Emergency care with lay responders in underserved populations: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the individual and community health effects of task shifting for emergency care in low-resource settings and underserved populations worldwide. METHODS: We systematically searched 13 databases and additional grey literature for studies published between 1984 and 2019. Eligible studies involved emergency care training for laypeople in underserved or low-resource populations, and any quantitative assessment of effects on the health of individuals or communities. We conducted duplicate assessments of study eligibility, data abstraction and quality. We synthesized findings in narrative and tabular format. FINDINGS: Of 19 308 papers retrieved, 34 studies met the inclusion criteria from low- and middle-income countries (21 studies) and underserved populations in high-income countries (13 studies). Targeted emergency conditions included trauma, burns, cardiac arrest, opioid poisoning, malaria, paediatric communicable diseases and malnutrition. Trainees included the general public, non-health-care professionals, volunteers and close contacts of at-risk populations, all trained through in-class, peer and multimodal education and public awareness campaigns. Important clinical and policy outcomes included improvements in community capacity to manage emergencies (14 studies), patient outcomes (13 studies) and community health (seven studies). While substantial effects were observed for programmes to address paediatric malaria, trauma and opioid poisoning, most studies reported modest effect sizes and two reported null results. Most studies were of weak (24 studies) or moderate quality (nine studies). CONCLUSION: First aid education and task shifting to laypeople for emergency care may reduce patient morbidity and mortality and build community capacity to manage health emergencies for a variety of emergency conditions in underserved and low-resource settings.

Improving Health and Healthcare Access for People Who Experience Imprisonment in Ontario.

People who experience imprisonment have worse health status than other Ontarians - about 40% lack access to primary care in the community, and the period after release from prison is associated with high risks of adverse health outcomes. Population-based correctional and health administrative data suggest that access to quality healthcare in prison and in the community needs to improve if we are to improve population health and deliver on healthcare obligations to people experiencing imprisonment.

Virtual opioid poisoning education and naloxone distribution programs: A scoping review.

The global opioid poisoning crisis is a complex issue with far-reaching public health implications. Opioid Poisoning Education and Naloxone Distribution (OPEND) programs aim to reduce stigma and promote harm reduction strategies, enhancing participants' ability to apply life-saving interventions, including naloxone administration and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to opioid poisoning. While virtual OPEND programs have shown promise in improving knowledge about opioid poisoning response, their implementation and evaluation have been limited. The COVID-19 pandemic has sparked renewed interest in virtual health services, including OPEND programs. Our study reviews the literature on fully virtual OPEND programs worldwide. We analyzed 7,722 articles, 30 of which met our inclusion criteria. We extracted and synthesized information about the interventions' type, content, duration, the scales used, and key findings. Our search shows a diversity of interventions being implemented, with different study designs, duration, outcomes, scales, and different time points for measurement, all of which hinder a meaningful analysis of interventions' effectiveness. Despite this, virtual OPEND programs appear effective in increasing knowledge, confidence, and preparedness to respond to opioid poisoning while improving stigma regarding people who use opioids. This effect appears to be true in a wide variety of populations but is significantly relevant when focused on laypersons. Despite increasing efforts, access remains an issue, with most interventions addressing White people in urban areas. Our findings offer valuable insights for the design, implementation, and evaluation of future virtual OPEND programs.

Respiratory infectious disease outbreaks among people experiencing homelessness: a systematic review of prevention and mitigation strategies.

