RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Poverty has a significant influence on health. Efforts to optimize income and reduce poverty could make a difference to the lives of patients and their families. Routine screening for poverty in primary care is an important first step but rarely occurs in Canada. We aimed to implement a targeted screening and referral process in a large, distributed primary care team in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The main outcome was the proportion of targeted patients screened. METHODS: This implementation evaluation was conducted with a large community-based primary care team in north Toronto. The primary care team serves relatively wealthy neighborhoods with pockets of poverty. Physicians were invited to participate. We implemented targeted screening by combining census information on neighborhood-level deprivation with postal codes in patient records. For physicians agreeing to participate, we added prompts to screen for poverty to the charts of adult patients living in the most deprived areas. Standardized electronic medical record templates recommended a referral to a team case worker for income optimization, for those patients screening positive. We recorded the number and percentages of participants at each stage, from screening to receiving advice on income optimization. RESULTS: 128 targeted patients with at least one visit (25%) were screened. The primary care team included 86 physicians distributed across 19 clinical locations. Thirty-four physicians (39%) participated. Their practices provided care for 27,290 patients aged 18 or older; 852 patients (3%) were found to be living in the most deprived neighborhoods. 509 (60%) had at least one office visit over the 6 months of follow up. 25 patients (20%) screened positive for poverty, and 13 (52%) were referred. Eight patients (62% of those referred) were ultimately seen by a caseworker for income optimization. CONCLUSIONS: We implemented a targeted poverty screening program combined with resources to optimize income for patients in a large, distributed community-based primary care team. Screening was feasible; however, only a small number of patients were linked to the intervention Further efforts to scale and spread screening and mitigation of poverty are warranted; these should include broadening the targeted population beyond those living in the most deprived areas.
Asunto(s)
Pobreza , Atención Primaria de Salud , Estudios de Factibilidad , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo , OntarioRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: More than 90% of antibiotics are prescribed in primary care, but 50% may be unnecessary. Reducing unnecessary antibiotic overuse is needed to limit antimicrobial resistance. We conducted a pragmatic trial of a primary care provider-focused antimicrobial stewardship intervention to reduce antibiotic prescriptions in primary care. METHODS: Primary care practitioners from six primary care clinics in Toronto, Ontario were assigned to intervention or control groups to evaluate the effectiveness of a multi-faceted intervention for reducing antibiotic prescriptions to adults with respiratory and urinary tract infections. The intervention included provider education, clinical decision aids, and audit and feedback of antibiotic prescribing. The primary outcome was total antibiotic prescriptions for these infections. Secondary outcomes were delayed prescriptions, prescriptions longer than 7 days, recommended antibiotic use, and outcomes for individual infections. Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate treatment effects, adjusting for clustering by clinic and baseline differences. RESULTS: There were 1682 encounters involving 54 primary care providers from January until May 31, 2019. In intervention clinics, the odds of any antibiotic prescription was reduced 22% (adjusted Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.78; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.64.0.96). The odds that a delay in filling a prescription was recommended was increased (adjusted OR=2.29; 95% CI=1.37, 3.83), while prescription durations greater than 7 days were reduced (adjusted OR=0.24; 95% CI=0.13, 0.43). Recommended antibiotic use was similar in control (85.4%) and intervention clinics (91.8%, p=0.37). CONCLUSIONS: A community-based, primary care provider-focused antimicrobial stewardship intervention was associated with a reduced likelihood of antibiotic prescriptions for respiratory and urinary infections, an increase in delayed prescriptions, and reduced prescription durations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03517215 ).
Asunto(s)
Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio , Adulto , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Ontario , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Atención Primaria de Salud , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Several new classes of glucose-lowering medications have been introduced in the past two decades. Some, such as sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2s), have evidence of improved cardiovascular outcomes, while others, such as dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4s), do not. It is therefore important to identify their uptake in order to find ways to support the use of more effective treatments. AIM: To analyse the uptake of these new classes among patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a retrospective repeated cross-sectional analysis in primary care. Rates of medication uptake in Australia, Canada, England, and Scotland were compared. METHOD: Primary care Electronic Medical Data on prescriptions (Canada, UK) and dispensing data (Australia) from 2012 to 2017 were used. Individuals aged ≥40 years on at least one glucose-lowering drug class in each year of interest were included, excluding those on insulin only. Proportions of patients in each nation, for each year, on each class of medication, and on combinations of classes were determined. RESULTS: Data from 238 619 patients were included in 2017. The proportion of patients on sulfonylureas (SUs) decreased in three out of four nations, while metformin decreased in Canada. Use of combinations of metformin and new drug classes increased in all nations, replacing combinations involving SUs. In 2017, more patients were on DPP4s (between 19.1% and 27.6%) than on SGLT2s (between 10.1% and 15.3%). CONCLUSION: New drugs are displacing SUs. However, despite evidence of better outcomes, the adoption of SGLT2s lagged behind DPP4s.