COVID-19 vaccine uptake among Ontario physicians: a descriptive population-based retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine COVID-19 vaccine uptake among physicians in Ontario, Canada from 14 December 2020 to 13 February 2022. DESIGN: Population-based retrospective cohort study. SETTING: All registered physicians in Ontario, Canada using data from linked provincial administrative healthcare databases. PARTICIPANTS: 41 267 physicians (including postgraduate trainees) who were Ontario residents and registered with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario were included. Physicians who were out of province, had not accessed Ontario Health Insurance Plan-insured services for their own care for ≥5 years and those with missing identifiers were excluded. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were the proportions of physicians who were recorded to have received at least one, at least two and three doses of a Health Canada-approved COVID-19 vaccine by study end date. Secondary outcomes were how uptake varied by physician characteristics (including age, sex, specialty and residential location) and time elapsed between doses. RESULTS: Of 41 267 physicians, (56% male, mean age 47 years), 39 359 (95.4%) received at least one dose, 39 148 (94.9%) received at least two doses and 35 834 (86.8%) received three doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of those who received three doses, the proportions were 90.4% among those aged ≥60 years and 81.2-89.5% among other age groups; 88.7% among family physicians and 89% among specialists. 1908 physicians (4.6%) had no record of vaccination, and this included 3.4% of family physicians and 4.1% of specialists; however, 28% of this group had missing specialty information. CONCLUSIONS: In Ontario, within 14 months of COVID-19 vaccine availability, 86.8% of physicians had three doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, compared with 45.6% of the general population. Findings may signify physicians' confidence in the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.

Enablers and Barriers for End-of-Life Symptom Management Medications in Long-Term Care Homes: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care (LTC) homes provide personal and medical care 24/7 to individuals unable to live at home due to illness or disability and are often the final place of care and death for their residents. Therefore, LTC homes are tasked with providing quality end-of-life care, often requiring injectable symptom management medications to relieve distressing symptoms (eg, pain). In this study, we aimed to understand the enablers and barriers to prescribing and administering end-of-life symptom management medications in LTC homes. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: From February 2021 to December 2022, we conducted virtual semi-structured interviews with health care providers (physicians and nurses) who worked in Ontario LTC homes and family caregivers of residents who died in LTC. METHODS: We analyzed interview transcripts using thematic analysis. RESULTS: We identified 4 themes related to factors that may impact the prescribing and administering of medications for end-of-life symptom management: (1) identifying the end-of-life period and symptoms, (2) communication among health care providers and between health care providers and family caregivers, (3) health care provider competency with end-of-life medications, and (4) resources for LTC staff to support medication prescribing and administrating. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: In LTC, there are distinct challenges in the prescribing and administrating of end-of-life symptom management medications. Our findings can be used to inform interventions aimed at improving end-of-life care for LTC residents. However, these interventions require buy-in and investment from the provincial government and the LTC sector.

Corrigendum: Measuring the Use of End-of-Life Symptom Relief Medications in Long-Term Care Homes-a Qualitative Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.5770/cgj.27.712.].

Mental health sequelae in survivors of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction. A population-based cohort study.

PURPOSE: Cardiogenic shock secondary to acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS) is associated with substantial short- and long-term morbidity and mortality. However, there are limited data on mental health sequelae that survivors experience following discharge. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada of critically ill adult (≥ 18 years) survivors of AMI-CS, admitted to hospital between April 1, 2009 and March 31, 2019. We compared these patients to AMI survivors without shock. We captured outcome data using linked health administrative databases. The primary outcome was a new mental health diagnosis (a composite of mood, anxiety, or related disorders; schizophrenia/psychotic disorders; and other mental health disorders) following hospital discharge. We secondarily evaluated incidence of deliberate self-harm and death by suicide. We compared patients using overlap propensity score-weighted, cause-specific proportional hazard models. RESULTS: We included 7812 consecutive survivors of AMI-CS, from 135 centers. Mean age was 68.4 (standard deviation (SD) 12.2) years, and 70.3% were male. Median follow-up time was 767 days (interquartile range (IQR) 225-1682). Incidence of new mental health diagnosis among AMI-CS survivors was 109.6 per 1,000 person-years (95% confidence interval (CI) 105.4-113.9), compared with 103.8 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 102.5-105.2) among AMI survivors without shock. After propensity score adjustment, there was no difference in the risk of new mental health diagnoses following discharge [hazard ratio (HR) 0.99 (95% CI 0.94-1.03)]. Factors associated with new mental health diagnoses following AMI-CS included female sex, pre-existing mental health diagnoses, and discharge to a long-term hospital or rehabilitation institute. CONCLUSION: Survivors of AMI-CS experience substantial mental health morbidity following discharge. Risk of new mental health diagnoses was comparable between survivors of AMI with and without shock. Future research on interventions to mitigate psychiatric sequelae after AMI-CS is warranted.

