We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis using linked administrative health data to examine community-based primary care physicians and patients with eligible chronic conditions in BC during 2010–2013. Descriptive analyses of patients and physicians compared 3 groups: no incentives in any of the 4 years, incentives in all 4 years, and incentives in any of the study years. We used hierarchical logistic regression models to identify the patient- and physician-level characteristics associated with billing incentives.

Of 428 770 eligible patients, 142 475 (33.2%) had an incentive billed on their behalf in all 4 years, and 152 686 (35.6%) never did. Of 3936 physicians, 2625 (66.7%) billed at least 1 incentive in each of the 4 years, and 740 (18.8%) billed no incentives during the study period. The strongest predictors of having an incentive billed were the number of physician contacts a patient had (odds ratio [OR] for > 48 contacts 134.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 112.27–161.78) and whether a physician had a large number of patients in his or her practice for whom incentives were billed (OR 42.38 [95% CI 34.55–52.00] for quartile 4 v. quartile 1).

The findings suggest that primary care physicians bill incentives for patients based on whom they see most often rather than using a population health management approach to their practice.

Using linked health administrative databases, we identified all people in Ontario with diabetes as of Apr. 1, 2014. We identified First Nations people using the Indian Register. We looked at outcomes from Apr. 1, 2014, to Mar. 31, 2015. We determined the proportion of people with a regular family physician and their continuity of care with that physician. We also examined visits with specialists for diabetes care, hospital admissions for ambulatory-care–sensitive conditions, and emergency department visits for hypo- or hyperglycemia.

There were 1 380 529 people diagnosed with diabetes in Ontario as of Apr. 1, 2014, of whom 22 952 (1.7%) were First Nations people. First Nations people were less likely to have a regular family physician (85.3% v. 97.7%) and had lower continuity of care with that physician (mean score for continuity of care 74.6 v. 77.7) than other people in Ontario. They were also less likely to see specialists. First Nations people were more likely to be admitted to hospital for ambulatory-care–sensitive conditions (2.4% v. 1.2%) and to have an emergency department visit for hypo- or hyperglycemia (1.5% v. 0.8%). Disparities were particularly marked for those living in First Nations communities.

First Nations people with diabetes in Ontario had poorer access to and use of primary care than other people with diabetes in the province. These findings may help explain continued disparities in the rates of complications related to diabetes.

This retrospective population-based cohort study included all recognized pregnancies among Ontario residents aged 10–55 years with an estimated date of conception between Apr. 1, 2002, and Mar. 31, 2017. We defined peripregnancy emergency department use as any emergency department visit during pregnancy or within 42 days after pregnancy. We used modified Poisson regression with a robust error variance to generate relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the outcome of any peripregnancy emergency department use in association with maternal age, parity, residential income quintile, location of residence, immigrant status, antenatal care provider and number of comorbidities within 120 days before the clinical start of the pregnancy (expressed as total number of Aggregated Diagnosis Groups [ADGs] obtained with the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Group System). All RRs, except for number of comorbidities, were further adjusted for number of ADGs.

Peripregnancy emergency department use occurred in 1 075 991 (39.4%) of 2 728 236 recognized pregnancies, including 35.8% of livebirths, 47.3% of stillbirths, 73.7% of miscarriages and 84.8% of threatened abortions. A peripregnancy emergency department visit was more likely among women who were less than 25 years of age (adjusted RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.16–1.17), were nulliparous (adjusted RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.13–1.13), resided in the lowest income quintile area (adjusted RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.15–1.16) or in a rural area (adjusted RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.50–1.51), were Canadian-born (adjusted RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.22–1.23), were not seen by an obstetrician (adjusted RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.54–1.80) or had a greater number of ADGs. Emergency department use peaked in the first trimester and in the first week postpartum. Compared to women residing in urban areas, those residing in rural areas had an odds ratio (OR) of 3.44 (95% CI 3.39–3.49) for 3 or more emergency department visits. Women with 3–4 (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.97–2.01), 5–6 (OR 3.55, 95% CI 3.49–3.61), or 7 or more (OR 7.59, 95% CI 7.39–7.78) prepregnancy comorbidities were more likely to have 3 or more peripregnancy emergency department visits than were those with 2 or fewer comorbidities.

Peripregnancy emergency department use occurred in nearly 40% of pregnancies, notably in the first trimester and early in the postpartum period. Efforts are needed to streamline rapid access to ambulatory obstetric care during these peak periods, when women are susceptible to miscarriage or a complication after a livebirth.

We conducted a cross-sectional study among public drug plan beneficiaries residing in all provinces except Quebec. We used the Canadian Institute for Health Information’s National Prescription Drug Utilization Information System to identify all drugs dispensed to beneficiaries of public drug programs in 2016/17. We stratified the cohort into 2 groups: high–drug-cost beneficiaries (top 5% of beneficiaries based on annual costs) and other beneficiaries (remaining 95%). For each group, we reported total drug costs, prevalence of high-cost claims (> $1000), median number of drugs, proportion of beneficiaries aged 65 or more, the 10 most costly reimbursed medications and the 10 medications most commonly reimbursed. We reported estimates overall and by province.

