The Impact of Team-Based Primary Care on Guideline-Recommended Disease Screening

Building High-Performing Primary Care Systems: After a Decade of Policy Change, Is Canada "Walking the Talk?"

Policy Points Considerable investments have been made to build high-performing primary care systems in Canada. However, little is known about the extent to which change has occurred over the last decade with implementing programs and policies across all 13 provincial and territorial jurisdictions. There is significant variation in the degree of implementation of structural features of high-performing primary care systems across Canada. This study provides evidence on the state of primary care reform in Canada and offers insights into the opportunities based on changes that governments elsewhere have made to advance primary care transformation.

CONTEXT

Despite significant investments to transform primary care, Canada lags behind its peers in providing timely access to regular doctors or places of care, timely access to care, developing interprofessional teams, and communication across health care settings. This study examines changes over the last decade (2012 to 2021) in policies across 13 provincial and territorial jurisdictions that address the structural features of high-performing primary care systems.

METHODS

A multiple comparative case study approach was used to explore changes in primary care delivery across 13 Canadian jurisdictions. Each case consisted of (1) qualitative interviews with academics, provincial health care leaders, and health care professionals and (2) a literature review of policies and innovations. Data for each case were thematically analyzed within and across cases, using 12 structural features of high-performing primary care systems to describe each case and assess changes over time.

FINDINGS

The most significant changes include adopting electronic medical records, investments in quality improvement training and support, and developing interprofessional teams. Progress was more limited in implementing primary care governance mechanisms, system coordination, patient enrollment, and payment models. The rate of change was slowest for patient engagement, leadership development, performance measurement, research capacity, and systematic evaluation of innovation.

CONCLUSIONS

Progress toward building high-performing primary care systems in Canada has been slow and variable, with limited change in the organization and delivery of primary care. Canada's experience can inform innovation internationally by demonstrating how preexisting policy legacies constrain the possibilities for widespread primary care reform, with progress less pronounced in the attributes that impact physician autonomy. To accelerate primary care transformation in Canada and abroad, a national strategy and performance measurement framework is needed based on meaningful engagement of patients and other stakeholders. This must be accompanied by targeted funding investments and building strong data infrastructure for performance measurement to support rigorous research.

Impact of remuneration, extrinsic and intrinsic incentives on interprofessional primary care teams: protocol for a rapid scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Interprofessional teams and funding and payment provider arrangements are key attributes of high-performing primary care. Several Canadian jurisdictions have introduced team-based models with different payment models. Despite these investments, the evidence of impact is mixed. This has raised questions about whether team-based primary care models are being implemented to facilitate team collaboration and effectiveness. Thus, we present a protocol for a rapid scoping review to systematically map, synthesise and summarise the existing literature on the impact of provider remuneration mechanisms and extrinsic and intrinsic incentives in team-based primary care. This review will answer three research questions: (1) What is the impact of provider remuneration models on team, patient, provider and system outcomes in primary care?; (2) What extrinsic and intrinsic incentives have been used in interprofessional primary care teams?; and (3) What is the impact of extrinsic and intrinsic team-based incentives on team, patient, provider and system outcomes?

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a rapid scoping review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews guidelines. We will search electronic databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit) and grey literature sources (Google Scholar, Google). This review will consider all empirical studies and full-text English-language articles published between 2000 and 2022. Reviewers will independently perform the literature search, data extraction and synthesis of included studies. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool will be used to appraise the quality of evidence. The literature will be synthesised, summarised and mapped to themes that answer the research question of this review.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required. Findings from this study will be written for publication in an open-access peer-review journal and presented at national and international conferences. Knowledge users are part of the research team and will assist with disseminating findings to the public, clinicians, funders and professional associations.

Team-based primary care practice and physician's services: Evidence from Family Health Teams in Ontario, Canada

Team-based primary care offers a wide range of health services to patients by using interdisciplinary health care providers committed to delivering comprehensive, coordinated and high-quality care through team collaboration. Ontario's Family Health Team (FHT), the largest team-based practice model in Canada, was introduced to improve access to and effectiveness of primary health care services, and was available primarily for physicians paid under blended capitation models (Family Health Organizations and Family Health Networks). Using health administrative data on physicians practicing under blended capitation models in Ontario between 2006 and 2015, we study the impact of switching from non-FHT to FHTs on the production of capitated comprehensive care services, after-hours services, non-incentivized services, and services provided to non-enrolled patients by family physicians. We find that when in FHTs, physicians increase the production of total services and non-incentivized services by 26% and 5% per annum and reduce capitated comprehensive care services by 3.2% per annum. When in FHTs, physicians also see and enroll more patients relative to those practicing in non-FHTs. We find evidence of improved access to physician's services under team-based primary care, but switching to FHTs has no effect on the production of after-hours services and services provided to non-enrolled patients.