Cytoplasmic switch of ARS2 isoforms promotes nonsense-mediated mRNA decay and arsenic sensitivity.

The life of RNA polymerase II (RNAPII) transcripts is shaped by the dynamic formation of mutually exclusive ribonucleoprotein complexes (RNPs) that direct transcript biogenesis and turnover. A key regulator of RNA metabolism in the nucleus is the scaffold protein ARS2 (arsenic resistance protein 2), bound to the cap binding complex (CBC). We report here that alternative splicing of ARS2's intron 5, generates cytoplasmic isoforms that lack 270 amino acids from the N-terminal of the protein and are functionally distinct from nuclear ARS2. Switching of ARS2 isoforms within the CBC in the cytoplasm has dramatic functional consequences, changing ARS2 from a NMD inhibitor to a NMD promoter that enhances the binding of UPF1 to NCBP1 and ERF1, favouring SURF complex formation, SMG7 recruitment and transcript degradation. ARS2 isoform exchange is also relevant during arsenic stress, where cytoplasmic ARS2 promotes a global response to arsenic in a CBC-independent manner. We propose that ARS2 isoform switching promotes the proper recruitment of RNP complexes during NMD and the cellular response to arsenic stress. The existence of non-redundant ARS2 isoforms is relevant for cell homeostasis, and stress response.

Early Psychosis Intervention and Primary Care: A Mixed Methods Study of Family Physician Knowledge, Attitudes, Preferences, and Needs.

Family physicians (FPs) play an important but underappreciated role in the pathways to care for people with early psychosis. We conducted a mixed-methods study to describe the knowledge, attitudes, preferences, and needs of FPs towards the recognition and management of early psychosis. We sent a cross-sectional postal survey to a random sample of FPs in Ontario, Canada, and conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with twenty. FPs were generally aware of important early psychosis symptoms, however, there were some knowledge gaps. Among surveyed FPs, 25% were unsure of the availability of early psychosis intervention services in their region, and most (80%) would prefer to co-manage with specialists. In the qualitative interviews, FPs expressed varied comfort levels in recognizing psychosis, and that timely access to psychiatry was a main concern. Our findings suggest that FPs require better support in recognizing and managing early psychosis and facilitating connections with specialized care.

Development and validation of a real-world model to predict 1-year Level 3 (severe) hypoglycaemia risk in adults with diabetes (the iNPHORM study, United States).

AIMS: We aimed to develop and internally validate a real-world prognostic model for Level 3 hypoglycaemia risk compatible with outpatient care in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: iNPHORM is a 12-month, US-based panel survey. Adults (18-90 years old) with type 1 diabetes mellitus or insulin- and/or secretagogue-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus were recruited from a nationwide, probability-based internet panel. Among participants completing ≥ 1 follow-up questionnaire(s), we modelled 1-year Level 3 hypoglycaemia risk using Andersen and Gill's Cox survival and penalized regression with multiple imputation. Candidate variables were selected for their clinical relevance and ease of capture at point-of-care. RESULTS: In total, 986 participants [type 1 diabetes mellitus: 17%; men: 49.6%; mean age: 51 (SD: 14.3) years] were analysed. Across follow-up, 035.1 (95% CI: 32.2-38.1)% reported ≥1 Level 3 event(s), and the rate was 5.0 (95% CI: 4.1-6.0) events per person-year. Our final model showed strong discriminative validity and parsimony (optimism corrected c-statistic: 0.77). Numerous variables were selected: age; sex; body mass index; marital status; level of education; insurance coverage; race; ethnicity; food insecurity; diabetes type; glycated haemoglobin value; glycated haemoglobin variability; number, type and dose of various medications; number of SH events requiring hospital care (past year and over follow-up); type and number of comorbidities and complications; number of diabetes-related health care visits (past year); use of continuous/flash glucose monitoring; and general health status. CONCLUSIONS: iNPHORM is the first US-based primary prognostic study on Level 3 hypoglycaemia. Future model implementation could potentiate risk-tailored strategies that reduce real-world event occurrence and overall diabetes burden.

