Health TAPESTRY Ontario: A Multi-Site Randomized Controlled Trial Testing Implementation and Reproducibility.

PURPOSE: Health Teams Advancing Patient Experience: Strengthening Quality (Health TAPESTRY) is a complex primary care program aimed at assisting older adults to stay healthier for longer. This study evaluated the feasibility of implementation across multiple sites, and the reproducibility of the effects found in the previous randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This was a pragmatic, unblinded, 6-month parallel group randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized (intervention or control) using a computer-generated system. Eligible patients, aged 70 years and older, were rostered to 1 of 6 participating interprofessional primary care practices (urban and rural). In total, 599 (301 intervention, 298 control) patients were recruited from March 2018 through August 2019. Intervention participants received a home visit from volunteers to collect information on physical and mental health, and social context. An interprofessional care team created and implemented a plan of care. The primary outcomes were physical activity and number of hospitalizations. RESULTS: Based on the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, Health TAPESTRY had widespread reach and adoption. In the intention-to-treat analysis (257 intervention, 255 control), there were no statistically significant between-group differences for hospitalizations (incidence rate ratio = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.48-1.30; P = .35) or total physical activity (mean difference = -0.26; 95% CI, -1.18 to 0.67; P = .58). There were 37 non-study related serious adverse events (19 intervention, 18 control). CONCLUSIONS: We found Health TAPESTRY was successfully implemented for patients in diverse primary care practices; however, implementation did not reproduce the effect on hospitalizations and physical activity found in the initial randomized controlled trial.

The association between patients' frailty status, multimorbidity, and demographic characteristics and changes in primary care for chronic conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a pre-post study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of SARS-COV-2 (Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) pandemic on primary care management (frequency of monitoring activities, regular prescriptions, and test results) of older adults with common chronic conditions (diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease) and to examine whether any changes were associated with age, sex, neighbourhood income, multimorbidity, and frailty. METHODS: A research database from a sub-set of McMaster University Sentinel and Information Collaboration family practices was used to identify patients ≥65 years of age with a frailty assessment and 1 or more of the conditions. Patient demographics, chronic conditions, and chronic disease management information were retrieved. Changes from 14 months pre to 14 months since the pandemic were described and associations between patient characteristics and changes in monitoring, prescriptions, and test results were analysed using regression models. RESULTS: The mean age of the 658 patients was 75 years. While the frequency of monitoring activities and prescriptions related to chronic conditions decreased overall, there were no clear trends across sub-groups of age, sex, frailty level, neighbourhood income, or number of conditions. The mean values of disease monitoring parameters (e.g. blood pressure) did not considerably change. The only significant regression model demonstrated that when controlling for all other variables, patients with 2 chronic conditions and those with 4 or more conditions were twice as likely to have reduced numbers of eGFR (Estimated glomerular filtration rate) measures compared to those with only 1 condition ((OR (odds ratio) = 2.40, 95% CI [1.19, 4.87]); (OR = 2.19, 95% CI [1.12, 4.25]), respectively). CONCLUSION: In the first 14 months of the pandemic, the frequency of common elements of chronic condition care did not notably change overall or among higher-risk patients.

Assessing the application of continuity of care indices in the last year of life: a retrospective population-based study.

Context: Most people spend the majority of their last year of life at home or in a home-like setting, receiving outpatient healthcare. Increasing numbers of physicians and teams, including palliative care providers, may become involved in care in addition to a usual provider such as a family physician. Continuity of care (CoC) near the end of life, although considered a marker of quality of care, may be interrupted despite the provision of high-quality care. Objective: To describe continuity of outpatient physician care in the last 12 months of life and determine patient and illness-related factors associated with high continuity. Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Datasets: Linked population-based health administrative databases for Ontario, Canada, held at ICES. Population: Decedents aged 19 years or older, who died between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2017. Outcome Measures: Continuity of care scores for the last 12 months of life, using the Usual Provider continuity (UPC), Bice-Boxerman continuity (CoC), and Sequential Continuity (SECON) indices. Multivariate models were used to determine factors associated with higher continuity scores (>= 0.75). Results: Decedents (n=322,445) were on average 76.3 years of age, 47.8% were female, and 13.2% resided in rural regions. Decedents had a mean of 16.2 outpatient physician encounters in the last year of life, from a mean of 3.8 different physician specialties. Mean continuity indices' scores (1 being perfect) were low: UPC= 0.36, CoC= 0.31, and SECON= 0.37. Proportions of decedents with high continuity were: UPC= 12.6%, CoC= 9.6%, and SECON= 12.9%. Decedents who experienced a terminal illness (i.e., cancer) end-of-life trajectory were least likely to experience high UPC (OR= 0.32; 95% CI= 0.30, 0.34). Having six or more comorbidities (OR= 0.65; 95% CI= 0.63, 0.66), and being in the highest quintile of outpatient physician encounters (i.e., >22 visits) (OR= 0.28; 95% CI= 0.27, 0.29) were also negatively associated with high UPC. Results were similar for other indices. Conclusions: Decedents experience low continuity of outpatient physician care in the last year of life, especially those with cancer, comorbidities, and frequent physician visits. Modifications to existing indices may be needed to serve as end-of-life care quality indicators.

