Guides for facilitating the implementation and evaluation of social prescribing: lessons from the "Access to Resources in the Community" model. / Guides visant à faciliter la mise en oeuvre et l'évaluation de la prescription sociale : leçons tirées du modèle « Accès aux ressources communautaires ¼.

Social prescribing (SP) embodies a comprehensive approach to addressing the social determinants of health. Access to Resources in the Community (ARC) is an innovative SP program offering bilingual services that involves a single point of entry for health and social needs and introduces practice changes to assist primary care providers in engaging patients, along with a nonclinical lay navigator who supports patients in accessing relevant community resources. The ARC team has created a SP toolkit offering practical guidance for setting up, implementing, monitoring the progress of and evaluating SP programs. The four ARC guides can be easily customized for application in diverse practice and research settings.

We developed a set of guides for use in "Access to Resources in the Community" (ARC), one of the first social prescribing (SP) programs established and evaluated in Ontario, Canada. The four guides are: (1) PC Practice Set Up, (2) Navigator Training, (3) Navigation Processes and (4) Evaluation. The guides provide practical guidance for establishing, conducting and monitoring progress, and evaluating SP programs; they form the basis of a toolkit we created to support organizations and researchers in establishing and evaluating SP programs. The guides and toolkit are currently being adopted for the ARC/211- Ontario program that we are cocreating through a nonprofit research partnership with Community Connections, an innovative hub of 211 Ontario in Collingwood. The program will help generate evidence on the feasibility, effectiveness, impact on health inequities and cost-effectiveness of adapting and scaling up SP programs in Canada.

Nous avons mis au point quatre guides à utiliser dans le cadre du programme « Accès aux ressources communautaires ¼ (ARC), l'un des premiers programmes de prescription sociale reconnus et évalués en Ontario (Canada). Les quatre guides sont 1) Préparation du cabinet de soins primaires, 2) Formation des intervenants pivots, 3) Processus d'intervention pivot et 4) Évaluation. Ces guides fournissent des conseils pratiques sur l'établissement, la tenue et l'évaluation de programmes de prescription sociale ainsi que sur le suivi des progrès, constituant ansi la base d'une trousse d'outils créée pour aider les organisations et les chercheurs à établir et à évaluer des programmes de prescription sociale. Les guides et la trousse d'outils sont en cours d'adoption dans le cadre du programme ARC/211-Ontario que nous sommes en train de cocréer grâce à un partenariat de recherche sans but lucratif avec Community Connection, un carrefour novateur situé à Collingwood et qui relève de 211 Ontario. Ce programme contribuera à générer des données probantes sur la faisabilité, l'efficacité, la rentabilité et l'incidence (du point de vue des inégalités en matière de santé) de l'adaptation et de l'application à grande échelle des programmes de prescription sociale au Canada.

Person-centered care for common mental disorders in Ontario's primary care patient-centered medical homes: a qualitative study of provider perspectives.

BACKGROUND: For more than a decade, the Patient-Centered Medical Home model has been a guiding vision for the modernization of primary care systems. In Canada, Ontario's Family Health Teams (FHTs) were designed in the mid-2000s with the medical home model in mind. These primary care clinics aim to provide accessible, comprehensive, and person-centered primary care services to communities across Ontario. Their services typically include mental health care for people experiencing common mental disorders, such as depression and anxiety disorders. It remains unclear, however, whether the mental health care delivered within FHTs is consistent with person-centered care approaches. In the current study, we aimed to explore the perspectives of FHT providers on the care delivered to people with common mental disorders to determine whether, and to what extent, they believed this care was person-centered. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative grounded theory study involving interviews with 65 health professionals and administrators from 18 FHTs across Ontario. Transcripts were coded using a three-step process of initial, focused, and axial coding that mixed inductive and deductive approaches informed by sensitizing concepts on person-centeredness. RESULTS: Practices and challenges associated with the delivery of mental health care in a person-centered way were captured by several themes regrouped into five domains: (1) patient as unique person, (2) patient-provider relationship, (3) sharing power and responsibility, (4) connecting to family and community, and (5) creating person-centered care environments. FHT providers perceived that they delivered person-centered care by delivering mental health care that was responsive, flexible, and consistent with biopsychosocial approaches. They emphasized the importance of creating long-lasting relationships with patients grounded in empathy and trust. Their challenges included being able to ensure continuity of care, adequately prioritizing patients' mental health issues, and meaningfully engaging patients and families as partners in care. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that FHT providers have adopted a range of person-centered practices for people with common mental disorders. However, greater attention to practices such as shared decision making, supporting self-management, and involving families in care would strengthen person-centeredness and bring teams closer to the Patient-Centered Medical Home vision.

