Policies in Canada fail to address disparities in access to person-centred osteoarthritis care: a content analysis.

BACKGROUND: Women are disproportionately impacted by osteoarthritis (OA) but less likely than men to access OA care, particularly racialized women. One way to reduce inequities is through policies that can influence healthcare services. We examined how OA-relevant policies in Canada address equitable, person-centred OA care for women. METHODS: We used content analysis to extract data from English-language OA-relevant documents referred to as policies or other synonymous terms published in 2000 or later identified by searching governmental and other web sites. We used summary statistics to describe policy characteristics, person-centred care using McCormack's six-domain framework, and mention of OA prevalence, barriers and strategies to improve equitable access to OA care among women. RESULTS: We included 14 policies developed from 2004 to 2021. None comprehensively addressed all person-centred care domains, and few addressed individual domains: enable self-management (50%), share decisions (43%), exchange information (29%), respond to emotions (14%), foster a healing relationship (0%) and manage uncertainty (0%). Even when mentioned, content offered little guidance for how to achieve person-centred OA care. Few policies acknowledged greater prevalence of OA among women (36%), older (29%) or Indigenous persons (29%) and those of lower socioeconomic status (14%); or barriers to OA care among those of lower socioeconomic status (50%), in rural areas (43%), of older age (37%) or ethno-cultural groups (21%), or women (21%). Four (29%) policies recommended strategies for improving access to OA care at the patient (self-management education material in different languages and tailored to cultural norms), clinician (healthcare professional education) and system level (evaluate OA service equity, engage lay health leaders in delivering self-management programs, and offer self-management programs in a variety of formats). Five (36%) policies recommended research on how to improve OA care for equity-seeking groups. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian OA-relevant policies lack guidance to overcome disparities in access to person-centred OA care for equity-seeking groups including women. This study identified several ways to strengthen policies. Ongoing research must identify the needs and preferences of equity-seeking persons with OA, and evaluate the impact of various models of service delivery, knowledge needed to influence OA-relevant policy.

Multi-level strategies to improve equitable timely person-centred osteoarthritis care for diverse women: qualitative interviews with women and healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Women are more likely to develop osteoarthritis (OA), and have greater OA pain and disability compared with men, but are less likely to receive guideline-recommended management, particularly racialized women. OA care of diverse women, and strategies to improve the quality of their OA care is understudied. The purpose of this study was to explore strategies to overcome barriers of access to OA care for diverse women. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with key informants and used content analysis to identify themes regarding what constitutes person-centred OA care, barriers of OA care, and strategies to support equitable timely access to person-centred OA care. RESULTS: We interviewed 27 women who varied by ethno-cultural group (e.g. African or Caribbean Black, Chinese, Filipino, Indian, Pakistani, Caucasian), age, region of Canada, level of education, location of OA and years with OA; and 31 healthcare professionals who varied by profession (e.g. family physician, nurse practitioner, community pharmacist, physio- and occupational therapists, chiropractors, healthcare executives, policy-makers), career stage, region of Canada and type of organization. Participants within and across groups largely agreed on approaches for person-centred OA care across six domains: foster a healing relationship, exchange information, address emotions, manage uncertainty, share decisions and enable self-management. Participants identified 22 barriers of access and 18 strategies to overcome barriers at the patient- (e.g. educational sessions and materials that accommodate cultural norms offered in different languages and formats for persons affected by OA), healthcare professional- (e.g. medical and continuing education on OA and on providing OA care tailored to intersectional factors) and system- (e.g. public health campaigns to raise awareness of OA, and how to prevent and manage it; self-referral to and public funding for therapy, greater number and ethno-cultural diversity of healthcare professionals, healthcare policies that address the needs of diverse women, dedicated inter-professional OA clinics, and a national strategy to coordinate OA care) levels. CONCLUSIONS: This research contributes to a gap in knowledge of how to optimize OA care for disadvantaged groups including diverse women. Ongoing efforts are needed to examine how best to implement these strategies, which will require multi-sector collaboration and must engage diverse women.

Person-centered care for diverse women: Narrative review of foundational research.