Palliative care physicians' motivations for models of practicing in the community: A qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, both primary care providers and palliative care specialists are required to address palliative care needs of our communities. Clarity on the roles of primary and specialist-level palliative care providers is needed in order to improve access to care. This study examines how community-based palliative care physicians apply their roles as palliative care specialists, what motivates them, and the impact that has on how they practice. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured virtual interviews of community-based palliative care specialists. We asked participants to describe their care processes and the factors that influence how they work. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured virtual interviews of community-based palliative care physicians in Ontario, Canada was undertaken between March and June 2020. At interview end, participants indicated whether their practice approaches aligned with one or more models depicted in a conceptual framework that includes consultation (specialist provides recommendations to the family physician) and takeover (palliative care physician takes over all care responsibility from the family physician) models. RESULTS: Of the 14 participants, 4 worked in a consultation model, 8 in a takeover model, and 2 were transitioning to a consultation model. Different motivators were found for the two practice models. In the takeover model, palliative care physicians were primarily motivated by their relationships with patients. In the consultation model, palliative care physicians were primarily motivated by their relationships with primary care. These differing motivations corresponded to differences in the day-to-day processes and outcomes of care. CONCLUSIONS: The physician's personal or internal motivators were drivers in their practice style of takeover versus consultative palliative care models. Awareness of these motivations can aid our understanding of current models of care and help inform strategies to enhance consultative palliative care models.

Achieving holistic, quality-of-life focused care: description of a Compassion Care Community initiative in Canada.

The compassionate community movement as both a public health approach and a social model of care for various life stages is gaining traction in Canada and elsewhere. One example is the Windsor-Essex Compassion Care Community (WECCC), an evidence-based model and set of tools to improve the quality of life, health and wellness of vulnerable and aging populations by identifying and addressing upstream and downstream social and other risks to physical and mental health. This paper presents findings from the WECCC pilot evaluation. The WECCC initiative provided one-on-one volunteer-supported quality of life assessment, resource navigation and goals support program (Catalyzing Community Connections). This was augmented with public education sessions on social connection and loneliness (Importance of Being Connected) for the broader population. The RE-AIM framework was used to frame evaluation of WECCC through the first 4 years. Questionnaires were used to evaluate participant outcomes related to implementation and effectiveness. Interviews and focus groups were completed to understand impacts. From 2017 to 2020, WECCC has engaged over 2,500 individuals, 65 organizations and 400 volunteers combined in both programs. Nearly all (82% to 95%) participants reported positive changes to health, quality of life and/or social connections. This developmental phase of a compassionate community initiative has allowed piloting of an evaluation framework focusing on reach, adoption, implementation and early signals of effectiveness and maintenance. This demonstration provides information on feasibility, acceptability and potential impacts of this type of over-arching community initiative.

The compassionate communities movement is a social and holistic approach to care that engages community members in caring for others. The movement is growing around the world. The philosophy is that all citizens benefit from participating in care for others who are aging, disabled, nearing end-of-life or struggling with determinants of health. The Windsor-Essex Compassion Care Community (WECCC) is a Canadian example of this model. WECCC seeks to improve the health of people at any stage of life by helping them to identify their life needs and goals and providing them support to meet them. The program has two core components: one-on-one volunteer-support for person-directed goals and navigation (Catalyzing Community Connections) and public education sessions about loneliness and social connection (Importance of Being Connected). Evaluation is a routine part of program delivery with questionnaires, interviews and focus groups used to understand the program's outcomes. From 2017 to 2020, WECCC has worked with over 2,500 individuals, 65 organizations and 400 volunteers. Satisfaction with the program is very high (95%). Nearly all participants reported positive changes to their quality of life (82%) and social connections (95%). Although pilot results are favorable, continued evaluation and stronger research designs are needed to comprehensively evaluate the WECCC program over time and to support growth and spread of the model.

