Search

Introduction : Hospitalized patients are at risk of unrecognized clinical deterioration that may lead to adverse events.Context : Rapid Response Teams (RRTs) exist around the world as a strategy to improve patient safety.Objective : To explore how RRTs work, their characteristics, impacts, and methods of implementation.Design : Literature review.Method : Consultation of the databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, PUBMED, COCHRANE library, SCOPUS, and PROQUEST Dissertations and Theses. Keywords : “health care team” and “rapid response team”.Results : 121 articles were included. The collected data were divided into five categories : 1) composition and operation of RRTs, 2) benefits and limitations of RRTs, 3) perceptions of RRTs by health care teams, organizations, and patients, 4) implementation strategies, and 5) facilitators and barriers to implementation.Discussion : Although there are many articles related to RRTs, it appears that : 1) few studies analyze the difference in outcomes in hospitalized patients related to the composition of RRTs, 2) few studies describe how RRTs should work, 3) more studies are needed on the impacts of RRTs on hospitalized patients, 4) organizations’ and patients’ perceptions of RRTs are not well studied, and 5) more studies are needed on the best way to implement an RRT.Conclusion : The results show that there is a lack of studies on the difference in outcomes in hospitalized patients related to the composition of RRTs, on how RRTs should work, on the impacts of RRTs on hospitalized patients, on organizations’ and patients’ perceptions of RRTs, and on the factors that influence the success or failure of the implementation of an RRT.

Introduction : Cardiovascular disease is on the rise and is the second leading cause of death among Canadians. Background : The care pathway followed by myocardial infarction patients in remote areas has an impact on their continuity of care.Objective : To describe the care pathway of myocardial infarction patients living in a remote area.Methods : A qualitative formative research design was used. Two samples were created, the first comprising sixteen people who had undergone a percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, and the second made up of four health professionals working in Family Medicine Groups (FMGs).Results : Eight steps were identified and three priority needs were raised, namely : 1) understanding the pathway of care and services ; 2) effectively communicating health information to the various establishments ; and 3) setting up follow-up by FMG health professionals when the patient returns home.Discussion : Nurses play a key role in all steps of the pathway and in meeting patients’ needs.Conclusion : The care and service pathway are suboptimal but the same for participants from this remote area.

Background: Canadian health funding currently prioritizes scaling up for evidence-based primary care innovations, but not all teams prepare for scaling up. We explored scalability assessment among primary care innovators in the province of Quebec to evaluate their preparedness for scaling up., Methods: We performed a cross-sectional survey from Feb. 18 to Mar. 18, 2019. Eligible participants were 33 innovation teams selected for the 2019 Quebec College of Family Physicians' Symposium on Innovations. We conducted a Web-based survey in 2 sections: innovation characteristics and the Innovation Scalability Self-administered Questionnaire. The latter includes 16 criteria (scalability components) grouped into 5 dimensions: theory (1 criterion), impact (6 criteria), coverage (4 criteria), setting (3 criteria) and cost (2 criteria). We classified innovation types using the International Classification of Health Interventions . We performed a descriptive analysis using frequency counts and percentages., Results: Out of 33 teams, 24 participated (72.7%), with 1 innovation each. The types of innovation were management (15/24), prevention (8/24) and therapeutic (1/24). Most management innovations focused on patient navigation (9/15). In order of frequency, teams had assessed theory (79.2%) and impact (79.2%) criteria, followed by cost (77.1%), setting (59.7%) and coverage (54.2%). Most innovations (16/24) had assessed 10 criteria or more, including 10 management innovations, 5 prevention innovations and 1 therapeutic innovation. Implementation fidelity was the least assessed criterion (6/24)., Interpretation: The scalability assessments of a primary care innovation varied according to its type. Management innovations, which were the most prevalent and assessed the most scalability components, appear to be most prepared for primary care scale-up in Canada., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (Copyright 2020, Joule Inc. or its licensors.)

Background: Patient engagement could improve the quality of primary care practices. However, we know little about effective patient engagement strategies. We aimed to assess the acceptability and feasibility of embedding advisory councils of clinicians, managers, patients and caregivers to conduct patient-oriented quality improvement projects in primary care practices., Methods: Using a participatory action research approach, we conducted our study in two non-academic primary care practices in Quebec City (Canada). Patient-experts (patients trained in research) were involved in study design, council recruitment and meeting facilitation. Advisory councils were each to include patients and/or caregivers, clinicians and managers. Over six meetings, councils would identify quality improvement priorities and plan projects accordingly. We assessed acceptability and feasibility of the councils using non-participant observations, audio-recordings and self-administered questionnaires. We used descriptive analyses, triangulated qualitative data and performed inductive thematic analysis., Results: Between December 2017 and June 2018, two advisory councils were formed, each with 11 patients (36% male, mean age 53.8 years), a nurse and a manager practising as a family physician (25% male, mean age 45 years). The six meetings per practice occurred within the study period with a mean of eight patients per meeting. Councils worked on two projects each: the first council on a new information leaflet about clinic organization and operation, and on communications about local public health programs; the second on methods to further engage patients in the practice, and on improving the appointment scheduling system. Median patient satisfaction was 8/10, and 66.7% perceived councils had an impact on practice operations. They considered involvement of a manager, facilitation by patient-experts, and the fostering of mutual respect as key to this impact. Clinicians and managers liked having patients as facilitators and the respect among members. Limiting factors were difficulty focusing on a single feasible project and time constraints. Managers in both practices were committed to pursuing the councils post-study., Conclusion: Our results indicated that embedding advisory councils of clinicians, managers, patients and caregivers to conduct patient-oriented quality improvement projects in primary care practices is both acceptable and feasible. Future research should assess its transferability to other clinical contexts., Competing Interests: Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