The association between alcohol retail access and health care visits attributable to alcohol for individuals with and without a history of alcohol-related health-care use.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Alcohol retail access is associated with alcohol use and related harms. This study measured whether this association differs for people with and without heavy and disordered patterns of alcohol use. DESIGN: The study used a repeated cross-sectional analysis of health administrative databases. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS/CASES: All residents of Ontario, Canada aged 10-105 years with universal health coverage (n = 10 677 604 in 2013) were included in the analysis. MEASUREMENTS: Quarterly rates of emergency department (ED) and outpatient visits attributable to alcohol in 464 geographic regions between 2013 and 2019 were measured. Quarterly off-premises alcohol retail access scores were calculated (average drive to the closest seven stores) for each geographic region. Mixed-effect linear regression models adjusted for area-level socio-demographic covariates were used to examine associations between deciles of alcohol retail access and health-care visits attributable to alcohol. Stratified analyses were run for individuals with and without prior alcohol-attributable health-care use in the past 2 years. FINDINGS: We included 437 707 ED visits and 505 271 outpatient visits attributable to alcohol. After adjustment, rates of ED visits were 39% higher [rate ratio (RR) = 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.20-1.61] and rates of outpatient visits were 49% higher (RR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.26-1.75) in the highest versus lowest decile of alcohol access. There was a positive association between alcohol access and outpatient visits attributable to alcohol for individuals without prior health-care attributable to alcohol (RR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.39-1.95 for the highest to lowest decile of alcohol access) but not for individuals with prior health-care attributable to alcohol (RR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.90-1.30). There was a positive association between alcohol access and ED visits attributable to alcohol for individuals with and without prior health-care for alcohol for ED visits. CONCLUSION: In Ontario, Canada, greater alcohol retail access appears to be associated with higher rates of emergency department (ED) and outpatient health-care visits attributable to alcohol. Individuals without prior health-care for alcohol may be more susceptible to greater alcohol retail access for outpatient but not ED visits attributable to alcohol.

Association between opioid use disorder and palliative care: a cohort study using linked health administrative data in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are at risk of premature death and can benefit from palliative care. We sought to compare palliative care provision for decedents with and without OUD. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study using health administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, to identify people who died between July 1, 2015, and Dec. 31, 2021. The exposure was OUD, defined as having emergency department visits, hospital admissions, or pharmacologic treatments suggestive of OUD within 3 years of death. Our primary outcome was receipt of 1 or more palliative care services during the last 90 days before death. Secondary outcomes included setting, initiation, and intensity of palliative care. We conducted a secondary analysis excluding sudden deaths (e.g., opioid toxicity, injury). RESULTS: Of 679 840 decedents, 11 200 (1.6%) had OUD. Compared with people without OUD, those with OUD died at a younger age and were more likely to live in neighbourhoods with high marginalization indices. We found people with OUD were less likely to receive palliative care at the end of their lives (adjusted relative risk [RR] 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.86), but this difference did not exist after excluding people who died suddenly (adjusted RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.96-1.01). People with OUD were less likely to receive palliative care in clinics and their homes regardless of cause of death. INTERPRETATION: Opioid use disorder can be a chronic, life-limiting illness, and people with OUD are less likely to receive palliative care in communities during the 90 days before death. Health care providers should receive training in palliative care and addiction medicine to support people with OUD.

Ascertaining the Francophone population in Ontario: validating the language variable in health data.

