Search

Abstract Background The management of pandemic influenza creates public health challenges. An ethical framework, 'Stand on Guard for Thee: ethical considerations in pandemic influenza preparedness' that served as a template for the World Health Organization's global consultation on pandemic planning, was transformed into a survey administered to a random sample of 500 Canadians to obtain opinions on key ethical issues in pandemic preparedness planning. Methods All framework authors and additional investigators created items that were pilot-tested with volunteers of both sexes and all socioeconomic strata. Surveys were telephone administered with random sampling achieved via random digit dialing (RDD). Eligible participants were adults, 18 years or older, with per province stratification equaling provincial percent of national population. Descriptive results were tabulated and logistic regression analyses were used to assess whether demographic factors were significantly associated with outcomes. Results 5464 calls identified 559 eligible participants of whom 88.5% completed surveys. Over 90% of subjects agreed the most important goal of pandemic influenza preparations was saving lives, with 41% endorsing saving lives solely in Canada and 50% endorsing saving lives globally as the highest priority. Older age (OR = 8.51, p < 0.05) and current employment (OR = 9.48, p < 0.05) were associated with an endorsement of saving lives globally as highest priority. About 90% of respondents supported the obligation of health care workers to report to work and face influenza pandemic risks excepting those with a serious health condition that increased risks. Over 84% supported the government's provision of disability insurance and death benefits for health care workers facing elevated risk. Strong majorities favored stocking adequate protective antiviral dosages for all Canadians (92%) and, if effective, influenza vaccinations (95%). Over 70% agreed Canada should provide international assistance to poorer countries for pandemic preparation, even if resources for Canadians were reduced. While 92% of this group, believed provision should be 7 to 10% of all resources generated, 43% believed the provision should be greater than 10%. Conclusions Results suggest trust in public health officials to make difficult decisions, providing emphasis on reciprocity and respect for individual rights.

Objective The objectives of this paper are: (a) to determine Canadian family physicians' attitudes towards cognitive screening, (b) to identify what cognitive screening tools are being used, (c) to investigate how they rate these tools' effectiveness and (d) to identify the attributes of an ideal cognitive screening tool for the primary care setting. Method Postal survey questionnaire of a random sample of 249 practicing members of the College of Family Physicians of Canada. Results Response rate was 52%. The majority of physicians 'Agreed' or 'Strongly Agreed' that cognitive impairment assessment is important in primary care (89%), and 'Disagreed' or 'Strongly Disagreed' that it should be left to specialists (92%). However, 35% were undecided when asked if assessment in primary care would lead to better outcomes. The most frequently used assessment tools were Mini-Mental Status Exam (MMSE), Clock Drawing, Delayed Word Recall, Standardized MMSE and Alternating Sequences, but were mainly rated as only 'Good' in terms of perceived effectiveness. Validity/accuracy was identified as the top attribute of an ideal screening tool. Female physicians were more likely to have a positive attitude towards cognitive assessment. Younger physicians, those in group practices, or those with either <= 20% or 61-80% of elderly patients in their practice indicated a shorter ideal time to administer a cognitive screening tool. Conclusion Despite general agreement that primary care physicians have an important role in cognitive screening, there is less agreement that it leads to better outcomes. The development of a superior screening tool to be used in the primary care setting is needed. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pneumonia and influenza represent a significant public health burden in Canada and abroad. Knowledge of how this burden varies geographically provides clues to understanding the determinants of these illnesses, and insight into the effective management of health-care resources. We conducted a retrospective, population-based, ecological-level study to assess age- and gender-specific spatial patterns of pneumonia and influenza hospitalizations in the province of Ontario, Canada from 1992 to 2001. Results revealed marked variability in hospitalization rates by age, as well as clear and statistically significant patterns of high rates in northern rural counties and low rates in southern urban counties. A moderate yet significant level of positive spatial autocorrelation (Moran's I=0.21, P<0.05) was found in the global data, with significant, age-specific clusters of high values or 'hot spots' identified in several northern counties. Findings illustrate the need for geographically focused prevention strategies, and resource and service allocation policies informed by regional and population-specific demands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Consistent and predictable seasonal fluctuations in hospitalizations have been demonstrated for diverse communicable and non-communicable health conditions. The objective of this study was to examine the seasonal patterns of all hospitalizations by age and gender in order to determine whether the hospital system for a large geographical area was subject to consistent, predictable temporal variations.Methods: A retrospective population-based study of approximately 14 million residents of Ontario was conducted to assess temporal patterns in all hospitalizations from April 1, 1988 to March 31, 2000. Time series analysis, using spectral analysis, was conducted to assess seasonal variations and trends over time and to account for autocorrelation.Results: Conspicuous seasonality in hospitalizations was found in every age group for both sexes with the exception of males between the ages of 20 and 39. The average monthly variability ranged from lows of 15% for the age group 20-29 for both sexes, to highs of 34% in males between 5 and 9 years. For the total population, this represents a 12-year average variability of approximately 20% or 20,000 out of 97,000 hospitalizations. For both sexes, peak hospitalizations typically occurred in the spring and autumn for the youngest and oldest age groups, and in January for the middle age groups.Conclusion: Seasonal factors play an important role in the utilization of hospital services in Ontario. The determinants of this seasonality, which include environmental and social/behavioural factors, are not well understood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis, although both preventable and treatable, continues to be the world's leading cause of death from an infectious agent. PURPOSE: To extend the results of our previous study of knowledge and practices of final year medical students regarding tuberculosis at three medical schools from endemic and nonendemic areas and to describe their attitudes. METHODS: Eight statements assessing attitudes, as part of a larger survey, were administered to final year medical students at McMaster University in Canada, Christian Medical College in India, and Makerere University in Uganda. RESULTS: One hundred sixty surveys were returned with 155 completed attitude responses. The response rate was 68.4% (65 of 95) for McMaster University, 39.7% (23 of 58) for the Christian Medical College, and 78.3% (72 of 92) for Makerere University. Analysis showed that six of eight attitude items were slightly statistically different among the schools with minimal effect of curriculum time and patient exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Despite quite varied exposure to tuberculosis, students from endemic and nonendemic areas responded similarly on statements addressing attitudes toward tuberculosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Screening mammography is a commonly employed preventive modality. The employment of mammography in older women is not supported by evidence from clinical trials, largely because elderly women were excluded from such trials. Most guidelines do not recommend routine screening in older women. How residents reason in this gray zone has been subject to little empirical study. PURPOSES: This study sought to answer two questions: How variable are residents' decision responses to mammography screening scenarios in older women where there is no clear evidence? What reasons do residents give to justify these decisions? METHODS: Residents were asked to respond to four scenarios and give their screening recommendations and the reasons justifying their decisions. RESULTS: There was considerable variability in resident responses to the four scenarios. Only in one scenario was there near unanimity on the preferred screening decision. Resident perceptions of quality of life, longevity and understanding of the guidelines were cited as justification for their decisions. CONCLUSION: Clinical preceptors should be aware of how the variability of resident perceptions of such factors as quality of life and prognosis may influence decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Studies indicate that practicing clinicians do not employ quantitative techniques in diagnosis. If evidence-based approaches to clinical care are to succeed, there is a need to develop pedagogical tools to introduce the relevant techniques in clinical medicine. DESCRIPTION: This article describes 2 heuristic techniques that can be used by clinical teachers to introduce residents and medical students to the practice of estimating prior probabilities in diagnostic reasoning. The techniques are the probability pie and the probability dollar. The techniques require learners to divide either a pie or a dollar according to the probability they assign in the differential diagnosis. The techniques also introduce related ideas such as likelihood ratios, posterior probabilities, diagnostic accuracy and intra- and interrater variability. EVALUATION: An example of a 60-year-old man presenting with chest pain is presented to illustrate the technique. CONCLUSION: This article presents a simple and clinically relevant method of introducing important concepts in quantitative reasoning. More systematic evaluation is required to assess its effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When public health decisionmakers turned to quarantine during the recent severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic, difficult questions were raised about the legitimacy and acceptability of restrictive measures to attain public health goals. SARS also brought to light how scientific uncertainty can permeate public health decisionmaking, leading us to think about the relationship between the adequacy of evidence of the effectiveness of an intervention and its role in the justification of public health action. In this article, we critically examine the role of evidence and effectiveness in decision-making for quarantine. It is our contention that the effectiveness of a public health intervention should not be defined exclusively in (absolute and objective) scientific terms but rather conceptualized relationally and normatively in public health decisionmaking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Physicians have long been advised to have a third party present during certain parts of a physical examination; however, little is known about the frequency of chaperone use for those specific intimate examinations regularly performed in primary care. We aimed to determine the frequency of chaperone use among family physicians across a variety of intimate physical examinations for both male and female patients, and also to identify the factors associated with chaperone use. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed to a randomly selected sample of 500 Ontario members of the College of Family Physicians of Canada. Participants were asked about their use of chaperones when performing a variety of intimate examinations, namely female pelvic, breast, and rectal exams and male genital and rectal exams. RESULTS: 276 of 500 were returned (56%), of which 257 were useable. Chaperones were more commonly used with female patients than with males (t = 9.09 [df = 249], p < 0.001), with the female pelvic exam being the most likely of the five exams to be attended by a chaperone (53%). As well, male physicians were more likely to use chaperones for examination of female patients than were female physicians for the examination of male patients. Logistic regression analyses identified two independent factors--sex of physician and availability of a nurse--that were significantly associated with chaperone use. For female pelvic exam, male physicians were significantly more likely to report using a chaperone (adjusted Odds Ratio [OR] 40.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.91-97.52). Likewise, having a nurse available also significantly increased the likelihood of a chaperone being used (adjusted OR 6.92, 95% CI 2.74-17.46). This pattern of results was consistent across the other four exams. Approximately two-thirds of respondents reported using nurses as chaperones, 15% cited the use of other office staff, and 10% relied on the presence of a family member. CONCLUSION: Clinical practice concerning the use of chaperones during intimate exams continues to be discordant with the recommendations of medical associations and medico-legal societies. Chaperones are used by only a minority of Ontario family physicians. Chaperone use is higher for examinations of female patients than of male patients and is highest for female pelvic exams. The availability of a nurse in the clinic to act as a chaperone is associated with more frequent use of chaperones. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research ethics review committees (ERCs) worldwide faced daunting challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. There was a need to balance rapid turnaround with rigorous evaluation of high-risk research protocols in the context of considerable uncertainty. This study explored the experiences and performance of ERCs during the pandemic. We conducted an anonymous, cross-sectional, global online survey of chairs (or their delegates) of ERCs who were involved in the review of COVID-19-related research protocols after March 2020. The survey ran from October 2022 to February 2023 and consisted of 50 items, with opportunities for descriptive responses to open-ended questions. Two hundred and three participants [130 from high-income countries (HICs) and 73 from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)] completed our survey. Respondents came from diverse entities and organizations from 48 countries (19 HICs and 29 LMICs) in all World Health Organization regions. Responses show little of the increased global funding for COVID-19 research was allotted to the operation of ERCs. Few ERCs had pre-existing internal policies to address operation during public health emergencies, but almost half used existing guidelines. Most ERCs modified existing procedures or designed and implemented new ones but had not evaluated the success of these changes. Participants overwhelmingly endorsed permanently implementing several of them. Few ERCs added new members but non-member experts were consulted; quorum was generally achieved. Collaboration among ERCs was infrequent, but reviews conducted by external ERCs were recognized and validated. Review volume increased during the pandemic, with COVID-19-related studies being prioritized. Most protocol reviews were reported as taking less than three weeks. One-third of respondents reported external pressure on their ERCs from different stakeholders to approve or reject specific COVID-19-related protocols. ERC members faced significant challenges to keep their committees functioning during the pandemic. Our findings can inform ERC approaches towards future public health emergencies. To our knowledge, this is the first international, COVID-19-related study of its kind., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Salamanca-Buentello 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.)

Introduction: The WHO has stated that vaccine hesitancy is a serious threat to overcoming COVID-19. Vaccine hesitancy among underserved and at-risk communities is an ongoing challenge in Canada. Public confidence in vaccine safety and effectiveness and the principles of equity need to be considered in vaccine distribution. In Canada, governments of each province or territory manage their own healthcare system, providing an opportunity to compare and contrast distribution strategies. The overarching objective of this study is to identify effective vaccine distribution approaches and advance knowledge on how to design and implement various strategies to meet the different needs of underserved communities., Methods and Analysis: Multiple case studies in seven Canadian provinces will be conducted using a mixed-methods design. The study will be informed by Experience-Based CoDesign techniques and theoretically guided by the Socio-Ecological Model and the Vaccine Hesitancy Matrix frameworks. Phase 1 will involve a policy document review to systematically explore the vaccine distribution strategy over time in each jurisdiction. This will inform the second phase, which will involve (2a) semistructured, in-depth interviews with policymakers, public health officials, researchers, providers, groups representing patients, researchers and stakeholders and (2b) an analysis of population-based administrative health data of vaccine administration. Integration of qualitative and quantitative data will inform the identification of effective vaccine distribution approaches for various populations. Informed by this evidence, phase 3 of the study will involve conducting focus groups with multiple stakeholders to codesign recommendations for the design and implementation of effective vaccine delivery strategies for equity-deserving and at-risk populations., Ethics and Dissemination: This study is approved by the University of Toronto's Health Sciences Research Ethics Board (#42643), University of British Columbia Behavioural Research Ethics Board (#H22-01750-A002), Research Ethics Board of the Nova Scotia Health Authority (#48272), Newfoundland and Labrador Health Research Ethics Board (#2022.126), Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board, University of Calgary (REB22-0207), and University of Manitoba Health Research Board (H2022-239). The outcome of this study will be to produce a series of recommendations for implementing future vaccine distribution approaches from the perspective of various stakeholders, including equity-deserving and at-risk populations., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: High-performing primary care is recognised as the foundation of an effective and efficient healthcare system. Many medical graduates report they are not prepared for independent practice. To date, no research has been conducted to identify the key capabilities and competencies of high-performing family medicine graduates in Canada. This pilot project aims to identify the capabilities and competencies of high-performing early-career family physicians in Ontario, Canada, and explore opportunities for enhancing learning, teaching and assessment within family medicine residency programmes., Methods and Analysis: Employing a mixed-methods explanatory sequential study design, this research will use a theory-driven Professional Capability Framework, previously validated in studies across nine professions, to guide the investigation. The first (quantitative) phase involves surveying ~50 high-performing early-career family physicians identified as high performing by educators, colleagues and leaders. The objective of the survey is to identify the key competencies and personal, interpersonal and cognitive capabilities of high-performing family physicians. The second (qualitative) phase involves conducting workshops with stakeholders, including educators, professional associations, regulators and colleges, to test the veracity of the results. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive statistics, and qualitative data will be analysed using Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis. The first and second phases will identify the key capabilities and competencies required to confidently adapt to the independent practice of comprehensive family medicine and inform fit-for-purpose educational strategies for teaching, learning and assessment., Ethics and Dissemination: The study is approved by the University of Toronto's Health Sciences Research Ethics Board (#41799). Research findings will be discussed with professional bodies, educators responsible for family medicine curricula and universities. Study findings will also be disseminated through academic conferences and academic publications in peer-reviewed journals. Project summaries and infographics will be developed and disseminated to key stakeholders., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: This study aimed to: (1) examine the experience of nine global jurisdictions that engaged primary care providers (PCPs) to administer COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic; (2) describe how vaccine hesitancy and principles of equity were incorporated in the COVID-19 vaccine roll-out strategies and (3) identify the barriers and facilitators to the vaccine roll-out., Design: Rapid scoping review., Data Sources: Searches took place in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, the Cochrane Library, SCOPUS and PsycINFO, Google, and the websites of national health departments. Searches and analyses took place from May 2021 to July 2021., Results: Sixty-two documents met the inclusion criteria (35=grey literature; 56% and 27=peer reviewed; 44%). This review found that the vaccine distribution approach started at hospitals in almost all jurisdictions. In some jurisdictions, PCPs were engaged at the beginning, and the majority included PCPs over time. In many jurisdictions, equity was considered in the prioritisation policies for various marginalised communities. However, vaccine hesitancy was not explicitly considered in the design of vaccine distribution approaches. The barriers to the roll-out of vaccines included personal, organisational and contextual factors. The vaccine roll-out strategy was facilitated by establishing policies and processes for pandemic preparedness, well-established and coordinated information systems, primary care interventions, adequate supply of providers, education and training of providers, and effective communications strategy., Conclusions: Empirical evidence is lacking on the impact of a primary care-led vaccine distribution approach on vaccine hesitancy, adoption and equity. Future vaccine distribution approaches need to be informed by further research evaluating vaccine distribution approaches and their impact on patient and population outcomes., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified pre-existing challenges to health promotion and care across the world, and particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This qualitative study draws on data from a panel of immunisation experts and uses a novel framework of vaccine delivery domains to explore perspectives from those who live and work in these settings on the challenges to implementing COVID-19 vaccine programs in LMICs., Methods: We conducted a thematic content analysis of 96 participant free text replies to questions from Round I of a three-round Delphi consensus study amongst global experts on COVID-19 vaccine implementation., Results: Participant responses highlighted challenges to vaccine program implementation including issues related to equity; governance, decision-making, and financing; regulatory structures, planning, and coordination; prioritisation, demand generation, and communication; vaccine, cold chain, logistics, and infrastructure; service delivery, human resources, and supplies; and surveillance, monitoring, and evaluation., Conclusion: We reflect on our findings in light of global efforts to address vaccine inequity and emphasise three key areas salient to improving vaccination efforts during novel infectious disease outbreaks: 1) Ensuring safe and sustainable service delivery in communities and at points of care; 2) Strengthening systems for end-to-end delivery of vaccines, therapeutics, diagnostics, and essential supplies; 3) Transforming structural paradigms towards vaccine equity., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Haldane 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.)

Rationale, Aims and Objectives: Evidence-Based Medicine proposes a prescriptive model of physician decision-making in which 'best evidence' is used to guide best practice. And yet, proponents of EBM acknowledge that EBM fails to offer a systematic theory of physician decision-making., Methods: In this paper, we explore how physicians from the neurology and emergency medicine communities have responded to an evolving body of evidence surrounding the acute treatment of patients with ischemic stroke. Through analysis of this case study, we argue that EBM's vision of evidence-based medical decision-making fails to appreciate a process that we have termed epistemic evaluation., Results and Conclusions: Physicians are required to interpret and apply any knowledge-even what EBM would term 'best evidence'-in light of their own knowledge, background and experience. This is consequential for EBM as understanding what physicians do and why they do it would appear to be essential to achieving optimal practice in accordance with best evidence., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The rapid implementation of global COVID-19 vaccination programs has surfaced many challenges and inequities, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, there continues to be a lack of consensus on which challenges are global priorities for action, and how to best respond to them. This study uses consensus-based methods to identify and rank the most important challenges and solutions for implementation of COVID-19 vaccination programs in LMICs., Methods: We conducted a three-round modified Delphi study with a global panel of vaccine delivery experts. In Round I, panelists identified broad topical challenges and solutions. Responses were collated and coded into distinct items. Through two further rounds of structured, iterative surveys panelists reviewed and ranked the identified items. Responses were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively to achieve consensus on the most important COVID-19 vaccine delivery challenges and solutions., Results: Of the 426 invited panelists, 96 completed Round I, 56 completed Round II, and 39 completed Round III. Across all three rounds there was equal representation by gender, and panelists reported work experience in all World Bank regions and across a variety of content areas and organizations. Of the 64 initially identified items, the panel achieved consensus on three challenges and 10 solutions. Challenges fell under themes of structural factors and infrastructure and human and material resources, while solutions also included items within themes of communication, community engagement, and access and planning, processes, and operations., Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccine delivery is challenged by long-standing and structural inequities that disadvantage health service delivery in LMICs. These findings can, and should, be used by global health organizations to efficiently and optimally direct resources to respond to these key challenges and solutions., Competing Interests: Authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright: © 2022 Ariyarajah 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.)