Access to primary health care: perspectives of primary care physicians and community stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: Action on the social determinants of health is important to strengthen primary health care and promote access among underserved populations. We report on findings from stakeholder consultations undertaken at one of the Canadian sites of the Innovative Models Promoting Access-to-Care Transformation (IMPACT) program, as part of the development of a best practice intervention to improve access to primary health care. The overarching objective of this qualitative study was to understand the processes, barriers, and facilitators to connect patients to health enabling community resources (HERs) to inform a patient navigation model situated in primary care. METHODS: Focus groups and interviews were conducted with primary care physicians, and community health and social service providers to understand their experiences in supporting patients in reaching HERs. Current gaps in access to primary health care and the potential of patient navigation were also explored. We applied Levesque et al., (2013) access framework to code the data and four themes emerged: (1) Approachability and Ability to Perceive, (2) Acceptability and Ability to Seek, (3) Availability and Accommodation, and Ability to Reach, and (4) Appropriateness. RESULTS: Determinants of access included patient and provider awareness of HERs, the nature of the patient-provider relationship, funding of HERs, integration of primary and community care services, and continuity of information. Participants' perspectives about the potential scope and role of a patient navigator provided valuable insight for the development of the Access to Resources in the Community (ARC) navigation model and how it could be embedded in a primary care setting. CONCLUSION: Additional consultation with key stakeholders in the health region is needed to gain a broader understanding of the challenges in caring for primary care patients with social barriers and how to support them in accessing community-based primary health care to inform the design of the ARC intervention.

Nurturing an organizational context that supports team-based primary mental health care: A grounded theory study.

BACKGROUND: The expansion of the Patient-Centred Medical Home model presents a valuable opportunity to enhance the integration of team-based mental health services in primary care settings, thereby meeting the growing demand for such services. Understanding the organizational context of a Patient-Centred Medical Home is crucial for identifying the facilitators and barriers to integrating mental health care within primary care. The main objective of this paper is to present the findings related to the following research question: "What organizational features shape Family Health Teams' capacity to provide mental health services for depression and anxiety across Ontario, Canada?" METHODS: Adopting a constructivist grounded theory approach, we conducted interviews with various mental health care providers, and administrators within Ontario's Family Health Teams, in addition to engaging provincial policy informants and community stakeholders. Data analysis involved a team-based approach, including code comparison and labelling, with a dedicated data analysis subcommittee convening monthly to explore coded concepts influencing contextual factors. RESULTS: From the 96 interviews conducted, involving 82 participants, key insights emerged on the organizational contextual features considered vital in facilitating team-based mental health care in primary care settings. Five prominent themes were identified: i) mental health explicit in the organizational vision, ii) leadership driving mental health care, iii) developing a mature and stable team, iv) adequate physical space that facilitates team interaction, and v) electronic medical records to facilitate team communication. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the often-neglected organizational elements that influence primary care teams' capacity to deliver quality mental health care services. It highlights the significance of strong leadership complemented by effective communication and collaboration within teams to enhance their ability to provide mental health care. Strengthening relationships within primary care teams lies at the core of effective healthcare delivery and should be leveraged to improve the integration of mental health care.

Nurse practitioner and physician end-of-life home visits and end-of-life outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Physicians and nurse practitioners (NPs) play critical roles in supporting palliative and end-of-life care in the community. We examined healthcare outcomes among patients who received home visits from physicians and NPs in the 90 days before death. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using linked data of adult home care users in Ontario, Canada, who died between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2019. Healthcare outcomes included medications for pain and symptom management, emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalisations and a community-based death. We compared the characteristics of and outcomes in decedents who received a home visit from an NP, physician and both to those who did not receive a home visit. RESULTS: Half (56.9%) of adult decedents in Ontario did not receive a home visit from a provider in the last 90 days of life; 34.5% received at least one visit from a physician, 3.8% from an NP and 4.9% from both. Compared with those without any visits, having at least one home visit reduced the odds of hospitalisation and ED visits, and increased the odds of receiving medications for pain and symptom management and achieving a community-based death. Observed effects were larger in patients who received at least one visit from both. CONCLUSIONS: Beyond home care, receiving home visits from primary care providers near the end of life may be associated with better outcomes that are aligned with patients' preferences-emphasising the importance of NPs and physicians' role in supporting people near the end of life.