Randomized Controlled Trial of a Decision Support Intervention About Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Hospitalized Patients Who Have a High Risk of Death.

BACKGROUND: Many seriously ill hospitalized patients have cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) as part of their care plan, but CPR is unlikely to achieve the goals of many seriously ill hospitalized patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a multicomponent decision support intervention changes documented orders for CPR in the medical record, compared to usual care. DESIGN: Open-label randomized controlled trial. PATIENTS: Patients on internal medicine and neurology wards at two tertiary care teaching hospitals who had a 1-year mortality greater than 10% as predicted with a validated model and whose care plan included CPR, if needed. INTERVENTION: Both the control and intervention groups received usual communication about CPR at the discretion of their care team. The intervention group participated in a values clarification exercise and watched a CPR video decision aid. MAIN MEASURE: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had a no-CPR order at 14 days after enrollment. KEY RESULTS: We recruited 200 patients between October 2017 and October 2018. Mean age was 77 years. There was no difference between the groups in no-CPR orders 14 days after enrollment (17/100 (17%) intervention vs 17/99 (17%) control, risk difference, - 0.2%) (95% confidence interval - 11 to 10%; p = 0.98). In addition, there were no differences between groups in decisional conflict summary score or satisfaction with decision-making. Patients in the intervention group had less conflict about understanding treatment options (decisional conflict knowledge subscale score mean (SD), 17.5 (26.5) intervention arm vs 40.4 (38.1) control; scale range 0-100 with lower scores reflecting less conflict). CONCLUSIONS: Among seriously ill hospitalized patients who had CPR as part of their care plan, this decision support intervention did not increase the likelihood of no-CPR orders compared to usual care. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Frailty Network, The Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization.

Impact of physician-based palliative care delivery models on health care utilization outcomes: A population-based retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Increasing involvement of palliative care generalists may improve access to palliative care. It is unknown, however, if their involvement with and without palliative care specialists are associated with different outcomes. AIM: To describe physician-based models of palliative care and their association with healthcare utilization outcomes including: emergency department visits, acute hospitalizations and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in last 30 days of life; and, place of death. DESIGN: Population-based retrospective cohort study using linked health administrative data. We used descriptive statistics to compare outcomes across three models (generalist-only palliative care; consultation palliative care, comprising of both generalist and specialist care; and specialist-only palliative care) and conducted a logistic regression for community death. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: All adults aged 18-105 who died in Ontario, Canada between April 1, 2012 and March 31, 2017. RESULTS: Of the 231,047 decedents who received palliative services, 40.3% received generalist, 32.3% consultation and 27.4% specialist palliative care. Across models, we noted minimal to modest variation for decedents with at least one emergency department visit (50%-59%), acute hospitalization (64%-69%) or ICU admission (7%-17%), as well as community death (36%-40%). In our adjusted analysis, receipt of a physician home visit was a stronger predictor for increased likelihood of community death (odds ratio 9.6, 95% confidence interval 9.4-9.8) than palliative care model (generalist vs consultation palliative care 2.0, 1.9-2.0). CONCLUSION: The generalist palliative care model achieved similar healthcare utilization outcomes as consultation and specialist models. Including a physician home visit component in each model may promote community death.

The little things are big: evaluation of a compassionate community approach for promoting the health of vulnerable persons.

BACKGROUND: Vulnerable persons are individuals whose life situations create or exacerbate vulnerabilities, such as low income, housing insecurity and social isolation. Vulnerable people often receive a patchwork of health and social care services that does not appropriately address their needs. The cost of health and social care services escalate when these individuals live without appropriate supports. Compassionate Communities apply a population health theory of practice wherein citizens are mobilized along with health and social care supports to holistically address the needs of persons experiencing vulnerabilities. AIM: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of a compassionate community intervention for vulnerable persons in Windsor Ontario, Canada. METHODS: This applied qualitative study was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We collected and analyzed focus group and interview data from 16 program stakeholders: eight program clients, three program coordinators, two case managers from the regional health authority, one administrator from a partnering community program, and two nursing student volunteers in March through June 2018. An iterative analytic process was applied to understand what aspects of the program work where and why. RESULTS: The findings suggest that the program acts as a safety net that supports people who are falling through the cracks of the formal care system. The 'little things' often had the biggest impact on client well-being and care delivery. The big and little things were achieved through three key processes: taking time, advocating for services and resources, and empowering clients to set personal health goals and make authentic community connections. CONCLUSION: Compassionate Communities can address the holistic, personalized, and client-centred needs of people experiencing homelessness and/or low income and social isolation. Volunteers are often untapped health and social care capital that can be mobilized to promote the health of vulnerable persons. Student volunteers may benefit from experiencing and responding to the needs of a community's most vulnerable members.

