CMAJ open最新文献

Background: The social isolation and safety measures imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic differentially burdened pregnant and postpartum people, disrupting health care and social support systems. We sought to understand the experiences of people navigating pre- and postnatal care, from pregnancy through to the early postpartum period, during the pandemic.

Methods: In this qualitative investigation, we conducted semistructured interviews with people residing in British Columbia and Alberta, Canada, during the second half of pregnancy and again at 4-6 weeks' post partum between June 2020 and July 2021. Interviews were conducted remotely (via Zoom or telephone) and focused on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pre- and postnatal care, birth and labour planning, and the birthing experience. We used content and thematic analysis to analyze the data, and checked patterns using NVivo.

Results: We interviewed 19 people during the second half of pregnancy and 18 of these people at 4-6 weeks' post partum. We identified 7 themes/subthemes describing how the COVID-19 pandemic affected their experiences: disrupted support systems, isolation, disrupted health care experiences (pre- and postnatal care, and labour and birth/hospital protocols), violated social norms (including typical rituals such as baby showers), impact on mental health and unexpected benefits (such as a no-visitor policy in hospitals after the birth, which provided a quiet period to bond with baby).

Interpretation: Pregnant and postpartum people were uniquely vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic and would have benefited from increased access to support in both health care and social settings. Future work should investigate maternal and infant/child functioning and behaviour to assess the long-term impact of the pandemic on Canadian families and developing children, with an aim to increase support where necessary.

Background: Omicron is the current predominant variant of concern of SARS-CoV-2. We hypothesized that vaccination alters outcomes of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the Omicron wave and that these patients have different characteristics and outcomes than in previous waves.

Methods: This is a substudy of the Host Response Mediators in Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection (ARBs CORONA I) trial, which included adults admitted to hospital with acute COVID-19 up to July 2022 from 9 hospitals in British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec. We excluded emergency department visits without hospital admission, readmissions and admissions for another reason. Using adjusted regression analysis, we compared mortality and organ dysfunction between vaccinated (≥ 2 doses) and unvaccinated patients during the Omicron wave, as well as between all patients in the Omicron and first 3 waves of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results: During the Omicron wave, 28-day mortality was significantly lower in vaccinated (n = 19/237) than unvaccinated hospitalized patients (n = 12/127) (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-0.89); vaccinated patients had lower risk of admission to the intensive care unit, invasive ventilation and acute respiratory distress syndrome and shorter hospital length of stay. Patients hospitalized during the Omicron wave had more comorbidities than in previous waves, and lower 28-day mortality than in waves 1 and 2 (adjusted OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.24-0.59; and 0.42, 95% CI 0.26-0.65) but not wave 3 (adjusted OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.43-1.51) and had less organ dysfunction than in the first 2 waves.

Interpretation: Patients who were at least double vaccinated had lower mortality than unvaccinated patients hospitalized during the Omicron wave. Patients hospitalized during the Omicron wave had more chronic disease and lower mortality than in the first 2 waves, but not wave 3. Changes in vaccination, treatments and predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant may have decreased mortality in patients hospitalized during the Omicron wave.

Background: European studies have shown that nonfasting remnant cholesterol can be a strong predictor of cardiovascular disease risk and may contribute to identifying residual risk; however, Canadian data are lacking on nonfasting remnant cholesterol. In this study, we aimed to determine the relation between nonfasting remnant cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and cardiovascular disease among people in Alberta.

Methods: In this retrospective analysis, we used data from Alberta's Tomorrow Project, a large prospective cohort that enrolled Albertans aged 35-69 years (2000-2015). Participants with consent to data linkage, with complete nonfasting lipid data and without existing cardiovascular disease were included. The nonfasting remnant cholesterol and LDL cholesterol relation with a composite cardiovascular disease outcome of major incident cardiovascular diagnoses, ascertained by linking to Alberta Health databases, was determined by multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for age, sex, statin use, comorbidities, and LDL cholesterol or remnant cholesterol.

Results: The final sample of 13 988 participants was 69.4% female, and the mean age was 61.8 (standard deviation [SD] 9.7) years. Follow-up time was approximately 15 years. Mean remnant cholesterol was significantly higher among individuals with versus without cardiovascular disease (0.87 [SD 0.40] mmol/L v. 0.78 [SD 0.38] mmol/L, standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.24), and mean LDL cholesterol was significantly lower (2.69 [SD 0.93] mmol/L v. 2.88 [SD 0.84] mmol/L, SMD 0.21). The odds of incident composite cardiovascular disease were significantly increased per mmol/L increase in remnant cholesterol (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27-1.73) but significantly decreased per mmol/L increase in LDL cholesterol (adjusted OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.68-0.79).

Interpretation: In this large Albertan cohort of predominantly older females, nonfasting remnant cholesterol had a positive relation with cardiovascular disease incidence, whereas LDL cholesterol did not. These findings support the clinical utility of measuring non-fasting remnant cholesterol to detect cardiovascular disease risk.

