Enhancing community-oriented care: Implementation of social prescribing within a family health team.

High quality comprehensive primary care is essential for the health and well-being of individuals and communities, but the provision of health services is inadequate to fully address these needs. Social isolation and loneliness are associated with poor health outcomes and are increasingly prevalent among older adults. The St. Michael's Hospital Academic Family Health Team, a large interdisciplinary primary care organization that serves approximately 55,000 people in the downtown east of Toronto, Ontario, developed and implemented a social prescribing program to support socially isolated and lonely older adults. This article reports the development of that program-called SEED (Seniors, Equity, Engagement, and Dignity)-and describes opportunities and challenges and some preliminary results from the first year. By supporting people in new ways, this program aims to reduce loneliness and social isolation, increase capacity within the family health team, and support diverse older adults to live fulfilling lives.

Social Prescribing in Canada: A Tool for Integrating Health and Social Care for Underserved Communities.

Social prescribing is a practical tool for addressing the social determinants of health through supported referrals to community services. This globally spreading intervention aims to meet the needs of underserved populations and to better link health and social care organizations by supporting self-management and connecting participants to non-clinical supports in their communities, such as food and income support, parks and walking groups, arts activities and friendly visiting. This paper describes the current state of social prescribing in Canada, provides an overview of the Canadian Institute for Social Prescribing and offers an introduction to processes and resources for initiating social prescribing interventions.

Implementing social interventions in primary care in Canada: A qualitative exploration of lessons learned from leaders in the field.

PURPOSE: Primary health care providers and practices are increasingly instituting direct interventions into social determinants of health and health inequities, but experiences of the leaders in these initiatives remain largely unexamined. METHODS: Sixteen semi-structured interviews with Canadian primary care leaders in developing and implementing social interventions were conducted to assess barriers, keys to success, and lessons learned from their work. RESULTS: Participants focused on practical approaches to establishing and maintaining social intervention programs and our analysis pointed to six major themes. A deep understanding of community needs, through data and client stories, forms a foundation for program development. Improving access to care is essential to ensuring programs reach those most marginalized. Client care spaces must be made safe as a first step to engagement. Intervention programs are strengthened by the involvement of patients, community members, health team staff, and partner agencies in their design. The impact and sustainability of these programs is enhanced by implementation partnerships with community members, community organizations, health team members, and government. Health providers and teams are more likely to assimilate simple, practical tools into practice. Finally, institutional change is key to establishing successful programs. CONCLUSION: Creativity, persistence, partnership, a deep understanding of community and individual social needs, and a willingness to overcome barriers underlie the implementation of successful social intervention programs in primary health care settings.

Exploring the Barriers and Facilitators Experienced by Palliative Health Care Providers Working with Patients Experiencing Homelessness during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: Patients experiencing homelessness not only have higher rates of medical complexity, comorbidity, and mortality, but also face barriers to accessing palliative care services. In structurally vulnerable populations with palliative care needs, these barriers are compounded, creating significant challenges for both patients and providers that have important health equity implications. Objective: The aim is to explore the experiences of palliative care providers working with patients experiencing homelessness during the COVID-19 pandemic and understand the barriers they faced in providing care, as well as facilitators that aided in the success of their teams. Methods: Seven health care providers from two Canadian palliative outreach teams involved in delivering palliative care services to patients experiencing homelessness during the COVID-19 pandemic participated in audio-recorded and transcribed videoconferencing interviews. Analysis was completed using generic descriptive thematic analysis. Results: Five key themes were identified: (1) factors negatively impacting patient health, (2) use of technology, (3) care provider emotions, (4) care provider education and advocacy, and (5) outreach team factors. Conclusion: Identified barriers during the pandemic included worsening of existing patient vulnerabilities, as well as challenges incorporating technology into care. Providers faced increased emotional burden, with a rise in workload, stress, fear, and grief. However, several facilitators allowed teams to provide high-quality care to this vulnerable population, including team support, interprofessional collaboration, and advocacy and education initiatives. The outreach model also proved to be a highly flexible, resilient, and adaptable model for providing care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Toward equity-oriented cancer care: a Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) protocol to promote equitable access to lung cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Screening for lung cancer with low dose CT can facilitate the detection of early-stage lung cancers that are amenable to treatment, reducing mortality related to lung cancer. Individuals are considered eligible for lung cancer screening if they meet specific high-risk criteria, such as age and smoking history. Population groups that are at highest risk of lung cancer, and therefore, the target of lung cancer screening interventions, are also the least likely to participate in lung cancer screening. This can lead to a widening of health inequities. Deliberate effort is needed to both reduce lung cancer risk (through upstream interventions that promote smoking cessation) as well as midstream interventions that promote equitable access to lung cancer screening. METHODS: This protocol paper describes an equity-informed patient-oriented research study. Our study aims to promote equitable access to lung cancer screening by partnering with patients to co-design an e-learning module for healthcare providers. The learning module will describe the social context of lung cancer risk and promote access to lung cancer screening by increasing equity at the point of care. We have applied the Generative Co-Design Framework for Healthcare Innovation and detail our study processes in three phases and six steps: Pre-design (establishing a study governance structure); Co-design (identifying research priorities, gathering and interpreting data, co-developing module content); and Post-design (pilot testing the module and developing an implementation plan). DISCUSSION: Patient engagement in research can promote the design and delivery of healthcare services that are accessible and acceptable to patients. This is particularly important for lung cancer screening as those at highest risk of developing lung cancer are also those who are least likely to participate in lung cancer screening. By detailing the steps of our participatory co-design journey, we are making visible the processes of our work so that they can be linked to future outcomes and related impact, and inform a wide range of patient co-led processes.