Frequency of providing a palliative approach to care in family practice: a chart review and perceptions of healthcare practitioners in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Most patients nearing the end of life can benefit from a palliative approach in primary care. We currently do not know how to measure a palliative approach in family practice. The objective of this study was to describe the provision of a palliative approach and evaluate clinicians' perceptions of the results. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive study of deceased patients in an interprofessional team family practice. We integrated conceptual models of a palliative approach to create a chart review tool to capture a palliative approach in the last year of life and assessed a global rating of whether a palliative approach was provided. Clinicians completed a questionnaire before learning the results and after, on perceptions of how often they believed a palliative approach was provided by the team. RESULTS: Among 79 patients (mean age at death 73 years, 54% female) cancer and cardiac diseases were the top conditions responsible for death. One-quarter of patients were assessed as having received a palliative approach. 53% of decedents had a documented discussion about goals of care, 41% had nurse involvement, and 15.2% had a discussion about caregiver well-being. These indicators had the greatest discrimination between a palliative approach or not. Agreement that elements of a palliative approach were provided decreased significantly on the clinician questionnaire from before to after viewing the results. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified measurable indicators of a palliative approach in family practice, that can be used as the basis for quality improvement.

Using a self-directed workbook to support advance care planning with long term care home residents.

BACKGROUND: While advance care planning (ACP) has been shown to improve the quality of end-of-life (EOL) communication and palliative care, it is rarely practiced in long term care (LTC) homes, where staff time to support the process is limited. This study examines the potential of a publicly available self-directed ACP workbook distributed to LTC residents to encourage ACP reflection and communication. METHODS: Recruitment took place across three LTC homes, between June 2018 and July 2019. To be eligible, residents had to have medical stability, cognitive capacity, and English literacy. The study employed a mixed methods concurrent design using the combination of ranked (quantitative) and open (qualitative) workbook responses to examine documented care preferences and ACP reflections and communications. RESULTS: 58 residents initially agreed to participate in the study of which 44 completed self-directed ACP workbooks. Our combined quantitative and qualitative results suggested that the workbooks supported the elicitation of a range of resident care preferences of relevance for EOL care planning and decision making. For example, ranked data highlighted that most residents want to remain involved in decisions pertaining to their care (70%), even though less than half expect their wishes to be applied without discretion (48%). Ranked data further revealed many residents value quality of life over quantity of life (55%) but a sizable minority are concerned they will not receive enough care at EOL (20%). Open comments affirmed and expanded on ranked data by capturing care preferences not explored in the ranked data such as preferences around spiritual care and post mortem planning. Analysis of all open comments also suggested that while the workbook elicited many reflections that could be readily communicated to family/friends or staff, evidence that conversations had occurred was less evident in recorded workbook responses. CONCLUSIONS: ACP workbooks may be useful for supporting the elicitation of resident care preferences and concerns in LTC. Developing follow up protocols wherein residents are supported in communicating their workbook responses to families/friends and staff may be a critical next step in improving ACP engagement in LTC. Such protocols would require staff training and an organizational culture that empowers staff at all levels to engage in follow up conversations with residents.

