Effectiveness of a hospital-initiated smoking cessation programme: 2-year health and healthcare outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco-related illnesses are leading causes of death and healthcare use. Our objective was to determine whether implementation of a hospital-initiated smoking cessation intervention would reduce mortality and downstream healthcare usage. METHODS: A 2-group effectiveness study was completed comparing patients who received the 'Ottawa Model' for Smoking Cessation intervention (n=726) to usual care controls (n=641). Participants were current smokers, >17 years old, and recruited during admission to 1 of 14 participating hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Baseline data were linked to healthcare administrative data. Competing-risks regression analysis was used to compare outcomes between groups. RESULTS: The intervention group experienced significantly lower rates of all-cause readmissions, smoking-related readmissions, and all-cause emergency department (ED) visits at all time points. The largest absolute risk reductions (ARR) were observed for all-cause readmissions at 30 days (13.3% vs 7.1%; ARR, 6.1% (2.9% to 9.3%); p<0.001), 1 year (38.4% vs 26.7%; ARR, 11.7% (6.7% to 16.6%); p<0.001), and 2 years (45.2% vs 33.6%; ARR, 11.6% (6.5% to 16.8%); p<0.001). The greatest reduction in risk of all-cause ED visits was at 30 days (20.9% vs 16.4%; ARR, 4.5% (0.4% to 8.7%); p=0.03). Reduction in mortality was not evident at 30 days, but significant reductions were observed by year 1 (11.4% vs 5.4%; ARR 6.0% (3.1% to 9.0%); p<0.001) and year 2 (15.1% vs 7.9%; ARR, 7.3% (3.9% to 10.7%); p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Considering the relatively low cost, greater adoption of hospital-initiated tobacco cessation interventions should be considered to improve patient outcomes and decrease subsequent healthcare usage.

A Comprehensive Assessment of Family Physician Gender and Quality of Care: A Cross-Sectional Analysis in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating primary care quality across physician gender are limited to primary and secondary prevention. OBJECTIVES: Investigate the relationship between family physician gender and quality of primary care using indicators that cover 5 key dimensions of primary care. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis using linked health administrative datasets (April 1, 2008 to March 31, 2010). SUBJECTS: All family physicians working in the 3 main primary care models in the province of Ontario (Canada), providing general care and having a panel size >1200. MEASURES: Indicators of cancer screening (3), chronic disease management (9), continuity (2), comprehensiveness (2), and access (5). RESULTS: A total of 4195 physicians (31% female) were eligible. Adjusting for provider and patient factors, patients of female physicians were more likely to have received recommended cancer screening (odds ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] (OR) range: 1.24 [1.18-1.30], 1.85 [1.78-1.92]) and diabetes management (OR: 1.04 [1.01-1.08], 1.28 [1.05-1.57]). They had fewer emergency room visits (rate ratio [95% CI] (RR) range: 0.83 [0.79-0.87]) and hospitalizations (RR: 0.89 [0.86-0.93]), and higher referrals (RR: 1.12 [1.09-1.14]). There was evidence of effect modification by patient gender (female vs. male) for hospitalization (RR: 0.74 [0.70-0.79] vs. 0.96 [0.90-1.02]) and emergency room visits (RR: 0.84 [0.81-0.88] vs. 0.98 [0.94-1.01]). Lower emergency room visits were also more evident in more complex patients of female physicians. There were no significant differences in the continuity or comprehensiveness measures. CONCLUSIONS: The indicators assessed in this study point to a benefit for patients under the care of female physicians. Potential explanations are discussed.

