Examining the extent and factors associated with interprofessional teamwork in primary care settings.

Despite growing emphasis on adopting team-based models of primary care to facilitate patient access to a diverse range of care providers, our understanding of team functioning within primary care teams remains limited. This study examined interprofessional teamwork within primary care practices (Family Health Teams [FHT] and Community Health Centers - [CHC]) in Ontario and explored team-level and organizational factors associated with interprofessional teamwork. Interprofessional teamwork was measured using the Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool (CPAT), which was completed by providers in each participating team. The CPAT responses of 988 providers representing on average 12 professions (sd = 2.1) across 66 teams (44 FHTs and 22 CHCs) were included in the analysis. The average CPAT score was 46.6 (sd = 2.5). CHCs had significantly higher CPAT scores than FHTs (mdiff = 1.7, p = .02). Using diverse communication mechanisms to share information, increasing quality improvement capacities, and age of practice, had a statistically significant positive association with CPAT scores. Increasing team size, using centralized administrative processes, a high level of information exchange, and having a mixed governance board were significantly negatively associated with CPAT score. Findings illustrate factors associated with interprofessional teamwork and offer insight into the comparative performance of two team-based primary care models in Ontario.

Do family health clinics provide primary-level palliative care in Ontario and the eastern regions of Quebec?

OBJECTIVE: To explore the extent to which family health clinics in Ontario and the eastern regions of the province of Quebec provide palliative care. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Ontario and the eastern regions of Quebec. PARTICIPANTS: The clinic leads of a select group of family health clinics with patient enrolment models in Ontario and the eastern regions of Quebec. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The types of palliative care services that the clinics provide, as well as the enablers of and barriers to providing palliative care within the 2 provinces. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 32%. Clinics in both provinces reported providing palliative care to ambulatory patients (83% of Ontario clinics and 74% of Quebec clinics). Only 29 of 102 (28%) Ontario clinics provided on-call services themselves, compared with 31 of 34 (91%) Quebec clinics, with the resulting effect being that more patients were directed to emergency departments in Ontario. Access to palliative care specialist teams for support was higher in Ontario than in Quebec (67% vs 41%, respectively). In Ontario, 56% of practices indicated that they had access to palliative care physicians who could take over the care of their patients with palliative care needs, but a lower number (44%) actually handed over care to these physicians. CONCLUSION: A group of clinics are providing full palliative care services to their own patients with palliative care needs, including "on-call" services and home visits, and these serve as role models. In Ontario in particular, substantial gaps still exist with respect to clinics providing their own after-hours coverage and home visits; many rely on other services to provide that care. In Quebec, lack of access to palliative care specialist teams appears to be a key challenge in the areas included in this survey. This survey could help policy makers and funders of health care services ensure that appropriate conditions are put in place for optimal palliative care provision in these clinics, such as coordinating access to on-call coverage and support from palliative care specialist teams, as well as providing education to all physicians and adequate remuneration.

Income inequalities in multimorbidity prevalence in Ontario, Canada: a decomposition analysis of linked survey and health administrative data.

BACKGROUND: The burden of multimorbidity is a growing clinical and health system problem that is known to be associated with socioeconomic status, yet our understanding of the underlying determinants of inequalities in multimorbidity and longitudinal trends in measured disparities remains limited. METHODS: We included all adult respondents from four cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) (between 2005 to 2011/12), linked at the individual-level to health administrative data in Ontario, Canada (pooled n = 113,627). Multimorbidity was defined at each survey response as having ≥2 (of 17) high impact chronic conditions, based on claims data. Using a decomposition method of the Erreygers-corrected concentration index (CErreygers), we measured household income inequality and the contribution of the key determinants of multimorbidity (including socio-demographic, socio-economic, lifestyle and health system factors) to these disparities. Differences over time are described. We tested for statistically significant changes to measured inequality using the slope index (SII) and relative index of inequality (RII) with a 2-way interaction on pooled data. RESULTS: Multimorbidity prevalence in 2011/12 was 33.5% and the CErreygers was - 0.085 (CI: -0.108 to - 0.062), indicating a greater prevalence among lower income groups. In decomposition analyses, income itself accounted more than two-thirds (69%) of this inequality. Age (21.7%), marital status (15.2%) and physical inactivity (10.9%) followed, and the contribution of these factors increased from baseline (2005 CCHS survey) with the exception of age. Other lifestyle factors, including heavy smoking and obesity, had minimal contribution to measured inequality (1.8 and 0.4% respectively). Tests for trends (SII/RII) across pooled survey data were not statistically significant (p = 0.443 and 0.405, respectively), indicating no change in inequalities in multimorbidity prevalence over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: A pro-rich income gap in multimorbidity has persisted in Ontario from 2005 to 2011/12. These empirical findings suggest that to advance equality in multimorbidity prevalence, policymakers should target chronic disease prevention and control strategies focused on older adults, non-married persons and those that are physically inactive, in addition to addressing income disparities directly.