Objectives: Pharmaceutical industry involvement in medical education, research and clinical practice can lead to conflicts of interest. Within this context, this study examined how the 'Suboxone Education Programme', developed and delivered by a pharmaceutical company as part of a federally regulated risk management program, was presented as a solution to various kinds of risks relating to opioid use in public documents from medical institutions across Canada., Setting: These documents were issued during the Canadian opioid crisis, a time when the involvement of industry in health policy was being widely questioned given industry's role in driving the overprescribing of opioid analgesics and contributing to population-level harms., Design: A critical discourse analysis of 69 documents collected between July 2020 and May 2021 referencing the Suboxone Education Program spanning 13 years (2007-2021) from medical, nursing and pharmacy institutions sourced from every Canadian province and territory. Discursive themes were identified through iterative and duplicate analyses using a semistructured data extraction instrument., Results: Documents characterised the Programme as addressing iatrogenic risks from overprescribing opioid analgesics, environmental risks from a toxic street drug supply and pharmacological risks relating to the dominant therapeutic alternative of methadone. The programme was identified as being able to address these risks by providing mechanisms to surveil healthcare professionals and to facilitate the prescribing of Suboxone. Medical institutions legitimised the Suboxone Education Programme by lending their regulatory, epidemiological and professional authority., Conclusions: Addressing risk is considered as a central, moral responsibility of contemporary healthcare services. In this case, moral imperatives to address opioid crisis-related risks overrode other ethical concerns regarding conflicts of interest between industry and public welfare. Failing to address these conflicts potentially imperils efforts of mitigating population health harms by propagating an important driving force of the opioid crisis., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

While the degree of COVID-19 vaccine accessibility and uptake varies at both national and global levels, increasing vaccination coverage raises questions regarding the standard of prevention that ought to apply to different settings where COVID-19 vaccine trials are hosted. A WHO Expert Group has developed guidance on the ethical implications of conducting placebo-controlled trials in the context of expanding global COVID-19 vaccine coverage. The guidance also considers alternative trial designs to placebo controlled trials in the context of prototype vaccines, modified vaccines, and next generation vaccines., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper: [All members of the WHO Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator Ethics and Governance Working Group declared their interests according to WHO standard procedures. None of the interests declared were found to be significant.]., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Clinically focused interventions for people living with pain, such as health professional education, clinical decision support systems, prescription drug monitoring programs, and multidisciplinary care to support opioid tapering, have all been promoted as important solutions to the North American opioid crisis. Yet none have so far delivered substantive beneficial opioid-related population health outcomes. In fact, while total opioid prescribing has leveled off or reduced in many jurisdictions, population-level harms from opioids have continued to increase dramatically. We attribute this failure partly to a poor recognition of the epistemic and ethical complexities at the interface of clinical and population health. We draw on a framework of knowledge networks in wicked problems to identify 3 strategies to help navigate these complexities: (1) designing and evaluating clinically focused interventions as complex interventions, (2) reformulating evidence to make population health dynamics apparent, and (3) appealing to the inseparability of facts and values to support decision-making in uncertainty. We advocate that applying these strategies will better equip clinically focused interventions as complements to structural and public health interventions to achieve the desired beneficial population health effects. ( Am J Public Health . 2022;112(S1):S56-S65. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306500).

