Protocol for a mixed-method analysis of implementation of case management in primary care for frequent users of healthcare services with chronic diseases and complex care needs.

INTRODUCTION: Case management (CM) in a primary care setting is a promising approach to integrating and improving healthcare services and outcomes for patients with chronic conditions and complex care needs who frequently use healthcare services. Despite evidence supporting CM and interest in implementing it in Canada, little is known about how to do this. This research aims to identify the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a CM intervention in different primary care contexts (objective 1) and to explain the influence of the clinical context on the degree of implementation (objective 2) and on the outcomes of the intervention (objective 3). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multiple-case embedded mixed-methods study will be conducted on CM implemented in ten primary care clinics across five Canadian provinces. Each clinic will represent a subunit of analysis, detailed through a case history. Cases will be compared and contrasted using multiple analytical approaches. Qualitative data (objectives 1 and 2) from individual semistructured interviews (n=130), focus group discussions (n=20) and participant observation of each clinic (36 hours) will be compared and integrated with quantitative (objective 3) clinical data on services use (n=300) and patient questionnaires (n=300). An evaluation of intervention fidelity will be integrated into the data analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project received approval from the CIUSSS de l'Estrie - CHUS Research Ethic Board (project number MP-31-2019-2830). Results will provide the opportunity to refine the CM intervention and to facilitate effective evaluation, replication and scale-up. This research provides knowledge on how to resp ond to the needs of individuals with chronic conditions and complex care needs in a cost-effective way that improves patient-reported outcomes and healthcare use, while ensuring care team well-being. Dissemination of results is planned and executed based on the needs of various stakeholders involved in the research.

Case Management in Primary Care for Frequent Users of Health Care Services: A Realist Synthesis.

PURPOSE: Case management (CM) is a promising intervention for frequent users of health care services. Our research question was how and under what circumstances does CM in primary care work to improve outcomes among frequent users with chronic conditions? METHODS: We conducted a realist synthesis, searching MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO (1996 to September 2017) for articles meeting the following criteria: (1) population: adult frequent users with chronic disease, (2) intervention: CM in a primary care setting with a postintervention evaluation, and (3) primary outcomes: integration of services, health care system use, cost, and patient outcome measures. Academic and gray literature were evaluated for relevance and robustness. Independent reviewers extracted data to identify context, mechanism, and outcome (CMO) configurations. Analysis of CMO configurations allowed for the modification of an initial program theory toward a refined program theory. RESULTS: Of the 9,295 records retrieved, 21 peer-reviewed articles and an additional 89 documents were retained. We evaluated 19 CM interventions and identified 11 CMO configurations. The development of a trusting relationship fostering patient and clinician engagement in the CM intervention was recurrent in many CMO configurations. CONCLUSION: Our refined program theory proposes that in the context of easy access to an experienced and trusted case manager who provides comprehensive care while maintaining positive interactions with patients, the development of this relationship fosters the engagement of both individuals and yields positive outcomes when the following mechanisms are triggered: patients and clinicians feel supported, respected, accepted, engaged, and committed; and patients feel less anxious, more secure, and empowered to self-manage.

Strategic analysis of interventions to reduce physician shortages in rural regions.

INTRODUCTION: Physician shortages in rural regions of OECD countries has led to the development of regulatory, financial, educational and tailored interventions designed to reduce physician shortages. Studies evaluating these interventions report weak or inconclusive results. The objective of this research is to examine the strategic relevance of the interventions by identifying and prioritizing the determinants of physician shortages and analyzing the interventions based on their ability to target the determinants. METHODS: First, the determinants of physician shortages were identified and categorized using Mays et al's 2005 method for reviewing qualitative literature. Second, the determinants were prioritized based on importance, severity and solvability, using Lehmann et al's multilevel categorization of factors affecting attraction and retention. Third, the interventions were analyzed based on their ability to target the determinants through a document analysis as descriptive commentary from a policy analysis perspective. RESULTS: Three individual and 10 contextual (work, rural or international context) determinants of physician shortages were identified. Non-rural background, inadequate training and inadequate incentive structure were prioritized as level 1. Lack of professional support, poor work infrastructure and personal interests were prioritized as level 2. Poor rural infrastructure, inadequate supply planning and cultural difference were prioritized as level 3. Non-minority background, geography and climate, global migration and aging population were prioritized as level 4. Establishing rural medical schools targets the greatest number of priority determinants, followed by financial interventions targeting practicing physicians and non-traditional health services delivery strategies. Curriculum changes, professional support strategies, selective admission to medical schools, financially targeting student physicians and coercive regulatory measures follow. Community support strategies target the fewest number of determinants and trickle-down economic regulation targets none. CONCLUSION: Strategic analysis demonstrates that most interventions designed to reduce physician shortages in rural regions are strategically relevant because they address the priority determinants of physician shortages. A link is established between the determinants of physician shortages and the interventions, thereby addressing an important concern expressed in the literature. An original contribution is made to health human resources literature by relying on established theoretical frameworks to achieve a strategic analysis of the interventions.

Characteristics of self-management among patients with complex health needs: a thematic analysis review.

OBJECTIVE: There is a gap of knowledge among healthcare providers on characteristics of self-management among patients with chronic diseases and complex healthcare needs. Consequently, the objective of this paper was to identify characteristics of self-management among patients with chronic diseases and complex healthcare needs. DESIGN: Thematic analysis review of the literature. METHODS: We developed search strategies for the MEDLINE and CINAHL databases, covering the January 2000-October 2018 period. All articles in English or French addressing self-management among an adult clientele (18 years and older) with complex healthcare needs (multimorbidity, vulnerability, complexity and frequent use of health services) were included. Studies that addressed self-management of a single disease or that did not have any notion of complexity or vulnerability were excluded. A mixed thematic analysis, deductive and inductive, was performed by three evaluators as described by Mileset al. RESULTS: Twenty-one articles were included. Patients with complex healthcare needs present specific features related to self-management that can be exacerbated by deprived socioeconomic conditions. These patients must often prioritise care based on one dominant condition. They are at risk for depression, psychological distress and low self-efficacy, as well as for receiving contradictory information from healthcare providers. However, the knowledge and experiences acquired in the past in relation to their condition may help them improve their self-management skills. CONCLUSIONS: This review identifies challenges to self-management for patients with complex healthcare needs, which are exacerbated in contexts of socioeconomic insecurity and proposes strategies to help healthcare providers better adapt their self-management support interventions to meet the specific needs of this vulnerable clientele.