Exploring Intra and Interorganizational Integration Efforts Involving the Primary Care Sector - A Case Study from Ontario.

Background: The primary care sector is uniquely positioned to lead the coordination of providers and organizations across health and social care sectors. This study explores whether intraorganizational (professional) integration within a primary care team might be related to interorganizational integration between primary care and other community partners involved in caring for complex patients. Methods: Two care coordination initiatives (Health Links) were selected - one led by a primary care team with a high level of intraorganizational integration as assessed by the Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool (CPAT), and the other led by a primary care team with a low level of intraorganizational integration. A case study design involving a social network approach was used to assess interorganizational integration across six types of relationships including regular contact, perceived level of integration, referrals, information sharing, joint care planning, and shared resources. Results: Compared to the high-CPAT led case, the low-CPAT led case had higher density (more ties among organizations) in terms of regular contact, integration, and sharing of resources, whereas the opposite was true for the referral, information sharing, and joint care planning networks. Network centralization (extent to which network activity is influenced by one or a group of organizations) was higher for the high-CPAT case compared to the low-CPAT case in the integration, referrals, and joint care planning networks, while the low-CPAT case had higher centralization with regard to regular contact, information sharing, and shared resources. Conclusion: The interplay between intra and interorganizational integration remains unclear. We found no consistent differences in the patterns of ties across the six types of networks examined between the two cases. Assessing changes in network metrics for different organizations in each case over time, and supplementing network findings through in-depth interviews with network members are key next steps to consider.

Capacity building and mentorship among pan-Canadian early career researchers in community-based primary health care.

AIM: To describe activities and outcomes of a cross-team capacity building strategy that took place over a five-year funding period within the broader context of 12 community-based primary health care (CBPHC) teams. BACKGROUND: In 2013, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research funded 12 CBPHC Teams (12-Teams) to conduct innovative cross-jurisdictional research to improve the delivery of high-quality CBPHC to Canadians. This signature initiative also aimed to enhance CBPHC research capacity among an interdisciplinary group of trainees, facilitated by a collaboration between a capacity building committee led by senior researchers and a trainee-led working group. METHODS: After the committee and working group were established, capacity building activities were organized based on needs and interests identified by trainees of the CBPHC Teams. This paper presents a summary of the activities accomplished, as well as the outcomes reported through an online semistructured survey completed by the trainees toward the end of the five-year funding period. This survey was designed to capture the capacity building and mentorship activities that trainees either had experienced or would like to experience in the future. Descriptive and thematic analyses were conducted based on survey responses, and these findings were compared with the existing core competencies in the literature. FINDINGS: Since 2013, nine webinars and three online workshops were hosted by trainees and senior researchers, respectively. Many of the CBPHC Teams provided exposure for trainees to innovative methods, CBPHC content, and showcased trainee research. A total of 27 trainees from 10 of the 12-Teams responded to the survey (41.5%). Trainees identified key areas of benefit from their involvement in this initiative: skills training, networking opportunities, and academic productivity. Trainees identified gaps in research and professional skill development, indicating areas for further improvement in capacity building programs, particularly for trainees to play a more active role in their education and preparation.

Integrated Care Planning for Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review.

INTRODUCTION: There has been a growing emphasis on the use of integrated care plans to deliver cancer care. However little is known about how integrated care plans for cancer patients are developed including featured core activities, facilitators for uptake and indicators for assessing impact. METHODS: Given limited consensus around what constitutes an integrated care plan for cancer patients, a scoping review was conducted to explore the components of integrated care plans and contextual factors that influence design and uptake. RESULTS: Five types of integrated care plans based on the stage of cancer care: surgical, systemic, survivorship, palliative and comprehensive (involving a transition between stages) are described in current literature. Breast, esophageal and colorectal cancers were common disease sites. Multi-disciplinary teams, patient needs assessment and transitional planning emerged as key features. Provider buy-in and training alongside informational technology support served as important facilitators for plan uptake. Provider-level measurement was considerably less robust compared to patient and system-level indicators. CONCLUSIONS: Similarities in design features, components and facilitators across the various types of integrated care plans indicates opportunities to leverage shared features and enable a management lens that spans the trajectory of a patient's journey rather than a phase-specific silo approach to care.

The Electronic Patient Reported Outcome Tool: Testing Usability and Feasibility of a Mobile App and Portal to Support Care for Patients With Complex Chronic Disease and Disability in Primary Care Settings.

