Prevalence and patterns of multimorbidity among linguistic groups of patients receiving home care in Ontario: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated the negative impact of language barriers on access, quality, and safety of healthcare, which can lead to health disparities in linguistic minorities. As the population ages, those with multiple chronic diseases will require increasing levels of home care and long-term services. This study described the levels of multimorbidity among recipients of home care in Ontario, Canada by linguistic group. METHODS: Population-based retrospective cohort of 510,685 adults receiving home care between April 1, 2010, to March 31, 2018, in Ontario, Canada. We estimated and compared prevalence and characteristics of multimorbidity (2 or more chronic diseases) across linguistic groups (Francophones, Anglophones, Allophones). The most common combinations and clustering of chronic diseases were examined. Logistic regression models were used to explore the main predictors of 'severe' multimorbidity (defined as the presence of five or more chronic diseases). RESULTS: The proportion of home care recipients with multimorbidity and severe multimorbidity was 92% and 44%, respectively. The prevalence of multimorbidity was slightly higher among Allophones (93.6%) than among Anglophones (91.8%) and Francophones (92.4%). However, Francophones had higher rates of cardiovascular and respiratory disease (64.9%) when compared to Anglophones (60.2%) and Allophones (61.5%), while Anglophones had higher rates of cancer (34.2%) when compared to Francophones (25.2%) and Allophones (24.3%). Relative to Anglophones, Allophones were more likely to have severe multimorbidity (adjusted OR = 1.04, [95% CI: 1.02-1.06]). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of multimorbidity among Ontarians receiving home care services is high; especially for whose primary language is a language other than English or French (i.e., Allophones). Understanding differences in the prevalence and characteristics of multimorbidity across linguistic groups will help tailor healthcare services to the unique needs of patients living in minority linguistic situations.

Distance, access and equity: a cross-sectional geospatial analysis of disparities in access to primary care for French-only speakers in Ottawa, Ontario.

BACKGROUND: Although language concordance between patients and primary care physicians results in better quality of care and health outcomes, little research has explored inequities in travel burden to access primary care people of linguistic minority groups in Canada. We sought to investigate the travel burden of language-concordant primary care among people who speak French but not English (French-only speakers) and the general public in Ottawa, Ontario, and any inequities in access across language groups and neighbourhood ruralities. METHODS: Using a novel computational method, we estimated travel burden to language-concordant primary care for the general population and French-only speakers in Ottawa. We used language and population data from Statistics Canada's 2016 Census, neighbourhood demographics from the Ottawa Neighbourhood Study, and collected the main practice location and language of primary care physicians from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. We measured travel burden using Valhalla, an open-source road-network analysis platform. RESULTS: We included data from 869 primary care physicians and 916 855 patients. Overall, French-only speakers faced greater travel burdens than the general population to access language-concordant primary care. Median differences in travel burden were statistically significant but small (median difference in drive time 0.61 min, p < 0.001, interquartile range 0.26-1.17 min), but inequities in travel burden between groups were larger among people living in rural neighbourhoods. INTERPRETATION: French-only speakers in Ottawa face modest - but statistically significant - overall inequities in travel burden when accessing primary care, compared with the general population, and higher inequities in specific neighbourhoods. Our results are of interest to policy-makers and health system planners, and our methods can be replicated and used as comparative benchmarks to quantify access disparities for other services and regions across Canada.

Clinical and economic impact of a community-based, hybrid model of in-person and virtual care in a Canadian rural setting: a cross-sectional population-based comparative study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical and economic impact of a community-based, hybrid model of in-person and virtual care by comparing health-system performance of the rural jurisdiction where this model was implemented with neighbouring jurisdictions without such a model and the broader regional health system. DESIGN: A cross-sectional comparative study. SETTING: Ontario, Canada, with a focus on three largely rural public health units from 1 April 2018 until 31 March 2021. PARTICIPANTS: All residents of Ontario, Canada under the age of 105 eligible for the Ontario Health Insurance Plan during the study period. INTERVENTIONS: An innovative, community-based, hybrid model of in-person and virtual care, the Virtual Triage and Assessment Centre (VTAC), was implemented in Renfrew County, Ontario on 27 March 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was a change in emergency department (ED) visits anywhere in Ontario, secondary outcomes included changes in hospitalisations and health-system costs, using per cent changes in mean monthly values of linked health-system administrative data for 2 years preimplementation and 1 year postimplementation. RESULTS: Renfrew County saw larger declines in ED visits (-34.4%, 95% CI -41.9% to -26.0%) and hospitalisations (-11.1%, 95% CI -19.7% to -1.5%) and slower growth in health-system costs than other rural regions studied. VTAC patients' low-acuity ED visits decreased by -32.9%, high-acuity visits increased by 8.2%, and hospitalisations increased by 30.0%. CONCLUSION: After implementing VTAC, Renfrew County saw reduced ED visits and hospitalisations and slower health-system cost growth compared with neighbouring rural jurisdictions. VTAC patients experienced reduced unnecessary ED visits and increased appropriate care. Community-based, hybrid models of in-person and virtual care may reduce the burden on emergency and hospital services in rural, remote and underserved regions. Further study is required to evaluate potential for scale and spread.

