Improving prevention in primary care: evaluating the effectiveness of outreach facilitation

BACKGROUND: Out reach facilitation is designed to promote uptake of evidence-based guidelines. There is evidence indicating that outreach facilitation can be effective in improving implementation of preventive care in GPs' offices. In this trial, we test a modified version of an outreach facilitation intervention. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether a comprehensive preventive intervention program using outreach facilitators improves preventive care delivery. DESIGN: Match-paired, cluster-randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Fee-for-service primary care practices in Eastern Ontario, Canada, at a time of physician shortage. PARTICIPANTS: Volunteer sample of 54 primary care practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean difference between trial arms in practices' delivery of preventive manoeuvres, measured by preventive performance indices estimated from chart reviews and patient survey data. RESULTS: No difference was detected between the trial's arms for the primary outcome's overall prevention index [2.0%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.2 to 7.3; P = 0.44]. A small significant difference between the arms was detected for the secondary outcome's overall prevention index (2.8%; 95% CI 0.7-4.8; P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: In contrast to similar facilitation trials, this outreach facilitation program did not produce improvements in the delivery of preventive care. This lack of effect may be due to differences in the intervention and context, or the practice's limited capacity to change. Our intervention simultaneously facilitated a high number of manoeuvres, blinded facilitators and physicians to the targeted tests and had a relatively short intervention period and large number of practices assigned per facilitator. Changes in the primary care service model in Ontario at the time of the trial could have also washed out the intervention effect.     

A case study of a Canadian homelessness intervention programme for elderly people

The aims of this study were to describe: (1) how the Homelessness Intervention Programme addressed the needs of elderly people who were homeless or at risk of homelessness; and (2) the factors that influenced the ability of the programme to address client needs. The programme was offered by a multi-service non-profit agency serving low-income families and individuals in an urban neighbourhood in Ontario, Canada. Using a case study approach, we conducted 10 individual interviews and three focus groups with programme clients, programme providers, other service providers and programme funders. Programme providers completed intake forms, monthly follow-up forms and exit/housing change forms for each of the 129 clients served by the programme over a 28-month period. Approximately equal proportions of clients were between 54 years old and 65 years old (47%) and over 65 years (53%). There were equal proportions of women and men. In addition to being homeless or marginally housed, clients lived with multiple and complex issues including chronic illness, mental illness and substance abuse. Through the facilitation of continuity of care, the programme was able to meet the needs of this vulnerable group of elderly people. Three types of continuity of care were facilitated: relational, informational and management continuity. The study confirmed the value of a continuous caring relationship with an identified provider and the delivery of a seamless service through coordination, integration and information sharing between different providers. Study findings also highlighted the broader systemic factors that acted as barriers to the programme and its ability to meet the needs of elderly people. These factors included limited housing options available; limited income supports; and lack of coordinated, accessible community health and support services. The central findings stress the importance of continuity of care as a guiding concept for intervention programmes for homeless and marginally housed elderly people.     

Recognition of the critically ill patient and escalation of therapy

Critical illness often involves multiple organ failures and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In the vast majority of patients, there is a recognizable period of physiological deterioration which heralds the development of organ failure and critical illness. Despite efforts to improve the detection and management of critical illness, signs of deterioration are often missed and decisions to move patients to critical care units are delayed. Standardized approaches which implement an effective ‘chain of response’ are now utilized worldwide. They focus on attempting to reduce the incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) such as in-hospital cardiac arrest and unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission using preventative measures. These systems should include: accurate recording and documentation of vital signs, recognition and interpretation of abnormal values, rapid bedside patient assessment by trained teams and appropriate interventions. Early warning systems (EWS) are an important part of this and can help identify patients at risk of deterioration and SAEs. Assessment of the critically ill patient should be undertaken by an appropriately trained clinician and follow a structured ABCDE (airway, breathing, circulation, disability and exposure) format. This facilitates correction of life-threatening problems by priority and provides a standardized approach between professionals. Lastly, timely support and input from members of the critical care team are vital to ensure optimal outcomes for critically ill patients.     

Cups for COVID: rapid implementation of a harm reduction initiative to support populations experiencing homelessness during the COVID-19 pandemic

SettingAs of June 10, 2020, 37 people experiencing homelessness or unstable housing in Calgary, Alberta, had developed lab-confirmed COVID-19. Spread occurred despite standard outbreak controls at affected shelter and supportive housing sites. Among these 37 cases, drink sharing was frequently identified as a modifiable mode of possible transmission. We collaborated with emergency shelters, a supportive housing site, and street and encampment outreach groups, using mixed service delivery by health staff, non-profits, and peers with lived experience with homelessness.InterventionTo empower individuals to decrease COVID-19 transmission using a harm reduction approach, we provided disposable paper cups to service providers for distribution to clients. Service providers tracked the number of cups distributed. To assess effectiveness, we interviewed staff and peers who distributed the cups.OutcomesCup distribution was highest among populations with higher rates of alcohol use, and the intervention was well received by people who drink alcohol regularly, providing unique opportunities to promote COVID-19 awareness and safer drinking practices. Providers to these populations reported enthusiastic client engagement and repeat requests for cups for safer drinking. Intervention usefulness was limited in contexts with low alcohol consumption and in the absence of paired COVID-19 education. Provider reports suggest appropriate disposal of these cups after use.ImplicationsDisposable cups are a novel, rapidly implementable, low-cost harm reduction tool to empower people experiencing homelessness to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission due to drink sharing, ideally as part of a larger harm reduction and community education strategy.