Role of Antioxidant Therapy in the Treatment and Prognosis of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background: A significant aspect of the SARS-CoV-2 pathology involves oxidative stress, characterized by an imbalance between the production of harmful free radicals and the body's antioxidant defenses. With the ongoing evolution of SARS-CoV-2, the investigation into non-virus-specific therapeutic options, such as antioxidant therapy, has gained importance. Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize data from randomized control trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of antioxidant therapy in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: We searched the peer-reviewed indexed literature on MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Scopus, from inception to July 2023. Results: The search identified 3306 articles from which 25 were included for quantitative synthesis, with 5 studies eligible for meta-analysis. Antioxidant therapies included zinc, vitamin A, vitamin C, and combination treatments. Zinc interventions showed mixed results regarding intensive care unit admissions and hospital stays. Vitamin A studies indicated improvements in inflammatory markers. Vitamin C studies displayed inconsistent effects on clinical improvement and hospitalization. Combination treatments suggested benefits in symptom clearance and cytokine storm reduction. Meta-analysis of vitamin C studies found no significant difference in C-reactive protein concentrations (-0.50; 95% CI: -3.63, 2.63; I2 = 0%), intensive care unit stay duration (pooled mean difference: 1.44; 95% CI: 0.07, 2.81; I2 = 0%), or mortality (pooled odds ratio: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.28, 1.09; I2 = 0%), with a slight trend favoring reduced hospitalization duration (pooled mean difference: -2.37; 95% CI: -2.99, -1.76; I2 = 49%). Of the 25 studies, 8 were high quality with low bias, 6 had some concerns, and 11 were low quality with high bias. Conclusions: The review presents mixed efficacy of antioxidant therapies for SARS-CoV-2, with some studies indicating potential benefits. Further well-designed large-scale RCTs are warranted to determine the definitive role of antioxidants in SARS-CoV-2 treatment.This systematic review was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42023430805.

Advocating for Policy Change: Examples Emerging From a Medical-Legal Partnership in Primary Care.

Medical-legal partnerships bring legal services directly into clinical settings. Policy advocacy is often opportunistic and varies across partnerships. Our objective was to study policy advocacy that emerged from a medical-legal partnership in Toronto over a four-year period. This study consisted of a document review and thematic analysis, triangulated with data from interviews with legal team members and health providers. We defined policy advocacy as actions associated with attempts to change policy or legislation. The medical-legal partnership engaged in seven distinct cases of policy advocacy: disability support form requirements, changing workplace review, challenging barriers to citizenship, housing, publicly funded medication program (pharma care), safe injection sites, and the need for increased social assistance. Actions taken included presentations at conferences and submissions of briefs to government. We found that a medical-legal partnership resulted in policy advocacy with issues arising from both the health and the legal team with impacts likely greater than if each group had acted alone.

Adaptation and qualitative evaluation of the BETTER intervention for chronic disease prevention and screening by public health nurses in low income neighbourhoods: views of community residents.

BACKGROUND: The BETTER intervention is an effective comprehensive evidence-based program for chronic disease prevention and screening (CDPS) delivered by trained prevention practitioners (PPs), a new role in primary care. An adapted program, BETTER HEALTH, delivered by public health nurses as PPs for community residents in low income neighbourhoods, was recently shown to be effective in improving CDPS actions. To obtain a nuanced understanding about the CDPS needs of community residents and how the BETTER HEALTH intervention was perceived by residents, we studied how the intervention was adapted to a public health setting then conducted a post-visit qualitative evaluation by community residents through focus groups and interviews. METHODS: We first used the ADAPT-ITT model to adapt BETTER for a public health setting in Ontario, Canada. For the post-PP visit qualitative evaluation, we asked community residents who had received a PP visit, about steps they had taken to improve their physical and mental health and the BETTER HEALTH intervention. For both phases, we conducted focus groups and interviews; transcripts were analyzed using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Thirty-eight community residents participated in either adaptation (n = 14, 64% female; average age 54 y) or evaluation (n = 24, 83% female; average age 60 y) phases. In both adaptation and evaluation, residents described significant challenges including poverty, social isolation, and daily stress, making chronic disease prevention a lower priority. Adaptation results indicated that residents valued learning about CDPS and would attend a confidential visit with a public health nurse who was viewed as trustworthy. Despite challenges, many recipients of BETTER HEALTH perceived they had achieved at least one personal CDPS goal post PP visit. Residents described key relational aspects of the visit including feeling valued, listened to and being understood by the PP. The PPs also provided practical suggestions to overcome barriers to meeting prevention goals. CONCLUSIONS: Residents living in low income neighbourhoods faced daily stress that reduced their capacity to make preventive lifestyle changes. Key adapted features of BETTER HEALTH such as public health nurses as PPs were highly supported by residents. The intervention was perceived valuable for the community by providing access to disease prevention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: #NCT03052959, 10/02/2017.

