Federal opioid agonist therapy policy: interrupted time series analysis of the impact of the methadone exemption removal across eight provinces in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Federal deregulation of opioid agonist therapies are an attractive policy option to improve access to opioid use disorder care and achieve widespread beneficial impacts on growing opioid-related harms. There have been few evaluations of such policy interventions and understanding effects can help policy planning across jurisdictions. METHODS: Using health administrative data from eight of ten Canadian provinces, this study evaluated the impacts of Health Canada's decision in May 2018 to rescind the requirement for Canadian health professionals to obtain an exemption from the Canadian Drugs and Substance Act to prescribe methadone for opioid use disorder. Over the study period of June 2017 to May 2019, we used descriptive statistics to capture overall trends in the number of agonist therapy prescribers across provinces and we used interrupted time series analysis to determine the effect of this decision on the trajectories of the agonist therapy prescribing workforces. RESULTS: There were important baseline differences in the numbers of agonist therapy prescribers. The province with the highest concentration of prescribers had 7.5 more prescribers per 100,000 residents compared to the province with the lowest. All provinces showed encouraging growth in the number of prescribers through the study period, though the fastest growing province grew 4.5 times more than the slowest. Interrupted time series analyses demonstrated a range of effects of the federal policy intervention on the provinces, from clearly positive changes to possibly negative effects. CONCLUSIONS: Federal drug regulation policy change interacted in complex ways with provincial health professional regulation and healthcare delivery, kaleidoscoping the effects of federal policy intervention. For Canada and other health systems such as the US, federal policy must account for significant subnational variation in OUD epidemiology and drug regulation to maximize intended beneficial effects and mitigate the risks of negative effects.

"The straw that broke the camel's back": An analysis of racialized women clinicians' experiences providing diabetes care.

INTRODUCTION: Racialized women clinicians (RWCs) experience the brunt of unfair racial and gendered expectations, which is a direct result of their visible identity. Our study sought to understand how these experiences intersect to impact the personal and professional well-being of RWCs, and their approach to diabetes care. METHODS: Data were collected from 24 RWCs working within Canadian diabetes care settings, who participated in semi-structured, one-on-one interviews conducted from April 2021 to September 2021. The data were qualitatively analyzed using thematic analysis to develop emergent themes, and interactions were explored using the socioecological model (SEM), adapted to our study context. RESULTS: We identified three themes: (1) Discordance between self-identity and relational identity impacted how RWCs interacted with others, and how others interacted with them; (2) Tokenistic, "inclusive" organizational policies/practices and inherently racist and sexist social norms permitted acts of discrimination and led to the systematic othering and exclusion of RWCs within the workplace; and (3) Differential treatment of RWCs had both positive and negative impacts on participants' relational, workplace and self-identity. Using the SEM, we also found that differential treatment of RWCs stems from upstream policies, structures, and social norms, percolating through different levels of the SEM, including work environments and communities, which eventually impacts one's relational identity, as well as one's perception of oneself. CONCLUSION: The differential treatment of RWCs arises predominantly from macro systems of the work environment. The burden to address these disparities must be shifted to the source (i.e., namely systems) by implementing interventions that equitably value diversity efforts, institute policies of accountability and correction of implicit biases, and prioritize an inclusive culture broadly across faculty and leadership.

Assessing the sustainability and scalability of a diabetes eHealth innovation: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: To date, little is known about the sustainability and scalability of MyDiabetesPlan, an eHealth innovation designed to facilitate shared decision-making within diabetes care. To avoid the possibility of its short-lived implementation and promote wider adoption so as to promote patient-centred diabetes care, it is critical to understand MyDiabetesPlan's sustainability and scalability in order to ensure its long-term impact at a greater scale. We sought to identify the sustainability and scalability potential of MyDiabetesPlan and its limiting factors. METHODS: Using a concurrent triangulation mixed-methods approach, data were collected from 20 individuals involved in the development and implementation of MyDiabetesPlan. The National Health Services Sustainability Model (NHSSM) and the Innovation Scalability Self-administered Questionnaire (ISSaQ) were administered using a 'think-aloud' approach and subsequently, short semi-structured interviews were conducted. Mean aggregate scores and stakeholder-specific scores were generated for the NHSSM and ISSaQ, to quantitatively determine facilitating and limiting factors to sustainability and scalability. Content analysis occurred iteratively with qualitative data, to examine commonalities and differences with the quantitative findings. RESULTS: The top facilitating factor to sustaining MyDiabetesPlan was "Staff involvement and training to sustain the process.", whereas the top limiting factors were: "Adaptability of Improved Process", "Senior Leadership Engagement" and "Infrastructure for Sustainability". The top three facilitating factors for scale-up were "Acceptability", "Development with Theory" and "Consistency with Policy Directives." Conversely, the top three limiting factors were "Financial and Human Resources", "Achievable Adoption" and "Broad Reach". Qualitative findings corroborated the limiting/facilitating factors identified. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing staff involvement throughout the dynamic care contexts, and resource constraints impacting scale-up can enhance the sustainability and scalability of MyDiabetesPlan. As such, future plans will focus on garnering organizational leadership buy-in and support, which may address the resource constraints associated with sustainability and scalability and improve the capacity for adequate staff involvement. eHealth researchers will be able to prioritize these limiting factors from the outset of their tool development to purposefully optimize its sustainability and scalability performance.