Advance care planning conversations in primary care: a quality improvement project using the Serious Illness Care Program.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) conversations are associated with improved end-of-life healthcare outcomes and patients want to engage in ACP with their healthcare providers. Despite this, ACP conversations rarely occur in primary care settings. The objective of this study was to implement ACP through adapted Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) training sessions, and to understand primary care provider (PCP) perceptions of implementing ACP into practice. METHODS: We conducted a quality improvement project guided by the Normalization Process Theory (NPT), in an interprofessional academic family medicine group in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. NPT is an explanatory model that delineates the processes by which organizations implement and integrate new work. PCPs (physicians, family medicine residents, and allied health care providers), completed pre- and post-SICP self-assessments evaluating training effectiveness, a survey evaluating program implementability and sustainability, and semi-structured qualitative interviews to elaborate on barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for successful implementation. Descriptive statistics and pre-post differences (Wilcoxon Sign-Rank test) were used to analyze surveys and thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative interviews. RESULTS: 30 PCPs participated in SICP training and completed self-assessments, 14 completed NoMAD surveys, and 7 were interviewed. There were reported improvements in ACP confidence and skills. NoMAD surveys reported mixed opinions towards ACP implementation, specifically concerning colleagues' abilities to conduct ACP and patients' abilities to participate in ACP. Physicians discussed busy clinical schedules, lack of patient preparedness, and continued discomfort or lack of confidence in having ACP conversations. Allied health professionals discussed difficulty sharing patient prognosis and identification of appropriate patients as barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Training in ACP conversations improved PCPs' individual perceived abilities, but discomfort and other barriers were identified. Future iterations will require a more systematic process to support the implementation of ACP into regular practice, in addition to addressing knowledge and skill gaps.

Low-acuity emergency department use among patients in different primary care models in Hamilton and Ontario.

Jurisdictions such as Hamilton, Ontario, where most primary care practices participate in patient enrolment models with enhanced after-hours access, may demonstrate overall improved health equity outcomes. Non-urgent Emergency Department (ED) use has been suggested as an indicator of primary care access; however, the impact of primary care access on ED use is uncertain and likely varies by patient and contextual factors. This population-based, retrospective study investigated whether or not different primary care models were associated with different rates of non-urgent ED visits in Hamilton, a city with relatively high neighbourhood marginalization, compared to the rest of Ontario from 2014/2015 to 2017/2018. In Ontario, enrolment capitation-based practices had more non-urgent ED visits than non-enrolment fee-for-service practices. In Hamilton, where most of the city's family physicians are in enrolment capitation-based practices, differences between models were minimal. The influence of primary care reforms may differ depending on how they are distributed within regions.

Implementing Advance Care Planning Tools in Practice: A Modified World Café to Elicit Barriers and Recommendations from Potential Adopters.

This paper reports findings from a modified World Café conducted at a palliative care professional conference in 2019, where input on tools to support advance care planning (ACP) was solicited from healthcare practitioners, managers and family members of patients. Barriers to ACP tool use included insufficient structures and resources in healthcare, death-avoidance culture and inadequate patient and family member engagement. Recommendations for tool use included clarification of roles and processes, training, mandates and monitoring, leadership support, greater reflection of diversity in tools and methods for public engagement. This paper illuminates factors to consider when implementing ACP tools in healthcare.

Effect of an Interactive Website to Engage Patients in Advance Care Planning in Outpatient Settings.

PURPOSE: Online programs may help to engage patients in advance care planning in outpatient settings. We sought to implement an online advance care planning program, PREPARE (Prepare for Your Care; http://www.prepareforyourcare.org), at home and evaluate the changes in advance care planning engagement among patients attending outpatient clinics. METHODS: We undertook a prospective before-and-after study in 15 primary care clinics and 2 outpatient cancer centers in Canada. Patients were aged 50 years or older (primary care) or 18 years or older (cancer care) and free of cognitive impairment. They used the PREPARE website over 6 weeks, with reminders sent at 2 or 4 weeks. We used the 55-item Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey, which measures behavior change processes (knowledge, contemplation, self-efficacy, readiness) on 5-point scales and actions relating to substitute decision makers, quality of life, flexibility for the decision maker, and asking doctors questions on an overall scale from 0 to 21; higher scores indicate greater engagement. RESULTS: In total, 315 patients were screened and 172 enrolled, of whom 75% completed the study (mean age = 65.6 years, 51% female, 35% had cancer). The mean behavior change process score was 2.9 (SD 0.8) at baseline and 3.5 (SD 0.8) at follow-up (mean change = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.49-0.73); the mean action measure score was 4.0 (SD 4.9) at baseline and 5.2 (SD 5.4) at follow-up (mean change = 1.2; 95% CI, 0.54-1.77). The effect size was moderate (0.75) for the former and small (0.23) for the latter. Findings were similar in both primary care and cancer care populations. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the online PREPARE program in primary care and cancer care clinics increased advance care planning engagement among patients.