Primary Care Physician Panel Size and Quality of Care: A Population-Based Study in Ontario, Canada.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between the number of patients under a primary care physician's care (panel size) and primary care quality indicators. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, population-based study of fee-for-service and capitated interprofessional and non-interprofessional primary health care practices in Ontario, Canada between April 2008 and March 2010, encompassing 4,195 physicians with panel sizes ≥1,200 serving 8.3 million patients. Data was extracted from multiple linked, health-related administrative databases and covered 16 quality indicators spanning 5 dimensions of care: access, continuity, comprehensiveness, and evidence-based indicators of cancer screening and chronic disease management. RESULTS: The likelihood of being up-to-date on cervical, colorectal, and breast cancer screening showed relative decreases of 7.9% (P <.001), 5.9% (P = .01), and 4.6% (P <.001), respectively, with increasing panel size (from 1,200 to 3,900). Eight chronic care indicators (4 medication-based and 4 screening-based) showed no significant association with panel size. The likelihood of individuals with a new diagnosis of congestive heart failure having an echocardiogram, however, increased by a relative 8.1% (P <.001) with higher panel size. Increasing panel size was also associated with a 10.8% relative increase in hospitalization rates for ambulatory-care-sensitive conditions (P = .04) and a 10.8% decrease in non-urgent emergency department visits (P = .004). Continuity was highest with medium panel sizes (P <.001), and comprehensiveness had a small decrease (P = .03) with increasing panel size. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing panel size was associated with small decreases in cancer screening, continuity, and comprehensiveness, but showed no consistent relationships with chronic disease management or access indicators. We found no panel size threshold above which quality of care suffered.

A population-based study evaluating family physicians' HIV experience and care of people living with HIV in Ontario.

PURPOSE: Greater physician experience managing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has been associated with better HIV-specific outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the HIV experience of a family physician modifies the association between the model of care delivery and the quality of care for people living with HIV. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from a population-based observational study conducted between April 1, 2009, and March 31, 2012. A total of 13,417 patients with HIV in Ontario were stratified into 5 possible patterns or models of care. We used multivariable hierarchical logistic regression analyses, adjusted for patient characteristics and pairwise comparisons, to evaluate the modification of the association between care model and indicators of quality of care (receipt of antiretroviral therapy, cancer screening, and health care use) by level of physician HIV experience (≤5, 6-49, ≥50 patients during study period). RESULTS: The majority of HIV-positive patients (52.8%) saw family physicians exclusively for their care. Among these patients, receipt of antiretroviral therapy was significantly lower for those receiving care from family physicians with 5 or fewer patients and 6-49 patients compared with those with 50 or more patients (mean levels of adherence [95% CIs] were 0.34 [0.30-0.39] and 0.40 [0.34-0.45], respectively, vs 0.77 [0.74-0.80]). Patients' receipt of cancer screenings and health care use were unrelated to family physician HIV experience. CONCLUSIONS: Family physician HIV experience was strongly associated with receipt of antiretroviral therapy by HIV-positive patients, especially among those seeing only family physicians for their care. Future work must determine the best models for integrating and delivering comprehensive HIV care among diverse populations and settings.

A cross-sectional, population-based study of HIV physicians and outpatient health care use by people with HIV in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: People with HIV are living longer and their care has shifted towards the prevention and management of comorbidities. However, little is known about who is providing their care. Our objective was to characterize the provision of HIV care in Ontario by physician specialty. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective population-based observational study using linked administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, a single payer health care system. All Ontarians with HIV were identified using a validated case ascertainment algorithm. We examined office-based health care visits for this cohort between April 1, 2009 and March 31, 2012. Physician characteristics were compared between specialty groups. We stratified the frequency and distribution of physician care into three categories: (a) care by physician specialty (family physicians, internal medicine specialists, infectious disease specialists, and other specialists), (b) care based on physician caseload (low, medium or high categorized as ≤5, 6-49 or ≥50 HIV patients per physician), and (c) care that is related to HIV versus unrelated to HIV. RESULTS: Family physicians were older, graduated earlier, were more often female, and were the only group practicing in rural settings. Unlike other specialists, most family physicians (76.8%) had low-volume caseloads. There were 406,411 outpatient visits made by individuals with HIV; one-third were for HIV care. Family physicians provided the majority of care (53.6% of all visits and 53.9% of HIV visits). Internal medicine specialists provided 4.9% of all visits and 9.6% of HIV visits. Infectious disease specialists provided 12.5% of all visits and 32.7% of HIV visits. Other specialties provided 29.0% of visits; most of these (33.0%) were to psychiatrists. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of visits to physicians caring for HIV patients reveals different patterns of health care delivery by specialty and HIV caseload. Further research should delineate how specialties share care for this population and how different patterns relate to quality of care.