Perceptions and Correlates of Distress Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Stress Management Strategies Among Adults With Diabetes: A Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Greater risk of adverse health outcomes and public health measures have increased distress among people with diabetes during the coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The objectives of this study were to explore how the experiences of people with diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic differ according to sociodemographic characteristics and identify diabetes-related psychosocial correlates of COVID distress. METHODS: Patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes were recruited from clinics and community health centres in Toronto, Ontario, as well as patient networks. Participants were interviewed to explore the experiences of people with diabetes with varied sociodemographic and clinical identities, with respect to wellness (physical, emotional, social, financial, occupational), level of stress and management strategies. Multiple linear regression was used to assess the relationships between diabetes distress, diabetes self-efficacy and resilient coping with COVID distress. RESULTS: Interviews revealed that specific aspects of psychosocial wellness affected by the pandemic, and stress and illness management strategies utilized by people with diabetes differed based on socioeconomic status, gender, type of diabetes and race. Resilient coping (ß=-0.0517; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.0918 to -0.0116; p=0.012), diabetes distress (ß=0.0260; 95% CI, 0.0149 to 0.0371; p<0.0001) and diabetes self-efficacy (ß=-0.0184; 95% CI, -0.0316 to -0.0052; p=0.007) were significantly associated with COVID distress. CONCLUSIONS: Certain subgroups of people with diabetes have experienced a disproportionate amount of COVID distress. Assessing correlates of COVID distress among people with diabetes will help inform interventions such as diabetes self-management education to address the psychosocial distress caused by the pandemic.

Evaluation of Experiences and Impact of Patient Engagement on e-Health Research: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Health technology has increasingly moved toward adopting a "user-centred design" approach to include the user/patient throughout the innovation and design process; however, few studies have evaluated the patient's experience of such an engagement. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the role of patient engagement (PE) within e-health innovation research. METHOD: Using qualitative descriptive methodology, semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight participants (patient partners and research/development team members). FINDINGS: Key themes were centred on enablers of, challenges to and methods of improving PE. CONCLUSION: PE must be prioritized from study conception, explicitly programmed into study conduct and valued by integrating patient partner input.

"If We Got a Win-Win, You Can Sell It to Everybody": A Qualitative Study Employing Normalization Process Theory to Identify Critical Factors for eHealth Implementation and Scale-up in Primary Care.

OBJECTIVES: Translation of eHealth research findings and successful implementation into clinical care is limited. We used a multitiered approach (individual, organizational, societal) to assess the implementation potential of MyDiabetesPlan within Ontario's primary care system and applied the normalization process theory (NPT) to explicate our findings. METHODS: Data were collected from 15 individuals through interviews with primary care administrative end-users and a focus group discussion with Ministry of Health decision-makers, then qualitatively analyzed using thematic analysis for emergent themes. RESULTS: We identified 3 themes corresponding to our multitiered approach: 1) stakeholder buy-in was critical to engagement and was impacted by perceptions/capacities; 2) clinical integration of MyDiabetesPlan depended on alignment with clinic philosophy of care, pre-existing technologies and workflow; and 3) political climate and trends were important considerations for eHealth implementation. Application of NPT to findings revealed that interplay between buy-in and perceptions/capacities of clinical practice stakeholders was critical to engaging them for eHealth implementation. In contrast, evaluation of costs and outcomes was critical to inform operational-management stakeholders' perceptions. Findings at the organizational and societal levels best aligned with the factors influencing operationalization of MyDiabetesPlan. Overall, our findings show that the synergistic operationalization of MyDiabetesPlan into practice was a prerequisite to implementation at all health-care levels. CONCLUSIONS: Application of NPT revealed context- and stakeholder-specific interactions that should be synergistically leveraged to promote MyDiabetesPlan normalization into routine clinical practice. Our findings provide further insight into how researchers can comprehensively assess eHealth implementation potential within Ontario and can be extrapolated to similar single-payer health-care jurisdictions.