BACKGROUND: Language barriers can impact health care and outcomes. Valid and reliable language data is central to studying health inequalities in linguistic minorities. In Canada, language variables are available in administrative health databases; however, the validity of these variables has not been studied. This study assessed concordance between language variables from administrative health databases and language variables from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) to identify Francophones in Ontario. METHODS: An Ontario combined sample of CCHS cycles from 2000 to 2012 (from participants who consented to link their data) was individually linked to three administrative databases (home care, long-term care [LTC], and mental health admissions). In total, 27,111 respondents had at least one encounter in one of the three databases. Language spoken at home (LOSH) and first official language spoken (FOLS) from CCHS were used as reference standards to assess their concordance with the language variables in administrative health databases, using the Cohen kappa, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive values (NPV). RESULTS: Language variables from home care and LTC databases had the highest agreement with LOSH (kappa = 0.76 [95%CI, 0.735-0.793] and 0.75 [95%CI, 0.70-0.80], respectively) and FOLS (kappa = 0.66 for both). Sensitivity was higher with LOSH as the reference standard (75.5% [95%CI, 71.6-79.0] and 74.2% [95%CI, 67.3-80.1] for home care and LTC, respectively). With FOLS as the reference standard, the language variables in both data sources had modest sensitivity (53.1% [95%CI, 49.8-56.4] and 54.1% [95%CI, 48.3-59.7] in home care and LTC, respectively) but very high specificity (99.8% [95%CI, 99.7-99.9] and 99.6% [95%CI, 99.4-99.8]) and predictive values. The language variable from mental health admissions had poor agreement with all language variables in the CCHS. CONCLUSIONS: Language variables in home care and LTC health databases were most consistent with the language often spoken at home. Studies using language variables from administrative data can use the sensitivity and specificity reported from this study to gauge the level of mis-ascertainment error and the resulting bias.

Changes in End-of-Life Symptom Management Prescribing among Long-Term Care Residents during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To examine changes in the prescribing of end-of-life symptom management medications in long-term care (LTC) homes during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using routinely collected health administrative data in Ontario, Canada. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We included all individuals who died in LTC homes between January 1, 2017, and March 31, 2021. We separated the study into 2 periods: before COVID-19 (January 1, 2017, to March 17, 2020) and during COVID-19 (March 18, 2020, to March 31, 2021). METHODS: For each LTC home, we measured the percentage of residents who died before and during COVID-19 who had a subcutaneous symptom management medication prescription in their last 14 days of life. We grouped LTC homes into quintiles based on their mean prescribing rates before COVID-19, and examined changes in prescribing during COVID-19 and COVID-19 outcomes across quintiles. RESULTS: We captured 75,438 LTC residents who died in Ontario's 626 LTC homes during the entire study period, with 19,522 (25.9%) dying during COVID-19. The mean prescribing rate during COVID-19 ranged from 46.9% to 79.4% between the lowest and highest prescribing quintiles. During COVID-19, the mean prescribing rate in the lowest prescribing quintile increased by 9.6% compared to before COVID-19. Compared to LTC homes in the highest prescribing quintile, homes in the lowest prescribing quintile experienced the highest proportion of COVID-19 outbreaks (73.4% vs 50.0%), the largest mean outbreak intensity (0.27 vs 0.09 cases/bed), the highest mean total days with a COVID-19 outbreak (72.7 vs 24.2 days), and the greatest proportion of decedents who were transferred and died outside of LTC (22.1% vs 8.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: LTC homes in Ontario had wide variations in the prescribing rates of end-of-life symptom management medications before and during COVID-19. Homes in the lower prescribing quintiles had more COVID-19 cases per bed and days spent in an outbreak.

Measuring the Use of End-of-Life Symptom Relief Medications in Long-Term Care Homes-a Qualitative Study.