Despite advocacy and recommendations to improve health care and health for persons who identify as women, women continue to face inequities in access to and quality of care. Person-centered care for women is one approach that could reduce gendered inequities. We conducted a series of studies to understand what constitutes person-centered care for women and how to achieve it. The overall aim of this article is to highlight the key findings of those studies that can inform policy, practice, and ongoing research. We conducted a narrative review of all studies related to person-centered care for women conducted in our group starting in 2018 over a 5-year period, which was general at the outset, and increasingly focused on racialized immigrant women who constitute a large proportion of the Canadian population. We organized study summaries by research phase: synthesis of person-centered care for women research, exploration of existing person-centered care for women guidance, consultation with key informants, consensus survey of key informants to prioritize strategies to achieve person-centered care for women, and consensus meeting with key informants to prioritize future research. We conducted the reported research in collaboration with an advisory group of diverse women and managers of community agencies. Our research revealed that little prior research had fully established what constitutes person-centered care for women, and in particular, how to achieve it. We also found little acknowledgment of person-centered care for women or strategies to support it in medical curriculum, clinical guidelines, or healthcare policies. We subsequently consulted women who differed by age, ethno-cultural group, health issue, education and geography, and clinicians of different specialties, who offered considerable insight on strategies to support person-centered care for women. Other diverse women, clinicians, healthcare managers, and researchers prioritized issues that warrant future research. We hope that by compiling a summary of our completed research, we draw attention to the need for person-centered care for women and motivate others to pursue it through policy, practice, and research.

Exploring the merits of research performance measures that comply with the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment and strategies to overcome barriers of adoption: qualitative interviews with administrators and researchers.

BACKGROUND: In prior research, we identified and prioritized ten measures to assess research performance that comply with the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment, a principle adopted worldwide that discourages metrics-based assessment. Given the shift away from assessment based on Journal Impact Factor, we explored potential barriers to implementing and adopting the prioritized measures. METHODS: We identified administrators and researchers across six research institutes, conducted telephone interviews with consenting participants, and used qualitative description and inductive content analysis to derive themes. RESULTS: We interviewed 18 participants: 6 administrators (research institute business managers and directors) and 12 researchers (7 on appointment committees) who varied by career stage (2 early, 5 mid, 5 late). Participants appreciated that the measures were similar to those currently in use, comprehensive, relevant across disciplines, and generated using a rigorous process. They also said the reporting template was easy to understand and use. In contrast, a few administrators thought the measures were not relevant across disciplines. A few participants said it would be time-consuming and difficult to prepare narratives when reporting the measures, and several thought that it would be difficult to objectively evaluate researchers from a different discipline without considerable effort to read their work. Strategies viewed as necessary to overcome barriers and support implementation of the measures included high-level endorsement of the measures, an official launch accompanied by a multi-pronged communication strategy, training for both researchers and evaluators, administrative support or automated reporting for researchers, guidance for evaluators, and sharing of approaches across research institutes. CONCLUSIONS: While participants identified many strengths of the measures, they also identified a few limitations and offered corresponding strategies to address the barriers that we will apply at our organization. Ongoing work is needed to develop a framework to help evaluators translate the measures into an overall assessment. Given little prior research that identified research assessment measures and strategies to support adoption of those measures, this research may be of interest to other organizations that assess the quality and impact of research.

How is patient-centred care conceptualized in obstetrical health? comparison of themes from concept analyses in obstetrical health- and patient-centred care.

BACKGROUND: Due to gender inequities that exist for women of childbearing age, there exists a need to deliver care tailored to their needs and preferences. Patient-centred care (PCC) can be used to meet these needs. This review aims to compare patient care delivery between PCC and obstetrical care. This can help us address how PCC should be delivered to women before, during and after pregnancy versus how it is delivered to patients regardless of sex. METHODS: A review of literature was conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and SCOPUS for English PCC and high-quality perinatal reviews published between 2010 and 2021. The data were analysed using a modified Walker and Avant framework. RESULTS: A total of 2138 unique studies were identified, with 11 PCC and 9 high-quality obstetrical care studies included. Common defining features between PCC and obstetrical care include respect and dignity, informed decision-making, therapeutic alliance, effective communication, social relationships and autonomy. PCC-specific features were holistic care, empowerment, individualized care, coordinated care and empathy. Unique high-quality obstetrical care themes included continuity of care, privacy and confidentiality, provider education and status, physical environment and equitable maternal care. CONCLUSIONS: There are shared defining attributes between PCC and obstetrical care, including respect and dignity, informed decision-making, the therapeutic alliance, effective communication, social relationships and autonomy. However, there remain unique defining attributes for high-quality obstetrical care and PCC. This highlights the need for a unique approach to obstetrical care. More research on care for different physiological conditions in women is needed to address patient care that addresses different parts of the lifespan and develop frameworks that can influence health policy, patient care and health system evaluation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study was one part of a larger, multicomponent study of how to implement PCC for women across the lifespan. While we did not specifically consult or involve women in this dual concept analysis, our larger study (content analysis of clinical guidelines and government policies, qualitative interviews with women and clinicians, Delphi study to prioritize consensus recommendations for achieving PCC for women) was guided by the experiences and input of a 50+ women advisory panel.