Aim: To describe activities and outcomes of a cross-team capacity building strategy that took place over a five-year funding period within the broader context of 12 community-based primary health care (CBPHC) teams., Background: In 2013, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research funded 12 CBPHC Teams (12-Teams) to conduct innovative cross-jurisdictional research to improve the delivery of high-quality CBPHC to Canadians. This signature initiative also aimed to enhance CBPHC research capacity among an interdisciplinary group of trainees, facilitated by a collaboration between a capacity building committee led by senior researchers and a trainee-led working group., Methods: After the committee and working group were established, capacity building activities were organized based on needs and interests identified by trainees of the CBPHC Teams. This paper presents a summary of the activities accomplished, as well as the outcomes reported through an online semistructured survey completed by the trainees toward the end of the five-year funding period. This survey was designed to capture the capacity building and mentorship activities that trainees either had experienced or would like to experience in the future. Descriptive and thematic analyses were conducted based on survey responses, and these findings were compared with the existing core competencies in the literature., Findings: Since 2013, nine webinars and three online workshops were hosted by trainees and senior researchers, respectively. Many of the CBPHC Teams provided exposure for trainees to innovative methods, CBPHC content, and showcased trainee research. A total of 27 trainees from 10 of the 12-Teams responded to the survey (41.5%). Trainees identified key areas of benefit from their involvement in this initiative: skills training, networking opportunities, and academic productivity. Trainees identified gaps in research and professional skill development, indicating areas for further improvement in capacity building programs, particularly for trainees to play a more active role in their education and preparation.

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., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Plain English Summary: Making primary care clinics more patient-centered is key to improving patients' experience of care. If patients themselves were engaged in helping define priorities and suggesting quality improvements in the clinic, care would respond better to their needs. However, patient engagement is a new phenomenon, particularly in community based primary care clinics. How to engage patients in quality improvement in these clinics, or what effect this might have, is not well known. The involvement of patients needs to be adapted to the way these clinics function. The aim of this study is to create and evaluate a new model of patient engagement for quality improvement in community based primary care clinics. Patients, primary care professionals and researchers will create advisory councils in two primary care clinics in Quebec City (Canada). In each clinic, the advisory council will include 12 patients or caregivers registered at the clinic, a clinician and a clinic manager. The advisory council will meet every 6 weeks for a total of six meetings. Two patient-experts will facilitate meetings. During meetings, members of the council will list their needs in order of importance. Then they will suggest improvements in line with these needs. We will study if our advisory council model is well adapted to community based primary care settings and meets participants' expectations. At the end of the study we will be able to offer guidance about engaging patients with health professionals in quality improvement in primary care clinics., Abstract: Background Involvement of end-users, including patients, managers and clinicians, in identifying quality improvement and research priorities might improve the relevance of projects and increase their impact. Few patient engagement initiatives have taken place in community based primary care practices (CBPCPs) and best practices for engaging patients in such settings are not well defined. The aim of this pilot study is to develop and assess the feasibility of a new collaborative model of advisory council involving clinicians, managers, patients and caregivers in CBPCP to strengthen their capacity to conduct quality improvement and patient-oriented research projects. Methods We will conduct a participatory action research project in two non-academic CBPCPs in Quebec City (Canada). In each CBPCP, the advisory council will include 12 patients or caregivers, a clinician and a clinic manager. Patients or their caregivers will be identified by clinicians and contacted by patient-experts. They will be eligible if they are registered at the practice, motivated, and available to attend meetings. The council will meet every 6 weeks for a total of six meetings. Two patient-experts will guide council members to identify quality improvement priorities and patient-oriented research questions based on their experience in the clinic. They will then be supported to plan actions to target these priorities. Analysis of meetings will be based on feasibility criteria, notes by non-participant observers in log books, audio-recording of the meetings and questionnaires to evaluate council members' perceptions and the likelihood they would engage in such councils. Discussion The results of this study will  be a model of patient engagement and a discussion of factors to improve the model to fit the needs of primary care patients and professionals. This will lay the foundation for a sustainable structure for long-term patient engagement and contribute to the development of a patient-centered and quality-improvement culture in CBPCPs., Competing Interests: This project was approved by the Comité d’éthique du Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval. All participants, with the exception of the four patient-experts, will sign informed consent at the beginning of the first meeting before to engage in the full process. For the health professionals and CBPCP managers, meetings will count as work time, and patients/caregivers will be financially rewarded for attending.Not applicable.The authors declare that they have no competing interests.Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Introduction : in collaboration with family physician, primary care nurses can play a key role for persons with chronic diseases (CD). However, these activities vary from one practice to another. Context : the absence of evidence hinders our understanding of the issues related to the improvement of nursing practices in primary care organizations. Objective : to describe the primary care nurse’s activities for persons with CD and elements influencing those activities. Design : systematic literature review. Method : MEDLINE, CINHAL and SCOPUS electronic databases were reviewed. Key words : « primary health care », « primary nursing » and « chronic disease ». Results : eighteen studies were included in the review. Nurses activities can be clustered in four domain of activities : 1) Global assessment of the person with CD, 2) Care management, 3) Health Promotion and 4) Nurse-Physician Collaboration. Elements influencing nurses’ activities can be related to the setting of care, to nurse or to the person with CD. Discussion : nurses’ activities in primary care are understudied. Activities such as case management and interprofessional collaboration are lacking. Conclusion : descriptive studies are needed to describe in-depth nurses’ activities in primary settings for persons with CD.