BACKGROUND: People experiencing complex chronic disease and disability (CCDD) face some of the greatest challenges of any patient population. Primary care providers find it difficult to manage multiple discordant conditions and symptoms and often complex social challenges experienced by these patients. The electronic Patient Reported Outcome (ePRO) tool is designed to overcome some of these challenges by supporting goal-oriented primary care delivery. Using the tool, patients and providers collaboratively develop health care goals on a portal linked to a mobile device to help patients and providers track progress between visits. OBJECTIVES: This study tested the usability and feasibility of adopting the ePRO tool into a single interdisciplinary primary health care practice in Toronto, Canada. The Fit between Individuals, Fask, and Technology (FITT) framework was used to guide our assessment and explore whether the ePRO tool is: (1) feasible for adoption in interdisciplinary primary health care practices and (2) usable from both the patient and provider perspectives. This usability pilot is part of a broader user-centered design development strategy. METHODS: A 4-week pilot study was conducted in which patients and providers used the ePRO tool to develop health-related goals, which patients then monitored using a mobile device. Patients and providers collaboratively set goals using the system during an initial visit and had at least 1 follow-up visit at the end of the pilot to discuss progress. Focus groups and interviews were conducted with patients and providers to capture usability and feasibility measures. Data from the ePRO system were extracted to provide information regarding tool usage. RESULTS: Six providers and 11 patients participated in the study; 3 patients dropped out mainly owing to health issues. The remaining 8 patients completed 210 monitoring protocols, equal to over 1300 questions, with patients often answering questions daily. Providers and patients accessed the portal on an average of 10 and 1.5 times, respectively. Users found the system easy to use, some patients reporting that the tool helped in their ability to self-manage, catalyzed a sense of responsibility over their care, and improved patient-centered care delivery. Some providers found that the tool helped focus conversations on goal setting. However, the tool did not fit well with provider workflows, monitoring questions were not adequately tailored to individual patient needs, and daily reporting became tedious and time-consuming for patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although our study suggests relatively low usability and feasibility of the ePRO tool, we are encouraged by the early impact on patient outcomes and generally positive responses from both user groups regarding the potential of the tool to improve care for patients with CCDD. As is consistent with our user-centered design development approach, we have modified the tool based on user feedback, and are now testing the redeveloped tool through an exploratory trial.

Improving Patient Experience and Primary Care Quality for Patients With Complex Chronic Disease Using the Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes Tool: Adopting Qualitative Methods Into a User-Centered Design Approach.

BACKGROUND: Many mHealth technologies do not meet the needs of patients with complex chronic disease and disabilities (CCDDs) who are among the highest users of health systems worldwide. Furthermore, many of the development methodologies used in the creation of mHealth and eHealth technologies lack the ability to embrace users with CCDD in the specification process. This paper describes how we adopted and modified development techniques to create the electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes (ePRO) tool, a patient-centered mHealth solution to help improve primary health care for patients experiencing CCDD. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the design and development approach, specifically the process of incorporating qualitative research methods into user-centered design approaches to create the ePRO tool. Key lessons learned are offered as a guide for other eHealth and mHealth research and technology developers working with complex patient populations and their primary health care providers. METHODS: Guided by user-centered design principles, interpretive descriptive qualitative research methods were adopted to capture user experiences through interviews and working groups. Consistent with interpretive descriptive methods, an iterative analysis technique was used to generate findings, which were then organized in relation to the tool design and function to help systematically inform modifications to the tool. User feedback captured and analyzed through this method was used to challenge the design and inform the iterative development of the tool. RESULTS: Interviews with primary health care providers (n=7) and content experts (n=6), and four focus groups with patients and carers (n=14) along with a PICK analysis-Possible, Implementable, (to be) Challenged, (to be) Killed-guided development of the first prototype. The initial prototype was presented in three design working groups with patients/carers (n=5), providers (n=6), and experts (n=5). Working group findings were broken down into categories of what works and what does not work to inform modifications to the prototype. This latter phase led to a major shift in the purpose and design of the prototype, validating the importance of using iterative codesign processes. CONCLUSIONS: Interpretive descriptive methods allow for an understanding of user experiences of patients with CCDD, their carers, and primary care providers. Qualitative methods help to capture and interpret user needs, and identify contextual barriers and enablers to tool adoption, informing a redesign to better suit the needs of this diverse user group. This study illustrates the value of adopting interpretive descriptive methods into user-centered mHealth tool design and can also serve to inform the design of other eHealth technologies. Our approach is particularly useful in requirements determination when developing for a complex user group and their health care providers.