services; and financial assistance. For patient partners and academic researchers, striking a balance referred to the challenge of reconciling patient partners' interests and established research practices. Finally, both groups recognized the value and positive impact of patient engagement in the programme in terms of improving the relevance of research and the applicability of results. While patient partners and academic researchers identified similar challenges and strategies, their experiences of patient engagement differed according to their own backgrounds, motives and expectations. Conclusion: Both patient partners and academic researchers highlighted the importance of finding a balance between providing structure or guidelines for patient engagement, while allowing for flexibility along the way. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient partners from the PriCARE research programme were involved in the following aspects of the current study: (1) development of the research objectives; (2) planning of the research design; (3) development and validation of data collection tools (i.e., interview guides); (4) production of data (i.e., acted as interviewees); (5) validation of data analysis tools (code book); (6) analysis of qualitative data; and (7) drafting of the manuscript and contributing to other knowledge translation activities, such as conference presentations and the creation of a short animated video. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely recognized as important tools for achieving a patient‐centred approach in health research. While PROMs are subject to several stages of validation during development, even questionnaires with robust psychometric properties may challenge patient comfort and understanding. Aim: Building on the experience of patient engagement in the PriCARE research programme, this paper outlines the team's response to concerns raised by patient partners regarding the administration of the questionnaire. Methods: Based on a participatory action research design and the patient engagement framework in the Strategy for Patient‐Oriented Research of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, PriCARE team members worked together to discuss concerns, review the questionnaires and come up with solutions. Data were collected through participant observation of team meetings. Results: This paper demonstrates how patient partners were engaged in PriCARE and integrated into the programme's governance structure, focusing on the challenges that they raised regarding the questionnaires and how these were addressed by PriCARE team members in a six‐step approach: (1) Recognizing patient partner concerns, discussing concerns and reframing the challenges; (2) Detailing and sharing evidence of the validity of the questionnaires; (3) Evaluating potential solutions; (4) Searching the literature for guidelines; (5) Creating guidelines; and (6) Sharing and refining guidelines. Conclusion: This six‐step approach demonstrates how research teams can integrate patient partners as equal members, develop meaningful collaboration through recognition of individual experiences and expertise and ensure that the patient perspective is taken into consideration in research and healthcare innovation. Patient or Public Contribution: All patient partners from the PriCARE programme were actively involved in the six‐step approach. They were also involved in the preparation of the manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To describe the state of health of Quebec nursing staff during the pandemic according to their exposure to COVID‐19, work‐related characteristics and sociodemographic factors (gender, generational age group). State of health was captured essentially by assessing psychological distress, depression symptoms and fatigue. Design and methods: A large‐scale cross‐sectional study was conducted with 1,708 nurses and licenced practical nurses in Quebec (87% women, mean age of 41 ± 11 years). The survey included several questionnaires and validated health‐related scales (psychological distress, depression symptoms and fatigue). The STROBE guidelines were followed in reporting the study's findings. Results: Results showed that the prevalence of psychological distress and depression symptoms was moderate to severe. Women, generation Xers and Yers, nurses who cared for COVID‐19 patients and those with a colleague who was infected with COVID‐19 at work scored higher for fatigue, psychological distress and depression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The objectives of this study were 1) to describe how case management programs engaged community pharmacies and community-based organisations in a perspective of integrated care for people with complex needs, and 2) to identify enablers, barriers and potential strategies for this engagement. Methods: Using a descriptive qualitative design, individual interviews and focus groups with patients, healthcare providers and managers were analysed according to a mixed thematic analysis based on a deductive (Rainbow Model of Integrated Care) and an inductive approach. Results and discussion: Participants highlighted the individualized service plan as a significant tool to foster a shared person-focused vision of care, information exchanges and concerted efforts. Openness to collaboration was also considered as an enabler for community stakeholders' engagement. The lack of recognition of community-based organisations by certain providers and the time required to participate in individualized service plans were outlined as barriers to professional integration. Limited opportunities for community stakeholders to be involved in decision-making within case management programs were reported as another constraint to their engagement. Cultural differences between organisations regarding the focus of the intervention (psychosocial vs healthcare needs) and differences in bureaucratic structures and funding mechanisms may negatively affect community stakeholders' engagement. Formal consultation mechanisms and improvement of communication channels between healthcare providers and community stakeholders were suggested as ways to overcome these barriers. Conclusion: Efforts to improve care integration