A Brief Tool to Screen Patients for Precarious Employment: A Validation Study.

PURPOSE: Precarious employment, defined by temporary contracts, unstable employment, or job insecurity, is increasingly common and is associated with inconsistent access to benefits, lower income, and greater exposure to physical and psycholosocial hazards. Clinicians can benefit from a simple approach to screen for precarious employment to improve their understanding of a patient's social context, help with diagnoses, and inform treatment plans and intersectional interventions. Our objective was to validate a screening tool for precarious employment. METHODS: We used a 3-item screening tool that covered key aspects of precarious employment: non-standard employment, variable income, and violations of occupational health and safety rights and protections. Answers were compared with classification using the Poverty and Employment Precarity in Southern Ontario Employment Index. Participants were aged 18 years and older, fluent in English, and employed. They were recruited in 7 primary care clinic waiting rooms in Toronto, Canada over 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 204 people aged 18-72 years (mean 38 [SD 11.3]) participated, of which 93 (45.6%) identified as men and 119 (58.3%) self-reported as White. Participants who reported 2 or more of the 3 items as positive were almost 4 times more likely to be precariously employed (positive likelihood ratio = 3.84 [95% CI, 2.15-6.80]). CONCLUSIONS: A 3-item screening tool can help identify precarious employment. Our tool is useful for starting a conversation about employment precarity and work conditions in clinical settings. Implementation of this screening tool in health settings could enable better targeting of resources for managing care and connecting patients to legal and employment support services.

An evaluation of an employment assistance program focused on people living with HIV in Toronto, Canada.

Unemployment is more common among people living with HIV (PLWH) compared to the general population. PLWH who are employed have better physical and mental health outcomes compared to unemployed PLWH. The main objective of this mixed-methods study was to conduct a program evaluation of Employment Action (EACT), a community-based program that assists PLWH in Toronto, Ontario, Canada to maintain meaningful employment. We extracted quantitative data from two HIV services databases used by EACT, and collected qualitative data from 12 individuals who had been placed into paid employment through EACT. From 131 clients included in the analysis, 38.1% (n = 50) maintained their job for at least 6 weeks within the first year of enrollment in the EACT program. Gender, ethnicity, age, and first language did not predict employment maintenance. Our interviews highlighted the barriers and facilitators to effective service delivery. Key recommendations include implementing skills training, embedding PLWH as EACT staff, and following up with clients once they gain employment. Investment in social programs such as EACT are essential for strengthening their data collection capacity, active outreach to service users, and sufficient planning for the evaluation phase prior to program implementation.