High–drug-cost beneficiaries accounted for nearly half (46.5%) of annual spending, with an average annual spend of $14 610 per beneficiary, compared to $1570 among other beneficiaries. The median number of drugs dispensed was higher among high–drug-cost beneficiaries than among other beneficiaries (13 [interquartile range (IQR) 7–19] v. 8 [IQR 4–13]), and a much larger proportion of high–drug-cost beneficiaries than other beneficiaries received at least 1 high-cost claim (40.9% v. 0.6%). Long-term medications were the most commonly used medications for both groups, whereas biologics and antivirals were the most costly medications for high–drug-cost beneficiaries.

High–drug-cost beneficiaries were characterized by the use of expensive medications and polypharmacy relative to other beneficiaries. Interventions and policies to help reduce spending need to consider both of these factors.

We conducted a randomized trial in 3 primary care practices in Lethbridge, Alberta in 2017–2018. We recruited "patients at high risk" referred by the primary care doctor who required establishment or review of their Goals of Care Designation (GCD). Enrolled patients were randomly allocated to receive the Plan Well Guide, delivered by a trained facilitator, or usual care. Eight to 12 weeks after the intervention, a research assistant blinded to intervention assignment contacted the patients in both groups by telephone to do a final outcome assessment. The primary outcome was completion of GCD forms; secondary outcomes included decisional conflict scores and ratings of satisfaction.

A total of 123 patients (59 women [48.0%]; mean age 73.9 yr) were enrolled, 66 in the intervention arm and 57 in the usualcare arm; 119 patients completed the trial. After the intervention, GCD completion rates in the intervention and usual-care groups were 95.3% and 90.9%, respectively (risk difference [RD] 4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] –14% to 22%), and the rate of concordance between medical orders and expressed preferences on follow-up was 78% and 66%, respectively (RD 12%, 95% CI –7% to 30%). Significantly fewer patients in the intervention group than in the usual-care group had written medical orders for intensive care unit care and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (22 [34%] v. 33 [60%], RD –26%, 95% CI –42% to –8%). Patients in the intervention group had lower decisional conflict scores than those in the usual-care group (mean 30.9 v. 43.1, adjusted mean difference –12.0, 95% CI –23.2 to –0.8). Physicians considered patients in the intervention group to have lower decisional conflict than those in the usual-care group, although not significantly so (mean score 10.4 v. 14.9, adjusted mean difference –4.7, 95% CI –9.9 to 0.4) and spent less time with the former (mean 9.7 v. 13.2 min, adjusted mean difference –3.5, 95% CI –5.5 to –1.5 min).

The decision-support intervention did not increase GCD completion rates but did seem to improve some aspects of decisional quality while reducing the physician’s time to accomplish GCD decisions. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01297946

In collaboration with the Chiefs of Ontario, we carried out a population-based study to identify cohorts of First Nations people and other people with diabetes in Ontario from 1995/96 to 2014/15. We used linked health administrative databases to evaluate rates of eye examination (2005/06–2014/15) and severe diabetic retinopathy treatment and compared them between the 2 populations, and between First Nations people living in and outside of First Nations communities.

We identified 23 013 First Nations people and 1 364 222 other people diagnosed with diabetes from 1995/96 to 2014/15, of whom 49.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 48.9%–50.7%) and 53.8% (95% CI 53.7%–54.0%), respectively, received an eye examination in 2014/15. Eye examination rates were similar for First Nations people regardless of whether they lived in or outside a First Nations community. First Nations people developed severe diabetic retinopathy at a faster rate than other people (hazard ratio 1.19, 95% CI 1.02–1.38). The gap between First Nations people and other people in the proportion requiring therapy for severe diabetic retinopathy was especially prominent among younger people. There were no significant differences in rates of diabetic retinopathy treatment in First Nations people stratified by place of residence.

Eye examination rates remain suboptimal among people with diabetes in Ontario and were lower among First Nations people. This is particularly concerning in light of our other findings showing an increased risk of requiring treatment for advanced diabetic retinopathy and the accelerated rate of diabetic retinopathy progression among First Nations people with diabetes.

We compared the prevalence of and risk factors for RTI-related death in singletons aged 28 days to 4 years across Ontario (Canada), Scotland and England (jurisdictions with universal health care) using linked administrative data for 2003–2013. We estimated rates of RTI-related mortality for children living in deprived areas and those born to teenage girls; we estimated both crude rates and those adjusted for health status at birth.

A total of 1 299 240 (Ontario), 547 556 (Scotland) and 3 910 401 (England) children were included in the study. Across all jurisdictions, children born in the most deprived areas experienced the highest rates of RTI-related mortality. After adjustment for high-risk chronic conditions and prematurity, we observed differences in mortality according to area-level deprivation in Ontario and England but not in Scotland. In Ontario, teenage motherhood was also an independent risk factor for RTI-related mortality.