Medical student exposure to women's health concepts and practices: a content analysis of curriculum at Canadian medical schools.

BACKGROUND: Women's health (WH) includes a broad array of concerns and challenges that affect health across the lifespan. Considerable research shows that women continue to experience disparities in access to and quality of care. Apart from surveys of medical trainees and faculty, little research and none in Canada examined medical curriculum for WH. This study assessed how Canadian medical schools integrate WH in their curriculum. METHODS: We used deductive and summative content analysis to describe instances and the nature of WH topics in program and course descriptions that were publicly-available on web sites of Canadian medical schools. We reported results using summary statistics and text examples. We employed a framework, tested in our prior research, that included mention of women's health principles and practices relevant to any health concern or condition including factors (e.g. sex, gender, social determinants) that influence health, and access to or quality of care. RESULTS: We retrieved 1459 documents from 16 medical schools (median 49.5, range 16 to 301). Few mentioned WH (125, 8.6 %), and the quantity of mentions varied by school (range 0.0-37.5 %). Pre-clerkship course documents more frequently mentioned WH (61/374, 17.3 %, chi square 43.2, p < 0.00001) compared with clerkship course documents (58/1067, 5.4 %). Core course documents more frequently mentioned WH (72/542, 13.3 %, chi square 29.0, p < 0.00001) compared with elective course documents WH (47/899, 5.2 %). Overall, documents more frequently referred to the WH domain of social determinants of health (88, 70.4 %). Few documents addressed women's health (21, 16.8 %), sex or gender (19, 15.2 %), other considerations (15.2 %) or principles/components of women's health (2, 1.6 %). Most documents that mentioned WH provided little detail about what those concepts referred to or how to optimize WH. CONCLUSIONS: Based on program and course descriptions, WH may not be well-integrated at Canadian medical schools, and future physicians may not be consistently exposed to the full breadth of WH. This reveals opportunities for enhancing WH in the medical curriculum. Future research is needed to engage stakeholders including women in developing, implementing and evaluating competencies and corresponding curriculum that reflect the full range of WH concepts and practices.

Patient-Centered Care for Women: Delphi Consensus on Evidence-Derived Recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-centered care (PCC) could reduce gender inequities in quality of care. Little is known about how to implement patient-centered care for women (PCCW). We aimed to generate consensus recommendations for achieving PCCW. METHODS: We used a 2-round Delphi technique. Panelists included 21 women of varied age, ethnicity, education, and urban/rural residence; and 21 health professionals with PCC or women's health expertise. Panelists rated recommendations, derived from prior research and organized by a 6-domain PCC framework, on a 7-point Likert scale in an online survey. We used summary statistics to report response frequencies and defined consensus as when ≥85% panelists chose 5 to 7. RESULTS: The response rate was 100%. In round 1, women and professionals retained 46 (97.9%) and 42 (89.4%) of 47 initial recommendations, respectively. The round 2 survey included 6 recommendations for women and 5 recommendations for professionals (did not achieve consensus in round 1 or were newly suggested). In round 2, women retained 2 of 6 recommendations and professionals retained 3 of 5 recommendations. Overall, 49 recommendations were generated. Both groups agreed on 44 (94.0%) recommendations (13 retained by 100% of both women and clinicians): fostering patient-physician relationship (n = 11), exchanging information (n = 10), responding to emotions (n = 4), managing uncertainty (n = 5), making decisions (n = 8), and enabling patient self-management (n = 6). CONCLUSION: The recommendations represent the range of PCC domains, are based on evidence from primary research, and reflect high concordance between women and professional panelists. They can inform the development of policies, guidelines, programs, and performance measures that foster PCCW.

Physician behaviours that optimize patient-centred care: Focus groups with migrant women.