A cross-sectional, population-based study measuring comorbidity among people living with HIV in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: As people diagnosed with HIV and receiving combination antiretroviral therapy are now living longer, they are likely to acquire chronic conditions related to normal ageing and the effects of HIV and its treatment. Comordidities for people with HIV have not previously been described from a representative population perspective. METHODS: We used linked health administrative data from Ontario, Canada. We applied a validated algorithm to identify people with HIV among all residents aged 18 years or older between April 1, 1992 and March 31, 2009. We randomly selected 5 Ontario adults who were not identified with HIV for each person with HIV for comparison. Previously validated case definitions were used to identify persons with mental health disorders and any of the following physical chronic diseases: diabetes, congestive heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, hypertension, asthma, chronic obstructive lung disease, peripheral vascular disease and end-stage renal failure. We examined multimorbidity prevalence as the presence of at least two physical chronic conditions, or as combined physical-mental health multimorbidity. Direct age-sex standardized rates were calculated for both cohorts for comparison. RESULTS: 34.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 33.6% to 35.2%) of people with HIV had at least one other physical condition. Prevalence was especially high for mental health conditions (38.6%), hypertension (14.9%) and asthma (12.7%). After accounting for age and sex differences, people with HIV had significantly higher prevalence of all chronic conditions except myocardial infarction and hypertension, as well as substantially higher multimorbidity (prevalence ratio 1.30, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.44) and combined physical-mental health multimorbidity (1.79, 95% CI 1.65 to 1.94). Prevalence of multimorbidity among people with HIV increased with age. The difference in prevalence of multimorbidity between the two cohorts was more pronounced among women. CONCLUSION: People living with HIV in Ontario, especially women, had higher prevalence of comorbidity and multimorbidity than the general population. Quantifying this morbidity at the population level can help inform healthcare delivery requirements for this complex population.

Tenofovir and emtricitabine resistance among antiretroviral-naive patients in the Canadian Observational Cohort Collaboration: implications for PrEP.

BACKGROUND: The real-world effectiveness of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) may be influenced by circulating HIV strains resistant to either tenofovir or emtricitabine. Yet, few studies have examined rates of resistance to these drugs in clinical settings. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of antiretroviral-naive participants in the Canadian Observational Cohort collaboration who initiated antiretroviral therapy between 2006 and 2014. In separate analyses, we determined the prevalence of pretherapy resistance and cumulative incidence of follow-up resistance to tenofovir and emtricitabine. We used multivariable proportional hazards models to examine associations between baseline variables and the development of resistance. RESULTS: We studied 6,622 antiretroviral-naive participants initiating therapy, of whom 5,428 (82.0%) had a baseline resistance test. Baseline resistance to tenofovir and emtricitabine was observed in 83 (1.5%) and 21 (0.4%) patients, respectively. Among patients without baseline resistance, the cumulative incidence of resistance to tenofovir and emtricitabine 5 years following treatment initiation was 0.0070 (95% CI 0.0046, 0.0095) and 0.033 (95% CI 0.028, 0.038), respectively. Following multivariable analysis, a baseline viral load ≥100,000 copies/ml was associated with emergence of tenofovir (hazard ratio [HR] 2.88; 95% CI 1.35, 6.15) and emtricitabine (HR 2.27; 95% CI 1.64, 3.15) resistance. Initiating an integrase inhibitor-based regimen and CD4+ T-cell count below 200 cells/mm3 were also associated with resistance to each drug. CONCLUSIONS: We observed a low prevalence of baseline resistance and a low incidence of emergence of resistance to tenofovir and emtricitabine among antiretroviral-naive patients in routine clinical care.