The Health System Costs of Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing: A Population-Based, Retrospective Cohort Study Using Linked Health Administrative Databases in Ontario, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the health system costs from hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and medications due to potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in Ontario, Canada, at the population-level. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of individuals ≥ 66 years of age and prescribed at least one medication from April 2002 to March 2015 was identified using linked population-level health administrative databases from Ontario, Canada. Patients were identified as having PIP or no PIP by applying a subset of the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing/Screening Tool to Alert Doctors to Right Treatment (STOPP/START) criteria. The number of days spent in hospital, new medications prescribed, and ED visits in the 90 days following PIP or patient index date were captured, as well as the total costs from each of these health services. Count regression models were used to generate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for each outcome given the presence of PIP versus no PIP and combined with the prevalence of PIP to generate population attributable fractions (PAFs). The PAF was then multiplied by the cost for each health service to obtain the costs attributable to PIP in the whole cohort, and by age and sex. RESULTS: PIP was associated with an increased rate of hospitalization (IRR 2.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.72-2.82), ED visits (IRR 1.87, 95% CI 1.82-1.92), and newly prescribed medications (IRR 1.13, 95% CI 1.13-1.14), resulting in PAFs of 55.7, 37.9, and 5.0% for each outcome, respectively. PIP was associated with 38.8% of the total spent on these healthcare services ($1.22 billion) in the 90 days after PIP. Costs attributable to PIP decreased with age despite increasing prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: PIP in older adults is a significant source of health system costs from healthcare service use beyond medication costs, with a significant portion of hospitalizations and ED visit costs attributable to PIP. Future work should focus on identifying strategies and priorities for intervention.

Health system costs of potentially inappropriate prescribing in Ontario, Canada: a protocol for a population-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Adverse drug events (ADEs) are common in older persons and contribute significantly to emergency department visits, hospitalisations and mortality. ADEs are often due to potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIP) or potentially inappropriate omissions (PIO), and are avoidable if inappropriate prescriptions or omissions are identified and prevented. Identifying PIP/PIO at the population level through the application of PIP/PIO assessment tools to health administrative data can provide a unique opportunity to assess the economic burden of PIP/PIO on the healthcare system beyond medication costs which is yet to be done. The objective of this study is to assess the economic burden associated with PIP/PIO and to estimate the incremental costs associated with distinct PIP/PIO in the province of Ontario. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a retrospective cohort study using Ontario's health administrative databases. Eligible patients aged 66 years and older who were prescribed at least one medication between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2014 (approximately 2.4 million patients) will be included. Population attributable fraction methodology will be used to assess the overall burden of PIP in Ontario, while regression analyses will be used to estimate the incremental costs of having specific PIP criteria and aid in prioritising targets for intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada. Dissemination will occur via publication, presentation at national and international conferences, and knowledge exchange with various stakeholders.

Interventions to reduce wait times for primary care appointments: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Accessibility and availability are important characteristics of efficient and effective primary healthcare systems. Currently, timely access to a family physician is a concern in Canada. Adverse outcomes are associated with longer wait times for primary care appointments and often leave individuals to rely on urgent care. When wait times for appointments are too long patients may experience worse health outcomes and are often left to use emergency department resources. The primary objective of our study was to systematically review the literature to identify interventions designed to reduce wait times for primary care appointments. Secondary objectives were to assess patient satisfaction and reduction of no-show rates. METHODS: We searched multiple databases, including: Medline via Ovid SP (1947 to present), Embase (from 1980 to present), PsychINFO (from 1806 to present), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; all dates), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL; 1937 to present), and Pubmed (all dates) to identify studies that reported outcomes associated with interventions designed to reduce wait times for primary care appointments. Two independent reviewers assessed all identified studies for inclusion using pre-defined inclusion/exclusion criteria and a multi-level screening approach. Our study methods were guided by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. RESULTS: Our search identified 3,960 articles that were eligible for inclusion, eleven of which satisfied all inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data abstraction of included studies revealed that open access scheduling is the most commonly used intervention to reduce wait times for primary care appointments. Additionally, included studies demonstrated that dedicated telephone calls for follow-up consultation, presence of nurse practitioners on staff, nurse and general practitioner triage, and email consultations were effective at reducing wait times. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study to systematically review and identify interventions designed to reduce wait times for primary care appointments. Our findings suggest that open access scheduling and other patient-centred interventions may reduce wait times for primary care appointments. Our review may inform policy makers and family healthcare providers about interventions that are effective in offering timely access to primary healthcare.

Methodology for Developing Deprescribing Guidelines: Using Evidence and GRADE to Guide Recommendations for Deprescribing.