BACKGROUND: No prior research studied how to implement patient-centred care (PCC) for migrant women, who face inequities in health-care quality. This study explored migrant women's views about what constitutes PCC and how to achieve it. DESIGN: We conducted a qualitative study involving three focus groups with migrant women living in Toronto, Canada, recruited from English language classes at a community settlement agency, used constant comparative technique to inductively analyse transcripts and interpreted themes against a published PCC framework. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three migrant women aged 25-78 from 10 countries participated. RESULTS: Women articulated 28 physician behaviours important to them across six PCC domains: foster a healing relationship, exchange information, address concerns, manage uncertainty, share decisions and enable self-care. They emphasized the PCC domain of exchanging information, which included 13 (46.4%) of 28 behaviours: listen to reason for visit, ask questions, provided detailed explanations, communicate clearly, ensure privacy and provide additional information. Women said that instead of practising these behaviours, physicians rushed through discussions, and ignored or dismissed their concerns and questions. As a result, women said that physicians may not fully understand their problem, and they may refrain from stating important details or avoid seeking care. CONCLUSIONS: This research characterized the lack of PCC experienced by migrant women and revealed specific physician behaviours to optimize PCC for migrant women. Research is needed to develop and evaluate the impact of strategies targeted at migrant women, physicians and health-care systems to support PCC for migrant women.

Barriers and facilitators of patient centered care for immigrant and refugee women: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Migrants experience disparities in healthcare quality, in particular women migrants. Despite international calls to improve healthcare quality for migrants, little research has addressed this problem. Patient-centred care (PCC) is a proven approach for improving patient experiences and outcomes. This study reviewed published research on PCC for migrants. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review by searching MEDLINE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for English-language qualitative or quantitative studies published from 2010 to June 2019 for studies that assessed PCC for adult immigrants or refugees. We tabulated study characteristics and findings, and mapped findings to a 6-domain PCC framework. RESULTS: We identified 581 unique studies, excluded 538 titles/abstracts, and included 16 of 43 full-text articles reviewed. Most (87.5%) studies were qualitative involving a median of 22 participants (range 10-60). Eight (50.0%) studies involved clinicians only, 6 (37.5%) patients only, and 2 (12.5%) both patients and clinicians. Studies pertained to migrants from 19 countries of origin. No studies evaluated strategies or interventions aimed at either migrants or clinicians to improve PCC. Eleven (68.8%) studies reported barriers of PCC at the patient (i.e. language), clinician (i.e. lack of training) and organization/system level (i.e. lack of interpreters). Ten (62.5%) studies reported facilitators, largely at the clinician level (i.e. establish rapport, take extra time to communicate). Five (31.3%) studies focused on women, thus we identified few barriers (i.e. clinicians dismissed their concerns) and facilitators (i.e. women clinicians) specific to PCC for migrant women. Mapping of facilitators to the PCC framework revealed that most pertained to 2 domains: fostering a healing relationship and exchanging information. Few facilitators mapped to the remaining 4 domains: address emotions/concerns, manage uncertainty, make decisions, and enable self-management. CONCLUSIONS: While few studies were included, they revealed numerous barriers of PCC at the patient, clinician and organization/system level for immigrants and refugees from a wide range of countries of origin. The few facilitators identified pertained largely to 2 PCC domains, thereby identifying gaps in knowledge of how to achieve PCC in 4 domains, and an overall paucity of knowledge on how to achieve PCC for migrant women.

Multi-level strategies to tailor patient-centred care for women: qualitative interviews with clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered care (PCC) is one approach for ameliorating persistent gendered disparities in health care quality, yet no prior research has studied how to achieve patient-centred care for women (PCCW). The purpose of this study was to explore how clinicians deliver PCCW, challenges they face, and the strategies they suggest are needed to support PCCW. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews (25-60 min) with clinicians. Thirty-seven clinicians representing 7 specialties (family physicians, cardiologists, cardiac surgeons, obstetricians/gynecologist, psychiatrists, nurses, social workers) who manage depression (n = 16), cardiovascular disease (n = 11) and contraceptive counseling (n = 10), conditions that affect women across the lifespan. We used constant comparative analysis to inductively analyze transcripts, mapped themes to a 6-domain PCC conceptual framework to interpret findings, and complied with qualitative research reporting standards. RESULTS: Clinicians said that women don't always communicate their health concerns and physicians sometimes disregard women's health concerns, warranting unique PCC approaches.. Clinicians described 39 approaches they used to tailor PCC for women across 6 PCC domains: foster a healing relationship, exchange information, address emotions/concerns, manage uncertainty, make decisions, and enable self-management. Additional conditions that facilitated PCCW were: privacy, access to female clinicians, accommodating children through onsite facilities, and flexible appointment formats and schedules. Clinicians suggested 7 strategies needed to address barriers of PCCW they identified at the: patient-level (online appointments, transport to health services, use of patient partners to plan and/or deliver services), clinician-level (medical training and continuing professional development in PCC and women's health), and system-level (funding models for longer appointment times, multidisciplinary teamwork to address all PCC domains). CONCLUSIONS: Our research revealed numerous strategies that clinicians can use to optimize PCCW, and health care managers and policy-makers can use to support PCCW through programs and policies. Identified strategies addressed all domains of an established PCC conceptual framework. Future research should evaluate the implementation and impact of these strategies on relevant outcomes such as perceived PCC among women and associated clinical outcomes to prepare for broad scale-up.