Severe (level 3) hypoglycaemia occurrence in a real-world cohort of adults with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus (iNPHORM, United States).

AIMS: Among adults with insulin- and/or secretagogue-treated diabetes in the United States, very little is known about the real-world descriptive epidemiology of iatrogenic severe (level 3) hypoglycaemia. Addressing this gap, we collected primary, longitudinal data to quantify the absolute frequency of events as well as incidence rates and proportions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: iNPHORM is a US-wide, 12-month ambidirectional panel survey (2020-2021). Adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) or insulin- and/or secretagogue-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were recruited from a probability-based internet panel. Participants completing ≥1 follow-up questionnaire(s) were analysed. RESULTS: Among 978 respondents [T1DM 17%; mean age 51 (SD 14.3) years; male: 49.6%], 63% of level 3 events were treated outside the health care system (e.g. by family/friend/colleague), and <5% required hospitalization. Following the 12-month prospective period, one-third of individuals reported ≥1 event(s) [T1DM 44.2% (95% CI 36.8%-51.8%); T2DM 30.8% (95% CI 28.7%-35.1%), p = .0404, α = 0.0007]; and the incidence rate was 5.01 (95% CI 4.15-6.05) events per person-year (EPPY) [T1DM 3.57 (95% CI 2.49-5.11) EPPY; T2DM 5.29 (95% CI 4.26-6.57) EPPY, p = .1352, α = 0.0007]. Level 3 hypoglycaemia requiring non-transport emergency medical services was more common in T2DM than T1DM (p < .0001, α = 0.0016). In total, >90% of events were experienced by <15% of participants. CONCLUSIONS: iNPHORM is one of the first long-term, prospective US-based investigations on level 3 hypoglycaemia epidemiology. Our results underscore the importance of participant-reported data to ascertain its burden. Events were alarmingly frequent, irrespective of diabetes type, and concentrated in a small subsample.

"There's nothing like a good crisis for innovation": a qualitative study of family physicians' experiences with virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Prior to the pandemic, Canada lagged behind other Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development countries in the uptake of virtual care. The onset of COVID-19, however, resulted in a near-universal shift to virtual primary care to minimise exposure risks. As jurisdictions enter a pandemic recovery phase, the balance between virtual and in-person visits is reverting, though it is unlikely to return to pre-pandemic levels. Our objective was to explore Canadian family physicians' perspectives on the rapid move to virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic, to inform both future pandemic planning for primary care and the optimal integration of virtual care into the broader primary care context beyond the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 68 family physicians from four regions in Canada between October 2020 and June 2021. We used a purposeful, maximum variation sampling approach, continuing recruitment in each region until we reached saturation. Interviews with family physicians explored their roles and experiences during the pandemic, and the facilitators and barriers they encountered in continuing to support their patients through the pandemic. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed for recurrent themes. RESULTS: We identified three prominent themes throughout participants' reflections on implementing virtual care: implementation and evolution of virtual modalities during the pandemic; facilitators and barriers to implementing virtual care; and virtual care in the future. While some family physicians had prior experience conducting remote assessments, most had to implement and adapt to virtual care abruptly as provinces limited in-person visits to essential and urgent care. As the pandemic progressed, initial forays into video-based consultations were frequently replaced by phone-based visits, while physicians also rebalanced the ratio of virtual to in-person visits. Medical record systems with integrated capacity for virtual visits, billing codes, supportive clinic teams, and longitudinal relationships with patients were facilitators in this rapid transition for family physicians, while the absence of these factors often posed barriers. CONCLUSION: Despite varied experiences and preferences related to virtual primary care, physicians felt that virtual visits should continue to be available beyond the pandemic but require clearer regulation and guidelines for its appropriate future use.