PURPOSE: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) are at increased risk of respiratory infections and associated morbidity and mortality. To characterize optimal intervention strategies, we completed a systematic review of mitigation strategies for PEH to minimize the spread and impact of respiratory infectious disease outbreaks, including COVID-19. METHODS: The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (#2020 CRD42020208964) and was consistent with the preferred reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. A search algorithm containing keywords that were synonymous to the terms "Homeless" and "Respiratory Illness" was applied to the six databases. The search concluded on September 22, 2020. Quality assessment was performed at the study level. Steps were conducted by two independent team members. RESULTS: A total of 4468 unique titles were retrieved with 21 meeting criteria for inclusion. Interventions included testing, tracking, screening, infection prevention and control, isolation support, and education. Historically, there has been limited study of intervention strategies specifically for PEH across the world. CONCLUSIONS: Staff and organizations providing services for people experiencing homelessness face specific challenges in adhering to public health guidelines such as physical distancing, isolation, and routine hygiene practices. There is a discrepancy between the burden of infectious diseases among PEH and specific research characterizing optimal intervention strategies to mitigate transmission in the context of shelters. Improving health for people experiencing homelessness necessitates investment in programs scaling existing interventions and research to study new approaches.

Limited evidence that emergency department care is more costly than other outpatient settings for low-acuity conditions: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Caring for patients with low-acuity conditions in Emergency Departments (ED) is often thought to cost more than treating those patients in other ambulatory settings. Understanding the relative cost of care between settings has critical implications for healthcare policy and system design. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of papers comparing the cost of care for low-acuity and ambulatory care sensitive conditions in ED and other outpatient settings. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science for peer reviewed papers, plus Google for grey literature. We conducted duplicate screening and data extraction, and quality assessment of included studies using an adapted SIGN checklist for economic studies. We calculated an unweighted mean charge ratio across studies and summarized our findings in narrative and tabular format. RESULTS: We identified one study comparing costs. 18 studies assessed physician or facility charges, conducted in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada, including cohort analyses (5), charge analyses (5), survey (1), and database searches (5) assessing populations ranging from 370 participants to 60 million. Charge ratios ranged from 0.60 to 13.45 with an unweighted mean of 4.20. Most (12) studies were of acceptable quality. CONCLUSION: No studies since 2001 assess the comparative costs of ED versus non-ED care for low-acuity ambulatory conditions. Physician and facility charges for ED care are higher than in other ambulatory settings for low-acuity conditions. Empirical evidence is lacking to support that ED care is more costly than similar care in other ambulatory settings.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: La prise en charge des patients souffrant d'affections de faible gravité dans les services d'urgence est souvent considérée comme plus coûteuse que la prise en charge de ces mêmes patients dans d'autres structures ambulatoires. Comprendre le coût relatif des soins entre les différents environnements a des implications cruciales pour la politique des soins de santé et la conception des systèmes. MéTHODES: Nous avons procédé à un examen systématique des documents comparant le coût des soins pour les affections à faible gravité et les affections sensibles aux soins ambulatoires dans les services d'urgence et dans d'autres établissements de soins ambulatoires. Nous avons effectué des recherches dans PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL et Web of Science pour les articles évalués par des pairs, ainsi que dans Google pour la littérature grise. Nous avons procédé à une double sélection et à une extraction des données, ainsi qu'à une évaluation de la qualité des études incluses à l'aide d'une liste de contrôle SIGN adaptée aux études économiques. Nous avons calculé un ratio moyen non pondéré pour l'ensemble des études et avons résumé nos conclusions sous forme de texte et de tableau. RéSULTATS: Nous avons identifié une étude comparant les coûts. 18 études ont évalué les frais des médecins ou des établissements, menées aux États-Unis, au Royaume-Uni et au Canada, y compris des analyses de cohortes (5), des analyses de frais (5), des enquêtes (1) et des recherches dans des bases de données (5) évaluant des populations allant de 370 participants à 60 millions de personnes. Les taux d'imputation allaient de 0,60 à 13,45, avec une moyenne non pondérée de 4,20. La plupart des études (12) étaient de qualité acceptable. CONCLUSION: Depuis 2001, aucune étude n'a évalué les coûts comparatifs des soins aux urgences par rapport aux soins hors urgences pour les affections ambulatoires de faible gravité. Les honoraires des médecins et des établissements pour les soins aux urgences sont plus élevés que dans d'autres structures ambulatoires pour les affections de faible gravité. Il n'existe pas de données empiriques permettant d'affirmer que les soins aux urgences sont plus coûteux que des soins similaires dispensés dans d'autres structures ambulatoires.