PROTOCOL: In-person interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness: An evidence and gap map.

This is the protocol for an evidence and gap map. The objectives are as follows: This EGM aims to map available evidence on the effects of in-person interventions to reduce social isolation and/or loneliness across all age groups in all settings.

Realist review of community coalitions and outreach interventions to increase access to primary care for vulnerable populations: a realist review.

BACKGROUND: There are meaningful gaps in equitable access to Primary Health Care (PHC), especially for vulnerable populations after widespread reforms in Western countries. The Innovative Models Promoting Access-to-Care Transformation (IMPACT) research program is a Canadian-Australian collaboration that aims to improve access to PHC for vulnerable populations. Relationships were developed with stakeholders in six regions across Canada and Australia where access-related needs could be identified. The most promising interventions would be implemented and tested to address the needs identified. This realist review was conducted to understand how community coalition and outreach (e.g., mobile or pop-up) services improve access for underserved vulnerable residents. OBJECTIVE: To inform the development and delivery of an innovative intervention to increase access to PHC for vulnerable populations. METHODS: A realist review was conducted in collaboration with the Local Innovative Partnership (LIP) research team and the IMPACT research members who conducted the review. We performed an initial comprehensive systematic search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library up to October 19, 2015, and updated it on August 8, 2020. Studies were included if they focused on interventions to improve access to PHC using community coalition, outreach services or mobile delivery methods. We included Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), and systematic reviews. Studies were screened by two independent reviewers and the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was used for data extraction and framework analysis to obtain themes. The LIP research team was also allowed to suggest additional papers not included at screening. RESULTS: We included 43 records, comprising 31 RCTs, 11 systematic reviews, and 1 case control study that was added by the LIP research team. We identified three main themes of PHC interventions to promote access for vulnerable residents, including: 1) tailoring of materials and services decreases barriers to primary health care, 2) services offered where vulnerable populations gather increases the "reach" of the interventions, 3) partnerships and collaborations lead to positive health outcomes. In addition, implementation designs and reporting elements should be considered. CONCLUSION: Realist reviews can help guide the development of locally adapted primary health care interventions.

The Impact of an Electronic Portal on Patient Encounters in Primary Care: Interrupted Time-Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Electronic patient portals are online applications that allow patients access to their own health information, a form of asynchronous virtual care. The long-term impact of portals on the use of traditional primary care services is unclear, but it is an important question at this juncture, when portals are being incorporated into many primary care practices. OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate how an electronic patient portal affected the use of traditional, synchronous primary care services over a much longer time period than any existing studies and to assess the impact of portal messaging on clinicians' workload. METHODS: We conducted a propensity-score-matched, open-cohort, interrupted time-series evaluation of a primary care portal from its implementation in 2010. We extracted information from the electronic medical record regarding age, sex, education, income, family health team enrollment, diagnoses at index date, and number of medications prescribed in the previous year. We also extracted the annual number of encounters for up to 8 years before and after the index date and provider time spent on secure messaging through the portal. RESULTS: A total of 7247 eligible portal patients and 7647 eligible potential controls were identified, with 3696 patients matched one to one. We found that portal registration was associated with an increase in the number of certain traditional encounters over the time period surrounding portal registration. Following the index year, there was a significant jump in annual number of visits to physicians in the portal arm (0.42 more visits/year vs control, P<.001) but not for visits to nurse practitioners and physician assistants. The annual number of calls to the practice triage nurses also showed a greater increase in the portal arm compared to the control arm after the index year (an additional 0.10 calls, P=.006). The average provider time spent on portal-related work was 5.7 minutes per patient per year. CONCLUSIONS: We found that portal registration was associated with a subsequent increase in the number of some traditional encounters and an increase in clerical workload for providers. Portals have enormous potential to truly engage patients as partners in their own health care, but their impact on use of traditional health care services and clerical burden must also be considered when they are incorporated into primary care.

Is equity considered in systematic reviews of interventions for mitigating social isolation and loneliness in older adults?