Natural history of abdominal pain in family practice: Longitudinal study of electronic medical record data in southwestern Ontario.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the frequency, natural history, and outcomes of 3 subtypes of abdominal pain (general abdominal pain, epigastric pain, localized abdominal pain) among patients visiting Canadian family practices. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with a 4-year longitudinal analysis. SETTING: Southwestern Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1790 eligible patients with International Classification of Primary Care codes for abdominal pain from 18 family physicians in 8 group practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The symptom pathways, the length of an episode, and the number of visits. RESULTS: Abdominal pain accounted for 2.4% of the 15,149 patient visits and involved 14.0% of the 1790 eligible patients. The frequencies of each of the 3 subtypes were as follows: localized abdominal pain, 89 patients, 1.0% of visits, and 5.0% of patients; general abdominal pain, 79 patients, 0.8% of visits, and 4.4% of patients; and epigastric pain, 65 patients, 0.7% of visits, and 3.6% of patients. Those with epigastric pain received more medications, and patients with localized abdominal pain underwent more investigations. Three longitudinal outcome pathways were identified. Pathway 1, in which the symptom remains at the end of the visit with no diagnosis, was the most common among patients with all subtypes of abdominal symptoms at 52.8%, 54.4%, and 50.8% for localized, general, and epigastric pain, respectively, and the symptom episodes were relatively short. Less than 15% of patients followed pathway 2, in which a diagnosis is made and the symptom persists, and yet the episodes were long with 8.75 to 16.80 months' mean duration and 2.70 to 4.00 mean number of visits. Pathway 3, in which a diagnosis is made and there are no further visits for that symptom, occurred approximately one-third of the time, with about 1 visit over about 2 months. Prior chronic conditions were common across all 3 subtypes of abdominal pain ranging from 72.2% to 80.0%. Psychological symptoms consistently occurred at a rate of approximately one-third. CONCLUSION: The 3 subtypes of abdominal pain differed in clinically important ways. The most frequent pathway was that the symptom remained with no diagnosis, suggesting a need for clinical approaches and education programs for care of symptoms themselves, not merely in the service of coming to a diagnosis. The importance of prior chronic conditions and psychological conditions was highlighted by the results.

Patient and Physician Factors Associated with First Diagnosis of Non-affective Psychotic Disorder in Primary Care.

Primary care physicians play a central role in pathways to care for first-episode psychosis, and their increased involvement in early detection could improve service-related outcomes. The aim of this study was to estimate the proportion of psychosis first diagnosed in primary care, and identify associated patient and physician factors. We used linked health administrative data to construct a retrospective cohort of people aged 14-35 years with a first diagnosis of non-affective psychosis in Ontario, Canada between 2005-2015. We restricted the sample to patients with help-seeking contacts for mental health reasons in primary care in the six months prior to first diagnosis of psychotic disorder. We used modified Poisson regression models to examine patient and physician factors associated with a first diagnosis of psychosis in primary care. Among people with early psychosis (n = 39,449), 63% had help-seeking contacts in primary care within six months prior to first diagnosis. Of those patients, 47% were diagnosed in primary care and 53% in secondary/tertiary care. Patients factors associated with lower likelihood of diagnosis in primary care included male sex, younger age, immigrant status, and comorbid psychosocial conditions. Physician factors associated with lower likelihood of diagnosis in primary care included solo practice model, urban practice setting, international medical education, and longer time since graduation. Our findings indicate that primary care is an important contact for help-seeking and diagnosis for a large proportion of people with early psychosis. For physicians less likely to diagnose psychosis in primary care, targeted resources and interventions could be provided to support them in caring for patients with early psychosis.

The roles of family physicians during a pandemic.

Family physicians play important roles throughout all stages of a pandemic response; however, actionable descriptions outlining these roles are absent from current pandemic plans. Using a multiple case study design, we conducted a document analysis and interviewed 68 family physicians in four Canadian regions. We identified roles performed by family physicians in five distinct stages of pandemic response: pre-pandemic, phased closure and re-opening, acute care crisis, vaccination, and pandemic recovery. In addition to adopting public health guidance to ensure continued access to primary care services, family physicians were often expected to operationalize public health roles (eg, staffing assessment centres), modulate access to secondary/tertiary services, help provide surge capacity in acute care facilities, and enhance supports and outreach to vulnerable populations. Future pandemic plans should include family physicians in planning, explicitly incorporate family physician roles, and ensure needed resources are available to allow for an effective primary care response.