in case management programs should be directed toward the recognition of community stakeholders as co-producers of care and co-builders of social policies across the entire care continuum for people with complex needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to (1) identify generic questionnaires that measure self-management in people with chronic conditions, (2) describe their characteristics, (3) describe their development and theoretical foundations, and (4) identify categories of self-management strategies they assessed. This scoping review was based on the methodological framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley and completed by Levac et al. A thematic analysis was used to examine self-management strategies assessed by the questionnaires published between 1976 and 2019. A total of 21 articles on 10 generic, self-reported questionnaires were identified. The questionnaires were developed using various theoretical foundations. The Patient Assessment of Self-Management Tasks and Partners in Health scale questionnaires possessed characteristics that made them suitable for use in clinical and research settings and for evaluating all categories of self-management strategies. This study provides clinicians and researchers with an overview of generic, self-reported questionnaires and highlights some of their practical characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Frequent geriatric users of emergency departments (EDs) represent a complex and heterogeneous population. Identifying their specific subgroups would allow the development of interventions better customized to their needs and characteristics. Thus, this study aimed to develop profiles of frequent geriatric ED users using the individual characteristics of patients. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Databases from the Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ) were utilized. PARTICIPANTSThis study included individuals aged 65 years or older living in the community in the Province of Quebec (Canada), who consulted in an ED at least four times in the year after an ED index date (an ED visit, chosen randomly, during an index period of January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2013) and who had received a diagnosis of ambulatory care‐sensitive conditions (ACSCs) in the 2 years preceding the index date. MEASUREMENTS: A latent class analysis was used to identify subgroups of frequent geriatric ED users according to their individual characteristics, including ACSC type, dementia, mental health disorders, cancer diagnosis, and comorbidity index. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 21,393 frequent geriatric ED users. Four groups of frequent geriatric ED users were identified: people with low comorbidity (39.0%), comprising the individuals with the lowest number of physical and mental health conditions; people with cancer (32.7%); people with pulmonaryand cardiac diseases (18.1%); and people with dementia or mental health disorders (10.2%), composed of individuals with the highest proportion of common and severe mental health disease, as well as dementia. This group accounts for the highest use of overall healthcare services. CONCLUSION: These profiles will be useful in developing customized interventions addressing the needs of each subgroup of frequent geriatric ED users. More research is needed to bridge the remaining gaps, especially regarding the healthiest frequent geriatric users of EDs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Millions of people worldwide have complex health and social care needs. Care coordination for these patients is a core dimension of integrated care and a key responsibility for primary healthcare. Registered nurses play a substantial role in care coordination. This review draws on previous theoretical work and provides a synthesis of care coordination interventions as operationalized by nurses for complex patient populations in primary healthcare. Methodology: We followed Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework for scoping reviews. We carried out a systematic search across CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus and ProQuest. Only empirical studies were included. We performed a thematic analysis using deductive (the American Nurses Association Framework) and inductive approaches. Findings were discussed with a group of experts. Results: Thirty-four articles were included in the synthesis. Overall, nursing care coordination activities were synthesized into three categories: those targeting the patient, family and caregivers; those targeting health and social care teams; and those bringing together patients and professionals. Interpersonal communication and information transfer emerged as cross-cutting activities that support every other activity. Our results also brought to light the nurses' contribution to care coordination efforts for patients with complex needs as well as critical components that should be present in every care coordination intervention for this clientele. These include an increased intensity and frequency of activities, relational continuity of care, and home visits. Conclusion: With the growing complexity of patient's needs, efforts must be directed towards enabling the primary healthcare level to effectively play its substantial role in care coordination. This includes finding primary care employment models that would facilitate multidisciplinary teamwork and the delivery of integrated care, and guarantee the delivery of intensive yet efficient coordinated care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Case management (CM) in a primary care setting is a promising approach to integrating and improving healthcare services and outcomes for patients with chronic conditions and complex care needs who frequently use healthcare services. Despite evidence supporting CM and interest in implementing it in Canada, little is known about how to do this. This research aims to identify the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a CM intervention in different primary care contexts (objective 1) and to explain the influence of the clinical context on the degree of implementation (objective 2) and on the outcomes of the intervention (objective 3). Methods and analysis A multiple-case embedded mixed-methods study will be conducted on CM implemented in ten primary care clinics across five Canadian provinces. Each clinic will represent a subunit of analysis, detailed through a case history. Cases will be compared and contrasted using multiple analytical approaches. Qualitative data (objectives 1 and 2) from individual semistructured interviews (n=130), focus group discussions (n=20) and participant observation of each clinic (36 hours) will be compared and integrated with quantitative (objective 3) clinical data on services use (n=300) and patient questionnaires (n=300). An evaluation of intervention fidelity will be integrated into the data analysis. Ethics and dissemination This project received approval from the CIUSSS de l'Estrie – CHUS Research Ethic Board (project number MP-31-2019-2830). Results will provide the opportunity to refine the CM intervention and to facilitate effective evaluation, replication and scale-up. This research provides knowledge on how to resp ond to the needs of individuals with chronic conditions and complex care needs in a cost-effective way that improves patient-reported outcomes and healthcare use, while ensuring care team well-being. Dissemination of results is planned and executed based on the needs of various stakeholders involved in the research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multimorbidity challenges the health‐care system and requires innovative approaches. In 2015, a 4‐month patient‐centred interdisciplinary pragmatic intervention was implemented in primary care with the aim of supporting self‐management for patients with multimorbidity. Objective: To explore the perceptions and experiences of health‐care professionals, patients and their caregivers with a 4‐month patient‐centred interdisciplinary pragmatic intervention in primary care. Design: A descriptive, qualitative study using semi‐structured interviews was conducted. Setting and participants: A purposive sample of 30 participants was recruited from seven family medicine groups including patients, caregivers and health‐care professionals (HCPs). Interviews were analysed using Thorne's interpretive description approach. Results: Findings were grouped into the benefits and challenges of participating in the intervention. The programme allowed patients to adopt realistic and adapted objectives; to customize interventions to the patient's reality; and to help patients gain confidence, improve their knowledge, skills and motivation to manage their condition. Interprofessional collaboration eased the exchange of information via team meetings and electronic medical records. Challenges were related to collaboration, communication, coordination of work and integration of newly relocated HCPs mainly due to part‐time assignments and staff turnover. HCPs part‐time schedules limited their availability and hindered patients' follow‐up. Discussion and conclusion: This intervention was useful and rewarding from the HCPs, patients and caregivers' perspective. However, to ensure the success of this complex interdisciplinary intervention, implementers and managers should anticipate organizational barriers such as availability and time management of relocated HCPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To identify factors associated with frequent emergency department (ED) use among older adults with ambulatory care sensitive conditions. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study using databases from the Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec. We included community‐dwelling individuals aged ≥65 years in the Province of Quebec (Canada), who consulted in ED at least once between 2012 and 2013 (index period), and were diagnosed with at least one ambulatory care sensitive condition in the 2 years preceding and including the index date (n = 264 473). We used a multivariate logistic regression model to evaluate the association between independent variables and being a frequent geriatric ED user, defined as four or more visits during the year after the index date. Results: Out of the total study population, 17 332 (6.6%) individuals were considered frequent ED users in the year after the index date, accounting for 38% of ED uses for this period. The main variables associated with frequent geriatric ED use were older age, presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder or diabetes, higher comorbidity index, common mental health disorders, polypharmacy, higher number of past ED and specialist visits, rural residence, and higher material and social deprivation. Dementia was inversely associated with frequent ED use. Conclusions: Frequent geriatric ED users constitute a complex population whose characteristics need to be managed thoroughly in order to enhance the quality and efficiency of their care. Further studies should address their description in administrative databases so as to combine self‐perceived and professionally evaluated variables. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 317–323. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Frequent emergency department users are patients cumulating at least four visits per year. Few studies have focused on persistent frequent users, who maintain their frequent user status for multiple consecutive years. This study targets an adult population with chronic conditions, and its aims are: 1) to estimate the prevalence of persistent frequent ED use; 2) to identify factors associated with persistent frequent ED use (frequent use for three consecutive years) and compare their importance with those associated with occasional frequent ED use (frequent use during the year following the index date); and 3) to compare characteristics of "persistent frequent users" to "occasional frequent users" and to "users other than persistent frequent users". Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study using Quebec administrative databases. All adult patients who visited the emergency department in 2012, diagnosed with chronic conditions, and living in non-remote areas were included. Patients who died in the three years following their index date were excluded. The main outcome was persistent frequent use (≥4 visits per year during three consecutive years). Potential predictors included sociodemographic characteristics, physical and mental comorbidities, and prior healthcare utilization. Odds ratios were computed using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Out of 297,182 patients who visited ED at least once in 2012, 3,357 (1.10%) were persistent frequent users. Their main characteristics included poor socioeconomic status, mental and physical comorbidity, and substance abuse. Those characteristics were also present for occasional frequent users, although with higher percentages for the persistent user group. The number of previous visits to the emergency department was the most important factor in the regression model. The occasional frequent users' attrition rate was higher between the first and second year of follow-up than between the second and third year. Conclusions: Persistent frequent users are a subpopulation of frequent users with whom they share characteristics, such as physical and mental comorbidities, though the former are poorer and younger. More research is needed in order to better understand what factors can contribute to persistent frequent use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Measuring self-management helps identify the degree of participation of people in the management of their chronic conditions and guides clinicians in determining person-centred priorities for providing support. The Partners in Health scale, a self-report generic questionnaire, was developed to capture the self-management of patients with chronic conditions. This study aimed to translate the Partners in Health scale into French and to examine its psychometric properties in French-speaking people with chronic conditions followed in primary care. The Partners in Health scale was translated into French using Hawkins and Osborne's method (2012). Content validity was evaluated through cognitive interviews (Think Aloud Method). Internal consistency was measured at baseline with Cronbach's alpha. Test-retest reliability was evaluated at baseline and two weeks later using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Concurrent validity was measured at baseline with the Self-efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease (SEM-CD) and the Patient Activation Measure (PAM), using Spearman correlations. Cognitive interviews were conducted with 10 participants. During these interviews, most items were clearly understood and accepted as formulated; only a few terms were modified. To evaluate the psychometric properties of the French-language version of the Partners in Health scale, 168 participants (male = 34.5%; mean age = 58 years; mean number of chronic conditions = 4.1) completed the questionnaire at baseline and 47 of them completed the questionnaire two weeks later by telephone. Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency was 0.85 (95% confidence interval: 0.81–0.88). The intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability was 0.77 (95% confidence interval: 0.58–0.87). Concurrent validity with spearman's coefficient correlation of Self-efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease and Patient Activation Measure was 0.68 and 0.61 respectively. The French-language version of the Partners in Health scale is a reliable and valid questionnaire for the measure of self-management in persons with chronic conditions seen in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective There is a gap of knowledge among healthcare providers on characteristics of self-management among patients with chronic diseases and complex healthcare needs. Consequently, the objective of this paper was to identify characteristics of self-management among patients with chronic diseases and complex healthcare needs. Design Thematic analysis review of the literature. Methods We developed search strategies for the MEDLINE and CINAHL databases, covering the January 2000-October 2018 period. All articles in English or French addressing self-management among an adult clientele (18 years and older) with complex healthcare needs (multimorbidity, vulnerability, complexity and frequent use of health services) were included. Studies that addressed self-management of a single disease or that did not have any notion of complexity or vulnerability were excluded. A mixed thematic analysis, deductive and inductive, was performed by three evaluators as described by Mileset al. Results Twenty-one articles were included. Patients with complex healthcare needs present specific features related to self-management that can be exacerbated by deprived socioeconomic conditions. These patients must often prioritise care based on one dominant condition. They are at risk for depression, psychological distress and low self-efficacy, as well as for receiving contradictory information from healthcare providers. However, the knowledge and experiences acquired in the past in relation to their condition may help them improve their selfmanagement skills. Conclusions This review identifies challenges to selfmanagement for patients with complex healthcare needs, which are exacerbated in contexts of socioeconomic insecurity and proposes strategies to help healthcare providers better adapt their self-management support interventions to meet the specific needs of this vulnerable clientele. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Frequent users represent a small proportion of emergency department users, but they account for a disproportionately large number of visits. Their use of emergency departments is often considered suboptimal. It would be more efficient to identify and treat those patients earlier in their health problem trajectory. It is therefore essential to describe their characteristics and to predict their emergency department use. In order to do so, adequate statistical tools are needed. The objective of this study was to determine the statistical tools used in identifying variables associated with frequent use or predicting the risk of becoming a frequent user. Methods We performed a scoping review following an established 5-stage methodological framework. We searched PubMed, Scopus and CINAHL databases in February 2019 using search strategies defined with the help of an information specialist. Out of 4534 potential abstracts, we selected 114 articles based on defined criteria and presented in a content analysis. Results We identified four classes of statistical tools. Regression models were found to be the most common practice, followed by hypothesis testing. The logistic regression was found to be the most used statistical tool, followed by χ² test and t-test of associations between variables. Other tools were marginally used. Conclusions This scoping review lists common statistical tools used for analysing frequent users in emergency departments. It highlights the fact that some are well established while others are much less so. More research is needed to apply appropriate techniques to health data or to diversify statistical point of views. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Significant evidence in the literature supports case management (CM) as an effective intervention to improve care for patients with complex healthcare needs. However, there is still little evidence about the facilitators and barriers to CM implementation in primary care setting. The three specific objectives of this study are to: (1) identify the facilitators and barriers of CM implementation in primary care clinics across Canada; (2) explain and understand the relationships between the actors, contextual factors, mechanisms and outcomes of the CM intervention; (3) identify the next steps towards CM spread in primary care across Canada. Methods and analysis We will conduct a multiple-case embedded mixed methods study. CM will be implemented in 10 primary care clinics in five Canadian provinces. Three different units of analysis will be embedded to obtain an in-depth understanding of each case: the healthcare system (macro level), the CM intervention in the clinics (meso level) and the individual/patient (micro level). For each objective, the following strategy will be performed: (1) an implementation analysis, (2) a realist evaluation and (3) consensus building among stakeholders using the Technique for Research of Information by Animation of a Group of Experts method. Ethics and dissemination This study, which received ethics approval, will provide innovative knowledge about facilitators and barriers to implementation of CM in different primary care jurisdictions and will explain how and why different mechanisms operate in different contexts to generate different outcomes among frequent users. Consensual and prioritised statements about next steps for spread of CM in primary care from the perspectives of all stakeholders will be provided. Our results will offer context-sensitive explanations that can better inform local practices and policies and contribute to improve the health of patients with complex healthcare needs who frequently use healthcare services. Ultimately, this will increase the performance of healthcare systems and specifically mitigate ineffective use and costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Valid and comprehensive instruments to measure integrated care are required to capture patient experience and improve quality of patient care. This study aimed to validate the Patient Experience of Integrated Care Scale (PEICS), among patients with chronic conditions seen in primary care. Methods: One hundred and fifty-nine (159) French-speaking adults with at least one chronic condition were recruited in two family medicine clinics in Quebec (Canada) and completed the 17-item PEICS (T1). Fifty (50) participants completed it a second time 2 weeks later (T2). The internal consistency of the scale was assessed using Cronbach's alpha, the test-retest reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and concurrent validity using three dimensions of the Continuity of Care from Multiple Clinicians (CC-MC), with Spearman's rank correlation coefficients. Results: Cronbach's alpha for the questionnaire was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.85 to 0.91). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.64 to 0.90) and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient with the three dimensions of the CC-MC varied from 0.44 to 0.54. Conclusions and discussion: The PEICS showed good psychometric properties. This scale could be used in a population with chronic conditions followed in primary care to measure patient experience of integrated care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of the V1SAGES case management intervention (Vulnerable Patients in Primary Care: Nurse Case Management and Self-management Support) for frequent users of health care services with chronic disease and complex care needs on psychological distress and patient activation.Methods: We used a 2-phase sequential mixed methods design. The first phase was a pragmatic randomized controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis that measured the effects of the intervention compared with usual care on psychological distress and patient activation before and after 6 months. The second phase had a qualitative descriptive design and entailed thematic analysis of in-depth interviews (25 patients, 6 case management nurses, 9 health managers) and focus groups (8 patients' spouses, 21 family physicians) to understand stakeholders' perceived effects of the intervention on patients.Results: A total of 247 patients were randomized into the intervention group (n = 126) or the control group (n = 121). Compared with usual care, the intervention reduced psychological distress (odds ratio = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.19-0.95, P = .04), but did not have any significant effect on patient activation (P = .43). Qualitative results suggested that patients and their spouses benefitted from the case management intervention, gaining a sense of security, and stakeholders noted better patient self-management of health.Conclusions: Together, our study's quantitative and qualitative results suggest that case management reduces psychological distress, making patients and caregivers feel more secure, whereas impact on self-management is unclear. Case management is a promising avenue to improve outcomes among frequent users of health care with complex needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]