Long term outcomes of cluster randomized trial to improve cardiovascular health at population level: The Cardiovascular Health Awareness Program (CHAP).

STUDY QUESTION: The Cardiovascular Health Awareness Program (CHAP) cardiovascular risk reduction program consisted of sessions run by local volunteers in local pharmacies during which cardiovascular risk was assessed, healthy lifestyle and preventive care was promoted, and the participants were oriented to local resources to support changes in modifiable risk factors. A clustered randomized trial implemented in September 2006 across 39 communities targeting community-dwelling individuals 65 years and older showed a significant reduction in hospitalization one year after its implementation (rate ratio of 91 [95% confidence interval (CI): 86%-97%]). This study explores the impact of CHAP in the first five years. METHODS: Using health administrative data housed at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, we established a closed cohort consisting of all individuals eligible in these communities at the study onset whom we followed over time. We assessed hospitalizations and survival using a negative binomial model for count data and Cox regression to assess time to first event, accounting for the clustered design. The primary outcome was the rate of cardiovascular-related hospitalizations defined as congestive heart failure, stroke or acute myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Most estimates pointed to an advantage for the intervention arm, but only all-cause mortality reached statistical significance (hazard ratio [95% CI] = 0.955 [0.914-0.999]). The hospitalization cardiovascular-related hospitalization rate ratio was (0.958, 95% CI: 0.898-1.022) in favour of the intervention communities, translating to an estimated 408 averted hospitalizations over the five-year period. There was no evidence of the effect of time from start of intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The consistent direction of the outcomes in favour of the intervention arms suggests that CHAP likely had a meaningful impact on reducing cardiovascular-related morbidity and mortality. Given the low cost of the intervention, further development of CHAP should be pursued.

A comparison of virological suppression and rebound between Indigenous and non-Indigenous persons initiating combination antiretroviral therapy in a multisite cohort of individuals living with HIV in Canada.

BACKGROUND: This study compared time to virological suppression and rebound between Indigenous and non-Indigenous individuals living with HIV in Canada initiating combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). METHODS: Data were from the Canadian Observational Cohort collaboration; eight studies of treatment-naive persons with HIV initiating cART after 1/1/2000. Fine and Gray models were used to estimate the effect of ethnicity on time to virological suppression (two consecutive viral loads [VLs] <50 copies/ml at least 3 months apart) after adjusting for the competing risk of death and time until virological rebound (two consecutive VLs >200 copies/ml at least 3 months apart) following suppression. RESULTS: Among 7,080 participants were 497 Indigenous persons of whom 413 (83%) were from British Columbia. The cumulative incidence of suppression 1 year after cART initiation was 54% for Indigenous persons, 77% for Caucasian and 80% for African, Caribbean or Black (ACB) persons. The cumulative incidence of rebound 1 year after suppression was 13% for Indigenous persons, 6% for Caucasian and 7% for ACB persons. Indigenous persons were less likely to achieve suppression than Caucasian participants (aHR=0.58, 95% CI 0.50, 0.68), but not more likely to experience rebound (aHR=1.03, 95% CI 0.84, 1.27) after adjusting for age, gender, injection drug use, men having sex with men status, province of residence, baseline VL and CD4+ T-cell count, antiretroviral class and year of cART initiation. CONCLUSIONS: Lower suppression rates among Indigenous persons suggest a need for targeted interventions to improve HIV health outcomes during the first year of treatment when suppression is usually achieved.