Family physician virtual care during COVID-19 in London-Middlesex, Ontario, Canada: a mixed methods exploration.

Context: On March 14, 2020, the Ontario, Canada health insurance plan approved COVID-19 physician virtual billing codes; family physicians (FPs) rapidly adopted a new model of care. Virtual care may remain post-pandemic; however, its future should be informed by evidence that considers access and continuity. Objective: 1) to determine FP virtual visit volumes and patient characteristics and 2) to explore FPs' perspectives on virtual visit adoption and implementation. Study Design: Mixed methods: Secondary analysis of health administrative (HA) data and semi-structured qualitative interviews with FPs. Setting or Dataset: London and Middlesex County, Ontario, Canada. HA data through ICES, Ontario entity holding data. Population studied: FPs and their patients. Outcome Measures: Volumes of FP in-person and virtual visits during early pandemic; characteristics of patients receiving care; FPs' perspectives on adopting and delivering virtual care. Results: Overall visit volume dropped by 36% during first wave, recovered to pre-pandemic levels by October 2020. Sharp in-person visit drop of 73% and virtual visit uptake from 0.08% of total visits to 57% within two weeks of March 2020. FPs described this initial drop in volume as patients not seeking care and practices lacking PPE. The move to virtual care was largely to telephone visits. Patient characteristics compared to pre-pandemic, the proportion seeking care were older (46 vs 50 years), more vulnerable (38% vs 41%), and more multimorbidity (33% vs 41%). This was consistent with FP reports that healthier patients stayed away, routine care deferred, sicker patients needed to be seen. FPs believed most vulnerable patients had access to care but cautioned highly vulnerable such as those homeless did not have cell phone access or a safe place to receive calls. Rural FPs reported access issues because of lack of high-speed internet. FPs attributed success of virtual care to the continuity in relationships they had with patients that were established in person pre-pandemic. Conclusions: FPs moved rapidly to virtual care. FP offices remained open despite PPE concerns but overall volumes dropped initially. Vulnerable and sicker patients received care but FPs expressed concern for highly vulnerable and rural residents. FPs believed they could offer patient-centred care over the phone but indicated the importance of maintaining in-person care to build relationships.

Recommendations for virtual care in primary care practices: a survey of patients across Ontario, Canada.

Context: The onset of COVID-19 has required the rapid adoption of virtual services in primary care (PC) practices, and virtual care delivery is likely to continue to some extent post-pandemic. Objective: To understand patient experience with synchronous virtual (telephone (Tel)/Video) appointments and elicit recommendations for its future use. Design: Mixed method, including patient survey co-developed with stakeholders and implemented online Feb-Mar 2021 with large promotional efforts through social media, patient and caregiver organizations, and other networks. We report on the survey results. Eligibility: 1+ virtual encounter in PC. Outcome measures: A) Patient experience scale (12/17 questions for Tel/Video) covering 4 sub-dimensions; B) Access related questions. Questions had 5-point Likert scale items (strongly disagree (-2) to strongly agree (+2)) and were converted into percentage (potential range -100%, +100%) Setting : Ontario, Canada which offers universal coverage for PC visits with no co-payment. Results: 534 eligible respondents (402/18/114 had Tel/Video/both): Females (78%), < 55 years (61%), white (75%), employed (61%), bachelor's degree (74%), family income > 100k (52%). Encounters evaluated were with family physicians (vs other health professionals) for 75%/46% of Tel/Video encounters. A) Patient Experience (Tel/Video) overall score: 75%/78%; Sub-dimensions: technology: 92%/84%, patient-provider relationship: 83%/86%, quality of care: 66%/66%, whole-person care: 43%/53%. Factors associated with a statistically significant(*) > 10% higher overall score in tel and/or video were: non-females: (8%*/14%*), French speaking (13%*/16%*), patient-provider relationship >1 year (16%*/7%), provider age < 50 (5%/15%*), having the choice of appointment time (15%*/21%*). Wanting to show problem to the provider was associated with a lower scores (-23%*/NA). B) Access Respondents overwhelmingly reported that Tel/Video visits reduced time (97%/97%), costs (81%/85%), and was more convenient (91%/91%). The majority wanted Tel (69%) and Video (71%) visits at least as often as in person visits post-covid. Only 5% did not want any future virtual care. Conclusions: Patient experience was largely positive and is influenced by patient/provider factors. Patients and providers may benefit from support/training to optimize care experience. We are now evaluating whether the reasons for visits influences care experience.