Lung cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in Canada and is responsible for a quarter of all cancer-related deaths in the country. Screening for lung cancer using tools such as a CT scan can allow us to find lung cancers when they are still small and curable. People can receive a lung CT scan depending on how old they are and for how long they have smoked cigarettes. Certain groups of people, particularly those who have fewer resources such as time and money, and those who experience injustice because of who they are and how they look are less likely to participate in lung cancer screening. We can increase participation in lung cancer screening by educating healthcare providers on appropriate and timely ways to talk to patients about lung cancer screening. In this paper, we outline the steps of a patient-partnered study in which many different stakeholders such as patients, providers and policy-makers have come together with a goal to improve equity in access to lung cancer screening. We will do this by jointly creating an online learning module that will educate healthcare providers on how life experiences shape smoking behaviour and lung cancer risk. The module will also impart key skills on how to deliver care which is timely, appropriate and safe. Once the module is ready it will be freely available to all healthcare providers to support the fair and just delivery of lung cancer screening in the province of Ontario and elsewhere.

Equity-Mobilizing Partnerships in Community (EMPaCT): Co-Designing Patient Engagement to Promote Health Equity.

Equity-Mobilizing Partnerships in Community (EMPaCT) is a novel approach to patient engagement that centres diverse lived experiences and promotes equity-oriented and inclusive partnerships. As an independent community table, EMPaCT is made up primarily of patients/diverse members of community. Researchers and other decision makers come to this table with their projects to learn how to make their project more inclusive and equitable. In this paper, we detail how we used participatory co-design to define, build and grow EMPaCT as an innovative and scalable patient partnership model that promotes bottom-up action for health equity.

Routinely asking patients about income in primary care: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Income is a key social determinant of health, yet it is rare for data on income to be routinely collected and integrated with electronic health records. AIM: To examine response bias and evaluate patient perspectives of being asked about income in primary care. DESIGN & SETTING: Mixed-methods study in a large, multi-site primary care organisation in Toronto, Canada, where patients are asked about income in a routinely administered sociodemographic survey. METHOD: Data were examined from the electronic health records of patients who answered at least one question on the survey between December 2013 and March 2016 (n = 14 247). The study compared those who responded to the income question with non-responders. Structured interviews with 27 patients were also conducted. RESULTS: A total of 10 441 (73%) patients responded to both parts of the income question: 'What was your total family income before taxes last year?' and 'How many people does your income support?'. Female patients, ethnic minorities, caregivers of young children, and older people were less likely to respond. From interviews, many patients were comfortable answering the income question, particularly if they understood the connection between income and health, and believed the data would be used to improve care. Several patients found it difficult to estimate their income or felt the options did not reflect fluctuating financial circumstances. CONCLUSION: Many patients will provide data on income in the context of a survey in primary care, but accurately estimating income can be challenging. Future research should compare self-reported income to perceived financial strain. Data on income linked to health records can help identify health inequities and help target anti-poverty interventions.