Screening for poverty and related social determinants to improve knowledge of and links to resources (SPARK): development and cognitive testing of a tool for primary care.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare organizations are increasingly exploring ways to address the social determinants of health. Accurate data on social determinants is essential to identify opportunities for action to improve health outcomes, to identify patterns of inequity, and to help evaluate the impact of interventions. The objective of this study was to refine a standardized tool for the collection of social determinants data through cognitive testing. METHODS: An initial set of questions on social determinants for use in healthcare settings was developed by a collaboration of hospitals and a local public health organization in Toronto, Canada during 2011-2012. Subsequent research on how patients interpreted the questions, and how they performed in primary care and other settings led to revisions. We administered these questions and conducted in-depth cognitive interviews with all the participants, who were from Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, and Newfoundland and Labrador. Cognitive interviewing was used, with participants invited to verbalize thoughts and feelings as they read the questions. Interview notes were grouped thematically, and high frequency themes were addressed. RESULTS: Three hundred and seventy-five individuals responded to the study advertisements and 195 ultimately participated in the study. Although all interviews were conducted in English, participants were diverse. For many, the value of this information being collected in typical healthcare settings was unclear, and hence, we included descriptors for each question. In general, the questions were understood, but participants highlighted a number of ways the questions could be changed to be even clearer and more inclusive. For example, more response options were added to the question of sexual orientation and the "making ends meet" question was completely reworded in light of challenges to understand the informal phrasing cited by English as a Second Language (ESL) users of the tool. CONCLUSION: In this work we have refined an initial set of 16 sociodemographic and social needs questions into a simple yet comprehensive 18-question tool. The changes were largely related to wording, rather than content. These questions require validation against accepted, standardized tools. Further work is required to enable community data governance, and to ensure implementation of the tool as well as the use of its data is successful in a range of organizations.

Eviction filings during bans on enforcement throughout the COVID-19 pandemic: an interrupted time series analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Bans on evictions were implemented to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and to protect vulnerable populations during a public health crisis. Our objective was to examine how three bans on eviction enforcement impacted eviction filings from March 2020 through January 2022 in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Data were derived from eviction application records kept by the Ontario Landlord and Tenant Board. We used segmented regression analysis to model changes in the average weekly filing rates for evictions due to non-payment of rent (L1 filings) and reasons other than non-payment of rent (L2 filings). RESULTS: The average number of weekly L1 and L2 applications dropped by 67.5 (95% CI: 55.2, 79.9) and 31.7 (95% CI: 26.7, 36.6) filings per 100,000 rental dwellings, respectively, following the first ban on eviction enforcement (p < 0.0001). Notably, they did not fall to zero. Level changes during the second and third bans were insubstantial and slope changes for L2 applications varied throughout the study period. The L1 filing rate appeared to increase towards the end of the study period (slope change: 1.3; 95% CI: 0.1, 2.6; p = 0.0387). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that while the first ban on eviction enforcement appeared to substantially reduce filing rates, subsequent bans were less effective and none of them eliminated eviction filings altogether. Enacting upstream policies that tackle the root causes of displacement would better equip jurisdictions during future public health emergencies.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les ordonnances d'expulsion résidentielles ont été suspendues pour réduire la propagation de la COVID-19 et pour protéger les populations vulnérables pendant une crise de santé publique. Notre objectif était d'examiner l'impact de trois interdictions d'exécution d'ordonnance d'éviction sur les requêtes d'expulsion de mars 2020 à janvier 2022 en Ontario, au Canada. MéTHODES: Les données ont été tirées des dossiers de requêtes d'expulsion conservés par la Commission de la location immobilière de l'Ontario. Nous avons utilisé une analyse de régression segmenté pour modéliser les changements dans les taux hebdomadaires moyens de requêtes d'expulsion pour non-paiement du loyer (requêtes L1) et pour des raisons autres que le non-paiement du loyer (requêtes L2). RéSULTATS: Le nombre moyen de demandes hebdomadaires de dépôts de requêtes L1 et L2 a chuté de 67,5 % (IC à 95% : 55,2, 79,9) et de 31,7 % (IC à 95% : 26,7, 36,6) pour 100 000 logements locatifs, respectivement, suite à la première interdiction d'exécution des expulsions. Il est à noter qu'elles ne sont pas tombées à zéro. Les changements du taux de requêtes au cours de la deuxième et la troisième interdictions n'étaient pas substantiels et les changements de pente pour les applications L2 ont varié tout au long de la période d'étude. Le taux de dépôt de L1 a semblé augmenter vers la fin de la période d'étude (changement de pente : 1,3; IC à 95% : 0,1, 2,6; p = 0,0387). CONCLUSION: Nos résultats suggèrent qu'alors que la première interdiction d'exécution des expulsions a semblé réduire considérablement les taux de dépôt d'expulsion, les interdictions ultérieures ont été moins efficaces et aucune d'entre elles n'a complètement éliminé les dépôts d'expulsion. L'adoption de politiques en amont qui s'attaquent plutôt aux causes profondes des expulsions permettrait de mieux équiper les juridictions lors de futures urgences de santé publique.