Objective: To explore what is known about end-of-life (EOL) conversations with frail older adults across all settings including primary care in Canada, and to understand the barriers to, and recommendations for, EOL conversations., Data Sources: Comprehensive searches were conducted in CINAHL (EBSCO), Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), AgeLine (EBSCO), Sociological Abstracts (ProQuest), and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ProQuest). Searches used text words and subject headings (eg, MeSH, Emtree) related to 3 concepts: frailty, Canada, and EOL conversations., Study Selection: Twenty-one English-language articles were selected (ie, 4 reviews, 10 commentaries, 3 quantitative studies, 3 qualitative studies, 1 mixed-methods study) that included information about EOL conversations with frail older adults in the Canadian health care context., Synthesis: In terms of having EOL conversations with frail older adults, this study found that many clinicians do not often and adequately discuss frailty and impending death with their older patients. Moreover, patients and their care partners do not have enough knowledge about frailty and death to make informed EOL decisions, leading to patients choosing more aggressive therapies instead of care focused on symptom management. In terms of barriers to EOL discussions, common barriers included a lack of trust between clinician and patient, inadequate EOL training for clinicians, and ineffective clinician communication with patients and families. Recommendations for improving EOL conversations include regular screening for frailty to prompt conversations about care and the use of an interprofessional approach., Conclusion: More empirical research is needed that uses exploratory methods to shed light on the contextual factors that may act as a barrier to EOL conversations. More research is also needed on the roles and responsibilities of interprofessional teams in screening for frailty and engaging in EOL conversations. Moreover, there is a need to better understand how frail older patients and their families want EOL conversations to unfold and what best facilitates these conversations., (Copyright © 2021 the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Multimorbidity - the occurrence of two or more long-term conditions in an individual - is a major global concern, placing a huge burden on healthcare systems, physicians, and patients. It challenges the current biomedical paradigm, in particular conventional evidence-based medicine's dominant focus on single-conditions. Patients' heterogeneous range of clinical presentations tend to escape characterization by traditional means of classification, and optimal management cannot be deduced from clinical practice guidelines. In this article, we argue that person-focused care based in complexity science may be a transformational lens through which to view multimorbidity, to complement the specialism focus on each particular disease. The approach offers an integrated and coherent perspective on the person's living environment, relationships, somatic, emotional and cognitive experiences and physiological function. The underlying principles include non-linearity, tipping points, emergence, importance of initial conditions, contextual factors and co-evolution, and the presence of patterned outcomes. From a clinical perspective, complexity science has important implications at the theoretical, practice and policy levels. Three essential questions emerge: (1) What matters to patients? (2) How can we integrate, personalize and prioritize care for whole people, given the constraints of their socio-ecological circumstances? (3) What needs to change at the practice and policy levels to deliver what matters to patients? These questions have no simple answers, but complexity science principles suggest a way to integrate understanding of biological, biographical and contextual factors, to guide an integrated approach to the care of people with multimorbidity., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objective: To summarize and synthesize qualitative studies that report patient and physician perspectives on continuity of care in family practice., Data Sources: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), and PsycInfo (Ovid) were searched for qualitative primary research reporting perspectives of patients, physicians, or both, on continuity of care in family practice., Study Selection: English-language qualitative studies were selected (eg, interviews, focus groups, mixed methods) that were conducted in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, New Zealand, or Australia., Synthesis: Themes were extracted, summarized, and synthesized. Six overarching themes emerged: continuity of care enables person-centred care; continuity of care increases quality of care; continuity of care leads to greater confidence in medical decision making; continuity of care comes with drawbacks; the absence of continuity of care may lead to medical and psychological harm; and continuity of care can foster greater joy and meaning in a physician's work. Out of the 6 themes, patients and physicians shared the first 5., Conclusion: To the authors' knowledge, this is the first qualitative review reporting the unique perspectives of both patients and family physicians on continuity of care. The findings add nuanced insight to the importance of continuity of care in family practice., (Copyright © 2021 the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Background: Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) requires adequate control of hypertension and diabetes. We designed and implemented pharmaceutical and healthy lifestyle interventions for patients with diabetes and/or hypertension in rural primary care, and assessed their effectiveness at reducing severe CVD events., Methods and Findings: We used a pragmatic, parallel group, 2-arm, controlled, superiority, cluster trial design. We randomised 67 township hospitals in Zhejiang Province, China, to intervention (34) or control (33). A total of 31,326 participants were recruited, with 15,380 in the intervention arm and 15,946 in the control arm. Participants had no known CVD and were either patients with hypertension and a 10-year CVD risk of 20% or higher, or patients with type 2 diabetes regardless of their CVD risk. The intervention included prescription of a standardised package of medicines, individual advice on lifestyle