A Conceptual Framework for Continuing Medical Education and Population Health.

ISSUE: Health systems have been increasingly called upon to address population health concerns and continuing medical education (CME) is an important means through which clinical practices can be improved. This manuscript elaborates on existing conceptual frameworks in order to support CME practitioners, funders, and policy makers to develop, implement, and evaluate CME vis-a-vis population health concerns. EVIDENCE: Existing CME conceptual models and conceptions of CME effectiveness require elaboration in order to meet goals of population health improvement. Frameworks for the design, implementation and evaluation of CME consistently reference population health, but do not adequately conceptualize it beyond the aggregation of individual patient health. As a pertinent example, opioid prescribing CME programs use the opioid epidemic to justify their programs, but evaluation approaches are inadequate for demonstrating population health impacts. CME programs that are built to have population health outcomes using frameworks intended primarily for physician performance and patient health outcomes are thus not able to recognize either non-linear associations or negative unintended consequences. IMPLICATIONS: This proposed conceptual framework draws on the fields of clinical population medicine, the social determinants of health, health equity, and philosophies of population health to build conceptual bridges between the CME outcome levels of physician performance and patient health to population health. The authors use their experience developing, delivering, and evaluating opioid prescribing- and poverty-focused CME programs to argue that population health-focused CME must be re-oriented in at least five ways. These include: 1) scaling effective CME programs while evaluating at population health levels; 2) (re)interpreting evidence for program content from a population perspective; 3) incorporating social determinants of health into clinically-oriented CME activities; 4) explicitly building fluency in population health concepts and practices among health care providers and CME planners; and 5) attending to social inequity in every aspect of CME programs.

Integrating social justice advocacy into a family health team: Successes and lessons learned.

PROBLEM ADDRESSED: Health is largely determined by socioeconomic factors. Health care providers can potentially address these factors through social justice advocacy. However, many individual providers and teams have not taken on this role in Canada. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: To address identified barriers in integrating social justice advocacy into the practice of individual health care providers and interdisciplinary teams. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: An Advocacy Tool Kit was created in 2017 to build individual capacity for social justice advocacy. An advocacy framework was adopted in 2018 that reiterated the commitment of the Department of Family and Community Medicine at St Michael's Hospital in Toronto, Ont, to social justice advocacy and outlined 2 new processes: to adopt and implement specific departmentwide campaigns to advocate for social justice; and to respond to inquiries about social justice issues and external advocacy campaigns. CONCLUSION: The initiatives have helped integrate social justice advocacy into the core activities of the interdisciplinary primary care team and can likely be replicated by other interested groups across the country.

Implementation of targeted screening for poverty in a large primary care team in Toronto, Canada: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Poverty has a significant influence on health. Efforts to optimize income and reduce poverty could make a difference to the lives of patients and their families. Routine screening for poverty in primary care is an important first step but rarely occurs in Canada. We aimed to implement a targeted screening and referral process in a large, distributed primary care team in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The main outcome was the proportion of targeted patients screened. METHODS: This implementation evaluation was conducted with a large community-based primary care team in north Toronto. The primary care team serves relatively wealthy neighborhoods with pockets of poverty. Physicians were invited to participate. We implemented targeted screening by combining census information on neighborhood-level deprivation with postal codes in patient records. For physicians agreeing to participate, we added prompts to screen for poverty to the charts of adult patients living in the most deprived areas. Standardized electronic medical record templates recommended a referral to a team case worker for income optimization, for those patients screening positive. We recorded the number and percentages of participants at each stage, from screening to receiving advice on income optimization. RESULTS: 128 targeted patients with at least one visit (25%) were screened. The primary care team included 86 physicians distributed across 19 clinical locations. Thirty-four physicians (39%) participated. Their practices provided care for 27,290 patients aged 18 or older; 852 patients (3%) were found to be living in the most deprived neighborhoods. 509 (60%) had at least one office visit over the 6 months of follow up. 25 patients (20%) screened positive for poverty, and 13 (52%) were referred. Eight patients (62% of those referred) were ultimately seen by a caseworker for income optimization. CONCLUSIONS: We implemented a targeted poverty screening program combined with resources to optimize income for patients in a large, distributed community-based primary care team. Screening was feasible; however, only a small number of patients were linked to the intervention Further efforts to scale and spread screening and mitigation of poverty are warranted; these should include broadening the targeted population beyond those living in the most deprived areas.