Socioeconomic disparities played a substantial role in child mortality related to RTI in all 3 jurisdictions. Context-specific investigations around the mechanisms of this increased risk and development of programs to address socioeconomic disparities are needed.

We conducted a 5-hour deliberative dialogue workshop in April 2019 in Montréal as the final phase of a mixed-methods study investigating comprehensive care for women living with HIV. The study drew on data from the Canadian HIV Women’s Sexual and Reproductive Health Cohort Study (CHIWOS). Recruitment was guided by a purposive maximum-variation sampling strategy to ensure an appropriate mix of participants and was facilitated by our existing CHIWOS networks. Participants included patients (women living with HIV) and HIV care providers (doctors, nurses, pharmacists). The workshop was facilitated professionally and included a synthesis of the evidence, small- and large-group deliberations, and voting on care improvements.

Eight patients and 8 HIV care providers participated. Drawing on identified care priorities, the participants identified 4 relatively rapid care improvements and 3 longer-term improvements. The rapid care improvements included delegating medical acts to members of multidisciplinary care teams; greater involvement of HIV community members within care settings and health care decision-making; creating a women’s health information booklet; and increasing HIV education among all health care providers and raising awareness of women’s care needs beyond HIV-specific care among HIV care providers. The longer-term care improvements included advocating for complete financial coverage of antiretroviral therapy within the government-sponsored Medicare program, facilitating access to allied care providers (e.g., physiotherapists and psychologists) and launching a population-wide campaign to increase awareness about the Undetectable = Untransmittable (U=U) initiative and other HIV advances.

The deliberative dialogue workshop yielded evidence-based, stakeholder-driven recommendations to improve the comprehensive care of women living with HIV in Quebec.

In this descriptive study, all Canadian medical schools (n = 17) were invited to provide data at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels (2007/08–2015/16 and 2007/08–2017/18, respectively). Information collected included the number, type and length of palliative care clinical rotations offered and the total number of medical trainees or residents enrolled at each school.

All 17 Canadian medical schools responded to the request for information. At the undergraduate level, palliative care clinical rotations were not offered in 2 schools, mandatory in 2 and optional in 13. Three schools that offered optional rotations were unable to provide complete data and were therefore excluded from further analyses. In 2015/16, only 29.7% of undergraduate medical students completed palliative care clinical rotations, yet this was a significant improvement compared to 2011/12 (13.6%, p = 0.02). At the postgraduate level, on average, 57.9% of family medicine trainees completed such rotations between 2007/08 and 2016/17. During the same period, palliative care clinical rotations were completed by trainees in specialty or subspecialty programs in anesthesiology (34.2%), geriatric medicine (64.4%), internal medicine (30.9%), neurology (28.2%) and psychiatry (64.5%).

Between 2008 and 2018, a large proportion of Canadian medical trainees graduated without the benefit of a clinical rotation in palliative care. Without dedicated clinical exposure to palliative care, many physicians will enter practice without vital palliative care competencies.

This was a descriptive qualitative, interview-based study. Physicians who had previously participated in the Telemedicine Interprofessional Model of Practice for Aging and Complex Treatments (Telemedicine IMPACT Plus [TIP] Program) were invited to participate and asked to describe their experience of being a member of the program. Interviews were conducted from March to May 2016. We conducted an iterative and interpretive process using both individual and team analysis to identify themes.

There were 15 participants, 9 specialists and 6 family physicians. Three themes emerged in the analysis: creating new perspectives on care for patients with multimorbidity by sharing knowledge, skills and attitudes; the shift from a consultant model to an interprofessional team model (allowing a window into the community, extending discussions beyond the medical model and focusing on the patient’s health in context); and opportunities for learners, including learning about interprofessional collaboration and gaining exposure to a real-world model for caring for people with multimorbidity in outpatient settings.

Family physicians and specialists participating in a TIP Program believed the program improved their knowledge and skills, while also serving as an effective care delivery strategy. The findings also support that learners require more exposure to nontraditional consultant models in order to care for patients with multimorbidity effectively.

We conducted a retrospective observational study of the sex of staff and resident physician recipients of resident-selected awards from provincial and national residency associations using data from 2000–2018. We classified awards into professionalism, advocacy and wellness awards, and education and teaching awards based on award names and descriptions, and compared the proportion of male and female recipients in these categories.

We identified 314 recipients of staff physician awards and 129 recipients of resident physician awards. Male staff and resident physicians had higher odds of receiving awards than their female counterparts (odds ratio [OR] 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13–1.89 and OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.18–2.46, respectively). There was a reduction in the odds of male residents’ receiving an award over the study period (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90–0.98). Male physicians had higher odds of receiving education and teaching awards than female physicians as staff but not as residents (OR 3.21, 95% CI 1.72–5.95 and OR 1.96, 95% CI 0.84–4.60, respectively).

Male staff and resident physicians in Canada had higher odds of receiving awards from provincial and national residency associations between 2000 and 2018 than their female counterparts. Given this disparity, it would be prudent for organizations that distribute awards to physicians, residents and medical students to examine their nomination criteria and processes for potential bias.