Is primary health care ready for artificial intelligence? Stakeholder perspectives: Worth the risk as long as you do it well.

Context: The effective deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) in primary health care requires a match between the AI tools that are being developed and the needs of primary health care practitioners and patients. Currently, the majority of AI development targeted toward potential application in primary care is being conducted without the involvement of these stakeholders. Objective: To identify key issues regarding the use of AI tools in primary health care by exploring the views of primary health care and digital health stakeholders. Study Design: A descriptive qualitative approach was taken in this study. Fourteen in-depth interviews were conducted with primary care and digital health stakeholders. Setting: Province of Ontario, Canada Population studied: Primary health care and digital health stakeholders Outcome Measures: N/A Results: Two main themes emerged from the data analysis: Worth the Risk as Long as You Do It Well; and, Mismatch Between Envisioned Uses and Current Reality. Participants noted that AI could have value if used for specific purposes, for example: supporting care for patients; reducing practitioner burden; analyzing existing evidence; managing patient populations; and, supporting operational efficiencies. Participants identified facilitators of AI being used for these purposes including: use of relevant case studies/success stories with realistic uses of AI highlighted; easy or low risk applications; and, end user involvement. However, barriers to the use of AI included: data quality; digital divide/equity; distrust of AI including security/privacy issues; for-profit motives; need for transparency about how AI works; and, fear about impact on practitioners regarding clinical judgement. Conclusion: AI will continue to become more prominent in primary health care. There is potential for positive impact, however there are many factors that need to be considered regarding the implementation of AI. The findings of this study can help to inform the development and deployment of AI tools in primary health care.

Identifying priorities for artificial intelligence and primary care in ontario: A multi-stakeholder engagement event.

CONTEXT: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being recognized as having potential importance to primary care (PC). However, there is a gap in our understanding about where to focus efforts related to AI for PC settings, especially given the current COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To identify current priority areas for AI and PC in Ontario, Canada. STUDY DESIGN: Multi-stakeholder engagement event with facilitated small and large group discussions. A nominal group technique process was used to identify and rank challenges in PC that AI may be able to support. Mentimeter software was used to allow real-time, anonymous and independent ranking from all participants. A final list of priority areas for AI and PC, with key considerations, was derived based on ranked items and small group discussion notes. SETTING: Ontario, Canada. POPULATION STUDIED: Digital health and PC stakeholders. OUTCOME MEASURES: N/A. RESULTS: The event included 8 providers, 8 patient advisors, 4 decision makers, 3 digital health stakeholders, and 12 researchers. Nine priority areas for AI and PC were identified and ranked, which can be grouped into those intended to support physician (preventative care and risk profiling, clinical decision support, routine task support), patient (self-management of conditions, increased mental health care capacity and support), or system-level initiatives (administrative staff support, management and synthesis of information sources); and foundational areas that would support work on other priorities (improved communication between PC and AI stakeholders, data sharing and interoperability between providers). Small group discussions identified barriers and facilitators related to the priorities, including data availability, quality, and consent; legal and device certification issues; trust between people and technology; equity and the digital divide; patient centredness and user-centred design; and the need for funding to support collaborative research and pilot testing. Although identified areas do not explicitly mention COVID-19, participants were encouraged to think about what would be feasible and meaningful to accomplish within a few years, including considerations of the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery phases. CONCLUSIONS: A one-day multi-stakeholder event identified priority areas for AI and PC in Ontario. These priorities can serve as guideposts to focus near-term efforts on the planning, development, and evaluation of AI for PC.