Building Equitable Patient Partnerships during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Challenges and Key Considerations for Research and Policy.

The unequal social and economic burden of the COVID-19 pandemic is evident in racialized and low-income communities across Canada. Importantly, social inequities have not been adequately addressed and current public policies are not reflective of the needs of diverse populations. Public participation in decision-making is crucial and there is, therefore, a pressing need to increase diversity of representation in patient partnerships in order to prevent the further exclusion of socially marginalized groups from research and policy making. Deliberate effort and affirmative action are needed to meaningfully engage and nurture diverse patient partnerships by broadening the scope of the patient community to include excluded or underrepresented individuals or groups. This will help us co-develop ways to enhance access and equity in healthcare and prevent the systematic reproduction of structural inequalities that have already been heightened by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Determinants of Implementation of a Clinical Practice Guideline for Homeless Health.

Clinical practice guidelines can improve the clinical and social care for marginalized populations, thereby improving health equity. The aim of this study is to identify determinants of guideline implementation from the perspective of patients and practitioner stakeholders for a homeless health guideline. We completed a mixed-method study to identify determinants of equitable implementation of homeless health guidelines, focusing on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Feasibility, Acceptability, Cost, and Equity Survey (GRADE-FACE) health equity implementation outcomes. The study included a survey and framework analysis. Eighty-eight stakeholders, including practitioners and 16 persons with lived experience of homelessness, participated in the study. Most participants favourably rated the drafted recommendations' priority status, feasibility, acceptability, cost, equity impact, and intent-to-implement. Qualitative analysis uncovered stakeholder concerns and perceptions regarding "fragmented services". Practitioners were reluctant to care for persons with lived experience of homelessness, suggesting that associated social stigma serves as a barrier for this population to access healthcare. Participants called for improved "training of practitioners" to increase knowledge of patient needs and preferences. We identified several knowledge translation strategies that may improve implementation of guidelines for marginalized populations. Such strategies should be considered by other guideline development groups who aim to improve health outcomes in the context of limited and fragmented resources, stigma, and need for advocacy.

Caring for patients with lived experience of homelessness.

OBJECTIVE: To guide family physicians working in a range of primary care clinical settings on how to provide care and support for patients who are vulnerably housed or experiencing homelessness. SOURCES OF INFORMATION: The approach integrates recommendations from evidence-based clinical guidelines, the views of persons with lived experience of homelessness, the theoretical tenets of the Patient's Medical Home framework, and practical lessons learned from family physicians working in a variety of clinical practice settings. MAIN MESSAGE: Family physicians can use simple and effective approaches to identify patients who are homeless or vulnerably housed; take initial steps to initiate access to housing, income assistance, case management, and treatment for substance use; and work collaboratively using trauma-informed and anti-oppressive approaches to better assist individuals with health and social needs. Family physicians also have a powerful advocacy voice and can partner with local community organizations and people with lived experience of homelessness to advocate for policy changes to address social inequities. CONCLUSION: Family physicians can directly address the physical health, mental health, and social needs of patients who are homeless or vulnerably housed. Moreover, they can champion outreach and onboarding programs that assist individuals who have experienced homelessness in accessing patient medical homes and can advocate for broader action on the underlying structural causes of homelessness.

Soigner les patients ayant connu l'itinérance.

OBJECTIF: Guider les médecins de famille de divers types de pratique familiale quant à la façon de dispenser des soins et du soutien aux patients logés précairement ou qui vivent l'itinérance. SOURCES D'INFORMATION: L'approche intègre les recommandations tirées des lignes directrices cliniques fondées sur les données probantes, l'opinion des personnes avec une expérience vécue de l'itinérance, les principes théoriques du cadre de travail du Centre de médecine de famille et des leçons pratiques provenant de médecins de famille qui travaillent dans des contextes cliniques variés. MESSAGE PRINCIPAL: Les médecins de famille peuvent utiliser des approches simples et efficaces pour identifier les patients itinérants ou logés précairement; franchir les premières étapes pour faciliter l'accès au logement, à l'aide financière, à la gestion de cas et au traitement de la toxicomanie; et collaborer en faisant appel à des approches anti-oppressives et qui tiennent compte des traumatismes pour mieux venir en aide aux personnes qui ont des besoins sur les plans social et sanitaire. Les médecins de famille ont un solide pouvoir de plaidoyer et peuvent s'associer aux organisations communautaires locales et aux personnes ayant vécu l'itinérance pour revendiquer des réformes politiques qui tiennent compte des iniquités sociales. CONCLUSION: Les médecins de famille ont la capacité de répondre directement aux besoins sociaux et aux besoins en matière de santé physique et de santé mentale des patients itinérants ou logés précairement. En outre, ils peuvent promouvoir les programmes d'approche et d'intégration qui aident les personnes avec une expérience vécue de l'itinérance à accéder aux centres de médecine de famille et peuvent militer pour l'adoption de mesures générales visant à contrer les causes structurelles sous-jacentes de l'itinérance.