Background: The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (task force) develops evidence-based preventive health care guidelines and knowledge translation (KT) tools to facilitate guideline dissemination and implementation. We aimed to determine practitioners' awareness of task force guidelines and KT tools and explore barriers and facilitators to their use.

Methods: The task force's KT team completed annual evaluations using surveys and interviews with primary care providers in Canada from 2014 to 2020, to assess practitioners' awareness and determinants of use of task force guidelines and tools. We transcribed interviews verbatim and double-coded them using a framework analysis approach.

Results: A total of 1284 primary care practitioners completed surveys and 183 participated in interviews. On average, 79.9% of participants were aware of the task force's 7 cancer screening guidelines, 36.2% were aware of the other 6 screening guidelines and 18.6% were aware of the 3 lifestyle or prevention guidelines. Participants identified 13 barriers and 7 facilitators to guideline and KT tool implementation; these were consistent over time. Participants identified strategies at the public and patient, provider and health systems levels to improve uptake of guidelines.

Interpretation: Canadian primary care practitioners were more aware of task force cancer screening guidelines than its other preventive health guidelines. Over the 6-year period, participants consistently reported barriers to guideline uptake, including misalignment with patient preferences and other provincial or specialty guideline organizations. Further evaluations will assess tailored strategies to address the barriers identified.

Background: A disproportionate number of COVID-19-related deaths in Canada occurred in long-term care homes, affecting residents, families and staff alike. This study explored the experiences of long-term care clinicians with respect to providing palliative and end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: We used a qualitative research approach. Long-term care physicians and nurse practitioners (NPs) in Ontario, Canada, participated in semistructured interviews between August and September of 2021. Interviews were undertaken virtually, and results were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results: Twelve clinicians (7 physicians and 5 NPs) were interviewed. We identified 5 themes, each with several subthemes: providing a palliative approach to care, increased work demands and changing roles, communication and collaboration, impact of isolation and visitation restrictions, and impact on the providers' personal lives. Clinicians described facing several concurrent challenges, including the uncertainty of COVID-19 illness, staffing and supply shortages, witnessing many deaths, and distress caused by isolation. These resulted in burnout and feelings of moral distress. Previous training and integration of the palliative care approach in the long-term care home, access to resources, increased communication and interprofessional collaboration, and strong leadership mitigated the impact and led to improved palliative care and a sense of pride while facing these challenges.

Interpretation: The pandemic had a considerable impact on clinicians caring for residents in long-term care homes at the end of life. It is important to address these lived experiences and use the lessons learned to identify strategies to improve palliative care in long-term care homes and reduce the impact of future pandemics with respect to palliative care.

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide essential evidence to inform practice, but the many necessary steps result in lengthy times to initiation, which is problematic in the case of rapidly emerging infections such as COVID-19. This study aimed to describe the start-up timelines for the Canadian Treatments for COVID-19 (CATCO) RCT.

Methods: We surveyed hospitals participating in CATCO and ethics submission sites using a structured data abstraction form. We measured durations from protocol receipt to site activation and to first patient enrolment, as well as durations of administrative processes, including research ethics board (REB) approval, contract execution and lead times between approvals to site activation.

Results: All 48 hospitals (26 academic, 22 community) and 4 ethics submission sites responded. The median time from protocol receipt to trial initiation was 111 days (interquartile range [IQR] 39-189 d, range 15-412 d). The median time between protocol receipt and REB submission was 41 days (IQR 10-56 d, range 4-195 d), from REB submission to approval, 4.5 days (IQR 1-12 d, range 0-169 d), from REB approval to site activation, 35 days (IQR 22-103 d, range 0-169 d), from protocol receipt to contract submission, 42 days (IQR 20-51 d, range 4-237 d), from contract submission to full contract execution, 24 days (IQR 15-58 d, range 5-164 d) and from contract execution to site activation, 10 days (IQR 6-27 d, range 0-216 d). Processes took longer in community hospitals than in academic hospitals.

Interpretation: The time required to initiate RCTs in Canada was lengthy and varied among sites. Adoption of template clinical trial agreements, greater harmonization or central coordination of ethics submissions, and long-term funding of platform trials that engage academic and community hospitals are potential solutions to improve trial start-up efficiency.

Background: Prognostic information at the time of hospital discharge can help guide goals-of-care discussions for future care. We sought to assess the association between the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS), which may highlight patients' risk of adverse outcomes at the time of hospital discharge, and in-hospital death among patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) within 12 months of a previous hospital discharge.

Methods: We conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study that included patients aged 75 years or older admitted at least twice over a 12-month period to the general medicine service at 7 academic centres and large community-based teaching hospitals in Toronto and Mississauga, Ontario, Canada, from Apr. 1, 2010, to Dec. 31, 2019. The HFRS (categorized as low, moderate or high frailty risk) was calculated at the time of discharge from the first hospital admission. Outcomes included ICU admission and death during the second hospital admission.