Background: At the end of life, individuals may experience physical symptoms such as pain, and guidelines recommend medications to manage these symptoms. Yet, little is known about the symptom management long-term care (LTC) residents receive at the end of life. Our research team developed a metric-whether residents receive one or more prescriptions for an end-of-life symptom management medication in their last two weeks-to explore end-of-life care for LTC residents. This qualitative study aimed to inform the refinement of the end-of-life prescribing metric, including the acceptability and applicability to assess the quality of a resident's symptom management at end-of-life. Methods: We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews with Ontario health-care providers (physicians and nurses) who work in LTC homes and family caregivers of residents who died in LTC. Interviews were conducted virtually between February 2021 and December 2022, and were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: We identified three major themes relating to perceptions of the metric: 1) appropriateness, 2) health-care provider applicability, and 3) caregiver applicability. Participants noted that the metric may be appropriate to assess end-of-life care, but noted important nuances. Regarding applicability, health-care providers found value in the metric and that it could inform their practice. Conversely, caregivers found limited value in the metric. Conclusion: The proposed metric captures a very specific aspect of end-of-life care-whether end-of-life medications were prescribed or not. Participants deemed that the metric may reflect whether LTC homes have processes to manage a resident's end-of-life symptoms with medication. However, participants thought the metric could not provide a complete picture of end-of-life care and its quality.

What are the views of Quebec and Ontario citizens on the tiebreaker criteria for prioritizing access to adult critical care in the extreme context of a COVID-19 pandemic?

BACKGROUND: The prioritization protocols for accessing adult critical care in the extreme pandemic context contain tiebreaker criteria to facilitate decision-making in the allocation of resources between patients with a similar survival prognosis. Besides being controversial, little is known about the public acceptability of these tiebreakers. In order to better understand the public opinion, Quebec and Ontario's protocols were presented to the public in a democratic deliberation during the summer of 2022. OBJECTIVES: (1) To explore the perspectives of Quebec and Ontario citizens regarding tiebreakers, identifying the most acceptable ones and their underlying values. (2) To analyze these results considering other public consultations held during the pandemic on these criteria. METHODS: This was an exploratory qualitative study. The design involved an online democratic deliberation that took place over two days, simultaneously in Quebec and Ontario. Public participants were selected from a community sample which excluded healthcare workers. Participants were first presented the essential components of prioritization protocols and their related issues (training session day 1). They subsequently deliberated on the acceptability of these criteria (deliberation session day 2). The deliberation was then subject to thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 47 participants from the provinces of Quebec (n = 20) and Ontario (n = 27) took part in the online deliberation. A diverse audience participated excluding members of the healthcare workforce. Four themes were identified: (1) Priority to young patients - the life cycle - a preferred tiebreaker; (2) Randomization - a tiebreaker of last resort; (3) Multiplier effect of most exposed healthcare workers - a median acceptability tiebreaker, and (4) Social value - a less acceptable tiebreaker. CONCLUSION: Life cycle was the preferred tiebreaker as this criterion respects intergenerational equity, which was considered relevant when allocating scarce resources to adult patients in a context of extreme pandemic. Priority to young patients is in line with other consultations conducted around the world. Additional studies are needed to further investigate the public acceptability of tiebreaker criteria.

Study protocol for the development and validation of a clinical prediction tool to estimate the risk of 1-year mortality among hospitalized patients with dementia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with dementia and their caregivers could benefit from advance care planning though may not be having these discussions in a timely manner or at all. A prognostic tool could serve as a prompt to healthcare providers to initiate advance care planning among patients and their caregivers, which could increase the receipt of care that is concordant with their goals. Existing prognostic tools have limitations. We seek to develop and validate a clinical prediction tool to estimate the risk of 1-year mortality among hospitalized patients with dementia. METHODS: The derivation cohort will include approximately 235,000 patients with dementia, who were admitted to hospital in Ontario from April 1st, 2009, to December 31st, 2017. Predictor variables will be fully prespecified based on a literature review of etiological studies and existing prognostic tools, and on subject-matter expertise; they will be categorized as follows: sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, previous interventions, functional status, nutritional status, admission information, previous health care utilization. Data-driven selection of predictors will be avoided. Continuous predictors will be modelled as restricted cubic splines. The outcome variable will be mortality within 1 year of admission, which will be modelled as a binary variable, such that a logistic regression model will be estimated. Predictor and outcome variables will be derived from linked population-level healthcare administrative databases. The validation cohort will comprise about 63,000 dementia patients, who were admitted to hospital in Ontario from January 1st, 2018, to March 31st, 2019. Model performance, measured by predictive accuracy, discrimination, and calibration, will be assessed using internal (temporal) validation. Calibration will be evaluated in the total validation cohort and in subgroups of importance to clinicians and policymakers. The final model will be based on the full cohort. DISCUSSION: We seek to develop and validate a clinical prediction tool to estimate the risk of 1-year mortality among hospitalized patients with dementia. The model would be integrated into the electronic medical records of hospitals to automatically output 1-year mortality risk upon hospitalization. The tool could serve as a trigger for advance care planning and inform access to specialist palliative care services with prognosis-based eligibility criteria. Before implementation, the tool will require external validation and study of its potential impact on clinical decision-making and patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05371782.