BACKGROUND: Social isolation and loneliness affect one in four older adults in many regions around the world. Social isolation and loneliness are shown to be associated with declines in physical and mental health. Intersecting social determinants of health influence both the risk of being socially isolated and lonely as well as the access and uptake of interventions. Our objective is to evaluate what evidence is available within systematic reviews on how to mitigate inequities in access to and effectiveness of interventions. METHODS: We performed an overview of reviews following methods of the Cochrane Handbook for Overviews of Reviews. We selected systematic reviews of effectiveness of interventions aimed at mitigating social isolation and loneliness in older adults (aged 60 or above) published in the last 10 years. In addition, we assessed all primary studies from the most recent systematic review with a broad intervention focus. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus in collaboration with a librarian scientist. We used a structured framework called PROGRESS-Plus to assess the reporting and consideration of equity. PROGRESS-Plus stands for place of residence, race/ethnicity/culture/language, occupation, gender or sex, religion, education, socioeconomic status (SES), social capital, while "plus" stands for additional factors associated with discrimination and exclusion such as age, disability, and sexual orientation. We assessed whether PROGRESS-Plus factors were reported in description of the population, examination of differential effects, or discussion of applicability or limitations. RESULTS: We identified and assessed 17 eligible systematic reviews. We assessed all 23 primary studies from the most recent systematic review with a broad intervention focus. All systematic reviews and primary studies described the population by one or more PROGRESS-Plus factor, most commonly across place of residence and age, respectively. None of the reviews and five primary studies examined differential effects across one or more PROGRESS-Plus dimension. Nine reviews and four primary studies discussed applicability or limitations of their findings by at least one PROGRESS-Plus factor. CONCLUSIONS: Although we know that social isolation and loneliness are worse for the poorest and most socially disadvantaged older adults, the existing evidence base lacks details on how to tailor interventions for these socially disadvantaged older people.

The Feasibility of a Primary Care Based Navigation Service to Support Access to Health and Social Resources: The Access to Resources in the Community (ARC) Model.

Introduction: We established a patient centric navigation model embedded in primary care (PC) to support access to the broad range of health and social resources; the Access to Resources in the Community (ARC) model. Methods: We evaluated the feasibility of ARC using the rapid cycle evaluations of the intervention processes, patient and PC provider surveys, and navigator log data. PC providers enrolled were asked to refer patients in whom they identified a health and/or social need to the ARC navigator. Results: Participants: 26 family physicians in four practices, and 82 of the 131 patients they referred. ARC was easily integrated in PC practices and was especially valued in the non-interprofessional practices. Patient overall satisfaction was very high (89%). Sixty patients completed the post-intervention surveys, and 33 reported accessing one or more service(s). Conclusion: The ARC Model is an innovative approach to reach and support a broad range of patients access needed resources. The Model is feasible and acceptable to PC providers and patients, and has demonstrated potential for improving patients' access to health and social resources. This study has informed a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to evaluate the ARC navigation to an existing web and telephone navigation service (Ontario 211).

Using the quadruple aim to understand the impact of virtual delivery of care within Ontario community health centres: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and introduction of various restrictions resulted in drastic changes to 'traditional' primary healthcare service delivery modalities. AIM: To understand the impact of virtual care on healthcare system performance within the context of Ontario community health centres (CHCs). DESIGN & SETTING: Thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with 36 providers and 31 patients. METHOD: Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted in the autumn of 2020. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed thematically using the quadruple aim framework. RESULTS: The transition to virtual delivery of services has had both positive and negative impacts on care. Virtual care removed certain barriers to care such as access. However, patients and providers found that phone visits impacted quality of care owing to the inability to read body language and having to rely solely on patient descriptions. Video visits allowed for a similar experience to in-person visits but technical issues constrained this interaction. Depending on the service provided, some providers felt they were not providing the same quality of care. However, providers reported reductions in no-show rates and highlighted the efficiency of virtual appointments. Providers also found they were able to collaborate at a similar level before the pandemic and saw improvements in work-life balance. Overall, patients and providers alike preferred virtual visits with those known to them, and for less complex or transactional aspects of care. CONCLUSION: The study described positive and negative impacts on patient care, population health, health system costs, and provider experience. These results will be useful for primary care organisations in post-pandemic planning; however, future research is needed for a deeper exploration of the impact on quality of care specifically for more complex health concerns.

Perspectives of structurally marginalised patients attending contextually tailored and integrated care practices in Canada: a focused ethnography study.