Identifying strategies to implement patient-centred care for women: Qualitative interviews with women.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-centred care (PCC) is one approach for mitigating gendered inequities in health care quality. Little is known about how to implement PCC for women (PCCW). This study explored women's views about PCCW implementation. METHODS: Descriptive analysis of semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews with diverse women about PCC using an established 6-domain PCC framework. RESULTS: Participants were 33 women who varied in health care experience, age, education and setting. Themes were consistent across these characteristics. Women said that clinicians often dismissed their healthcare concerns. We transformed desired PCC elements into strategies to implement PCCW, 27 at the point-of-care (i.e. assume a non-judgmental disposition, demonstrate active listening, elicit questions, acknowledge emotions, explore preferences for treatment, and offer self-care information) and 3 at the system level (education for women/girls and clinicians about PCCW, widespread access to women's-only services or women clinicians). CONCLUSION: Many women experienced suboptimal PCC. By sharing their PCC experiences, women identified PCC elements of importance to them, and insight on actionable point-of-care and system-level strategies to implement PCCW. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This study revealed numerous ways that clinicians can foster PCCW, and insight on how healthcare managers and policy-makers can support PCCW implementation.

Is patient-centred care for women a priority for policy-makers? Content analysis of government policies.

BACKGROUND: Considerable research shows that women experience gendered disparities in healthcare access and quality. Patient-centred care (PCC) could reduce inequities by addressing the patient's clinical and personal needs. Healthcare policies can influence service delivery to optimise patient outcomes. This study assessed whether and how government policies recognise and promote PCC for women (PCCW). METHODS: We analysed the content of English-language policies published in Canada from 2010 to 2018 on depression and cardiac rehabilitation - conditions featuring known gendered inequities - that were identified on government websites. We extracted data and used summary statistics to enumerate mentions of PCC and women's health. RESULTS: We included 30 policies (20 depression, 10 cardiac rehabilitation). Of those, 20 (66.7%) included any content related to PCC (median 1.0, range 0.0 to 5.0), most often exchanging information (14, 46.7%) and making decisions (13, 43.3%). Less frequent domains were enabling self-management (8, 26.7%), addressing emotions (6, 20.0%) and fostering the relationship (4, 13.3%). No policies included content for the domain of managing uncertainty. A higher proportion of cardiac rehabilitation guidelines included PCC content. Among the 30 policies, 7 (23.3%) included content related to at least one women's health domain (median 0.0, range 0.0 to 3.0). Most frequently included were social determinants of health (4, 13.3%). Fewer policies mentioned any issues to consider for women (2, 28.6%), issues specific to subgroups of women (2, 28.6%) or distinguished care for women from men (2, 28.6%). No policies included mention of abuse or violence, or discrimination or stigma. The policies largely pertained to depression. Despite mention of PCC or women's health, policies offered brief, vague guidance on how to achieve PCCW; for example, "Patients value being involved in decision-making" and "Women want care that is collaborative, woman- and family-centered, and culturally sensitive." CONCLUSIONS: Despite considerable evidence of need and international recommendations, most policies failed to recognise gendered disparities or promote PCC as a mitigating strategy. These identified gaps represent opportunities by which government policies could be developed or strengthened to support PCCW. Future research should investigate complementary strategies such as equipping policy-makers with the evidence and tools required to develop PCCW-informed policies.