Variation in Access to Palliative Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer: A Population-Based Study in Canada.

BACKGROUND: As a result of improvements in cancer therapies, patients with metastatic malignancies are living longer, and the role of palliative radiotherapy has become increasingly recognized. However, access to adequate palliative radiotherapy may continue to be a challenge, as is evident from the high proportion of patients dying of prostate cancer who never receive palliative radiotherapy. The main objective of this investigation is to identify and describe the factors associated with the receipt of palliative radiation treatment in a decedent cohort of prostate cancer patients in Ontario. METHODOLOGY:  Population-based administrative databases from Ontario, Canada, were used to identify prostate cancer decedents, 65 years or older who received androgen deprivation therapy between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2018. Baseline and treatment characteristics were analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models for association with receipt of radiotherapy in a two-year observation period before death. RESULTS: We identified 3,788 prostate cancer decedents between 2013 and 2018; among these, 49.9% received radiotherapy in the two years preceding death. There were statistically significant positive associations between receipt of radiotherapy and younger age at diagnosis (odds ratio [OR] 1.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-2.3); higher stage at diagnosis (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.7); receipt of care at a regional cancer center (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3-2.4); and involvement of radiation oncologists (OR 155.1, 95% CI 83.3-288.7) or medical oncologists (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.8). However, there were no associations between receipt of radiotherapy and income, distance to the nearest cancer center, involvement of urologists in cancer care, healthcare administrative region, home-care involvement, or number of hospitalizations in the observation period. CONCLUSIONS: We found the utilization of palliative radiotherapy for prostate cancer patients in Ontario varies depending on age, stage at diagnosis, number of comorbidities, registration at regional cancer centers, and involvement of oncologists. There were no differences detected based on income or distance from a cancer center. The findings of this study represent an important opportunity to facilitate better access to palliative radiotherapy and referrals to multidisciplinary regional cancer centers, to improve the quality of life of this patient population.

Development of an anxiety disorder following an emergency department visit due to cannabis use: a population-based cohort study.

Background: There is ongoing uncertainty about whether cannabis use increases the risk of developing an anxiety disorder. In this study we estimated the risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder following an emergency department (ED) visit for cannabis use and explored factors associated with increased risk. Methods: We used health administrative data to perform a population-based cohort study of all individuals aged 10-105 years with no previous healthcare visits for anxiety disorders in Ontario, Canada, between January 2008 and March 2019. We compared the risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder in the ED or hospital (primary analysis) or additionally in an outpatient setting (secondary analysis) for individuals with an incident ED visit for cannabis to members of the general population using cumulative incidence functions and cause-specific hazard models adjusted for relevant confounders. Findings: Our study included 12,099,144 individuals aged 10-105 without prior care for an anxiety disorder in the ED or hospital, of which 34,822 (0.29%) had an incident ED visit due to cannabis. Within 3-years of an incident ED visit due to cannabis, 12.3% (n = 4294) of individuals had an incident ED visit or hospitalization for an anxiety disorder-a 3.7-fold (adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR] 3.69 95% CI 3.57-3.82) increased risk relative to the general population (1.2%). In secondary analysis, further excluding individuals with prior outpatient care for anxiety disorders, 23.6% of individuals with an ED visit due to cannabis had an incident outpatient visit, ED visit, or hospitalization for an anxiety disorder within 3-years compared to 5.6% of individuals in the general population (aHR 3.88 95% CI 3.77-2.99). The risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder was higher in individuals with ED visits for cannabis use compared to the general population across all age and sex strata. However, younger males with ED visits for cannabis use (aHR 5.67 95% CI 5.19-6.21) had a greater risk relative to the general population than younger women with cannabis use (aHR 3.22 95% CI 2.95-3.52). Interpretation: ED visits for cannabis use were associated with an increased risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder, particularly in young males. These findings have important clinical and policy implications given the increasing use of cannabis over time and trend towards legalization of cannabis. Funding: Canadian Institutes for Health Research.