Effectiveness of permanent supportive housing and income assistance interventions for homeless individuals in high-income countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Permanent supportive housing and income assistance are valuable interventions for homeless individuals. Homelessness can reduce physical and social wellbeing, presenting public health risks for infectious diseases, disability, and death. We did a systematic review, meta-analysis, and narrative synthesis to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of permanent supportive housing and income interventions on the health and social wellbeing of individuals who are homeless in high-income countries. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Epistemonikos, NIHR-HTA, NHS EED, DARE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to Feb 10, 2020, for studies on permanent supportive housing and income interventions for homeless populations. We included only randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and cost-effectiveness studies from high-income countries that reported at least one outcome of interest (housing stability, mental health, quality of life, substance use, hospital admission, earned income, or employment). We screened studies using a standardised data collection form and pooled data from published studies. We synthesised results using random effects meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. We assessed certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. FINDINGS: Our search identified 15 908 citations, of which 72 articles were included for analysis (15 studies on permanent supportive housing across 41 publications, ten studies on income interventions across 15 publications, and 21 publications on cost or cost-effectiveness). Permanent supportive housing interventions increased long-term (6 year) housing stability for participants with moderate support needs (one study; rate ratio [RR] 1·13 [95% CI 1·01-1·26]) and high support needs (RR 1·42 [1·19-1·69]) when compared with usual care. Permanent supportive housing had no measurable effect on the severity of psychiatric symptoms (ten studies), substance use (nine studies), income (two studies), or employment outcomes (one study) when compared with usual social services. Income interventions, particularly housing subsidies with case management, showed long-term improvements in the number of days stably housed (one study; mean difference at 3 years between intervention and usual services 8·58 days; p<0·004), whereas the effects on mental health and employment outcomes were unclear. INTERPRETATION: Permanent supportive housing and income assistance interventions were effective in reducing homelessness and achieving housing stability. Future research should focus on the long-term effects of housing and income interventions on physical and mental health, substance use, and quality-of-life outcomes. FUNDING: Inner City Health Associates.

Establishing need and population priorities to improve the health of homeless and vulnerably housed women, youth, and men: A Delphi consensus study.

BACKGROUND: Homelessness is one of the most disabling and precarious living conditions. The objective of this Delphi consensus study was to identify priority needs and at-risk population subgroups among homeless and vulnerably housed people to guide the development of a more responsive and person-centred clinical practice guideline. METHODS: We used a literature review and expert working group to produce an initial list of needs and at-risk subgroups of homeless and vulnerably housed populations. We then followed a modified Delphi consensus method, asking expert health professionals, using electronic surveys, and persons with lived experience of homelessness, using oral surveys, to prioritize needs and at-risk sub-populations across Canada. Criteria for ranking included potential for impact, extent of inequities and burden of illness. We set ratings of ≥ 60% to determine consensus over three rounds of surveys. FINDINGS: Eighty four health professionals and 76 persons with lived experience of homelessness participated from across Canada, achieving an overall 73% response rate. The participants identified priority needs including mental health and addiction care, facilitating access to permanent housing, facilitating access to income support and case management/care coordination. Participants also ranked specific homeless sub-populations in need of additional research including: Indigenous Peoples (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit); youth, women and families; people with acquired brain injury, intellectual or physical disabilities; and refugees and other migrants. INTERPRETATION: The inclusion of the perspectives of both expert health professionals and people with lived experience of homelessness provided validity in identifying real-world needs to guide systematic reviews in four key areas according to priority needs, as well as launch a number of working groups to explore how to adapt interventions for specific at-risk populations, to create evidence-based guidelines.