change, and adherence support. Control was usual hypertension and diabetes care. In both arms, as usual in China, most outpatient drug costs were out of pocket. The primary outcome was severe CVD events, including coronary heart disease and stroke, during 36 months of follow-up, as recorded by the CVD surveillance system. The study was implemented between December 2013 and May 2017. A total of 13,385 (87%) and 14,745 (92%) participated in the intervention and control arms, respectively. Their mean age was 64 years, 51% were women, and 90% were farmers. Of all participants, 64% were diagnosed with hypertension with or without diabetes, and 36% were diagnosed with diabetes only. All township hospitals and participants completed the 36-month follow-up. At 36 months, there were 762 and 874 severe CVD events in the intervention and control arms, respectively, yielding a non-significant effect on CVD incidence rate (1.92 and 2.01 per 100 person-years, respectively; crude incidence rate ratio = 0.90 [95% CI: 0.74, 1.08; P = 0.259]). We observed significant, but small, differences in the change from baseline to follow-up for systolic blood pressure (-1.44 mm Hg [95% CI: -2.26, -0.62; P < 0.001]) and diastolic blood pressure (-1.29 mm Hg [95% CI: -1.77, -0.80; P < 0.001]) in the intervention arm compared to the control arm. Self-reported adherence to recommended medicines was significantly higher in the intervention arm compared with the control arm at 36 months. No safety concerns were identified. Main study limitations include all participants being informed about their high CVD risk at baseline, non-blinding of participants, and the relatively short follow-up period available for judging potential changes in rates of CVD events., Conclusions: The comprehensive package of pharmaceutical and healthy lifestyle interventions did not reduce severe CVD events over 36 months. Improving health system factors such as universal coverage for the cost of essential medicines is required for successful risk-based CVD prevention programmes., Trial Registration: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN58988083., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Multimorbidity, often defined as having two or more chronic conditions is a global phenomenon. This study examined the association between key determinants identified by the chronic disease indicator framework and multimorbidity by rural and urban settings. The prevalence of individual diseases was also investigated by age and sex., Methods: The Canada Community Health Survey and linked health administrative databases were used to examine the association between multimorbidity, sociodemographic, behavioral, and other risk factors in the province of Ontario. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to conduct the main analysis., Results: Analyses were stratified by age (20-64 and 65-95) and area of residence (rural and urban). A total sample of n = 174,938 residents between the ages of 20-95 were examined in the Ontario province, of which 18.2% (n = 31,896) were multimorbid with 2 chronic conditions, and 23.4% (n = 40,883) with 3+ chronic conditions. Females had a higher prevalence of 2 conditions (17.9% versus 14.6%) and 3+ conditions (19.7% vs. 15.6%) relative to males. Out of all examined variables , poor self-perception of health, age, Body Mass Index, and income were most significantly associated with multimorbidity. Smoking was a significant risk factor in urban settings but not rural, while drinking was significant in rural and not urban settings. Income inequality was associated with multimorbidity with greater magnitude in rural areas. Prevalence of multimorbidity and having three or more chronic conditions were highest among low-income populations., Conclusion: Interventions targeting population weight, age/sex specific disease burdens, and additional focus on stable income are encouraged., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

An efficacious COVID-19 vaccine is currently the world's leading research priority. Several nations have indicated that if there is a compelling case for use of a vaccine before it is licensed, they would be prepared to authorise its emergency use or conditional approval on public health grounds. As of Dec 1, 2020, several developers of leading COVID-19 candidate vaccines have indicated that they have applied, or intend to apply, for emergency authorisation for their vaccines. Should candidate vaccines attain emergency use designation and be programmatically deployed before their phase 3 trials conclude, such a strategy could have far reaching consequences for COVID-19 vaccine research and the effective control of the COVID-19 pandemic. These issues merit careful consideration., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

As the world reflects upon one year since the first cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and prepare for and experience surges in cases, it is important to identify the most crucial ethical issues that might lie ahead so that countries are able to plan accordingly. Some ethical issues are rather obvious to predict, such as the ethical issues surrounding the use of immunity certificates, contact tracing, and the fair allocation of vaccines globally. Yet, the most significant ethical challenge that the world must address in the next year and beyond is to ensure that we learn the ethical lessons of the first year of this pandemic. Learning from our collective experiences thus far constitutes our greatest moral obligation. Appreciating that decision-making in the context of a pandemic is constrained by unprecedented complexity and uncertainty, beginning in June 2020, an international group of 17 experts in bioethics spanning 15 countries (including low-, middle-, and high-income countries) met virtually to identify what we considered to be the most significant ethical challenges and accompanying lessons faced thus far in the COVID-19 pandemic. Once collected, the group met over the course of several virtual meetings to identify challenges and lessons that are analytically distinct in order to identify common ethical themes under which different challenges and lessons could be grouped. The result, described in this paper, is what this expert group consider to be the top five ethical lessons from the initial experience with COVID-19 that must be learned., Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed., (Copyright: © 2021 Smith MJ et al.)