The association between physical availability of cannabis retail outlets and frequent cannabis use and related health harms: a systematic review.

An increasing number of regions have or are considering legalising the sale of cannabis for adult use. Experience from tobacco and alcohol regulation has found that greater access to physical retail stores is positively associated with increased substance use and harm. Whether this association exists for cannabis is unclear. We completed a systematic review examining the association between cannabis retail store access and adverse health outcomes. We identified articles up until July 20, 2023 by searching four databases. We included studies examining the association between measures of cannabis store access and adverse outcomes: frequent or problematic cannabis use, healthcare encounters due to cannabis use (e.g., cannabis-induced psychosis), and healthcare encounters potentially related to cannabis (e.g., self-harm episodes). Results were compared by study design type, retail access measure, and by subgroups including: children, adolescents, young adults, adults, and pregnant individuals. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021281788). The search generated 5750 citations of which we included 32 studies containing 44 unique primary analyses (unique retail measure and outcome pairs). Studies come from 4 countries (United States, Canada, Netherlands and Uruguay). Among the included analyses, there were consistent positive associations between greater cannabis retail access and 1) increased healthcare service use or poison control calls directly due to cannabis (10/12 analyses; 83%) (2) increased cannabis use and cannabis-related hospitalization during pregnancy (4/4; 100%) and 3) frequent cannabis use in adults and young adults (7/11; 64%). There was no consistent positive association between greater cannabis retail and increased frequent cannabis use in adolescents (1/4; 25%), healthcare service use potentially related to cannabis (2/6; 33%) or increased adverse neonatal birth outcomes (2/7; 26.8%). There is a positive association between greater cannabis store access and increases in cannabis harm. In countries with legal cannabis, retail restrictions may reduce use and harm. Funding: Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction (CCSA).

Real-World Evaluation of Primary Versus Secondary Prevention of Skeletal-Related Events in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Anti-osteoclast treatment with denosumab or zoledronate is known to effectively reduce the need for radiotherapy to bone and other skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). In this study, we analyze primary versus secondary initiation of bone-targeting agents (BTAs) relative to first palliative bone radiotherapy in patients dying of mCRPC. METHODS: Provincial administrative databases from Ontario, Canada identified patients with prostate cancer (2007-2018, n = 98 646) who received continuous androgen deprivation therapy (n = 29 453), died of prostate cancer (2013-2018, n = 3864), and received life-prolonging therapy for mCRPC (n = 1850). Variables were collected looking back 3 years from death. Multivariable analysis explored the relationship between clinical variables and BTAs. RESULTS: Of the 58% (1066/1850) patients with mCRPC who received BTA, only 289 (25.4%) started BTA prior to first palliative bone radiotherapy as primary prevention. Eight hundred and forty-eight (74.6%) patients either never received BTA before death (n = 447) or started BTA only after first bone radiotherapy (n = 401). More patients received denosumab (n = 825, 77%) than zoledronic acid (n = 241, 23%). 51.2% (582/1137) of palliative bone radiotherapy was initiated in the last 12 months of life. Factors associated with the use of BTA included elevated alkaline phosphatase (OR = 1.0, P = .023), de novo metastases (OR = 1.4, P = .005), medical oncologist involvement (OR = 2.0, P = .007), diagnosis 2012-2017 versus 2007-2011 (OR = 0.75, P = .034), and academic center (OR = 0.061, P = .007). CONCLUSION: A majority of patients with mCRPC never receive BTAs prior to first SRE, despite universal access and availability of these agents in Ontario. These results highlight an opportunity to improve outcomes by emphasizing early introduction of BTA in patients with mCRPC being started on systemic therapy.

