1
|
O'Brien N, Godard-Sebillotte C, Skerritt L, Dayle J, Carter A, Law S, Cox J, Andersson N, Kaida A, Loutfy M, de Pokomandy A. Assessing Gaps in Comprehensive HIV Care Across Settings of Care for Women Living with HIV in Canada. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2020; 29:1475-1485. [PMID: 32503397 DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2019.8121] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Women living with HIV in Canada experience barriers to comprehensive HIV care. We sought to describe care gaps across a typology of care. Methods: We analyzed baseline data from the Canadian HIV Women's Sexual and Reproductive Health Cohort Study (CHIWOS). A typology of care was characterized by primary HIV physician and care setting. Quality-of-care indicators included the following: Pap test, Pap test discussions, reproductive goal discussions, breast cancer screening, antiretroviral therapy (ART) use, adherence, HIV viral load, and viral load discussions. We defined comprehensive care with three indicators: Pap test, viral load, and either reproductive goal discussions over last 3 years or breast cancer screening, as indicated. Multivariable logistic regression analyses measured associations between care types and quality-of-care indicators. Results: Among women living with HIV accessing HIV care, 56.4% (657/1,164) experienced at least one gap in comprehensive care, most commonly reproductive goal discussions. Women accessed care from three types of care: (1) physicians (specialist and family physicians) in HIV clinics (71.6%); (2) specialists in non-HIV clinics (17.6%); and (3) family physicians in non-HIV clinics (10.8%), with 55.5%, 63.9%, and 50.8% gaps in comprehensive care, respectively. Type 3 care had double the odds of not being on ART: adjusted odds ratio (AOR 2.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-3.75), while Type 2 care had higher odds of not having discussed the importance of Pap tests (AOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.00-2.21). Discussion: Women continue to experience gaps in care, across types of care, indicating the need to evaluate and strengthen women-centered models of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadia O'Brien
- Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.,Chronic Viral Illness Service/Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
| | | | | | - Janice Dayle
- Chronic Viral Illness Service/Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
| | | | - Susan Law
- Institute for Better Health, Trillium Health Partners, Mississauga, Canada.,Institute for Health Policy, Management & Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Joseph Cox
- Chronic Viral Illness Service/Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
| | - Neil Andersson
- Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.,Centro de Investigación de Enfermedades Tropicales, Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero, Acapulco, Mexico
| | - Angela Kaida
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada
| | - Mona Loutfy
- Women's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Canada.,Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Alexandra de Pokomandy
- Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.,Chronic Viral Illness Service/Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abstract
Patients with stable chronic diseases such as diabetes and hypertension can be safely managed at the primary care level. Yet many such patients continue to follow-up with specialists at a higher expense with no added benefit. We introduce a new term to describe this phenomenon: scope inversion, defined as the provision of primary care by specialist physicians. We aimed to quantify the extent of scope inversion by conducting a systematic review. MEDLINE and five other databases were searched using the keywords 'specialist AND (routine OR primary) AND provi*' as well as other variations. The search was limited to human research without restrictions on language or date of publication. The inclusion criterion was studies on rates of the provision of routine primary care by specialist physicians. Thirteen observational studies met the inclusion criteria. A wide range of primary care involvement was observed among specialists, from 2.6% to 65% of clinic visits. Among children, 41.3% of visits with specialists were routine follow-ups for conditions such as allergic rhinitis and seborrhoeic dermatitis which could be managed in primary care. Data quality was moderate to low across the studies due to limitations of source data and varying definitions of primary care. Specialist physicians provide primary care to patients in a substantial proportion of clinic visits. Scope inversion is wasteful as it diverts patients to more expensive care without improving outcomes. A systems approach is needed to mitigate scope inversion and its harmful effects on healthcare service delivery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Muhammad Jawad Hashim
- Department of Family Medicine, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wilton J, Liu J, Sullivan A, Rachlis B, Marchand-Austin A, Giles M, Light L, Rank C, Burchell AN, Gardner S, Sider D, Gilbert M, Kroch AE. Trends in HIV care cascade engagement among diagnosed people living with HIV in Ontario, Canada: A retrospective, population-based cohort study. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0210096. [PMID: 30608962 PMCID: PMC6319701 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210096] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2018] [Accepted: 12/16/2018] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The HIV cascade is an important framework for assessing systems of care, but population-based assessment is lacking for most jurisdictions worldwide. We measured cascade indicators over time in a population-based cohort of diagnosed people living with HIV (PLWH) in Ontario, Canada. METHODS We created a retrospective cohort of diagnosed PLWH using a centralized laboratory database with HIV diagnostic and viral load (VL) test records linked at the individual-level. Individuals enter the cohort with record of a nominal HIV-positive diagnostic test or VL test, and remain unless administratively lost to follow-up (LTFU, >2 consecutive years with no VL test and no VL test in later years). We calculated the annual percent of diagnosed PLWH (cohort individuals not LTFU) between 2000 and 2015 who were in care (≥1 VL test), on ART (as documented on VL test requisition) or virally suppressed (<200 copies/ml). We also calculated time from diagnosis to linkage to care and viral suppression among individuals newly diagnosed with HIV. Analyses were stratified by sex and age. Upper/lower bounds were calculated using alternative indicator definitions. RESULTS The number of diagnosed PLWH increased from 8,859 (8,859-11,389) in 2000 to 16,110 (16,110-17,423) in 2015. Over this 16-year period, the percent of diagnosed PLWH who were: in care increased from 81% (63-81%) to 87% (81-87%), on ART increased from 55% (34-60%) to 81% (70-82%) and virally suppressed increased from 41% (23-46%) to 80% (67-81%). Between 2000 and 2014, the percent of newly diagnosed individuals who linked to care within three months of diagnosis or achieved viral suppression within six months of diagnosis increased from 67% to 82% and from 22% to 42%, respectively. Estimates were generally lower for females and younger individuals. DISCUSSION HIV cascade indicators among diagnosed PLWH in Ontario improved between 2000 and 2015, but gaps still remain-particularly for younger individuals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James Wilton
- Data and Applied Science Impact, Ontario HIV Treatment Network, Toronto, Canada
| | - Juan Liu
- Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Canada
| | | | - Beth Rachlis
- Data and Applied Science Impact, Ontario HIV Treatment Network, Toronto, Canada
- Division of Clinical Public Health, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
- Dignitas International, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Madison Giles
- Data and Applied Science Impact, Ontario HIV Treatment Network, Toronto, Canada
| | - Lucia Light
- Data and Applied Science Impact, Ontario HIV Treatment Network, Toronto, Canada
| | | | - Ann N. Burchell
- Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Canada
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Canada
- Department of Family and Community Medicine and Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Sandra Gardner
- Baycrest Health Sciences, Toronto, Canada
- Division of Biostatistics, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | | | - Mark Gilbert
- Clinical Prevention Services, British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Abigail E. Kroch
- Data and Applied Science Impact, Ontario HIV Treatment Network, Toronto, Canada
- Division of Clinical Public Health, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Brown CR, Hsu AT, Kendall C, Marshall D, Pereira J, Prentice M, Rice J, Seow HY, Smith GA, Ying I, Tanuseputro P. How are physicians delivering palliative care? A population-based retrospective cohort study describing the mix of generalist and specialist palliative care models in the last year of life. Palliat Med 2018; 32:1334-1343. [PMID: 29886804 PMCID: PMC6088516 DOI: 10.1177/0269216318780223] [Citation(s) in RCA: 59] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To enable coordinated palliative care delivery, all clinicians should have basic palliative care skill sets ('generalist palliative care'). Specialists should have skills for managing complex and difficult cases ('specialist palliative care') and co-exist to support generalists through consultation care and transfer of care. Little information exists about the actual mixes of generalist and specialist palliative care. AIM To describe the models of physician-based palliative care services delivered to patients in the last 12 months of life. DESIGN This is a population-based retrospective cohort study using linked health care administrative data. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS Physicians providing palliative care services to a decedent cohort in Ontario, Canada. The decedent cohort consisted of all adults (18+ years) who died in Ontario, Canada between April 2011 and March 2015 ( n = 361,951). RESULTS We describe four major models of palliative care services: (1) 53.0% of decedents received no physician-based palliative care, (2) 21.2% received only generalist palliative care, (3) 14.7% received consultation palliative care (i.e. care from both specialists and generalists), and (4) 11.1% received only specialist palliative care. Among physicians providing palliative care ( n = 11,006), 95.3% had a generalist palliative care focus and 4.7% a specialist focus; 74.2% were trained as family physicians. CONCLUSION We examined how often a coordinated palliative care model is delivered to a large decedent cohort and identified that few actually received consultation care. The majority of care, in both the palliative care generalist and specialist models, was delivered by family physicians. Further research should evaluate how different models of care impact patient outcomes and costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine Rl Brown
- 1 Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,2 Department of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Amy T Hsu
- 1 Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,3 Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,4 School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Claire Kendall
- 1 Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,2 Department of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,3 Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,5 Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Denise Marshall
- 6 Division of Palliative Care, Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Jose Pereira
- 5 Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Michelle Prentice
- 1 Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,3 Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Jill Rice
- 7 Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Hsien-Yeang Seow
- 8 Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Glenys A Smith
- 1 Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,3 Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Irene Ying