A Survey of American Thyroid Association Members Regarding the 2015 Adult Thyroid Nodule and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Background: The 2015 American Thyroid Association (ATA) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on management of thyroid nodules (TNs) and differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) in adults were developed to inform clinicians, patients, researchers, and health policy makers about the best available evidence, and its limitations, relating to management of these conditions. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional electronic survey of ATA members' perspectives of these CPGs, using a standardized survey (Clinician Guidelines Determinant Questionnaire) developed by the Guidelines International Network. A survey link was electronically mailed to members in February of 2019, with reminders sent to nonrespondents 2 and 5 weeks later. Data were descriptively summarized, after excluding missing responses. Results: The overall response rate was 19.8% (348/1761). The effective response rate was 20.2% (348/1720), after excluding a recently deceased member and individuals who had either invalid e-mail addresses or whose e-mails were returned. Of the respondents, 37.9% (132/348) were female, 60.4% (209/346) were endocrinologists, 27.5% (95/346) were surgeons, and 3.5% (12/346) were nuclear medicine specialists. The majority of respondents (71.9%; 250/348) were at a mid- or advanced-career level, and more than half were in academia (57.5%; 195/339). The majority (69.8%; 243/348) practiced in North America. The vast majority of respondents indicated that the CPGs explained the underlying evidence (92.3%; 298/323) and 92.9% (300/323) agreed or strongly agreed with the content. Most respondents stated that they regularly used the CPGs in their practice (83.0%; 268/323). Most respondents (83.0%; 268/323) also agreed or strongly agreed that the recommendations were easy to incorporate in their practice. The most popular CPG format was an electronic desktop file (78.8%; 252/320). Shorter more frequent CPGs were favored by 55.0% (176/320) of respondents, and longer traditional CPGs were favored by 39.7% (127/320). Conclusions: The clinical content and evidence explanations in the adult TN and DTC CPGs are widely accepted and applied among ATA survey respondents. Future ATA CPG updates need to be optimized to best meet users' preferences regarding format, frequency, and length.

How is patient-centred care conceptualized in women's health: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Gendered disparities in health care delivery and outcomes are an international problem. Patient-centred care (PCC) improves patient and health system outcomes, and is widely advocated to reduce inequities. The purpose of this study was to review published research for frameworks of patient-centred care for women (PCCW) that could serve as the basis for quality improvement. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, and Joanna Briggs index for English-language quantitative or qualitative studies published from 2008 to 2018 that included at least 50% women aged 18 years or greater and employed or generated a PCCW framework. Findings were analyzed using a 6-domain PCC framework, and reported using summary statistics and narrative descriptions. RESULTS: A total of 9267 studies were identified, 6670 were unique, 6610 titles were excluded upon title/abstract screening, and 11 were deemed eligible from among 60 full-text articles reviewed. None were based on or generated a PCCW framework, included solely women, or analyzed or reported findings by gender. All studies explored or described PCC components through qualitative research or surveys. None of the studies addressed all 6 domains of an established PCC framework; however, additional PCC elements emerged in 9 of 11 studies including timely responses, flexible scheduling, and humanized management, meaning tailoring communication and treatment to individual needs and preferences. There were no differences in PCC domains between studies comprised primarily of women and other studies. CONCLUSIONS: Given the paucity of research on PCCW, primary research is needed to generate knowledge about PCCW processes, facilitators, challenges, interventions and impacts, which may give rise to a PCCW framework that could be used to plan, deliver, evaluate and improve PCCW.

What constitutes patient-centred care for women: a theoretical rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Women experience disparities in health care delivery and outcomes. Patient-centred care for women (PCCW) is needed. This study examined how PCC has been conceptualized and operationalized in women's health research. METHODS: We conducted a theoretical rapid review of PCCW in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and SCOPUS from 2008 to 2018 for studies involving women aged 18 years or greater with any condition, and analyzed data using an established 6-domain framework of patient-centred communication. RESULTS: We included 39 studies, which covered the following clinical areas: maternal care, cancer, diabetes, HIV, endometriosis, dementia, distal radius fracture, overactive bladder, and lupus erythematosus. The 34 (87.2%) studies that defined or described PCC varied in the PCC elements they addressed, and none addressed all 6 PCC domains. Common domains were exchanging information (25, 73.5%) and fostering the patient-clinician relationship (22, 64.7%). Fewer studies addressed making decisions (16, 47.1%), enabling patient self-management (15, 44.1%), responding to emotions (12, 35.3%), or managing uncertainty (1, 2.9%). Compared with mixed-gender studies, those comprised largely of women more frequently prioritized exchanging information above other domains. Few studies tested strategies to support PCCW or evaluated the impact of PCCW; those that did demonstrated beneficial impact on patient knowledge, satisfaction, well-being, self-care and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Studies varied in how they conceptualized PCCW, and in many it was defined narrowly. Few studies examined how to implement or measure PCCW; thus, we lack insight on how to operationlize PCCW. Thus, further research is needed to confirm this, and whether PCCW differs across conditions, knowledge needed to inform policies, guidelines and measures aimed at improving health care and associated outcomes for women.