Addressing health inequity during the COVID-19 pandemic through primary health care and public health collaboration: a multiple case study analysis in eight high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic substantially magnified the inequity gaps among vulnerable populations. Both public health (PH) and primary health care (PHC) have been crucial in addressing the challenges posed by the pandemic, especially in the area of vulnerable populations. However, little is known about the intersection between PH and PHC as a strategy to mitigate the inequity gap. This study aims to assess the collaboration between PHC and PH with a focus on addressing the health needs of vulnerable populations during the COVID-19 pandemic across jurisdictions. METHODS: We analyzed and compared data from jurisdictional reports of COVID-19 pandemic responses in PHC and PH in Belgium, Canada (Ontario), Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, and Spain from 2020 to 2021. RESULTS: Four themes emerge from the analysis: (1) the majority of the countries implemented outreach strategies targeting vulnerable groups as a means to ensure continued access to PHC; (2) digital assessment in PHC was found to be present across all the countries; (3) PHC was insufficiently represented at the decision-making level; (4) there is a lack of clear communication channels between PH and PHC in all the countries. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified opportunities for collaboration between PHC and PH to reduce inequity gaps and to improve population health, focusing on vulnerable populations. The COVID-19 response in these eight countries has demonstrated the importance of an integrated PHC system. Consequently, the development of effective strategies for responding to and planning for pandemics should take into account the social determinants of health in order to mitigate the unequal impact of COVID-19. Careful, intentional coordination between PH and PHC should be established in normal times as a basis for effective response during future public health emergencies. The pandemic has provided significant insights on how to strengthen health systems and provide universal access to healthcare by fostering stronger connections between PH and PHC.

Promise and peril: how health system reforms impacted public health in three Canadian provinces.

OBJECTIVES: Several Canadian provinces and territories have reformed their health systems by centralizing power, resources, and responsibilities. Our study explored motivating factors and perceived impacts of centralization reforms on public health systems and essential operations. METHODS: A multiple case study design was used to examine three Canadian provinces that have undergone, or are in the process of undergoing, health system reform. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 58 participants within public health at strategic and operational levels, from Alberta, Ontario, and Québec. Data were analyzed using a thematic analytical approach to iteratively conceptualize and refine themes. RESULTS: Three major themes were developed to describe the context and impacts of health system centralization reforms on public health: (1) promising "value for money" and consolidating authority; (2) impacting intersectoral and community-level collaboration; and (3) deprioritizing public health operations and contributing to workforce precarity. Centralization highlighted concerns about the prioritization of healthcare sectors. Some core public health functions were reported to operate more efficiently, with less duplication of services, and improvements in program consistency and quality, particularly in Alberta. Reforms were also reported to have diverted funding and human resources away from core essential functions, and diminished the public health workforce. CONCLUSION: Our study highlighted that stakeholder priorities and a limited understanding about public health systems influenced how reforms were implemented. Our findings support calls for modernized and inclusive governance, stable public health funding, and investment in the public health workforce, which may help inform future reforms.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Plusieurs provinces et territoires canadiens ont réformé leur système de santé en centralisant le pouvoir, les ressources et les responsabilités. Notre étude a exploré les facteurs sous-jacents et les impacts perçus des réformes de centralisation sur les systèmes et les opérations essentielles de santé publique. MéTHODES: Nous avons mené une étude de cas multiples pour examiner la situation de trois provinces canadiennes qui ont subi ou qui sont en train de réaliser une réforme du système de santé. Des entrevues semi-structurées ont été menées auprès de 58 participants de la santé publique aux niveaux stratégique et opérationnel, en Alberta, en Ontario et au Québec. De façon itérative, nous avons thématiquement analysé les données recueillies. RéSULTATS: Trois thèmes principaux ont été formulés pour décrire le contexte et les impacts des réformes de centralisation du système de santé sur la santé publique : 1) la promesse d'une « optimisation des ressources ¼ et la consolidation de l'autorité, 2) l'impact sur la collaboration intersectorielle et communautaire, et 3) la privatisation des opérations de santé publique et la précarisation de la main-d'œuvre. La centralisation a mis en lumière des préoccupations quant à la priorité accordée aux services de santé. Certaines fonctions essentielles de la santé publique fonctionneraient de manière plus efficace, avec moins de dédoublement des services et des améliorations de la cohérence et de la qualité des programmes, notamment en Alberta. Les réformes auraient aussi détourné des fonds et des ressources humaines des fonctions essentielles de base et auraient réduit les effectifs de la santé publique. CONCLUSION: Notre étude a mis en exergue les priorités des parties prenantes et une compréhension limitée des systèmes de santé publique qui ont influencé la manière dont les réformes ont été mises en œuvre. Nos résultats soutiennent les appels à une gouvernance plus modernisée et inclusive, à un financement stable de la santé publique et à un investissement dans le personnel de santé publique, pouvant ainsi contribuer à alimenter les futures réformes.