The prevalence of physical multimorbidity among people with non-affective psychotic disorders 10 years after first diagnosis: a matched retrospective cohort study.

AIMS: The higher prevalence of chronic physical health conditions among people with psychotic disorders may result in a reduced life expectancy as compared to the general population. More research is needed on the risk of multiple co-occurring chronic health conditions, known as multimorbidity, for people with psychotic disorders. METHODS: We conducted a matched retrospective cohort study to quantify the prevalence of multimorbidity and associated factors among people with psychotic disorders over the 10-year period following first diagnosis, relative to those without psychosis. Data from an early psychosis intervention program in London, Canada were linked to population-based health administrative data to identify patients with first-episode psychosis (n = 439), and a comparison group from the general population (n = 1759) matched on age, sex, and postal code. We followed the cohort for 10 years to ascertain the prevalence of multimorbidity. We compared people with and without psychosis using modified Poisson regression models, and explored risk factors for multimorbidity among those with psychotic disorders. RESULTS: People with psychotic disorders may have a 26% higher prevalence of multimorbidity 10 years following first diagnosis, although our findings include the possibility of a null effect (PR = 1.26, 95% CI 0.96-1.66). People with psychosis living in areas with the highest levels of material deprivation had a threefold higher prevalence of multimorbidity as compared to those in the lowest areas of material deprivation (PR = 3.09, 95% CI 1.21-7.90). CONCLUSION: Multimorbidity is prevalent among those with psychosis, and assessment for chronic health conditions should be integrated into clinical care for younger populations with psychotic illness.

Is primary health care ready for artificial intelligence? What do primary health care stakeholders say?

BACKGROUND: Effective deployment of AI tools in primary health care requires the engagement of practitioners in the development and testing of these tools, and a match between the resulting AI tools and clinical/system needs in primary health care. To set the stage for these developments, we must gain a more in-depth understanding of the views of practitioners and decision-makers about the use of AI in primary health care. The objective of this study was to identify key issues regarding the use of AI tools in primary health care by exploring the views of primary health care and digital health stakeholders. METHODS: This study utilized a descriptive qualitative approach, including thematic data analysis. Fourteen in-depth interviews were conducted with primary health care and digital health stakeholders in Ontario. NVivo software was utilized in the coding of the interviews. RESULTS: Five main interconnected themes emerged: (1) Mismatch Between Envisioned Uses and Current Reality-denoting the importance of potential applications of AI in primary health care practice, with a recognition of the current reality characterized by a lack of available tools; (2) Mechanics of AI Don't Matter: Just Another Tool in the Toolbox- reflecting an interest in what value AI tools could bring to practice, rather than concern with the mechanics of the AI tools themselves; (3) AI in Practice: A Double-Edged Sword-the possible benefits of AI use in primary health care contrasted with fundamental concern about the possible threats posed by AI in terms of clinical skills and capacity, mistakes, and loss of control; (4) The Non-Starters: A Guarded Stance Regarding AI Adoption in Primary Health Care-broader concerns centred on the ethical, legal, and social implications of AI use in primary health care; and (5) Necessary Elements: Facilitators of AI in Primary Health Care-elements required to support the uptake of AI tools, including co-creation, availability and use of high quality data, and the need for evaluation. CONCLUSION: The use of AI in primary health care may have a positive impact, but many factors need to be considered regarding its implementation. This study may help to inform the development and deployment of AI tools in primary health care.