How do and could clinical guidelines support patient-centred care for women: Content analysis of guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: Patient-centred care (PCC) improves multiple patient and health system outcomes. However, many patients do not experience PCC, particularly women, who are faced with disparities in care and outcomes globally. The purpose of this study was to identify if and how guidelines address PCC for women (PCCW). METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, National Guideline Clearing House, and guideline developer websites for publicly-available, English-language guidelines on depression and cardiac rehabilitation, conditions with known gendered inequities. We used summary statistics to report guideline characteristics, clinical topic, mention of PCC according to McCormack's framework, and mention of women's health considerations. We appraised guideline quality with the AGREE II instrument. RESULTS: A total of 27 guidelines (18 depression, 9 cardiac rehabilitation) were included. All 27 guidelines mentioned at least one PCC domain (median 3, range 1 to 6), most frequently exchanging information (20, 74.1%), making decisions (20, 74.1%), and enabling patient self-management (21, 77.8%). No guidelines fully addressed PCC: 9 (50.0%) of 18 depression guidelines and 3 (33.3%) of 9 cardiac rehabilitation guidelines addressed 4 or more PCC domains. Even when addressed, guidance was minimal and vague. Among 14 (51.9%) guidelines that mentioned women's health, most referred to social determinants of health; none offered guidance on how to support women impacted by these factors, engage women, or tailor care for women. These findings pertained even to women-specific guidelines. Reported use or type of guideline development process/system did not appear to be linked with PCCW content. Based on quality appraisal with AGREE II, guidelines were either not recommended or recommended with modifications. In particular, the stakeholder involvement AGREE II domain was least addressed, but guidelines that scored higher for stakeholder involvement also appeared to better address PCCW. IMPLICATIONS: This research identified opportunities to generate guidelines that achieve PCCW. Strategies include employing a PCC framework, considering gender issues, engaging women on guideline-writing panels, and including patient-oriented tools in guidelines. Primary research is needed to establish what constitutes PCCW.

Barriers of Access to Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this systematic review was to comprehensively summarize barriers of access to breast reconstruction and evaluate access using the Penchansky and Thomas conceptual framework based on the six dimensions of access to care. METHODS: The authors performed a systematic review that focused on (1) breast reconstruction, (2) barriers, and (3) breast cancer. Eight databases (i.e., EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINHAL, ePub MEDLINE, ProQuest, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched. English peer-reviewed articles published between 1996 and 2016 were included. RESULTS: The authors' search retrieved 4282 unique articles. Two independent reviewers screened texts, selecting 99 articles for inclusion. All studies were observational and qualitative in nature. The availability of breast reconstruction was highest in teaching hospitals, private hospitals, and national cancer institutions. Accessibility affected access, with lower likelihood of breast reconstruction in rural geographic locations. Affordability also impacted access; high costs of the procedure or poor reimbursement by insurance companies negatively influenced access to breast reconstruction. Acceptability of the procedure was not universal, with unfavorable physician attitudes toward breast reconstruction and specific patient and tumor characteristics correlating with lower rates of breast reconstruction. Lastly, lack of patient awareness of breast reconstruction reduced the receipt of breast reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Using the access-to-care framework by Penchansky and Thomas, the authors found that barriers to breast reconstruction existed in all six domains and interplayed at many levels. The authors' systematic review analyzed this complex relationship and suggested multiprong interventions aimed at targeting breast reconstruction barriers, with the goal of promoting equitable access to breast reconstruction for all breast cancer patients.

Number and type of guideline implementation tools varies by guideline, clinical condition, country of origin, and type of developer organization: content analysis of guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Guideline implementation tools (GI tools) can improve clinician behavior and patient outcomes. Analyses of guidelines published before 2010 found that many did not offer GI tools. Since 2010 standards, frameworks and instructions for GI tools have emerged. This study analyzed the number and types of GI tools offered by guidelines published in 2010 or later. METHODS: Content analysis and a published GI tool framework were used to categorize GI tools by condition, country, and type of organization. English-language guidelines on arthritis, asthma, colorectal cancer, depression, diabetes, heart failure, and stroke management were identified in the National Guideline Clearinghouse. Screening and data extraction were in triplicate. Findings were reported with summary statistics. RESULTS: Eighty-five (67.5%) of 126 eligible guidelines published between 2010 and 2017 offered one or more of a total of 464 GI tools. The mean number of GI tools per guideline was 5.5 (median 4.0, range 1 to 28) and increased over time. The majority of GI tools were for clinicians (239, 51.5%), few were for patients (113, 24.4%), and fewer still were to support implementation (66, 14.3%) or evaluation (46, 9.9%). Most clinician GI tools were guideline summaries (116, 48.5%), and most patient GI tools were condition-specific information (92, 81.4%). Government agencies (patient 23.5%, clinician 28.9%, implementation 24.1%, evaluation 23.5%) and developers in the UK (patient 18.5%, clinician 25.2%, implementation 27.2%, evaluation 29.1%) were more likely to generate guidelines that offered all four types of GI tools. Professional societies were more likely to generate guidelines that included clinician GI tools. CONCLUSIONS: Many guidelines do not include any GI tools, or a variety of GI tools for different stakeholders that may be more likely to prompt guideline uptake (point-of-care forms or checklists for clinicians, decision-making or self-management tools for patients, implementation and evaluation tools for managers and policy-makers). While this may vary by country and type of organization, and suggests that developers could improve the range of GI tools they develop, further research is needed to identify determinants and potential solutions. Research is also needed to examine the cost-effectiveness of various types of GI tools so that developers know where to direct their efforts and scarce resources.

