Search

To map the state of the existing literature to identify the optimal time frame between the arrival of refugees in a host country and psychosocial assessments. We conducted scoping review using the method of Arksey and O'Malley (2005). A systematic search of 5 databases including PubMed, Psycinfo (OVID), PsycINFO BD APA, Scopus and Web of Sciences) and grey literature identified 2698 references. Thirteen studies published between 2010 and 2021 were considered eligible. A data extraction grid was designed and tested by the research team. It is not so ease to identify the most appropriate time interval to assess the mental health of newly settled refugees. All the studies selected agree on the need to carry out an initial assessment when refugees arrive in their host country. Several authors agree on the need to carry out screening at least twice during the resettlement period. However, what is less clear is the best time to perform the second screening. This scoping review mainly helped in highlighting the lack of probing data on the mental health indicators focused on during the assessment and on the optimal timeline for the assessment of refugees. Further research is needed to determine whether developmental and psychological screening is beneficial, the right time to perform the screening, and the most appropriate collection instruments and interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary healthcare is the main entry to the health care system for most of the population. In 2008, it was estimated that about 26% of the population in Quebec (Canada) did not have a regular family physician. In early 2017, about 10 years after the introduction of a centralized waiting list for patients without a family physician, Québec had 25% of its population without a family physician and nearly 33% of these or 540,000, many of whom were socially vulnerable (SV), remained registered on the list. SV patients often have more health problems. They also face access inequities or may lack the skills needed to navigate a constantly evolving and complex healthcare system. Navigation interventions show promise for improving access to primary health care for SV patients. This study aimed to describe and understand the expectations and needs of SV patients.Methods: A descriptive qualitative study rooted in a participatory study on navigation interventions implemented in Montérégie (Quebec) addressed to SV patients. Semi-structured individual face-to-face and telephone interviews were conducted with patients recruited in three primary health care clinics, some of whom received the navigation intervention. A thematic analysis was performed using NVivo 11 software.Results: Sixteen patients living in socially deprived contexts agreed to participate in this qualitative study. Three main expectations and needs of patients for navigation interventions were identified: communication expectations (support to understand providers and to be understood by them, discuss about medical visit, and bridge the communication cap between patients and PHC providers); relational expectations regarding emotional or psychosocial support; and pragmatic expectations (information on available resources, information about the clinic, and physical support to navigate the health care system).Conclusions: Our study contributes to the literature by identifying expectations and needs specified to SV patients accessing primary health care services, that relate to navigation interventions. This information can be used by decision makers for navigation interventions design and inform health care organizational policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Advanced Access (AA) Model has shown considerable success in improving timely access for patients in primary care settings. As a result, a majority of family physicians have implemented AA in their organizations over the last decade. However, despite its widespread use, few professionals other than physicians and nurse practitioners have implemented the model. Among those who have integrated it to their practice, a wide variation in the level of implementation is observed, suggesting a need to support primary care teams in continuous improvement with AA implementation. This quality improvement research project aims to document and measure the processes and effects of practice facilitation, to implement and improve AA within interprofessional teams.Methods: Five primary care teams at various levels of organizational AA implementation will take part in a quality improvement process. These teams will be followed independently over PDSA (Plan-Do-Study-Act) cycles for 18 months. Each team is responsible for setting their own objectives for improvement with respect to AA. The evaluation process consists of a mixed-methods plan, including semi-structured interviews with key members of the clinical and management teams, patient experience survey and AA-related metrics monitored from Electronic Medical Records over time.Discussion: Most theories on organizational change indicate that practice facilitation should enable involvement of stakeholders in the process of change and enable improved interprofessional collaboration through a team-based approach. Improving access to primary care services is one of the top priorities of the Quebec's ministry of health and social services. This study will identify key barriers to quality improvement initiatives within primary care and help to develop successful strategies to help teams improve and broaden implementation of AA to other primary care professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To measure the effectiveness of a 4-month interdisciplinary multifaceted intervention based on a change in care delivery for patients with multimorbidity in primary care practices.Methods: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial with a mixed-methods design in patients aged 18 to 80 years with 3 or more chronic conditions from 7 family medicine groups (FMGs) in Quebec, Canada. Health care professionals (nurses, nutritionists, kinesiologists) from the FMGs were trained to deliver the patient-centered intervention based on a motivational approach and self-management support. Primary outcomes: self-management (Health Education Impact Questionnaire); and self-efficacy.Secondary Outcomes: health status, quality of life, and health behaviors. Quantitative analyses used multi-level mixed effects and generalized linear mixed models controlling for clustering within FMGs. We also conducted in-depth interviews with patients, family members, and health care professionals.Results: The trial randomized 284 patients (144 in intervention group, 140 in control group). The groups were comparable. After 4 months, the intervention showed a neutral effect for the primary outcomes. There was significant improvement in 2 health behaviors (healthy eating with odds ratios [OR] 4.36; P = .006, and physical activity with OR 3.43; P = .023). The descriptive qualitative evaluation revealed that the patients reinforced their self-efficacy and improved their self-management which was divergent from the quantitative results.Conclusions: Quantitatively, this intervention showed a neutral effect on the primary outcomes and substantial improvement in 2 health behaviors as secondary outcomes. Qualitatively, the intervention was evaluated as positive. The combination of qualitative and quantitative designs proved to be a good design for evaluating this complex intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Implementing interprofessional advanced access (AA) requires reorganizing the practices of all team members to improve the timeliness of primary care. Often, team members do not know how to engage in a meaningful change process journey. Evidence-based change strategies that address fundamental care delivery processes could help improve timely access to the appropriate professionals while improving satisfaction of both staff and patients. Objective: To describe foundational evidence-based change strategies used by external facilitators to improve interprofessional AA in primary healthcare (PHC) clinics. Study design and analysis: Participatory action research was used to analyze change strategies and steps required for their implementation. AA indicators (3rd next available appointment, continuity of care, and availability for urgent care) were followed longitudinally to adapt the change strategies and assess their progressive impacts. This process led to the development of change packages. Setting: 8 interprofessional PHC clinics in Quebec, Canada. Population studied: Physicians, nurse practitioners, nurses, social workers and pharmacists. Intervention: External facilitators supported PHC clinics while relying on quality improvement techniques according to the Model for Improvement. Outcomes: Change packages: standardized tools to inform the planning, implementation, and monitoring of change strategies. These include: 1) Steps required to implement the strategy; 2) Key indicators to monitor change and evaluate the strategy's success; 3) Lessons learned from the process. Results: 4 different change packages were developed. 3 change packages support transformation of appointment systems, including a prioritization algorithm for appointment scheduling, integration of time slots for urgent care, and integration of an online appointment scheduler. One change package aims to improve patient flow and professional autonomy using collective orders. The contents of these change packages, including lessons learnt and impacts on key indicators of AA across participating clinics, will be presented. Conclusions: Improving AA in PHC is complex, but essential change strategies appeared to be common first steps among clinics undertaking this journey. Resulting change packages provide road maps to successfully guide the improvement of AA, lay a strong foundation for further improvement steps, and build a culture of improvement within and among PHC clinics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]