Mailed Letter Versus Phone Call to Increase Diabetic-Related Retinopathy Screening Engagement by Patients in a Team-Based Primary Care Practice: Prospective, Single-Masked, Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Vision loss from diabetic-related retinopathy (DR) is preventable through regular screening. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to test different patient engagement approaches to expand a teleophthalmology program at a primary care clinic in the city of Toronto, Canada. METHODS: A teleophthalmology program was set up in a large, urban, academic, team-based primary care practice. Patients older than 18 years with type 1 or type 2 diabetes were randomized to one of the following 4 engagement strategies: phone call, mail, mail plus phone call, or usual care. Outreach was conducted by administrative staff within the clinic. The primary outcome was booking an appointment for DR screening. RESULTS: A total of 23 patients in the phone, 28 in the mail, 32 in the mail plus phone call, and 27 in the control (usual care) group were included in the analysis. After the intervention and after excluding patients who said they were screened, 88% (15/17) of patients in the phone, 11% (2/18) in the mail, and 100% (21/21) in the mail and phone group booked an appointment with the teleophthalmology program compared to 0% (0/12) in the control group. Phoning patients positively predicted patients booking a teleophthalmology appointment (P<.001), whereas mailing a letter had no effect. CONCLUSIONS: Patient engagement to book DR screening via teleophthalmology in an urban, academic, team-based primary care practice using telephone calls was much more effective than patient engagement using letters or usual care. Practices that have access to a local DR screening program and have resources for such engagement strategies should consider using them as a means to improve their DR screening rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03927859; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03927859.

Perceptions of Ontario health system leaders on single-entry models for managing the COVID-19 elective surgery backlog: an interpretive descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated pre-existing challenges with respect to access to elective surgery across Canada, and a single-entry model (SEM) approach has been proposed as an equitable and efficient method to help manage the backlog. With Ontario's recent investment in centralized surgical wait-list management, we sought to understand the views of health system leaders on the role of SEMs in managing the elective surgery backlog. METHODS: We used the qualitative method of interpretive description to explore participant perspectives and identify practical strategies for policy-makers, administrators and clinical leaders. We conducted semistructured interviews with health system leaders from across Ontario on Zoom between March and June 2021. We used snowball and purposive sampling. Inclusion criteria included Ontario health care leaders, fluent in English or French, in positions relevant to managing the elective surgery backlog. Exclusion criteria were individuals who work outside Ontario, or do not hold relevant roles. RESULTS: Our interviews with 10 health system leaders - including hospital chief executive officers, surgeons, administrators and policy experts - resulted in 5 emergent domains: perceptions of the backlog, operationalizing and financing SEMs, barriers, facilitators, and equity and patient factors. All participants emphasized the need for clinical leaders to champion SEMs and the utility of SEMs in managing wait-lists for high-volume, low-acuity, low-complexity and low-variation surgeries. INTERPRETATION: Although SEMs are no panacea, the participants in our study stated that they believe SEMs can improve quality and reduce variability in wait times when SEMs are designed to address local needs and are implemented with buy-in from champions. Health care leaders should consider SEMs for improving surgical backlog management in their local jurisdictions.

Implementation and Outcomes of Virtual Care Across a Tertiary Cancer Center During COVID-19.

Importance: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has burdened health care resources and disrupted care of patients with cancer. Virtual care (VC) represents a potential solution. However, few quantitative data support its rapid implementation and positive associations with service capacity and quality. Objective: To examine the outcomes of a cancer center-wide virtual care program in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study applied a hospitalwide agile service design to map gaps and develop a customized digital solution to enable at-scale VC across a publicly funded comprehensive cancer center. Data were collected from a high-volume cancer center in Ontario, Canada, from March 23 to May 22, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome measures were care delivery volumes, quality of care, patient and practitioner experiences, and cost savings to patients. Results: The VC solution was developed and launched 12 days after the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 22 085 VC visits (mean, 514 visits per day) were conducted, comprising 68.4% (range, 18.8%-100%) of daily visits compared with 0.8% before launch (P < .001). Ambulatory clinic volumes recovered a month after deployment (3714-4091 patients per week), whereas chemotherapy and radiotherapy caseloads (1943-2461 patients per week) remained stable throughout. No changes in institutional or provincial quality-of-care indexes were observed. A total of 3791 surveys (3507 patients and 284 practitioners) were completed; 2207 patients (82%) and 92 practitioners (72%) indicated overall satisfaction with VC. The direct cost of this initiative was CAD$ 202 537, and displacement-related cost savings to patients totaled CAD$ 3 155 946. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that implementation of VC at scale at a high-volume cancer center may be feasible. An agile service design approach was able to preserve outpatient caseloads and maintain care quality, while rendering high patient and practitioner satisfaction. These findings may help guide the transformation of telemedicine in the post COVID-19 era.

Learning about Failure from Successful Ecosystems.

The evolutionary model of competitive selection is hard to translate in healthcare where current culture, incentives and policies often lead to a failure to check if something works and act on the results. This is particularly problematic in areas of high uncertainty (and corresponding high risk of failure for any proposed strategy), like the care of people with complex needs. We look to the software sector as an example of a human ecosystem experiencing an explosion of diversity that facilitates participation of people from varied backgrounds and has strong selection processes and approaches to manage uncertainty. Key lessons from this sector include facilitating failure through rapid tests with ready alternatives, support for people (not just ideas) so they can try different approaches and a system-level portfolio investment to account for high likelihood of failure of any given project. A successful ecosystem in healthcare would not only select proven strategies, but promote collaboration among innovators so that there is cumulative system learning as opposed to personal empire building. Given the major fiscal, social and demographic challenges on the horizon, failure to search for novel solutions is a bigger risk than trying new things that might not work.