How do organisational characteristics influence teamwork and service delivery in lung cancer diagnostic assessment programmes? A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic assessment programmes (DAPs) can reduce wait times for cancer diagnosis, but optimal DAP design is unknown. This study explored how organisational characteristics influenced multidisciplinary teamwork and diagnostic service delivery in lung cancer DAPs. DESIGN: A mixed-methods approach integrated data from descriptive qualitative interviews and medical record abstraction at 4 lung cancer DAPs. Findings were analysed with the Integrated Team Effectiveness Model. SETTING: 4 DAPs at 2 teaching and 2 community hospitals in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 22 staff were interviewed about organisational characteristics, target service benchmarks, and teamwork processes, determinants and outcomes; 314 medical records were reviewed for actual service benchmarks. RESULTS: Formal, informal and asynchronous team processes enabled service delivery and yielded many perceived benefits at the patient, staff and service levels. However, several DAP characteristics challenged teamwork and service delivery: referral volume/workload, time since launch, days per week of operation, rural-remote population, number and type of full-time/part-time human resources, staff colocation, information systems. As a result, all sites failed to meet target benchmarks (from referral to consultation median 4.0 visits, median wait time 35.0 days). Recommendations included improved information systems, more staff in all specialties, staff colocation and expanded roles for patient navigators. Findings were captured in a conceptual framework of lung cancer DAP teamwork determinants and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified several DAP characteristics that could be improved to facilitate teamwork and enhance service delivery, thereby contributing to knowledge of organisational determinants of teamwork and associated outcomes. Findings can be used to update existing DAP guidelines, and by managers to plan or evaluate lung cancer DAPs. Ongoing research is needed to identify ideal roles for navigators, and staffing models tailored to case volumes.

Meta-Review of the Quantity and Quality of Evidence for Knee Arthroplasty Devices.

INTRODUCTION: Some cardiovascular devices are licensed based on limited evidence, potentially exposing patients to devices that are not safe or effective. Research is needed to ascertain if the same is true of other types of medical devices. Knee arthroplasty is a widely-used surgical procedure yet implant failures are not uncommon. The purpose of this study was to characterize available evidence on the safety and effectiveness of knee implants. METHODS: A review of primary studies included in health technology assessments (HTA) on total (TKA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Biotechnology & BioEngineering Abstracts were searched from 2005 to 2014, plus journal tables of contents and 32 HTA web sites. Patients were aged 18 and older who underwent primary TKA or UKA assessed in cohort or randomized controlled studies. Summary statistics were used to report study characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 265 eligible primary studies published between 1986 and 2014 involving 59,217 patients were identified in 10 HTAs (2 low, 7 moderate, 1 high risk of bias). Most evaluated TKA (198, 74.5%). The quality of evidence in primary studies was limited. Most studies were industry-funded (23.8%) or offered no declaration of funding or conflict of interest (44.9%); based on uncontrolled single cohorts (58.5%), enrolled fewer than 100 patients (66.4%), and followed patients for 2 years or less (UKA: single cohort 29.8%, comparative cohort 16.7%, randomized trial 25.0%; TKA: single cohort 25.0%, comparative cohort 31.4%, randomized trial 48.6%). Furthermore, most devices were evaluated in only one study (55.3% TKA implants, 61.1% UKA implants). CONCLUSIONS: Patients, physicians, hospitals and payers rely on poor-quality evidence to support decisions about knee implants. Further research is needed to explore how decisions about the use of devices are currently made, and how the evidence base for device safety and effectiveness can be strengthened.