BACKGROUND: Class specific deprescribing guidelines could help clinicians taper and stop medications no longer needed or which may be causing more harm than benefit. We set out to develop methodology to create such guidelines using evidence-based methods for guideline development, evidence synthesis and recommendation rating. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise, we conducted a national modified Delphi consensus process to identify priorities for deprescribing guidelines, then conducted scoping exercises to identify feasible topics, and sequentially developed three deprescribing guidelines. We selected guideline development team members for clinical expertise; a GRADE member worked with staff to ensure guideline development processes were followed. We conducted or used systematic searches and reviews of deprescribing trials of selected drug classes, reviews or systematic reviews of drug class effectiveness, reviews of reviews of drug class harm and narrative syntheses of contextual questions to inform recommendations and guideline development. Our 8 step process for guideline development included defining scope and purpose, developing a logic model to guide the process and generate key clinical questions, setting criteria for admissible evidence and conducting systematic reviews, synthesizing evidence considering additional contextual information and performing quality estimates, formulating recommendations and providing strength estimations, adding clinical considerations, conducting clinical and stakeholder review and finally updating content pre-publication. Innovative aspects of the guideline development process included synthesizing evidence for outcomes of tapering or stopping medication, and incorporating evidence for medication harm into the recommendation strength rating. Through the development of three deprescribing guidelines (for proton pump inhibitors, benzodiazepine receptor agonists and antipsychotics) and associated decision-support algorithms, we were able to gradually hone the methodology; each guideline will be published separately. CONCLUSION: Our methodology demonstrates the importance of searching for short and long-term outcomes, showing the benefits of deprescribing and studying patient preferences. This publication will support development of future deprescribing guidelines.

Do sugar-sweetened beverages cause adverse health outcomes in children? A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes are examples of chronic diseases that impose significant morbidity and mortality in the general population worldwide. Most chronic diseases are associated with underlying preventable risk factors, such as elevated blood pressure, high blood glucose or glucose intolerance, high lipid levels, physical inactivity, excessive sedentary behaviours, and overweight/obesity. The occurrence of intermediate outcomes during childhood increases the risk of disease in adulthood. Sugar-sweetened beverages are known to be significant sources of additional caloric intake, and given recent attention to their contribution in the development of chronic diseases, a systematic review is warranted. We will assess whether the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages in children is associated with adverse health outcomes and what the potential moderating factors are. METHODS/DESIGN: Of interest are studies addressing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, taking a broad perspective. Both direct consumption studies as well as those evaluating interventions that influence consumption (e.g. school policy, educational) will be relevant. Non-specific or multi-faceted behavioural, educational, or policy interventions may also be included subject to the level of evidence that exists for the other interventions/exposures. Comparisons of interest and endpoints of interest are pre-specified. We will include randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, interrupted time series studies, controlled before-after studies, prospective and retrospective comparative cohort studies, case-control studies, and nested case-control designs. The MEDLINE®, Embase, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, ERIC, and PsycINFO® databases and grey literature sources will be searched. The processes for selecting studies, abstracting data, and resolving conflicts are described. We will assess risk of bias using design-specific tools. To determine sets of confounding variables that should be adjusted for, we have developed causal directed acyclic graphs and will use those to inform our risk of bias assessments. Meta-analysis will be conducted where appropriate; parameters for exploring statistical heterogeneity and effect modifiers are pre-specified. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to determine the quality of evidence for outcomes. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014009641.

[Prescription of generic drugs in general practice. Results of a survey of general practitioners]. / Verordnung von Generika in der hausärztlichen Praxis: Ergebnisse einer Befragung von Hausärzten.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Switching brand-name drugs to generics is reasonable and desired for economic reasons. Few data exist about problems, if any, during the switching in general practice. In this survey, the view of general practitioners (GPs) should be ascertained. METHODS: GPs in five counties in the German federal states Thüringen and Baden-Württemberg, who took part in a study on generic drug prescribing, were asked to complete a questionnaire about experiences and attitudes toward generic drug prescription. RESULTS: A total of 195 (84%) of 233 GPs answered the questionnaire. Two thirds (127/195) stated, that brands and generics are pharmacologically equivalent. Many of these GPs estimated to prescribe generic drugs in > 50% of instances; fewer doctors did so, if they had doubts as to the equivalence of generics (65% vs. 46%; p < 0.05). Nearly 8% reported generics being less effective, and 10% observed new adverse effects after switching. Many GPs appointed the following barriers: cooperation with hospitals and colleagues (86%), GP's lack of time (68%), and communication problems with the patient (50%). GPs estimated that > 10% of patients strictly reject generic drugs. CONCLUSION: An optimized cooperation between GPs and hospital physicians could facilitate the consumption of generic potential in pharmacotherapy. Reasons for the obvious contrast between the proven pharmacological equivalence of brand-name and generic drugs and the problems encountered after switching reported by GPs should be further studied.