Mixed methods feasibility study for the surviving opioid overdose with naloxone education and resuscitation (SOONER) trial.

AIM: We plan to conduct a randomised clinical trial among people likely to witness opioid overdose to compare the educational effectiveness of point-of-care naloxone distribution with best-available care, by observing participants' resuscitation skills in a simulated overdose. This mixed methods feasibility study aims to assess the effectiveness of recruitment and retention strategies and acceptability of study procedures. METHODS: We implemented candidate-driven recruitment strategies with verbal consent and destigmatizing study materials in a family practice, emergency department, and addictions service. People ≥16 years of age who are likely to witness overdose were randomized to point-of-care naloxone distribution or referral to an existing program. We evaluated participant skills as a responder to a simulated overdose 3-14 days post-recruitment. Retention strategies included flexible scheduling, reminders, cash compensation and refreshments. The primary outcome was recruitment and retention feasibility, defined as the ability to recruit 28 eligible participants in 28 days, with <50% attrition at the outcome simulation. Acceptability of study procedures and motivations for participation were assessed in a semi-structured interview. RESULTS: We enrolled 30 participants over 24 days, and retained 21 participants (70%, 95%CI 56.7-100). The most common motivation for participation was a desire to serve the community or loved ones in distress. Participants reported that study procedures were acceptable and that the outcome simulation provided a supportive and affirming environment. CONCLUSION: The planned trial is ready for implementation. Recruitment and retention is feasible and study processes are acceptable for people who are likely to witness overdose. (Registration: NCT03821649).

CAEP Position Statement: Emergency department management of people with opioid use disorder.

Deaths due to opioid overdose have reached unprecedented levels in Canada; over 12,800 opioid-related deaths occurred between January 2016 and March 2019, and overdose death rates increased by approximately 50% from 2016 to 2018.1 In 2016, Health Canada declared the opioid epidemic a national public health crisis,2 and life expectancy increases have halted in Canada for the first time in decades.3 Children are not exempt from this crisis, and the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada has recently prioritized the prevention of problematic substance use among Canadian youth.4.

Defining and measuring health equity in research on task shifting in high-income countries: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Task shifting interventions have been implemented to improve health and address health inequities. Little is known about how inequity and vulnerability are defined and measured in research on task shifting. We conducted a systematic review to identify how inequity and vulnerability are identified, defined and measured in task shifting research from high-income countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We implemented a novel search process to identify programs of research concerning task shifting interventions in high-income countries. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and CENTRAL to identify articles published from 2004 to 2016. Each program of research incorporated a "parent" randomized trial and "child" publications or sub-studies arising from the same research group. Two investigators extracted (1) study details, (2) definitions and measures of health equity or population vulnerability, and (3) assessed the quality of the reporting and measurement of health equity and vulnerability using a five-point scale developed for this study. We summarized the findings using a narrative approach. RESULTS: Fifteen programs of research met inclusion criteria, involving 15 parent randomized trials and 62 child publications. Included programs of research were all undertaken in the United States, among Hispanic- (5/15), African- (2/15), and Korean-Americans (1/15), and low socioeconomic status (2/15), rural (2/15) and older adult populations (2/15). Task shifting interventions included community health workers, peers, and a variety of other non-professional and lay workers to address a range of non-communicable diseases. Some research provided robust analyses of the affected populations' health inequities and demonstrated how a task shifting intervention redressed those concerns. Other studies provided no such definitions and measured only biomedical endpoints. CONCLUSION: Included studies vary substantially in the definition and measurement of health inequity and vulnerability. A more precise theoretical and evaluative framework for task shifting is recommended to effectively achieve the goal of equitable health.