Scaling Up Patient-Centered Interdisciplinary Care for Multimorbidity: A Pragmatic Mixed-Methods Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: To measure the effectiveness of a 4-month interdisciplinary multifaceted intervention based on a change in care delivery for patients with multimorbidity in primary care practices. METHODS: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial with a mixed-methods design in patients aged 18 to 80 years with 3 or more chronic conditions from 7 family medicine groups (FMGs) in Quebec, Canada. Health care professionals (nurses, nutritionists, kinesiologists) from the FMGs were trained to deliver the patient-centered intervention based on a motivational approach and self-management support. Primary outcomes: self-management (Health Education Impact Questionnaire); and self-efficacy. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: health status, quality of life, and health behaviors. Quantitative analyses used multi-level mixed effects and generalized linear mixed models controlling for clustering within FMGs. We also conducted in-depth interviews with patients, family members, and health care professionals. RESULTS: The trial randomized 284 patients (144 in intervention group, 140 in control group). The groups were comparable. After 4 months, the intervention showed a neutral effect for the primary outcomes. There was significant improvement in 2 health behaviors (healthy eating with odds ratios [OR] 4.36; P = .006, and physical activity with OR 3.43; P = .023). The descriptive qualitative evaluation revealed that the patients reinforced their self-efficacy and improved their self-management which was divergent from the quantitative results. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitatively, this intervention showed a neutral effect on the primary outcomes and substantial improvement in 2 health behaviors as secondary outcomes. Qualitatively, the intervention was evaluated as positive. The combination of qualitative and quantitative designs proved to be a good design for evaluating this complex intervention.

Patterns of Primary Care Use Prior to a First Diagnosis of Nonaffective Psychotic Disorder in Ontario, Canada: Modèles d'utilisation des soins de première ligne avant un premier diagnostic de trouble psychotique non affectif en Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Many people experience early signs and symptoms before the onset of psychotic disorder, suggesting that there may be help-seeking prior to first diagnosis. The family physician has been found to play a key role in pathways to care. This study examined patterns of primary care use preceding a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder. METHODS: We used health administrative data from Ontario (Canada) to construct a population-based retrospective cohort. We investigated patterns of primary care use, including frequency and timing of contacts, in the 6 years prior to a first diagnosis of psychosis, relative to a general population comparison group matched on age, sex, geographic area, and index date. We used latent class growth modeling to identify distinct trajectories of primary care service use, and associated factors, preceding the first diagnosis. RESULTS: People with early psychosis contacted primary care over twice as frequently in the 6 years preceding first diagnosis (RR = 2.22; 95% CI, = 2.19 to 2.25), relative to the general population, with a sharp increase in contacts 10 months prior to diagnosis. They had higher contact frequency across nearly all diagnostic codes, including mental health, physical health, and preventative health. We identified 3 distinct service use trajectories: low-, medium-, and high-increasing usage. DISCUSSION: We found elevated patterns of primary care service use prior to first diagnosis of psychotic disorder, suggesting that initiatives to support family physicians in their role on the pathway to care are warranted. Earlier intervention has implications for improved social, educational, and professional development in young people with first-episode psychosis.

The prevalence of multimorbidity in primary care: a comparison of two definitions of multimorbidity with two different lists of chronic conditions in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of multimorbidity varies widely due to the lack of consensus in defining multimorbidity. This study aimed to measure the prevalence of multimorbidity in a primary care setting using two definitions of multimorbidity with two different lists of chronic conditions. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 787,446 patients, aged 0 to 99 years, who consulted a family physician between July 2015 to June 2016. Multimorbidity was defined as 'two or more' (MM2+) or 'three or more' (MM3+) chronic conditions using the Fortin list and Chronic Disease Management Program (CDMP) list of chronic conditions. Crude and standardised prevalence rates were reported, and the corresponding age, sex or ethnic-stratified standardised prevalence rates were adjusted to the local population census. RESULTS: The number of patients with multimorbidity increased with age. Age-sex-ethnicity standardised prevalence rates of multimorbidity using MM2+ and MM3+ for Fortin list (25.9, 17.2%) were higher than those for CDMP list (22.0%; 12.4%). Sex-stratified, age-ethnicity standardised prevalence rates for MM2+ and MM3+ were consistently higher in males compared to females for both lists. Chinese and Indians have the highest standardised prevalence rates among the four ethnicities using MM2+ and MM3+ respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MM3+ was better at identifying a smaller number of patients with multimorbidity requiring higher needs compared to MM2+. Using the Fortin list seemed more appropriate than the CDMP list because the chronic conditions in Fortin's list were more commonly seen in primary care. A consistent definition of multimorbidity will help researchers and clinicians to understand the epidemiology of multimorbidity better.