Results: The cohort included 22 178 patients, of whom 1767 (8.0%) were categorized as having high frailty risk, 9464 (42.7%) as having moderate frailty risk, and 10 947 (49.4%) as having low frailty risk. One hundred patients (5.7%) with high frailty risk were admitted to the ICU, compared to 566 (6.0%) of those with moderate risk and 790 (7.2%) of those with low risk. After adjustment for age, sex, hospital, day of admission, time of admission and Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score, the odds of ICU admission were not significantly different for patients with high (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78 to 1.23) or moderate (adjusted OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.09) frailty risk compared to those with low frailty risk. Among patients admitted to the ICU, 75 (75.0%) of those with high frailty risk died, compared to 317 (56.0%) of those with moderate risk and 416 (52.7%) of those with low risk. After multivariable adjustment, the risk of death after ICU admission was higher for patients with high frailty risk than for those with low frailty risk (adjusted OR 2.86, 95% CI 1.77 to 4.77).

Interpretation: Among patients readmitted to hospital within 12 months, patients with high frailty risk were similarly likely as those with lower frailty risk to be admitted to the ICU but were more likely to die if admitted to ICU. The HFRS at hospital discharge can inform prognosis, which can help guide discussions for preferences for ICU care during future hospital stays.

Background: Peer support can address the informational and emotional needs of people living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and enable self-management. We aimed to identify preferences and priorities for content, format and processes of peer support delivery for patients with non-dialysis CKD and their loved ones.

Methods: Using a patient-oriented research approach, we conducted a half-day, virtual consensus workshop with stakeholder participants from across Canada, including patients, caregivers, peer mentors and clinicians. Using personas (fictional characters), participants discussed and voted on preferences for delivery of peer support across format, content and process categories. We analyzed transcripts from small- and large-group discussions inductively using content analysis.

Results: Twenty-one stakeholders, including 9 patients and 4 caregivers, participated in the workshop. In the voting exercise on format, participants prioritized peer mentor matching, programming for both patients and caregivers, and flexible scheduling. For content, participants prioritized informational and emotional support focus, and for process, they prioritized leveraging kidney care programs and alternative sources (e.g., social media) for promotion and referral. Analysis of workshop transcripts complemented prioritization results and emphasized tailoring of peer support delivery to accommodate the diversity of people living with CKD and their support needs. This concept was elaborated in 3 themes, namely alignment of program features with needs, inclusive peer support options and multiple access points.

Interpretation: We identified preferences for peer support delivery for people living with CKD and underscore the importance of tailored, flexible programming in this context. Findings could be used to develop, adapt or study CKD-focused peer support interventions.

Background: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV is underutilized. We aimed to identify barriers to use of PrEP and strategies that may facilitate its uptake.

Methods: Gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men, aged 19 years or older and living in Ontario and British Columbia, Canada, completed a cross-sectional survey in 2019-2020. Participants who met Canadian PrEP guideline criteria and were not already using PrEP identified relevant barriers and which strategies would make them more likely to start PrEP. We described the barriers and strategies separately for Ontario and BC.

Results: Of 1527 survey responses, 260 respondents who never used PrEP and met criteria for PrEP were included. In Ontario, the most common barriers were affordability (43%) and concern about adverse effects (42%). In BC, the most common reasons were concern about adverse effects (41%) and not feeling at high enough risk (36%). In Ontario, preferred strategies were short waiting time (63%), the health care provider informing about their HIV risk being higher than perceived (62%), and a written step-by-step guide (60%). In BC, strategies were short waiting time (68%), people speaking publicly about PrEP (68%), and the health care provider counselling about their HIV risk being higher than perceived (64%), adverse effects of PrEP (65%) and how well PrEP works (62%).

Interpretation: Concern about adverse effects and not self-identifying as having high risk for HIV were common barriers, and shorter waiting times may increase PrEP uptake. In Ontario, the findings suggested lack of affordability, whereas in BC, strategies involving health care providers were valued.

Background: Classroom-based education (CBE) is ubiquitous in postgraduate medical education (PGME), but to date no studies have synthesized the literature on the topic. We conducted a scoping review focusing on academic half days and noon conferences.

Methods: We searched 4 databases (MEDLINE [OVID], Embase [OVID], ERIC [EBSCO] and Web of Science) from inception to December 2021, performed reference and citation harvesting, and applied predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria to our screening. We used 2 frameworks for the analysis: "experiences, trajectories and reifications" and "description, justification and clarification."

Results: We included 90 studies, of which 55 focused on resident experiences, 29 on trajectories and 6 on reification. We classified 44 studies as "description," 38 as "justification" and 8 as "clarification." In the description studies, 12 compared academic half days with noon conferences, 23 described specific teaching topics, and 9 focused on resources needed for CBE. Justification studies examined the effects of CBE on outcomes, such as examination scores (17) and use of teaching strategies in team-based learning, principles of adult learning and e-learning (15). Of the 8 clarification studies, topics included the role of CBE in PGME, stakeholder perspectives and transfer of knowledge between classroom and workplace.

Interpretation: Much of the existing literature is either a description of various aspects of CBE or justification of particular teaching strategies. Few studies exist on how and why CBE works; future studies should aim to clarify how CBE facilitates resident learning within the sociocultural framework of PGME.