OBJECTIVES: To better understand the experience of patients attending community-based primary healthcare practices (CBPHCPs) aimed at improving equity and access to primary care for underserved patients, which have been implemented locally in several countries, including Canada. There are currently little data on how, or to what extent, they mitigate patients' experience of social inequalities in care and improve their access to health. This study explored the impacts of the sociospatial characteristics of these practices on patients' care experience. DESIGN AND METHODS: Qualitative, multisite, focused ethnographic study based on in-situ observations and interviews, incorporating inductive and deductive analysis, and using the concept of sense of place. SETTING: Three CBPHCPs located in deprived urban areas in two provinces of Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 28 structurally marginalised persons (17 women) attending the clinics, ranging in age from 18 to 79 years, and 16 managers, clinicians and practitioners working in these clinics. RESULTS: Data underscored the importance of clinic proximity and accessibility in facilitating patients' navigation of the health system. Patients appreciated the clinics' positive sociospatial characteristics. Non-judgmental environments and informal spaces fostered patients' empowerment and social interaction among themselves and with peer navigators and healthcare professionals. The experience of supportive continuity of care had a positive impact on patients' sense of well-being and, for many, a positive ripple effect and long-term impact on their social integration. CONCLUSION: These results have important implications for policy given the current context, in which governments are challenged to support primary healthcare that addresses the social determinants of health to achieve greater equity. We conclude that scaling up contextually tailored care and deploying humanistic innovative organisational practices into mainstream care will help narrow the equity gap and reduce current prevalent social inequalities in the health system.

Virtual care in Ontario community health centres: a cross-sectional study to understand changes in care delivery.

BACKGROUND: There has been a large-scale adoption of virtual delivery of primary care as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. AIM: In this descriptive study, an equity lens is used to explore the impact of transitioning to greater use of virtual care in community health centres (CHCs) across Ontario, Canada. DESIGN & SETTING: A cross-sectional survey was administered and electronic medical record (EMR) data were extracted from 36 CHCs. METHOD: The survey captured CHCs' experiences with the increased adoption of virtual care. A longitudinal analysis of the EMR data was conducted to evaluate changes in health service delivery. EMR data were extracted monthly for a period of time before the pandemic (April 2019-February 2020) and during (April 2020-February 2021). RESULTS: In comparison with the pre-pandemic period, CHCs experienced a moderate decline in visits made (11%), patients seen (9%), issues addressed (9%), and services provided (15%). During the pandemic period, an average of 54% of visits were conducted virtually, with telephone as the leading virtual modality (96%). Drops in service types ranged from 28%-82%. The distribution of virtual modalities varied according to the provider type. Access to in-person and virtual care did not vary across patient characteristics. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate a large shift towards virtual delivery while maintaining in-person care. No meaningful differences were found in virtual versus in-person care related to patient characteristics or rurality of centres. Future studies are needed to explore how to best select the appropriate modality for patients and service types.

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.

Improving access to primary health care: a cross-case comparison based on an a priori program theory.

BACKGROUND: Inequitable access to primary health care (PHC) remains a problem for most western countries. Failure to scale up effective interventions has been due, in part, to a failure to share the logic and essential elements of successful programs. The aim of this paper is to describe what we learned about improving access to PHC for vulnerable groups across multiple sites through use of a common theory-based program logic model and a common evaluation approach. This was the IMPACT initiative. METHODS: IMPACT's evaluation used a mixed methods design with longitudinal (pre and post) analysis of six interventions. The analysis for this paper included four of the six sites that met study criteria. These sites were located in Canada (Alberta, Quebec and Ontario) and Australia (New South Wales). Using the overarching logic model, unexpected findings were reviewed, and alternative explanations were considered to understand how the mechanisms of each intervention may have contributed to results. RESULTS: Each site addressed their local access problem with different strategies and from different starting points. All sites observed changes in patient abilities to access PHC and provider access capabilities. The combination of intended and observed consequences for consumers and providers was different at each site, but all sites achieved change in both consumer ability and provider capability, even in interventions where there was no activity targeting provider behaviors. DISCUSSION: The model helped to identify, explore and synthesize intended and unintended consequences of four interventions that appeared to have more differences than similarities. Similar outcomes for different interventions and multiple impacts of each intervention on abilities were observed, implying complex causal pathways. CONCLUSIONS: All the interventions were a low-cost incremental attempt to address unmet health care needs of vulnerable populations. Change is possible; sustaining change may be more challenging. Access to PHC requires attention to both patient abilities and provider characteristics. The logic model proved to be a valuable heuristic tool for defining the objectives of the interventions, evaluating their impacts, and learning from the comparison of 'cases'.