Women's Views on Advice About Weight Gain in Pregnancy: A Grounded Theory Study.

OBJECTIVES: Pregnant women prioritize the health of their pregnancy, and weight gain contributes to the pregnancy's health. Women encounter different messages about gestational weight gain from various sources that can be confusing. This study aimed to increase our understanding of the processes influencing how women experience the gestational weight gain advice they receive. METHODS: Grounded theory methodology was chosen. Women receiving prenatal care in a primary care setting were invited to participate in one-on-one interviews. RESULTS: All fifteen participants had high educational attainment, fourteen were Caucasian, and five had an elevated pre-pregnancy body mass index. Six interconnected themes emerged from the data: (1) striving to have a healthy pregnancy; (2) experiencing influences; (3) feeling worried; (4) Managing ambiguity; (5) trusting a source of information; and (6) feeling relief. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Physicians are perceived by pregnant women to be a source of trusted information about gestational weight gain and are therefore in a strategic position to help women achieve healthy weight gain during pregnancy.

Health Care Providers' Emotional Responses to Their Patients' Hypoglycemic Events: Qualitative Findings From the InHypo-DM Study, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Hypoglycemia can cause psychological distress in people with diabetes; however, less is understood about the emotional impact of hypoglycemia on their health care providers (HCPs). This article focuses on the experiences and emotions of HCPs caring for patients with diabetes. METHODS: This was a descriptive qualitative study from the InHypo-DM research program. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 20 HCPs from a variety of professions for 30- to 45-minute semi-structured interviews. An iterative analysis was conducted to identify the overarching themes. RESULTS: Three overarching themes encompassed the responses of participants when their patients experienced hypoglycemia. The first was a sense of professional responsibility, as participants felt they must have failed or inadequately fulfilled their professional duties. The second was a more personal range of emotions such as sadness and guilt. The final theme was how these emotions created a "call to action," prompting participants to identify potential strategies to prevent future hypoglycemic events. CONCLUSION: This qualitative study highlights the emotional impact of patients' hypoglycemia on HCPs. Although it may have been expected that HCPs have a strong sense of professional responsibility, it was unexpected that these responses often became personal emotions. To ameliorate the negative impact of these responses on patient care, HCPs should engage in activities that enable them to anticipate and manage their own emotional responses. In addition, strategies to optimize hypoglycemia detection and prevention should be promoted.

Healthcare teams and patient-related terminology: a review of concepts and uses.

BACKGROUND: Discussions concerning health care teams and patient-related terminology remain an ongoing debate. Terms such as interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary, as well as interprofessional are ambiguously defined and frequently used, rightly or wrongly, interchangeably. Also, clarification on the terminology regarding patients is rarely explicitly addressed in the health care team's literature, potentially resulting in confusion among health professional students, novice researchers, and practitioners. METHODS: A structured literature review was conducted. Electronic searches were performed from August 2018 to September 2019 on the following databases: CINHAL, Scopus, Science Direct, PubMed, Nursing and Allied Health and JSTOR. The following terms were used: 'terminology', 'team(s)', 'nursing', 'health', 'medical', 'education', 'interprofessional', 'interdisciplinary', 'multidisciplinary', 'transdisciplinary', 'collaboration', 'patient', 'client', 'customer', 'user' and 'person'. RESULTS: Small but significant nuances in the use of language and its implications for patient care can be made visible for health professional education and clinical practice. Healthcare is necessarily interdisciplinary and therefore we are obligated, and privileged, to think more critically about the use of terminology to ensure we are supporting high-quality evidence and knowledge application. CONCLUSION: To avoid confusion and lack of consistency in the peer-review literature, authors should be encouraged to offer brief definitions and the rationale for the use of a particular term or group of term. In addition, a deeper understanding of the values that each patient-related term represents for particular disciplines or health care professions is essential to achieve a more comprehensive conceptual rigour.