Perspectives of Canadian health leaders on the relationship between medical assistance in dying and palliative and end-of-life care services: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Medical assistance in dying (MAiD) was legalized in Canada in 2016, but coordination of MAiD and palliative and end-of-life care (PEOLC) services remains underdeveloped. We sought to understand the perspectives of health leaders across Canada on the relationship between MAiD and PEOLC services and to identify opportunities for improved coordination. METHODS: In this quantitative study, we purposively sampled health leaders across Canada with expertise in MAiD, PEOLC, or both. We conducted semi-structured interviews between April 2021 and January 2022. Interview transcripts were coded independently by 2 researchers and reconciled to identify key themes using content analysis. We applied the PATH framework for Integrated Health Services to guide data collection and analysis. RESULTS: We conducted 36 interviews. Participants expressed diverse views about the optimal relationship between MAiD and PEOLC, and the desirability of integration, separation, or coordination of these services. We identified 11 themes to improve the relationship between the services across 4 PATH levels: client-centred services (e.g., educate public); health operations (e.g., cultivate compassionate and proactive leadership); health systems (e.g., conduct broad and inclusive consultation and planning); and intersectoral initiatives (e.g., provide standard practice guidelines across health care systems). INTERPRETATION: Health leaders recognized that cooperation between MAiD and PEOLC services is required for appropriate referrals, care coordination, and patient care. They identified the need for public and provider education, standardized practice guidelines, relationship-building, and leadership. Our findings have implications for MAiD and PEOLC policy development and clinical practice in Canada and other jurisdictions.

Do expenditures on public health reduce preventable mortality in the long run? Evidence from the Canadian provinces.

BACKGROUND: Investments in public health - prevention of illnesses, and promotion, surveillance, and protection of population health - may improve population health, however, effects may only be observed over a long period of time. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the potential long-run relationship between expenditures on public health and avoidable mortality from preventable causes. METHODS: We focused on the country spending the most on public health in the OECD, Canada. We constructed a longitudinal dataset on mortality, health care expenditures and socio-demographic information covering years 1979-2017 for the ten Canadian provinces. We estimated error correction models for panel data to disentangle short-from long-run relationships between expenditures on public health and avoidable mortality from preventable causes. We further explored some specific causes of mortality to understand potential drivers. For comparison, we also estimated the short-run relationship between curative expenditures and avoidable mortality from treatable causes. RESULTS: We find evidence of a long-run relationship between expenditures on public health and preventable mortality, and no consistent short-run associations between these two variables. Findings suggest that a 1% increase in expenditures on public health could lead to 0.22% decrease in preventable mortality. Reductions in preventable mortality are greater for males (-0.29%) compared to females (-0.09%). These results are robust to different specifications. Reductions in some cancer and cardiovascular deaths are among the probable drivers of this overall decrease. By contrast, we do not find evidence of a consistent short-run relationship between curative expenditures and treatable mortality, except for males. CONCLUSION: This study supports the argument that expenditures on public health reap health benefits primarily in the long run, which, in this case, represents a reduction in avoidable mortality from preventable causes. Reducing public health expenditures on the premise that they have no immediate measurable benefits might thus harm population health outcomes in the long run.

The impact of team-based primary care on medication-related outcomes in older adults: A comparative analysis of two Canadian provinces.

Objective: To evaluate if access to team-based primary care is related to medication management outcomes for older adults. Methods: We completed two retrospective cohort studies using administrative health data for older adults (66+) in Ontario (n = 428,852) and Québec (n = 310,198) who were rostered with a family physician (FP) between the 2001/02 and 2017/18 fiscal years. We generated matched comparison groups of older adults rostered to an FP practicing in a team-based model, and older adults rostered to an FP in a non-team model. We compared the following outcomes between these groups: any adverse drug reactions (ADRs), any potentially inappropriate prescription (PIP), and polypharmacy. Average treatment effects of access to team-based care were estimated using a difference-in-differences estimator. Results: The risk of an ADR was 22 % higher (RR = 1.22, 95 % CI = 1.18, 1.26) for older adults rostered to a team-based FP in Québec and 6 % lower (RR = 0.943, 95 % CI = 0.907, 0.978) in Ontario. However, absolute risk differences were less than 0.5 %. Differences in the risk of polypharmacy were small in Québec (RR = 1.005, 95 % CI = 1.001, 1.009) and Ontario (RR = 1.004, 95 % CI = 1.001, 1.007) and had absolute risk differences of less than 1 % in both provinces. Effects on PIP were not statistically or clinically significant in adjusted models. Interpretation: We did not find evidence that access to team-based primary care in Ontario or Québec meaningfully improved medication management outcomes for older adults.