Search

Several new classes of medications for diabetes have recently become available newer medication classes have been increasing in use. It is unclear how their utilization varied across provinces and how the COVID-19 pandemic may have affected these trends. Our objective was to investigate Canada-wide and province-specific trends in diabetes medication dispensed by drug class over time, while also examining the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and related restrictions on diabetes medication dispensing. We conducted a repeated cross-sectional analysis study. Data were obtained from IQVIA's CompuScript database for Canada-wide prescription dispensing patterns in primary care from January 2018 to December 2021. Drug classes of interest were biguanides dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, sulfonylurea's, insulins, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors, and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. We examined trends before and after the onset of the pandemic with special attention to changes during periods of high COVID-19 activity. Most drug classes displayed a stable number of prescriptions each month throughout, except for glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors, which demonstrated a consistent pattern of increased dispensing. Sodium-glucose co-transporter inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists exhibited the greatest growth over the examined period, of 7.9% and 5.0% increases, respectively. For sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors, Prince Edward Island (4.0%) displayed the greatest growth while Ontario showed the least (2.5%). For glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor analogs, Saskatchewan (11.3%) displayed the greatest growth and Newfoundland the least (4.5%). The pandemic did not impact overall dispensing trends. However, spikes in COVID-19 cases corresponded to changes in dispensing for most drug classes. Important variations across Canada in guideline-recommended medication classes seems to be increasing over time. This is likely due to differing formulary listing and access to drug coverages. If so, future research could explore national formulary harmonization across Canada and health outcomes for patients with diabetes., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Riad et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: High-quality primary care is associated with better health outcomes and more efficient and equitable health system performance. However, the rate of primary care attachment is falling, and timely access to primary care is worsening, driving many patients to use walk-in clinics for their comprehensive primary care needs. This study sought to explore the experiences and perceived roles and responsibilities of walk-in physicians in this current climate. Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with nineteen physicians currently providing walk-in care in Ontario, Canada between May and December 2022., Results: Limited capacity for continuity and comprehensiveness of care were identified as major sources of professional tension for walk-in physicians. Divergent perspectives on their roles were anchored in how physicians viewed their professional identity. Some saw providing continuous and comprehensive care as an infringement on their professional role; others saw their professional role as more flexible and responsive to population needs. Regardless of their professional identity, participants reported feeling ill-equipped to manage the swell of unattached patients, citing a lack of time, resources, connectivity to the system, and remuneration flexibility. Conclusions: As practice demands of walk-in clinics change, an evolution in the professional roles and responsibilities of walk-in physicians follows. However, the resources, structure, and incentives of walk-in care have not evolved to reflect this, leaving physicians to set their own professional boundaries with patients. This results in increasing variations in care and confusion across the primary care sector around who is responsible for what, when, and how., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Terpou et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: The Government of Ontario, Canada, announced hospital funding reforms in 2011, including Quality-based Procedures (QBPs) involving pre-set funds for managing patients with specific diagnoses/procedures. A key goal was to improve quality of care across the jurisdiction., Methods: Interrupted time series evaluated the policy change, focusing on four QBPs (congestive heart failure, hip fracture surgery, pneumonia, prostate cancer surgery), on patients hospitalized 2010-2017. Outcomes included return to hospital or death within 30 days, acute length of stay (LOS), volume of admissions, and patient characteristics., Results: At 2 years post-QBPs, the percentage of hip fracture patients who returned to hospital or died was 3.13% higher in absolute terms (95% CI: 0.37% to 5.89%) than if QBPs had not been introduced. There were no other statistically significant changes for return to hospital or death. For LOS, the only statistically significant change was an increase for prostate cancer surgery of 0.33 days (95% CI: 0.07 to 0.59). Volume increased for congestive heart failure admissions by 80 patients (95% CI: 2 to 159) and decreased for hip fracture surgery by 138 patients (95% CI: -183 to -93) but did not change for pneumonia or prostate cancer surgery. The percentage of patients who lived in the lowest neighborhood income quintile increased slightly for those diagnosed with congestive heart failure (1.89%; 95% CI: 0.51% to 3.27%) and decreased for those who underwent prostate cancer surgery (-2.08%; 95% CI: -3.74% to -0.43%)., Interpretation: This policy initiative involving a change to hospital funding for certain conditions was not associated with substantial, jurisdictional-level changes in access or quality., Competing Interests: The authors have read the journal’s policy and have the following competing interests: NI, AB, KP, HM report funding from Ontario Strategy for Patient Oriented Research Support Unit (OSSU) Impact Award during the conduct of the study; OSSU was in turn funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Government of Ontario. NI is supported by a Canada Research Chair (Tier 2) in Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice and a clinician scholar award from the Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, unrelated to this work. AB is a former senior official in the Ontario Government and serves on the current Premier’s Council on Health. AL reports support from a CIHR Fellowship Award. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Background: The management of complex, multi-morbid patients is challenging for solo primary care providers (PCPs) with limited access to resources. The primary objective of the intervention was to reduce the overall rate of Emergency Department (ED) visits among patients in participating practices., Methods and Findings: An interrupted time series design and qualitative interviews were used to evaluate a multifaceted intervention, SCOPE (Seamless Care Optimizing the Patient Experience), offered to solo PCPs whose patients were frequent users of the ED. The intervention featured a navigation hub (nurse, homecare coordinator) to link PCPs with hospital and community resources, a general internist on-call to provide phone advice or urgent assessments, and access to patient results on-line. Continuous quality improvement (QI) strategies were employed to optimize each component of the intervention. The primary outcome was the relative pre-post intervention change in ED visit rate for patients of participating practices compared with that for a propensity-matched control group of physicians over the contemporaneous period. Themes were identified from semi-structured interviews on PCP's experiences and influential factors in their engagement. Twenty-nine physicians agreed to participate and were provided access to the intervention over an 18-month time period. There were a total of 1,525 intervention contacts over the 18-months (average: 50.6±60.8 per PCP). Both intervention and control groups experienced a trend towards lower rates of ED use by their patients over the study time period. The pre-post difference in trend for the intervention group compared to the controls was not significant at 1.4% per year (RR = 1.014; p = 0.59). Several themes were identified from qualitative interviews including: PCPs felt better supported in the care of their patients; they experienced a greater sense of community, and; they were better able to provide shared primary-specialty care., Conclusions: This multifaceted intervention to support solo PCPs in the management of their complex patients did not result in a reduced rate of ED visits compared to controls, likely related to variable uptake among PCPs. It did however result in more comprehensive and coordinated care for their patients. Future directions will focus on increasing uptake by improving ease of use, increasing the range of services offered and expanding to a larger number of PCPs., Competing Interests: Dr. Noah Ivers was supported by New Investigator Awards from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto. Dr. Gillian A. Hawker has received research support as the Sir John and Lady Eaton Professor and Chair of Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto. The other authors declare no competing interests. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Background: People with chronic diseases experience barriers to managing their diseases and accessing available health services. Patient navigator programs are increasingly being used to help people with chronic diseases navigate and access health services., Objective: The objective of this review was to summarize the evidence for patient navigator programs in people with a broad range of chronic diseases, compared to usual care., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Social Work Abstracts from inception to August 23, 2017. We also searched the reference lists of included articles. We included original reports of randomized controlled trials of patient navigator programs compared to usual care for adult and pediatric patients with any one of a defined set of chronic diseases., Results: From a total of 14,672 abstracts, 67 unique studies fit our inclusion criteria. Of these, 44 were in cancer, 8 in diabetes, 7 in HIV/AIDS, 4 in cardiovascular disease, 2 in chronic kidney disease, 1 in dementia and 1 in patients with more than one condition. Program characteristics varied considerably. Primary outcomes were most commonly process measures, and 45 of 67 studies reported a statistically significant improvement in the primary outcome., Conclusion: Our findings indicate that patient navigator programs improve processes of care, although few studies assessed patient experience, clinical outcomes or costs. The inability to definitively outline successful components remains a key uncertainty in the use of patient navigator programs across chronic diseases. Given the increasing popularity of patient navigators, future studies should use a consistent definition for patient navigation and determine which elements of this intervention are most likely to lead to improved outcomes., Trial Registration: PROSPERO #CRD42013005857.

Aims: To determine and quantify the prevalence of patient, provider and system level barriers to achieving diabetes care goals; and to examine whether barriers were different for people with poor glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 10%; 86 mmol/mol) compared to fair glycemic control (7 to <8%; 53-64 mmol/mol)., Methods: We administered a survey by telephone to community-dwelling patients with diabetes, to examine patient-reported barriers and facilitators to care. We compared responses in individuals with HbA1c ≥ 10% (86 mmol/mol) against those with HbA1c between 7-8% (53-64 mmol/mol). We examined associations between HbA1c group and barriers to care, adjusting for sociodemographic factors and diabetes duration., Results: The survey included 805 people with HbA1c ≥ 10% (86 mmol/mol), and 405 people with HbA1c 7-8% (53-64 mmol/mol). Participants with HbA1c ≥ 10% (86 mmol/mol) reported good access to care, however 20% of participants with HbA1c ≥ 10% (86 mmol/mol) felt that their care was not well-coordinated and 9.6% reported having an unmet health care need. In adjusted analysis, patients with HbA1c ≥10% (86 mmol/mol) were more likely to report lack of confidence and inadequate social support, compared to patients with HbA1c 7-8% (53-64 mmol/mol). They were also significantly more likely not to have drug insurance nor to have received recommended treatments because of cost., Conclusions: These results reinforce the importance of an individualized, yet multi-faceted approach. Specific attention to financial barriers seems warranted. These findings can inform the development of programs and initiatives to overcome barriers to care, and improve diabetes care and outcomes.