Primary care clinicians' confidence, willingness participation and perceptions of roles in advance care planning discussions with patients: a multi-site survey.

BACKGROUND: People who engage in advance care planning (ACP) are more likely to receive health care that is concordant with their goals at the end of life. Little discussion of ACP occurs in primary care. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe primary care clinicians' perspectives on having ACP conversations with their patients. METHODS: We conducted a survey of family physicians and non-physician clinicians in primary care in 2014-2015. We compared family physicians and non-physician clinicians on willingness, confidence, participation and acceptability for other clinicians to engage in six aspects of ACP (initiating, exchanging information, decision coaching, finalizing plans, helping communicate plans with family members and other health professionals) on scales from 0 = not at all/extremely unacceptable to 6 = very/all the time/extremely acceptable. RESULTS: The response rate was 72% (n = 117) among family physicians and 69% (n = 64) among non-physician clinicians. Mean ratings (standard deviation [SD]) of willingness were high (4.5 [1.4] to 5.0 [1.2] for physicians; 3.4 [1.8] to 4.6 [1.6] non-physician clinicians). There was little participation (mean ratings 2.4 [1.7] to 2.7 [1.6] for physicians, 1.0 [1.5] to 1.4 [1.7] for non-physician clinicians). Non-physician clinicians rated confidence statistically significantly lower than physicians for all ACP aspects. Acceptability for non-physician clinician involvement was high in both groups (mean acceptability ratings greater than 4). CONCLUSION: Current engagement of primary care clinicians in ACP is low. Given the high willingness and acceptability for non-physician clinician involvement, increasing the capacity of non-physician clinicians could enable uptake of ACP in primary care.

Exploring patient-reported barriers to advance care planning in family practice.

BACKGROUND: Although patient-centred care has become increasingly important across all medical specialties, when it comes to end of life care, research has shown that treatments ordered are not often concordant with people's expressed preferences. Patient and family engagement in Advance Care Planning (ACP) in the primary care setting could improve the concordance between patients' wishes and the healthcare received when patients cannot speak for themselves. The aim of this study was to better understand the barriers faced by older patients regarding talking to their family members and family physicians about ACP. METHODS: In this multi-site cross-sectional study, three free text questions regarding reasons patients found it difficult to discuss ACP with their families or their family physicians were part of a self-administered questionnaire about patients' knowledge of and engagement in ACP. The questionnaire, which included closed ended questions followed by three probing open ended questions, was distributed in 20 family practices across 3 provinces in Canada. The free text responses were analyzed using thematic analysis and form the basis of this paper. RESULTS: One hundred two participants provided an analyzable response to the survey when asked why they haven't talked to someone about ACP. Two hundred fifty-four answered the question about talking to their physician and 340 answered the question about talking to family members. Eight distinct themes emerged from the free text response analysis: 1. They were too young for ACP; 2. The topic is too emotional; 3. The Medical Doctor (MD) should be responsible for bringing up ACP 4. A fear of negatively impacting the patient-physician relationship; 5. Not enough time in appointments; 6. Concern about family dynamics; 7. It's not a priority; and 8. A lack of knowledge about ACP. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in our sample described many barriers to ACP discussions, including concerns about the effect these discussions may have on relationships with both family members and family physicians, and issues relating to patients' knowledge and interpretation of the importance, responsibility for, or relevance of ACP itself. Family physicians may be uniquely placed to leverage the longitudinal, person- centred relationship they have with patients to mitigate some of these barriers.

Unpacking 'the cloud': a framework for implementing public health approaches to palliative care.

Designing and implementing population-based systems of care that address the social determinants of health, take action on multiple levels, and are guided by evidence-based principles is a pressing priority, and an international challenge. Aging persons are a priority demographic whose health needs span physical, psychosocial and existential care domains, increase in the last year of life, are often poorly coordinated and therefore remain unmet. Compassionate communities (CCs) are an example of a public health approach that fully addresses the holistic healthcare needs of those who are aging and nearing end of life. The sharing of resources, tools, and innovations among implementers of CCs is occurring globally. Although this can increase impact, it also generates complexity that can complicate robust evaluation. When initiating population health level projects, it is important to clearly define and organize concepts and processes that are proposed to influence the health outcomes. The Health Impact Change Model (HICM) was developed to unpack the complexities associated with the implementation and evaluation of a Canadian CC intervention. The HICM offers utility for citizens, leaders and decision-makers who are engaged in the implementation of population health level strategies or other social approaches to care, such as compassionate cities and age or dementia-friendly communities. The HICM's concepts can be adapted to address a community's healthcare context, needs, and goals for change. We share examples of how the model's major concepts have been applied in the development, evaluation and spread of a complex CC approach.