Inequities in the delivery of mental health care: a grounded theory study of the policy context of primary care.

BACKGROUND: Strengthening capacity for mental health in primary care improves health outcomes by providing timely access to coordinated and integrated mental health care. The successful integration of mental health in primary care is highly dependent on the foundation of the surrounding policy context. In Ontario, Canada, policy reforms in the early 2000's led to the implementation of a new interprofessional team-model of primary care called Family Health Teams. It is unclear the extent to which the policy context in Ontario influenced the integration of mental health care in Family Health Teams emerging from this period of policy reform. The research question guiding this study was: what were key features of Ontario's policy context that influenced FHTs capacity to provide mental health services for mood and anxiety disorders? METHODS: A qualitative study informed by constructivist grounded theory. Individual interviews were conducted with executive directors, family physicians, nurse practitioners, nurses, and the range of professionals who provide mental health services in interprofessional primary care teams; community mental health providers; and provincial policy and decision makers. We used an inductive approach to data analysis. The electronic data management programme NVivo11 helped organise the data analysis process. RESULTS: We conducted 96 interviews with 82 participants. With respect to the contextual factors considered to be important features of Ontario's policy context that influenced primary care teams' capacity to provide mental health services, we identified four key themes: i) lack of strategic direction for mental health, ii) inadequate resourcing for mental health care, iii) rivalry and envy, and, iv) variations across primary care models. CONCLUSIONS: As the first point of contact for individuals experiencing mental health difficulties, primary care plays an important role in addressing population mental health care needs. In Ontario, the successful integration of mental health in primary care has been hindered by the lack of strategic direction, and inconsistent resourcing for mental health care. Achieving health equity may be stunted by the structural variations for mental health care across Family Health Teams and across primary care models in Ontario.

Patient perspectives on quality of care for depression and anxiety in primary health care teams: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Widespread policy reforms in Canada, the United States and elsewhere over the last two decades strengthened team models of primary care by bringing together family physicians and nurse practitioners with a range of mental health and other interdisciplinary providers. Understanding how patients with depression and anxiety experience newer team-based models of care delivery is essential to explore whether the intended impact of these reforms is achieved, identify gaps that remain and provide direction on strengthening the quality of mental health care. OBJECTIVE: The main study objective was to understand patients' perspectives on the quality of care that they received for anxiety and depression in primary care teams. METHODS: This was a qualitative study, informed by constructivist grounded theory. We conducted focus groups and individual interviews with primary care patients about their experiences with mental health care. Focus groups and individual interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Grounded theory guided an inductive analysis of the data. RESULTS: Forty patients participated in the study: 31 participated in one of four focus groups, and nine completed an individual interview. Participants in our study described their experiences with mental health care across four themes: accessibility, technical care, trusting relationships and meeting diverse needs. CONCLUSION: Greater attention by policymakers is needed to strengthen integrated collaborative practices in primary care so that patients have similar access to mental health services across different primary care practices, and smoother continuity of care across sectors. The research team is comprised of individuals with lived experience of mental health who have participated in all aspects of the research process.

Patients' engagement in primary care research: a case study in a Canadian context.

Patient engagement in primary care research is an increasingly common requirement, as it helps make research more relevant to patients and therefore more valuable. However, there is limited evidence about the outcomes on engagement and actually how it affects research. In Canada, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research has a Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR), which in 2016 funded Ontario's INSPIRE-PHC centre of excellence and its Patient Engagement Resource Centre (PERC). PERC conducted an online survey of the three INSPIRE-PHC studies that engaged patients to guide their research. We found that patient partners (PPs) were positive about their experience during research meetings, the value of collaboration, and the support that was provided. They were more involved in early stages of their research projects than in ongoing research activities. PPs valued their experience and also felt they had improved the research process and outcomes. This case study showed how PPs perceive their roles, but a more diverse group of PPs might have more differences in their experience. Background Patient engagement in primary care research is increasing and is now an expectation in many countries and funding agencies. In Canada, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) has mandated that patients be included as partners to guide the research process. Ontario's Patient Engagement Resource Centre (PERC) was established in 2016 by the INNOVATIONS STRENGTHENING PRIMARY HEALTH CARE THROUGH RESEARCH (INSPIRE-PHC), one of 12 centres of excellence in the province funded under the CIHR's Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) initiative. PERC's mission is to support the authentic engagement of patients in primary care research. The present case study examines patients' experience of engagement in INSPIRE-PHC research studies. Methods PERC conducted a web-based evaluation survey across the three INSPIRE-PHC studies that engaged patient partners (PPs). We used data collection tools developed by McMaster University (the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (PPEET)) and the Patient-Centred Outcomes Research Institute (Ways of Engaging- ENgagement ACtivity Tool (WE-ENACT)) to assess patient experience and areas of involvement. These included both closed- and open-ended questions. Results The quantitative data showed that PPs were positive about their experience during research meetings, the value of collaboration, and the support that was provided to facilitate engagement. Most of them were highly involved in the initial stages of their research projects but much less involved in operational activities. The qualitative findings showed that, overall, PPs valued their experience, felt prepared to contribute and that their contributions were welcomed. In particular, they considered that they had improved the research process and outcomes. The majority also reported that they had learned from the experience and found it valuable. Conclusions This case study shows that patients engaged in three primary care research studies found the experience to be positive and felt that they had contributed to the research. This study adds to the literature on the evaluation of patient engagement in primary health care research. However, a study of a more diverse sample of PPs might elucidate differences in experience that could enrich future patient engagement activities.