Increased mortality among Indigenous persons in a multisite cohort of people living with HIV in Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Compare all-cause mortality between Indigenous participants and participants of other ethnicities living with HIV initiating combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) in an interprovincial multi-site cohort. METHODS: The Canadian Observational Cohort is a collaboration of 8 cohorts of treatment-naïve persons with HIV initiating cART after January 1, 2000. Participants were followed from the cART initiation date until death or last viral load (VL) test date on or before December 31, 2012. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the effect of ethnicity on time until death after adjusting for age, gender, injection drug use, being a man who has sex with men, hepatitis C, province of origin, baseline VL and CD4 count, year of cART initiation and class of antiretroviral medication. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 7080 participants (497 Indigenous, 2471 Caucasian, 787 African/Caribbean/Black (ACB), 629 other, and 2696 unknown ethnicity). Most Indigenous persons were from British Columbia (BC) (83%), with smaller numbers from Ontario (13%) and Québec (4%). During the study period, 714 (10%) participants died. The five-year survival probability was lower for Indigenous persons (0.77) than for Caucasian (0.94), ACB (0.98), other ethnicities (0.96) and unknown ethnicities (0.85) (p < 0.0001). In an adjusted proportional hazard model for which missing data were imputed, Indigenous persons were more likely to die than Caucasian participants (hazard ratio = 2.69, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The mortality rate for Indigenous persons was higher than for other ethnicities and is largely reflective of the BC population. Addressing treatment challenges and identifying HIV- and non-HIV-related causes for mortality among Indigenous persons is required to optimize their clinical management.

A population-based study comparing patterns of care delivery on the quality of care for persons living with HIV in Ontario.

OBJECTIVES: Physician specialty is often positively associated with disease-specific outcomes and negatively associated with primary care outcomes for people with chronic conditions. People with HIV have increasing comorbidity arising from antiretroviral therapy (ART) related longevity, making HIV a useful condition to examine shared care models. We used a previously described, theoretically developed shared care framework to assess the impact of care delivery on the quality of care provided. DESIGN: Retrospective population-based observational study from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2012. PARTICIPANTS: 13 480 patients with HIV and receiving publicly funded healthcare in Ontario were assigned to one of five patterns of care. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cancer screening, ART prescribing and healthcare utilisation across models using adjusted multivariable hierarchical logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Models in which patients had an assigned family physician had higher odds of cancer screening than those in exclusively specialist care (colorectal cancer screening, exclusively primary care adjusted OR (AOR)=3.12, 95% CI (1.90 to 5.13), family physician-dominant co-management AOR=3.39, 95% CI (1.94 to 5.93), specialist-dominant co-management AOR=2.01, 95% CI (1.23 to 3.26)). The odds of having one emergency department visit did not differ among models, although the odds of hospitalisation and HIV-specific hospitalisation were lower among patients who saw exclusively family physicians (AOR=0.23, 95% CI (0.14 to 0.35) and AOR=0.15, 95% CI (0.12 to 0.21)). The odds of antiretroviral prescriptions were lower among models in which patients' HIV care was provided predominantly by family physicians (exclusively primary care AOR=0.15, 95% CI (0.12 to 0.21), family physician-dominant co-management AOR=0.45, 95% CI (0.32 to 0.64)). CONCLUSIONS: How care is provided had a potentially important influence on the quality of care delivered. Our key limitation is potential confounding due to the absence of HIV stage measures.

Health administrative data can be used to define a shared care typology for people with HIV.

OBJECTIVES: Building on an existing theoretical shared primary care/specialist care framework to (1) develop a unique typology of care for people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in Ontario, (2) assess sensitivity of the typology by varying typology definitions, and (3) describe characteristics of typology categories. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective population-based observational study from April 1, 2009, to March 31, 2012. A total of 13,480 eligible patients with HIV and receiving publicly funded health care in Ontario. We derived a typology of care by linking patients to usual family physicians and to HIV specialists with five possible patterns of care. Patient and physician characteristics and outpatient visits for HIV-related and non-HIV-related care were used to assess the robustness and characteristics of the typology. RESULTS: Five possible patterns of care were described as low engagement (8.6%), exclusively primary care (52.7%), family physician-dominated comanagement (10.0%), specialist-dominated comanagement (30.5%), and exclusively specialist care (5.2%). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated robustness of typology assignments. Visit patterns varied in ways that conform to typology assignments. CONCLUSION: We anticipate this typology can be used to assess the impact of care patterns on the quality of primary care for people living with HIV.