"Addressing the bigger picture": A qualitative study of internal medicine patients' perspectives on social needs data collection and use.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in collecting sociodemographic and social needs data in hospital settings to inform patient care and health equity. However, few studies have examined inpatients' views on this data collection and what should be done to address social needs. This study describes internal medicine inpatients' perspectives on the collection and use of sociodemographic and social needs information. METHODS: A qualitative interpretive description methodology was used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 patients admitted to a large academic hospital in Toronto, Canada. Participants were recruited using maximum variation sampling for diverse genders, races, and those with and without social needs. Interviews were coded using a predominantly inductive approach and a thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Patients expressed that sociodemographic and social needs data collection is important to offer actionable solutions to address their needs. Patients described a gap between their ideal care which would attend to social needs, versus the reality that hospital-based teams are faced with competing priorities and pressures that make it unfeasible to provide such care. They also believed that this data collection could facilitate more holistic, integrated care. Patients conveyed a need to have a trusting and transparent relationship with their provider to alleviate concerns surrounding bias, discrimination, and confidentiality. Lastly, they indicated that sociodemographic and social needs data could be useful to inform care, support research to inspire social change, and assist them with navigating community resources or creating in-hospital programs to address unmet social needs. CONCLUSIONS: While the collection of sociodemographic and social needs information in hospital settings is generally acceptable, there were varied views on whether hospital staff should intervene, as their priority is medical care. The results can inform the implementation of social data collection and interventions in hospital settings.

Effect of Free Medicine Distribution on Health Care Costs in Canada Over 3 Years: A Secondary Analysis of the CLEAN Meds Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Few interventions are proven to reduce total health care costs, and addressing cost-related nonadherence has the potential to do so. Objective: To determine the effect of eliminating out-of-pocket medication fees on total health care costs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized clinical trial using a prespecified outcome took place across 9 primary care sites in Ontario, Canada (6 in Toronto and 3 in rural areas), where health care services are generally publicly funded. Adult patients (≥18 years old) reporting cost-related nonadherence to medicines in the past 12 months were recruited between June 1, 2016, and April 28, 2017, and followed up until April 28, 2020. Data analysis was completed in 2021. Interventions: Access to a comprehensive list of 128 medicines commonly prescribed in ambulatory care with no out-of-pocket costs for 3 years vs usual medicine access. Main Outcome and Measures: Total publicly funded health care costs over 3 years, including costs of hospitalizations. Health care costs were determined using administrative data from Ontario's single-payer health care system, and all costs are reported in Canadian dollars with adjustments for inflation. Results: A total of 747 participants from 9 primary care sites were included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 51 [14] years; 421 [56.4%] female). Free medicine distribution was associated with a lower median total health care spending over 3 years of $1641 (95% CI, $454-$2792; P = .006). Mean total spending was $4465 (95% CI, -$944 to $9874) lower over the 3-year period. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, eliminating out-of-pocket medication expenses for patients with cost-related nonadherence in primary care was associated with lower health care spending over 3 years. These findings suggest that eliminating out-of-pocket medication costs for patients could reduce overall costs of health care. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02744963.