Association of virtual end-of-life care with healthcare outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A population-based study.

The use of virtual care for people at the end-of-life significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, but its association with acute healthcare use and location of death is unknown. The objective of this study was to measure the association between the use of virtual end-of-life care with acute healthcare use and an out-of-hospital death before vs. after the introduction of specialized fee codes that enabled broader delivery of virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a population-based cohort study of 323,995 adults in their last 90 days of life between January 25, 2018 and December 31, 2021 using health administrative data in Ontario, Canada. Primary outcomes were acute healthcare use (emergency department, hospitalization) and location of death (in or out-of-hospital). Prior to March 14, 2020, 13,974 (8%) people received at least 1 virtual end-of-life care visit, which was associated with a 16% higher rate of emergency department use (adjusted Rate Ratio [aRR] 1.16, 95%CI 1.12 to 1.20), a 17% higher rate of hospitalization (aRR 1.17, 95%CI 1.15 to 1.20), and a 34% higher risk of an out-of-hospital death (aRR 1.34, 95%CI 1.31 to 1.37) compared to people who did not receive virtual end-of-life care. After March 14, 2020, 104,165 (71%) people received at least 1 virtual end-of-life care visit, which was associated with a 58% higher rate of an emergency department visit (aRR 1.58, 95%CI 1.54 to 1.62), a 45% higher rate of hospitalization (aRR 1.45, 95%CI 1.42 to 1.47), and a 65% higher risk of an out-of-hospital death (aRR 1.65, 95%CI 1.61 to 1.69) compared to people who did not receive virtual end-of-life care. The use of virtual end-of-life care was associated with higher acute healthcare use in the last 90 days of life and a higher likelihood of dying out-of-hospital, and these rates increased during the pandemic.

Involvement of Palliative Care in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Patients and Associations with Survival and End-of-Life Outcomes.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a rare, aggressive, and incurable cancer with a poor prognosis and high symptom burden. For these patients, little is known about the impact of palliative care consultation on outcomes such as mortality, hospital admissions, or emergency department visits. The aim of this study is to determine if referral to supportive and palliative care in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma is associated with survival and decreased hospital admissions and emergency department visits. This is a retrospective chart review. Study participants include all malignant pleural mesothelioma patients seen at The Ottawa Hospital-an acute care tertiary center-between January 2002 and March 2019. In total, 223 patients were included in the study. The mean age at diagnosis was 72.4 years and 82.5% were male. Of the patients diagnosed between 2002 and 2010, only 11 (9.6%) were referred to palliative care. By comparison, of those diagnosed between 2011 and 2019, 49 (45.4%) were referred to palliative care. Median time from diagnosis to referral was 4.1 months. There was no significant difference in the median survival of patients referred for palliative care compared to those who did not receive palliative care (p = 0.46). We found no association between receiving palliative care and the mean number of hospital admissions (1.04 vs. 0.91) from diagnosis to death, and an increase in mean number of emergency department visits in the palliative care group (2.30 vs. 1.18). Although there was increased utilization of palliative care services, more than half of the MPM patients did not receive palliative care despite their limited survival. There was an increase in emergency department visits in the palliative care group; this may represent an increase in the symptom burden (i.e., indication bias) in those referred to palliative care.