Objective: The aim of this review, conducted in April 2020, is to examine available national primary care guidelines for COVID-19 and to explore the ways in which these guidelines support primary care facilities in responding to the demands of the COVID-19 pandemic., Design: Rapid review and narrative synthesis., Data Sources: PubMed, Embase and Google, as well as the websites of relevant national health departments, were searched from 1 January 2020 to 24 April 2020., Eligibility Criteria: Documents included must be issued by a national health authority, must be specific to COVID-19 care, directed at healthcare workers or managers, and must refer to the role of primary care in the COVID-19 response., Results: We identified 17 documents from 14 countries. An adapted framework on primary care challenges and responses to pandemic influenza framed our analysis. Guidelines generally reported on COVID-19 service delivery and mostly made specific recommendations for ensuring continued delivery of essential primary care services through telehealth or other virtual care modalities. Few offered guidance to support surveillance as a public health function. All offered guidance on implementing outbreak control measures, largely through flexible and coordinated organisational models with partners from various sectors. There was a lack of guidance to support supply chain management and practice resilience in primary care, and lack of personal protective equipment represents a serious threat to the provision of quality care during the pandemic., Conclusions: Current national primary care guidelines for COVID-19 provide guidance on infection control and minimising the risk of spread in primary care practices, while supporting the use of new technology and coordinated partnerships. However, to ensure primary care practice resilience and quality of care are upheld, guidelines must offer recommendations on supply chain management and operational continuity, supported by adequate resources., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The most powerful lesson learned from the 2013-2016 outbreak of Ebola in West Africa was that we do not learn our lessons. A common sentiment at the time was that Ebola served as a "wake-up call"-an alarm which signalled that an outbreak of that magnitude should never have occurred and that we are ill-prepared globally to prevent and respond to them when they do. Pledges were made that we must learn from the outbreak before we were faced with another. Nearly five years later the world is in the grips of a pandemic of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It is therefore of no surprise that we are now yet again hearing that the COVID-19 pandemic serves as the "wake-up call" we need and that there are many lessons to be learned to better prepare us for future outbreaks. Will anything be different this time around? We argue that nothing will fundamentally change unless we truly understand and appreciate the nature of the lessons we should learn from these outbreaks. Our past failures must be understood as moral failures that offer moral lessons. Unless we appreciate that we have a defect in our collective moral attitude toward remediating the conditions that precipitate the emergence of outbreaks, we will never truly learn.

Despite their burden and high prevalence, mental health disorders of children and adolescents remain neglected in many parts of the world. In developing countries, where half of the population is younger than 18 years old, one of every five children and adolescents is estimated to suffer from a mental health disorder. It is then essential to detect these conditions through screening in a timely and accurate manner. But such screening is fraught with considerable ethical, social, and cultural challenges. This study systematically identifies, for the first time, these challenges, along with potential solutions to address them. We report on the results of an international multi- and inter-disciplinary three-round Delphi survey completed by 135 mental health experts from 37 countries. We asked these experts to identify and rank the main ethical, social, and cultural challenges of screening for child and adolescent mental health problems in developing nations, and to propose solutions for each challenge. Thirty-nine significant challenges emerged around eight themes, along with 32 potential solutions organized into seven themes. There was a high degree of consensus among the experts, but a few interesting disagreements arose between members of the panel from high-income countries and those from low- and middle-income nations. The panelists overwhelmingly supported mental health screening for children and adolescents. They recommended ensuring local acceptance and support for screening prior to program initiation, along with careful and comprehensive protection of human rights; integrating screening procedures into primary care; designing and implementing culturally appropriate screening tools, programs, and follow-up; securing long-term funding; expanding capacity building; and task-shifting screening to local non-specialists. These recommendations can serve as a guide for policy and decision-making, resource allocation, and international cooperation. They also offer a novel approach to reduce the burden of these disorders by encouraging their timely and context-sensitive prevention and management., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Objective: To identify the ethical challenges associated with the development and implementation of new tuberculosis (TB) drugs and diagnostics., Methods: Twenty-three semi-structured qualitative interviews conducted between December 2015 and September 2016 with programme administrators, healthcare workers, advocates, policymakers, and funders based in the Americas, Europe, and Africa. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis., Results: Divergent interests and responsibilities, coupled with power imbalances, are a primary source of ethical challenges; the uncertain risk profiles of new drugs present an additional one. Although this challenge can be partially mitigated through stringent pharmacovigilance, respondents highlighted that high-burden countries tend to lack the resources to facilitate safe implementation. Increased advocacy and community engagement are considered an ethical imperative for future TB development and implementation., Conclusions: This project helps identify some of the ethical challenges of new TB technologies. It demonstrates that investigating ethical challenges through qualitative research is one way to apprehend the difficulty of implementing new TB technologies. Addressing this difficulty will require that those in positions of power reconsider their interests in relation to disempowered communities., Policy Implications: Efforts to build consensus regarding what values should underpin the global governance of TB research, prevention, and care are essential to facilitate the ethical implementation of new TB technologies.

Objective: To investigate the experiences of family caregivers who participated in an innovative model of interprofessional team-based care specifically designed for elderly patients with complex care needs., Design: Qualitative study., Setting: Large academic family practice in Toronto, Ont., Participants: Family caregivers of elderly patients who had attended the IMPACT (Interprofessional Model of Practice for Aging and Complex Treatments) clinic (N = 13)., Methods: Individual semistructured interviews, which were conducted face-to-face, audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using the constant comparative method., Main Findings: Family caregivers who attended the IMPACT clinic believed it enhanced caregiver experience and capacity. Caregivers experienced increased validation and engagement with the treatment team. Feelings of isolation were reduced, resulting in increased confidence and greater feelings of empowerment in their caregiver role., Conclusion: While the needs and value of caregivers are increasingly acknowledged, health care teams continue to struggle with how to relate to and engage with family caregivers-how best to support them and work with them in the context of their family members' care. Interprofessional teams who adopt the IMPACT model-providing synchronous, real-time interventions that include the caregiver-can facilitate increased caregiver capacity, confidence, and empowerment., (Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)