Healthcare system action on employment as a social determinant of health in people living with HIV: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Employment is a key social determinant of health. People living with HIV (PLWH) have higher unemployment rates than the general population. Vocational rehabilitation services have been shown to have significant and positive impact on employment status for PLWH. Understanding whether integrating vocational rehabilitation with health care services is acceptable, from the perspectives of PLWH and their health care providers, is an area that is understudied. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study and collected data from focus groups and interviews to understand the perspectives of stakeholders regarding the potential for vocational rehabilitation and health care integration. We completed five focus groups with 45 health care providers and one-to-one interviews with 23 PLWHs. Participants were sampled from infectious disease, primary care clinics, and AIDS Service Organizations in Toronto and Ottawa, Canada. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. We conducted a reflexive thematic analysis of the transcripts. FINDINGS: We found health care providers have little experience assisting patients with employment and PLWH had little experience receiving employment interventions from their health care team. This lack of integration between health care and vocational services was related to uncertainties around drug coverage, physician role and living with an episodic disability. Health care providers thought that there is potential for a larger role for health care clinics in providing employment interventions for PLWH however patients were divided. Some PLWH suggest that health care providers could provide advice on the disclosure of status, work limitations and act as advocates with employers. INTERPRETATION: Health care providers and some PLWH recognize the importance of integrating health services with vocational services but both groups have little experience with implementing these types of interventions. Thus, there needs to be more study of such interventions, including the processes entailed and outcomes they aim to achieve.

Priorities for Artificial Intelligence Applications in Primary Care: A Canadian Deliberative Dialogue with Patients, Providers, and Health System Leaders.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) implementation in primary care is limited. Those set to be most impacted by AI technology in this setting should guide it's application. We organized a national deliberative dialogue with primary care stakeholders from across Canada to explore how they thought AI should be applied in primary care. METHODS: We conducted 12 virtual deliberative dialogues with participants from 8 Canadian provinces to identify shared priorities for applying AI in primary care. Dialogue data were thematically analyzed using interpretive description approaches. RESULTS: Participants thought that AI should first be applied to documentation, practice operations, and triage tasks, in hopes of improving efficiency while maintaining person-centered delivery, relationships, and access. They viewed complex AI-driven clinical decision support and proactive care tools as impactful but recognized potential risks. Appropriate training and implementation support were the most important external enablers of safe, effective, and patient-centered use of AI in primary care settings. INTERPRETATION: Our findings offer an agenda for the future application of AI in primary care grounded in the shared values of patients and providers. We propose that, from conception, AI developers work with primary care stakeholders as codesign partners, developing tools that respond to shared priorities.

Implementing artificial intelligence in Canadian primary care: Barriers and strategies identified through a national deliberative dialogue.

BACKGROUND: With large volumes of longitudinal data in electronic medical records from diverse patients, primary care is primed for disruption by artificial intelligence (AI) technology. With AI applications in primary care still at an early stage in Canada and most countries, there is a unique opportunity to engage key stakeholders in exploring how AI would be used and what implementation would look like. OBJECTIVE: To identify the barriers that patients, providers, and health leaders perceive in relation to implementing AI in primary care and strategies to overcome them. DESIGN: 12 virtual deliberative dialogues. Dialogue data were thematically analyzed using a combination of rapid ethnographic assessment and interpretive description techniques. SETTING: Virtual sessions. PARTICIPANTS: Participants from eight provinces in Canada, including 22 primary care service users, 21 interprofessional providers, and 5 health system leaders. RESULTS: The barriers that emerged from the deliberative dialogue sessions were grouped into four themes: (1) system and data readiness, (2) the potential for bias and inequity, (3) the regulation of AI and big data, and (4) the importance of people as technology enablers. Strategies to overcome the barriers in each of these themes were highlighted, where participatory co-design and iterative implementation were voiced most strongly by participants. LIMITATIONS: Only five health system leaders were included in the study and no self-identifying Indigenous people. This is a limitation as both groups may have provided unique perspectives to the study objective. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide insight into the barriers and facilitators associated with implementing AI in primary care settings from different perspectives. This will be vital as decisions regarding the future of AI in this space is shaped.

