Search

BackgroundWith the approval of two COVID-19 vaccines in Canada, many people feel a sense of relief, as hope is on the horizon. However, only about 75% of people in Canada plan to receive one of the vaccines. ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to determine the reasons why people in Canada feel hesitant toward receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. MethodsWe screened 3915 tweets from public Twitter profiles in Canada by using the search words “vaccine” and “COVID.” The tweets that met the inclusion criteria (ie, those about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy) were coded via content analysis. Codes were then organized into themes and interpreted by using the Theoretical Domains Framework. ResultsOverall, 605 tweets were identified as those about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy stemmed from the following themes: concerns over safety, suspicion about political or economic forces driving the COVID-19 pandemic or vaccine development, a lack of knowledge about the vaccine, antivaccine or confusing messages from authority figures, and a lack of legal liability from vaccine companies. This study also examined mistrust toward the medical industry not due to hesitancy, but due to the legacy of communities marginalized by health care institutions. These themes were categorized into the following five Theoretical Domains Framework constructs: knowledge, beliefs about consequences, environmental context and resources, social influence, and emotion. ConclusionsWith the World Health Organization stating that one of the worst threats to global health is vaccine hesitancy, it is important to have a comprehensive understanding of the reasons behind this reluctance. By using a behavioral science framework, this study adds to the emerging knowledge about vaccine hesitancy in relation to COVID-19 vaccines by analyzing public discourse in tweets in real time. Health care leaders and clinicians may use this knowledge to develop public health interventions that are responsive to the concerns of people who are hesitant to receive vaccines.

BackgroundAs the increasing prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus has put pressure on health systems to appropriately manage these patients, there have been a growing number of mobile apps designed to improve the self-management of diabetes. One such app, BlueStar, has been shown to significantly reduce hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels in small studies and is the first app in the United States to receive Food and Drug Administration approval as a mobile prescription therapy. However, the impact of the app across real-world population among different clinical sites and health systems remains unclear. ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to conduct a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of the BlueStar mobile app to determine if app usage leads to improved HbA1c levels among diverse participants in real-life clinical contexts. We hypothesized that this mobile app would improve self-management and HbA1c levels compared with controls. MethodsThe study consisted of a multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Overall, 110 participants randomized to the immediate treatment group (ITG) received the intervention for 6 months, and 113 participants randomized to the wait-list control (WLC) group received usual care for the first 3 months and then received the intervention for 3 months. The primary outcome was glucose control measured by HbA1c levels at 3 months. Secondary outcomes assessed intervention impact on patient self-management, experience of care, and self-reported health utilization using validated scales, including the Problem Areas in Diabetes, the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities, and the EuroQol-5D. Intervention usage data were collected directly from the app. ResultsThe results of an analysis of covariance controlling for baseline HbA1c levels did not show evidence of intervention impact on HbA1c levels at 3 months (mean difference [ITG−WLC] −0.42, 95% CI −1.05 to 0.21; P=.19). Similarly, there was no intervention effect on secondary outcomes measuring diabetes self-efficacy, quality of life, and health care utilization behaviors. An exploratory analysis of 57 ITG participants investigating the impact of app usage on HbA1c levels showed that each additional day of app use corresponded with a 0.016-point decrease in participants’ 3-month HbA1c levels (95% CI −0.03 to −0.003). App usage varied significantly by site, as participants from 1 site logged in to the app a median of 36 days over 14 weeks (interquartile range [IQR] 10.5-124); those at another site used the app significantly less (median 9; IQR 6-51). ConclusionsThe results showed no difference between intervention and control arms for the primary clinical outcome of glycemic control measured by HbA1c levels. Although there was low usage of the app among participants, results indicate contextual factors, particularly site, had a significant impact on overall usage. Future research into the patient and site-specific factors that increase app utilization are needed. Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02813343; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02813343 (Archived by WebCite at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02813343)

Globally, systems have invested in a variety of dementia care programs in response to the aging population and those who have been diagnosed with dementia. This study is a qualitative secondary analysis of interview data from a larger study investigating stakeholder perceptions of programs that support caregivers and people living with an Alzheimer's Disease or Alzheimer's Disease-related dementia (AD/ADRD) in five North American jurisdictions. This study analyzed interviews with individuals living with an AD/ADRD and caregivers of individuals living with an AD/ADRD (n = 11). Thematic analysis was conducted to understand how the perception of dementia may have shaped their engagement and experience with healthcare systems. Our analysis resulted in three main themes of care users' experience: (i) undesirable experience owing to the overarching negative shared understanding and stereotyping of dementia; (ii) dismissal throughout disease progression when seeking health and social care support; and (iii) dehumanization during care interactions. The findings carry critical social and clinical implications, for example, in informing person-centered approaches to care, and communication tools clinicians can use to enhance provider, patient, and caregiver well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient-centred care is a key priority for governments, providers and stakeholders, yet little is known about the care preferences of patient groups. We completed a scoping review that yielded 193 articles for analysis. Five health states were used to account for the diversity of possible preferences based on health needs. Five broad themes were identified and expressed differently across the health states, including personalized care, navigation, choice, holistic care and care continuity. Patients' perspectives must be considered to meet the diverse needs of targeted patient groups, which can inform health system planning, quality improvement initiatives and targeting of investments., (Copyright © 2021 Longwoods Publishing.)