Knowledge exchange--translating research into practice and policy.

Substantial differences in population-based cancer control outcomes exist within and between nations. Optimal outcomes derive from 'what we know', 'what we apply in practice', and 'how complete and compliant is the population uptake of public health and clinical practice change'. This continuum of research (scientific discovery) to practice (application and uptake) to policy impacts the speed and completeness of practice change and is greatly influenced by the ability, opportunity and readiness of countries to implement evidence informed practices and policies through innovative change. Session 4 of the 4th International Cancer Control Congress focused on knowledge exchange through three plenary presentations and five interactive workshop discussions: 1) the role of epidemiological data as a basis for policy formulation; 2) existing global frameworks for cancer control; 3) knowledge exchange as it relates to public health practice and policy; 4) knowledge exchange in relation to primary, community, and specialist cancer care; and 5) the role of public engagement and advocacy in influencing cancer control policy. Common themes emerging from workshop discussions included the recognition of the importance of knowledge exchange processes, constituents and forums as key aspects of preparedness, awareness and readiness to implement public health and clinical practice change. The importance of cultural and contextual differences between nations was identified as a challenge requiring development of tools for generating relevant population/societal data (e.g., projection methodologies applied to population demographics, outcomes and resources, both societal, human and fiscal) and capacity building for facilitating knowledge transfer and exchange between the constituencies engaged in population-based public health practice and clinically based primary care and disease specialty practice exchange (researchers, health practitioners, health administrators, politicians, patients and families, and the private and public sectors). Understanding patient and public engagement advocacy and its role in influencing health and public policy investment priorities emerged as a critical and fundamental aspect of successful implementation of evidence-informed cancer control change.

Major gaps in diabetes clinical care among Canada's First Nations: results of the CIRCLE study.

AIMS: The aim of this cross-sectional study was to document the clinical management of type 2 diabetes and related complications in Canada's First Nations. METHODS: Patients were randomly selected from 19 communities. Data from charts from consenting patients were collected. RESULTS: Of 885 patients, 63.3% were female, mean age was 54.9 years and mean duration of T2DM was 11.2 years. Mean A1C was 8.2%; 61.1% of patients had an A1C >7.0%; mean LDL was 2.4 mmol/L; 92.6% had dyslipidemia; mean systolic BP was 132 mm Hg; mean diastolic BP was 76 mm Hg; 92.0% had hypertension. Lipid-lowering medications were prescribed to 62.9% of those with dyslipidemia and an LDL-C >2.0 mmol/L. Of hypertensive patients, 15.8% were not on an antihypertensive agent. For vascular protection, 55.1% were on a statin, 72.1% on an ACE inhibitor or ARB, and 64.5% on an anticoagulant. Smoking was documented in 39.4%, 92.1% were overweight/obese; 55.1% had chronic kidney disease, and 13.3% had coronary artery disease. CONCLUSIONS: Major care gaps were revealed, with most patients not achieving glycemic, lipid and BP targets. Over half of this relatively young cohort had established microvascular disease. Macrovascular disease rates may increase dramatically due to the high prevalence of risk factors.

Evaluation of a toolkit to improve cardiovascular disease screening and treatment for people with type 2 diabetes: protocol for a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial.

BACKGROUND: The gap between the level of care recommended by evidence-based clinical practice guidelines and the actual care delivered to patients in practice has been well established. The Canadian Diabetes Association (CDA) created an implementation strategy to improve the implementation of its 2008 guidelines. This study will evaluate the impact of the strategy to improve cardiovascular disease (CVD) screening, prevention and treatment for people with diabetes. DESIGN: A pragmatic cluster-randomized trial will be conducted to evaluate the CDA's CVD Toolkit. All family physicians in Ontario, Canada were randomly allocated to receive the Toolkit, which includes several printed educational materials targeting CVD screening, prevention and treatment, either in spring 2009 (intervention arm) or in spring 2010 (control arm). Randomization occurred at the level of the practice. Forty family physicians from each arm will be recruited to participate, and the medical records for 20 of their diabetic patients at high risk for CVD will be retrospectively reviewed. Outcome measures will be assessed for each patient between July 2009 and March 2010. The primary outcome will be that the patient is receiving a statin. Secondary outcomes will include 1) the receipt of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker, 2) various intermediate measures (A1c, blood pressure, LDL-cholesterol, total-/HDL-cholesterol ratio, body mass index and waist circumference), and 3) clinical inertia (the failure to change therapy in response to an abnormal A1c, blood pressure or cholesterol reading). The analysis will be carried out using multilevel hierarchical logistic regression models to account for the clustered nature of the data. The group assignment will be a physician-level variable. In addition, a process evaluation study with six focus groups of family physicians will assess the acceptability of the CDA's Toolkit and will explore factors contributing to any change or lack of change in behaviour, from the perspectives of family physicians. DISCUSSION: Printed educational materials for physicians have been shown to exert small-to-moderate changes in patient care. The CDA's CVD Toolkit is an example of a practice guideline implementation strategy that can be disseminated to a wide audience relatively inexpensively, and so demonstrating its effectiveness at improving diabetes care could have important consequences for guideline developers, policy makers and clinicians.