Chronic Struggle: An Institutional Ethnography of Chronic Pain and Marginalization.

There have been several recent calls to re-think chronic pain in response to the growing awareness of social inequities that impact the prevalence of chronic pain and its management. This in turn has resulted in new explorations of suffering as it relates to pain. While laudable, many of these clinically oriented accounts are abstract and often fail to offer a critical theoretical understanding of social and structural inequities. To truly rethink pain, we must also reconsider suffering, beginning in the everyday expert knowledge of people with chronic pain who can offer insights in relation to their bodies and also the organization of the social circumstances in which they live. Our team undertook a sociological approach known as institutional ethnography (IE) to explicate the work of people in managing lives beset by chronic pain and the inequities that stem from marginalization. In keeping with our critical paradigm, we describe participant accounts as situated, rather than lived, to de-emphasize the individual in favour of the social and relational. Through our analysis, we offer a new concept of chronic struggle to capture how pain, illness, economic deprivation, and suffering constitute a knot of experience that people living with chronic pain are obliged to simplify in order to fit existing logics of medicine. Our goal is to identify the social organization of chronic pain care which underpins experience in order to situate the social as political rather than medical or individual. PERSPECTIVE: This article explicates the health work of people living with chronic pain and marginalization, drawing on their situated experience. We offer the concept of chronic struggle as a conceptualization that allows us to bring into clear view the social organization of chronic pain in which the social is visible as political and structural rather than medical or individual.

Collection and Use of Social Determinants of Health Data in Inpatient General Internal Medicine Wards: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in incorporating social determinants of health (SDoH) data collection in inpatient hospital settings to inform patient care. However, there is limited information on this data collection and its use in inpatient general internal medicine (GIM). This scoping review sought to describe the current state of the literature on SDoH data collection and its application to patient care in inpatient GIM settings. METHODS: English-language searches on MedLine, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane, and PsycINFO were conducted from 2000 to April 2021. Studies reporting systematic data collection or use of at least three SDoH, sociodemographic, or social needs variables in inpatient hospital GIM settings were included. Four independent reviewers screened abstracts, and two reviewers screened full-text articles. RESULTS: A total of 8190 articles underwent abstract screening and eight were included. A range of SDoH tools were used, such as THRIVE, PRAPARE, WHO-Quality of Life, Measuring Health Equity, and a biopsychosocial framework. The most common SDoH were food security or malnutrition (n=7), followed by housing, transportation, employment, education, income, functional status and disability, and social support (n=5 each). Four of the eight studies applied the data to inform patient care, and three provided community resource referrals. DISCUSSION: There is limited evidence to guide the collection and use of SDoH data in inpatient GIM settings. This review highlights the need for integrated care, the role of the electronic health record, and social history taking, all of which may benefit from more robust SDoH data collection. Future research should examine the feasibility and acceptability of SDoH integration in inpatient GIM settings.

Centralization and integration of public health systems: Perspectives of public health leaders on factors facilitating and impeding COVID-19 responses in three Canadian provinces.

The extent to which power, resources, and responsibilities for public health are centralized or decentralized within a jurisdiction and how public health functions are integrated or coordinated with health care services may shape pandemic responses. However, little is known about the impacts of centralization and integration on public health system responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. We examine how public health leaders perceive centralization and integration facilitated and impeded effective COVID-19 responses in three Canadian provinces. We conducted a comparative case study involving semi-structured interviews with 58 public health system leaders in three Canadian provinces with varying degrees of centralization and integration. Greater public health system centralization and integration was seen by public health leaders to facilitate more rapidly initiated and well-coordinated provincial COVID-19 responses. Decentralization may have enabled locally tailored responses in the context of limited provincial leadership. Opacity in provincial decision-making processes, jurisdictional ambiguity impacting Indigenous communities, and ineffectual public health investments were impediments across jurisdictions and thus appear to be less impacted by centralization and integration. Our study generates novel insights about potential structural facilitators and impediments of effective COVID-19 pandemic responses during the second year of the pandemic. Findings highlight key areas for future research to inform system design that support leaders to manage large-scale public health emergencies.