- 9 Department of Family and Community Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.,10 Division of Palliative Care, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Peter Tanuseputro
- 1 Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,3 Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,4 School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,5 Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,7 Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Rhodes CM, Chang Y, Regan S, Triant VA. Non-Communicable Disease Preventive Screening by HIV Care Model. PLoS One 2017; 12:e0169246. [PMID: 28060868 PMCID: PMC5218477 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169246] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2016] [Accepted: 12/14/2016] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Importance The Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) epidemic has evolved, with an increasing non-communicable disease (NCD) burden emerging and need for long-term management, yet there are limited data to help delineate the optimal care model to screen for NCDs for this patient population. Objective The primary aim was to compare rates of NCD preventive screening in persons living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) by type of HIV care model, focusing on metabolic/cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer screening. We hypothesized that primary care models that included generalists would have higher preventive screening rates. Design Prospective observational cohort study. Setting Partners HealthCare System (PHS) encompassing Brigham & Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital, and affiliated community health centers. Participants PLWHA age >18 engaged in active primary care at PHS. Exposure HIV care model categorized as infectious disease (ID) providers only, generalist providers only, or ID plus generalist providers. Main Outcome(s) and Measures(s) Odds of screening for metabolic/CVD outcomes including hypertension (HTN), obesity, hyperlipidemia (HL), and diabetes (DM) and cancer including colorectal cancer (CRC), cervical cancer, and breast cancer. Results In a cohort of 1565 PLWHA, distribution by HIV care model was 875 ID (56%), 90 generalists (6%), and 600 ID plus generalists (38%). Patients in the generalist group had lower odds of viral suppression but similar CD4 counts and ART exposure as compared with ID and ID plus generalist groups. In analyses adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical covariates and clustering within provider, there were no significant differences in metabolic/CVD or cancer screening rates among the three HIV care models. Conclusions There were no notable differences in metabolic/CVD or cancer screening rates by HIV care model after adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors. These findings suggest that HIV patients receive similar preventive health care for NCDs independent of HIV care model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corinne M. Rhodes
- Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| | - Yuchiao Chang
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Susan Regan
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Virginia A. Triant
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kendall CE, Manuel DG, Younger J, Hogg W, Glazier RH, Taljaard M. A population-based study evaluating family physicians' HIV experience and care of people living with HIV in Ontario. Ann Fam Med 2015; 13:436-45. [PMID: 26371264 PMCID: PMC4569451 DOI: 10.1370/afm.1822] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Greater physician experience managing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has been associated with better HIV-specific outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the HIV experience of a family physician modifies the association between the model of care delivery and the quality of care for people living with HIV. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed data from a population-based observational study conducted between April 1, 2009, and March 31, 2012. A total of 13,417 patients with HIV in Ontario were stratified into 5 possible patterns or models of care. We used multivariable hierarchical logistic regression analyses, adjusted for patient characteristics and pairwise comparisons, to evaluate the modification of the association between care model and indicators of quality of care (receipt of antiretroviral therapy, cancer screening, and health care use) by level of physician HIV experience (≤5, 6-49, ≥50 patients during study period). RESULTS The majority of HIV-positive patients (52.8%) saw family physicians exclusively for their care. Among these patients, receipt of antiretroviral therapy was significantly lower for those receiving care from family physicians with 5 or fewer patients and 6-49 patients compared with those with 50 or more patients (mean levels of adherence [95% CIs] were 0.34 [0.30-0.39] and 0.40 [0.34-0.45], respectively, vs 0.77 [0.74-0.80]). Patients' receipt of cancer screenings and health care use were unrelated to family physician HIV experience. CONCLUSIONS Family physician HIV experience was strongly associated with receipt of antiretroviral therapy by HIV-positive patients, especially among those seeing only family physicians for their care. Future work must determine the best models for integrating and delivering comprehensive HIV care among diverse populations and settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire E Kendall
- C.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Department of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Douglas G Manuel
- C.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Department of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jaime Younger
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - William Hogg
- C.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Department of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Richard H Glazier
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Centre for Research on Inner City Health, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Family and Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Monica Taljaard
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|