Socioeconomic Status, Palliative Care, and Death at Home Among Patients With Cancer Before and During COVID-19.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound impact on the delivery of cancer care, but less is known about its association with place of death and delivery of specialized palliative care (SPC) and potential disparities in these outcomes. Objective: To evaluate the association of the COVID-19 pandemic with death at home and SPC delivery at the end of life and to examine whether disparities in socioeconomic status exist for these outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, an interrupted time series analysis was conducted using Ontario Cancer Registry data comprising adult patients aged 18 years or older who died with cancer between the pre-COVID-19 (March 16, 2015, to March 15, 2020) and COVID-19 (March 16, 2020, to March 15, 2021) periods. The data analysis was performed between March and November 2023. Exposure: COVID-19-related hospital restrictions starting March 16, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes were death at home and SPC delivery at the end of life (last 30 days before death). Socioeconomic status was measured using Ontario Marginalization Index area-based material deprivation quintiles, with quintile 1 (Q1) indicating the least deprivation; Q3, intermediate deprivation; and Q5, the most deprivation. Segmented linear regression was used to estimate monthly trends in outcomes before, at the start of, and in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Of 173 915 patients in the study cohort (mean [SD] age, 72.1 [12.5] years; males, 54.1% [95% CI, 53.8%-54.3%]), 83.7% (95% CI, 83.6%-83.9%) died in the pre-COVID-19 period and 16.3% (95% CI, 16.1%-16.4%) died in the COVID-19 period, 54.5% (95% CI, 54.2%-54.7%) died at home during the entire study period, and 57.8% (95% CI, 57.5%-58.0%) received SPC at the end of life. In March 2020, home deaths increased by 8.3% (95% CI, 7.4%-9.1%); however, this increase was less marked in Q5 (6.1%; 95% CI, 4.4%-7.8%) than in Q1 (11.4%; 95% CI, 9.6%-13.2%) and Q3 (10.0%; 95% CI, 9.0%-11.1%). There was a simultaneous decrease of 5.3% (95% CI, -6.3% to -4.4%) in the rate of SPC at the end of life, with no significant difference among quintiles. Patients who received SPC at the end of life (vs no SPC) were more likely to die at home before and during the pandemic. However, there was a larger immediate increase in home deaths among those who received no SPC at the end of life vs those who received SPC (Q1, 17.5% [95% CI, 15.2%-19.8%] vs 7.6% [95% CI, 5.4%-9.7%]; Q3, 12.7% [95% CI, 10.8%-14.5%] vs 9.0% [95% CI, 7.2%-10.7%]). For Q5, the increase in home deaths was significant only for patients who did not receive SPC (13.9% [95% CI, 11.9%-15.8%] vs 1.2% [95% CI, -1.0% to 3.5%]). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with amplified socioeconomic disparities in death at home and SPC delivery at the end of life. Future research should focus on the mechanisms of these disparities and on developing interventions to ensure equitable and consistent SPC access.

Cannabis-involvement in emergency department visits for self-harm following medical and non-medical cannabis legalization.

AIMS: Cannabis use may increase the risk of self-harm, but whether legalization of cannabis is associated with changes in self-harm is unknown. We examined changes in cannabis-involvement in emergency department (ED) visits for self-harm after the liberalization of medical and legalization of non-medical cannabis in Canada. METHODS: This repeated cross-sectional study used health administrative data to identify all ED visits for self-harm in individuals aged ten and older between January 2010 and December 2021. We identified self-harm ED visits with a co-diagnosis of cannabis (main exposure) or alcohol (control condition) and examined changes in rates of visits over four distinct policy periods (pre-legalization, medical liberalization, non-medical legalization with restrictions, and non-medical commercialization/COVID-19) using Poisson models. RESULTS: The study included 158,912 individuals with one or more self-harm ED visits, of which 7810 (4.9 %) individuals had a co-diagnosis of cannabis use and 24,761 (15.6 %) had a co-diagnosis of alcohol use. Between 2010 and 2021, the annual rate of ED visits for self-harm injuries involving cannabis per 100,000 individuals increased by 90.1 % (3.6 in 2010 to 6.9 in 2021 per 100,000 individuals), while the annual rate of self-harm injuries involving alcohol decreased by 17.3 % (168.1 in 2010 to 153.1 in 2021 per 100,000 individuals). The entire increase in visits relative to pre-legalization occurred after medical liberalization (seasonally adjusted Risk Ratio [asRR] 1.71 95 % CI 1.09-1.15) with no further increases during the legalization with restrictions (asRR 1.77 95%CI 1.62-1.93) or commercialization/COVID-19 periods (asRR 1.63 95%CI 1.50-176). CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis-involvement in self-harm ED visits almost doubled over 12 years and may have accelerated after medical cannabis liberalization. While the results cannot determine whether cannabis is increasingly causing self-harm ED visits or whether cannabis is increasingly being used by individuals at high risk of self-harm, greater detection for cannabis use in this population and intervention may be indicated.