A mixed-method study evaluating an innovative care model for rural patients undergoing outpatient breast surgery.

BACKGROUND: The Delta Oasis program was launched in New Brunswick in 2006 to offer patients from rural areas who were undergoing breast cancer surgery and their families 1 night of free accommodations and a postoperative consultation with an extramural nurse. We sought to investigate patient experiences with this program. METHODS: This mixed-method retrospective study took place from 2020 to 2022 and compared the preoperative anxiety and quality of recovery of program participants and control patients who were discharged home over 100 km from hospital. We conducted 2 × 2 analysis of variance to evaluate the effects of intervention group and surgery type. We conducted semistructured interviews with intervention participants, which we then thematically analyzed. Two patient partners were engaged during data synthesis to support the interpretation of results. RESULTS: We included 34 patients who participated in the program and 18 control patients. No statistically significant differences were found between treatment groups in preoperative anxiety and quality of recovery, regardless of surgery type. Thematic analysis of interviews with 17 intervention participants revealed that they were highly satisfied with the program and that the experience helped reduce stress and discomfort related to their surgery. INTERPRETATION: The Delta Oasis program is a cost-effective alternative to inpatient care after breast cancer surgery and is highly regarded by rural patients; expansion to other regions with the inclusion of additional low-risk surgeries could help address hospital capacity issues. This study contributes to our understanding of the patient experience with the Delta Oasis program and informs the development of similar programs elsewhere.

Relative remoteness and wage differentials in the Canadian allied health professional workforce.

INTRODUCTION: Health workforces around the world are characterized with geographic maldistribution, often leading to inequalities in rural health outcomes. Monetary incentives are frequently raised as a policy option to bolster recruitment of healthcare practitioners to rural and underserved communities; however, few rural health workforce studies focus on allied health professionals (AHPs), include urban comparators, integrate gender considerations, or measure rural diversity. This population-based observational study examines trends in the geographic and gender distribution and earnings of AHPs in Canada across the rural-urban continuum. METHODS: Nationally representative data from the 2006 and 2016 Canadian population censuses were pooled and linked with the geocoded Index of Remoteness for all inhabited communities. Five groups of university-educated AHPs providing prevention, diagnostic evaluation, therapy, and rehabilitation services were identified by occupation. Multiple linear regression models were used to estimate the associations between relative remoteness and annual earnings of AHPs aged 25-54 years, controlling for gender and other personal and professional characteristics. RESULTS: The density of AHPs was found to be 15 times higher in more urbanized and accessible parts of the country (23.6-25.6 per 10 000 population in 2016) compared to the most rural and remote areas (1.6 per 10 000 population), a pattern that changed little over the previous decade. A positive correlation was seen across occupations in terms of the degree of feminization and their geographic dispersion by relative remoteness. While pharmacists residing in more rural and remote communities earned 9% (95% confidence interval 4-15%) more than those in core urban centers, relative remoteness contributed little to wage differentials among dentists, physiotherapists and occupational therapists, or other AHPs in therapy and assessment (no significant difference at p<0.05). Women earned significantly less than men in dentistry, pharmacy, and physical or occupational therapy, after adjusting for remoteness and other characteristics. CONCLUSION: This study did not find consistent wage disparities by relative remoteness as characterizing allied health professions in Canada. The evidence base to support financial incentives to AHPs to reduce perceived opportunity costs associated with working and living in rural and underserved areas remains limited. More research is needed on the intersections of rurality, gender, and wage differentials among AHPs in different national contexts.

Projected health and economic outcomes of extending public funding of pharmacy services to include administration of Pneu23 and Td/Tdap immunizations by pharmacy practitioners in New Brunswick.

Background: Although legislation permits New Brunswick pharmacy professionals to administer a wide range of immunizations, public funding for these services is currently limited to immunizations against influenza and COVID-19 and was recently extended to include pneumococcal immunization (Pneu23) in individuals aged 65 years or older. We used administrative data to project health and economic outcomes associated with the current Pneu23 program and with extension of public funding to include: 1) younger adults aged 19 years or older in the Pneu23 program, and 2) tetanus boosters (Td/Tdap). Methods: Two model scenarios were compared: a Physician-Only model in which physicians remain the only practitioners to administer publicly funded Pneu23 and Td/Tdap, and a Blended model in which this service is also provided by pharmacy professionals. Immunization rates by practitioner type were projected based on physician billing data accessed via the New Brunswick Institute for Research, Data and Training in conjunction with trends observed with influenza immunization by pharmacists. These projections were used along with published data to estimate health and economic outcomes under each model. Results: Public funding of Pneu23 (65+), Pneu23 (19+) and Td/Tdap (19+) administration by pharmacy professionals is projected to yield increased immunization rates and physician time savings compared with the Physician-Only model. Public funding of Pneu23 and Td/Tdap administration by pharmacy professionals in those aged ≥19 years would result in cost savings, owing primarily to productivity losses avoided in the working age population. Discussion: Increased immunization rates, physician time savings and cost savings may be realized if public funding were extended to include administration of Pneu23 in younger adults and Td/Tdap, by pharmacy practitioners.

How should multiple myeloma research change in a patient-oriented world? Findings and lessons from the pan-Canadian myeloma priority setting partnership.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade there has been considerable research into the treatment, management, and quality of life of people living with multiple myeloma. However, there has been limited investigation into topics deemed important to patients and caregivers within this community. We conducted a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership to establish the 'Top 10 Priorities for Myeloma Research', informed by patient and public partners. METHODS: A research team and steering group were established in 2019 to conduct the myeloma priority setting partnership. Steering group members included patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers who advised the research team and oversaw the scope of the project, grounded on their lived experience. Following the James Lind Alliance guidelines for identification and ranking of research questions, we used surveys and a virtual workshop to collect and prioritize questions posed by myeloma patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers across Canada. RESULTS: The Top 10 list of priorities for myeloma research was finalized at the consensus-building workshop and encompassed questions related to diagnosis, treatment, management, and living well with myeloma. A final participant evaluation survey elicited a positive response. INTERPRETATION: The myeloma priority setting partnership identified the research priorities of people living with myeloma, caregivers, and healthcare providers to inform clinical research on this disease going forward. This project underscores the importance of patient and public engagement in the identification of research questions, highlighting the concerns of people affected by myeloma to ultimately improve the lives of people living with this disease.

Research on multiple myeloma, a rare blood cancer, rarely focuses on topics that are personally important to people living with myeloma, their caregivers, and their healthcare providers. The purpose of this study was to complete a priority setting partnership, following guidelines from the James Lind Alliance, to identify unanswered research questions from people directly affected by myeloma. The project was guided by a steering group of people living with myeloma, their caregivers, and healthcare providers who informed all stages of this process including two questionnaires to collect and rank questions and a priority setting workshop. The workshop brought together representatives from each group to form the final 'Top 10 Priorities for Myeloma Research', which included questions related to diagnosis, treatment, management, and living well with myeloma. This process allowed us to identify the research priorities of the myeloma community and highlighted the importance of including patients and the public as team members in the research process. We encourage other myeloma researchers to do the same to ensure research is meaningful and relevant to the communities who rely on it.