What supports and services post COVID-19 do children with disabilities and their parents need and want, now and into the future?

Introduction: Children and youth with disabilities and special healthcare needs, and their families, have been uniquely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the voices of children themselves are still not well represented in the existing literature. Methods: This qualitative descriptive study used a combination of visual methods and interviews to learn about the experiences of Canadian children with disabilities (n=18) and their parents (n=14) during the COVID pandemic and into the post-pandemic period. Data collection was carried out between January and July 2023. The aim was to identify the supports and services children and families need at present and moving forward. Results: Families' pandemic experiences were complex and nuanced. For many, the pandemic complicated and disrupted everyday activities and supports. These disruptions were largely buffered by parents. However, some families also identified unexpected benefits. Key themes pertaining to present and future needs included the need for services that are flexible; consistent; conducive to relationship-building; comprehensive; coordinated across sectors; and designed to support the needs of the whole family. Discussion: Implications for policy and practice are outlined.

Patient care staffing patterns and roles in community-based family practices.

OBJECTIVES: Our study describes patient care staff patterns and roles in community-based family practices. STUDY DESIGN: We used a multimethod comparative case study design that included detailed descriptive field notes of the office environment of 18 family practices and of 1637 clinical encounters, as well as in-depth interviews of practice staff and physicians. Systematic analysis of these data provided detailed descriptions of patient care staff patterns and functions. POPULATION: We included physicians and staff in 18 community-based Nebraska family practices. RESULTS: Practices are staffed with a range of clinical personnel, including registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, certified medical assistants, radiology technicians, and trained and untrained medical assistants. Each of these has specific educational preparation that potentially qualifies them for different patient care roles; however, staff roles were determined primarily by local needs and physician expectations rather than by education, training, or licensure. Staffing patterns varied greatly; the majority of practices employed at least one registered nurse (10 of 18), one licensed practical nurse (5), or both (4). Still, the overall majority of practices used non-nursing personnel as the predominate patient care staff. Patient care staff-to-clinician ratios ranged from a low of 0.5 to a high of 3.3. CONCLUSIONS: Many recent recommendations about collaborative models of clinical care seem problematic when put into a context of the findings of current staffing patterns and use of personnel in family practices. Staff members often fulfill roles independent of training. Staff leadership is also potentially important for designing effective collaborative care models; however, we found leadership only occurred with the approval of clinic authorities. These practical issues are rarely addressed in normative recommendations about system change and intervention. Our findings indicate that there are considerable opportunities for better use of the nursing and other patient care staff in the delivery of clinical services. Developing a collaborative practice model should include formalizing expectations of staff to reflect training and experience, and explicitly configuring staff to meet the needs, values, and goals of a practice.

The value of pharmaceutical representative visits and medication samples in community-based family practices.

BACKGROUND: Interactions between the pharmaceutical industry and physicians have been discussed in numerous publications; however, most articles are limited to surveys and self-report data and often focus on academic or training contexts. We describe the role of pharmaceutical representatives and the use of samples in community-based family practices, using data obtained by directly observing clinical encounters. METHODS: We collected detailed descriptive field notes of the direct observations of 53 primary care clinicians and 1588 patient encounters in 18 purposefully selected Nebraska family practices. We used a comparative case study design, that used depth interviews of clinicians and office staff, and included details of the interactions with pharmaceutical representatives and the use of samples in clinical encounters. RESULTS: Individual providers and practices displayed noticeable variation in their approaches to drug representatives and samples. We found formal strategies and policies in a minority of practices. Generally there was little structure in the organization and distribution of sample medications at the office level, and detailed patient education regarding these drugs was rarely observed in patient encounters. Nevertheless, samples were used in almost 20% of observed encounters, at times as starter dosages, but often as complete courses of treatment. The benefits derived from contact with the pharmaceutical industry varied substantially, but most often included free medication samples, meals, and patient education materials. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians have a complex symbiosis with the pharmaceutical industry and need to critically evaluate their handling of samples and their contact with pharmaceutical representatives to optimize this relationship and ensure quality patient care. Clinics with specific policies for interactions with drug companies appear to derive more satisfaction from their encounters.