Understanding Why Frequent Users of EMS Call 9-1-1: A Grounded Theory Study.

INTRODUCTION: Frequent users of emergency medical services (EMS) have disproportionately high 9-1-1 call frequency. Evidence suggests that this small group burdens the health care system, leading to misallocation of already-limited health resources. AIM: To understand frequent users' perceptions and experiences regarding EMS, as well as the driving factors underlying their frequent use. METHOD: A grounded theory approach guided our qualitative research process. Participants older than 17 years who called EMS five or more times in the past year were consecutively sampled where each participant was contacted in the order they appeared on our list of potential participants for interviews until data saturation was achieved. Transcripts were analyzed to derive common themes among frequent EMS callers. RESULTS: Frequent EMS calls often resulted from chronic medical conditions creating recurrent crisis situations, mental health issues as well as mobility issues, frequent noninjurious falls, and social isolation. Combined with these factors, perceptions of the purpose of EMS and social circumstances also contributed to the creation of complex health issues that influenced frequent EMS use. These findings can advise the development of future paramedicine programs and health promotion interventions.

Social factors in frequent callers: a description of isolation, poverty and quality of life in those calling emergency medical services frequently.

BACKGROUND: Frequent users of emergency medical services (EMS) comprise a disproportionate percentage of emergency department (ED) visits. EDs are becoming increasingly overwhelmed and a portion of use by frequent callers of EMS is potentially avoidable. Social factors contribute to frequent use however few studies have examined their prevalence. This study aims to describe social isolation/loneliness, poverty, and quality of life in a sample of frequent callers of EMS in the Hamilton region, a southern Ontario mid-sized Canadian city. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional quantitative study. METHODS: We surveyed people who called EMS five or more times within 12 months. A mailed self-administered survey with validated tools, and focused on four major measures: demographic information, social isolation, poverty, and quality of life. RESULTS: Sixty-seven frequent EMS callers revealed that 37-49% were lonely, 14% had gone hungry in the preceding month, and 43% had difficulties making ends meet at the end of the month. For quality of life, 78% had mobility problems, 55% had difficulty with self-care, 78% had difficulty with usual activities, 87% experienced pain/discomfort, and 67% had anxiety/depression. Overall quality adjusted life years value was 0.53 on a scale of 0 to 1. The response rate was 41.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Loneliness in our participants was more common than Hamilton and Canadian rates. Frequent EMS callers had higher rates of poverty and food insecurity than average Ontario citizens, which may also act as a barrier to accessing preventative health services. Lower quality of life may indicate chronic illness, and users who cannot access ambulatory care services consistently may call EMS more frequently. Frequent callers of EMS had high rates of social loneliness and poverty, and low quality of life, indicating a need for health service optimization for this vulnerable population.

Barriers to and enablers of advance care planning with patients in primary care: Survey of health care providers.

OBJECTIVE: To identify barriers to and enablers of advance care planning (ACP) perceived by physicians and other health professionals in primary care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, self-administered survey. SETTING: Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Family physicians (n = 117) and other health professionals (n = 64) in primary care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perceived barriers relating to the clinician, characteristics of patients, and system factors, rated on a 7-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 6 (an extreme amount), and enablers reported using an open-ended question. RESULTS: Between November 2014 and June 2015, questionnaires were returned by 72.2% (117 of 162) of family physicians and 68.8% (64 of 93) of the other health professionals. Physicians rated insufficient time, inability to electronically transfer the advance care plan across care settings, decreased interaction with patients near the end of life owing to transfer of care, and patients' difficulty understanding limitations and complications of treatment options as the highest barriers. Other health professionals additionally identified their own lack of knowledge and difficulty accessing the physician as barriers. Themes identified as enablers included greater public engagement, clinician attitudes, creating capacity for clinicians, integrating ACP into practice, and system and policy supports. CONCLUSION: In primary care, there are barriers to engaging patients in ACP at the patient, provider, and system levels that could potentially be addressed through the informed development of multifaceted interventions.