Does healthcare inequity reflect variations in peoples' abilities to access healthcare? Results from a multi-jurisdictional interventional study in two high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Primary healthcare services must respond to the healthcare-seeking needs of persons with a wide range of personal and social characteristics. In this study, examined whether socially vulnerable persons exhibit lower abilities to access healthcare. First, we examined how personal and social characteristics are associated with the abilities to access healthcare described in the patient-centered accessibility framework and with the likelihood of reporting problematic access. We then examined whether higher abilities to access healthcare are protective against problematic access. Finally, we explored whether social vulnerabilities predict problematic access after accounting for abilities to access healthcare. METHODS: This is an exploratory analysis of pooled data collected in the Innovative Models Promoting Access-To-Care Transformation (IMPACT) study, a Canadian-Australian research program that aimed to improve access to primary healthcare for vulnerable populations. This specific analysis is based on 284 participants in four study regions who completed a baseline access survey. Hierarchical linear regression models were used to explore the effects of personal or social characteristics on the abilities to access care; logistic regression models, to determine the increased or decreased likelihood of problematic access. RESULTS: The likelihood of problematic access varies by personal and social characteristics. Those reporting at least two social vulnerabilities are more likely to experience all indicators of problematic access except hospitalizations. Perceived financial status and accumulated vulnerabilities were also associated with lower abilities to access care. Higher scores on abilities to access healthcare are protective against most indicators of problematic access except hospitalizations. Logistic regression models showed that ability to access is more predictive of problematic access than social vulnerability. CONCLUSIONS: We showed that those at higher risk of social vulnerability are more likely to report problematic access and also have low scores on ability to seek, reach, pay, and engage with healthcare. Equity-oriented healthcare interventions should pay particular attention to enhancing people's abilities to access care in addition to modifying organizational processes and structures that reinforce social systems of discrimination or exclusion.

The Role of Social Workers in Interprofessional Primary Healthcare Teams.

Background: In Ontario, Canada, social workers are employed in a number of primary healthcare (PHC) settings such as Community Health Centres (CHCs) and Family Health Teams (FHTs). However, many aspects of social work practice within PHC settings are unknown. Objectives: The objectives of our study are to determine the amount of social work services provided in CHCs and FHTs, identify the types of services that social workers provide in CHCs and FHTs and ascertain the methods social workers use to deliver services in CHCs and FHTs. Method: An analysis of a cross-sectional data set obtained from a survey conducted in June 2016 in Ontario was performed. Results: The majority of practices (84.2%) had a social worker, although several practices also hosted other types of mental health workers. In virtually all practices with social workers, they (and individuals designated as mental healthcare providers) were also involved in practice level efforts to support mental healthcare delivery. In several practices, the care they delivered extended beyond that related directly to mental healthcare, ranging from preventive care and health promotion (64.5%) to palliative care (16.8%). In several practices, these workers also offered group appointments related to healthy behaviour (43.6%) and self-management (~33%). Interestingly, the role of social workers in practices where they were the sole designated mental healthcare worker was not meaningfully different from practices where other mental health professionals work. Conclusions: In PHC, social workers deliver or support the delivery of mental healthcare, but their role extends beyond that domain to encompass a broader set of services that contribute to the individual's health and wellbeing.