Cargando…
CUP study: protocol for a comparative analysis of centralised waitlist effectiveness, policies and innovations for connecting unattached patients to primary care providers
INTRODUCTION: Access to a primary care provider is a key component of high-functioning healthcare systems. In Canada, 15% of patients do not have a regular primary care provider and are classified as ‘unattached’. In an effort to link unattached patients with a provider, seven Canadian provinces imp...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8905966/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35256440 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049686 |
_version_ | 1784665302288564224 |
---|---|
author | Marshall, Emily Gard Breton, Mylaine Green, Michael Edwards, Lynn Ayn, Caitlyn Smithman, Mélanie Ann Ryan Carson, Shannon Ashcroft, Rachelle Bayoumi, Imaan Burge, Frederick Deslauriers, Véronique Lawson, Beverley Mathews, Maria McPherson, Charmaine Moritz, Lauren R Nesto, Sue Stock, David Wong, Sabrina T Andrew, Melissa |
author_facet | Marshall, Emily Gard Breton, Mylaine Green, Michael Edwards, Lynn Ayn, Caitlyn Smithman, Mélanie Ann Ryan Carson, Shannon Ashcroft, Rachelle Bayoumi, Imaan Burge, Frederick Deslauriers, Véronique Lawson, Beverley Mathews, Maria McPherson, Charmaine Moritz, Lauren R Nesto, Sue Stock, David Wong, Sabrina T Andrew, Melissa |
author_sort | Marshall, Emily Gard |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Access to a primary care provider is a key component of high-functioning healthcare systems. In Canada, 15% of patients do not have a regular primary care provider and are classified as ‘unattached’. In an effort to link unattached patients with a provider, seven Canadian provinces implemented centralised waitlists (CWLs). The effectiveness of CWLs in attaching patients to regular primary care providers is unknown. Factors influencing CWLs effectiveness, particularly across jurisdictional contexts, have yet to be confirmed. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed methods case study will be conducted across three Canadian provinces: Ontario, Québec and Nova Scotia. Quantitatively, CWL data will be linked to administrative and provider billing data to assess the rates of patient attachment over time and delay of attachment, stratified by demographics and compared with select indicators of health service utilisation. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with policymakers, patients, and primary care providers to elicit narratives regarding the administration, use, and access of CWLs. An analysis of policy documents will be used to identify contextual factors affecting CWL effectiveness. Stakeholder dialogues will be facilitated to uncover causal pathways and identify strategies for improving patient attachment to primary care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval to conduct this study has been granted in Ontario (Queens University Health Sciences and Affiliated Teaching Hospitals Research Ethics Board, file number 6028052; Western University Health Sciences Research Ethics Board, project 116591; University of Toronto Health Sciences Research Ethics Board, protocol number 40335), Québec (Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Estrie, project number 2020–3446) and Nova Scotia (Nova Scotia Health Research Ethics Board, file number 1024979). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8905966 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89059662022-03-25 CUP study: protocol for a comparative analysis of centralised waitlist effectiveness, policies and innovations for connecting unattached patients to primary care providers Marshall, Emily Gard Breton, Mylaine Green, Michael Edwards, Lynn Ayn, Caitlyn Smithman, Mélanie Ann Ryan Carson, Shannon Ashcroft, Rachelle Bayoumi, Imaan Burge, Frederick Deslauriers, Véronique Lawson, Beverley Mathews, Maria McPherson, Charmaine Moritz, Lauren R Nesto, Sue Stock, David Wong, Sabrina T Andrew, Melissa BMJ Open Health Services Research INTRODUCTION: Access to a primary care provider is a key component of high-functioning healthcare systems. In Canada, 15% of patients do not have a regular primary care provider and are classified as ‘unattached’. In an effort to link unattached patients with a provider, seven Canadian provinces implemented centralised waitlists (CWLs). The effectiveness of CWLs in attaching patients to regular primary care providers is unknown. Factors influencing CWLs effectiveness, particularly across jurisdictional contexts, have yet to be confirmed. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed methods case study will be conducted across three Canadian provinces: Ontario, Québec and Nova Scotia. Quantitatively, CWL data will be linked to administrative and provider billing data to assess the rates of patient attachment over time and delay of attachment, stratified by demographics and compared with select indicators of health service utilisation. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with policymakers, patients, and primary care providers to elicit narratives regarding the administration, use, and access of CWLs. An analysis of policy documents will be used to identify contextual factors affecting CWL effectiveness. Stakeholder dialogues will be facilitated to uncover causal pathways and identify strategies for improving patient attachment to primary care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval to conduct this study has been granted in Ontario (Queens University Health Sciences and Affiliated Teaching Hospitals Research Ethics Board, file number 6028052; Western University Health Sciences Research Ethics Board, project 116591; University of Toronto Health Sciences Research Ethics Board, protocol number 40335), Québec (Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Estrie, project number 2020–3446) and Nova Scotia (Nova Scotia Health Research Ethics Board, file number 1024979). BMJ Publishing Group 2022-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8905966/ /pubmed/35256440 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049686 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Health Services Research Marshall, Emily Gard Breton, Mylaine Green, Michael Edwards, Lynn Ayn, Caitlyn Smithman, Mélanie Ann Ryan Carson, Shannon Ashcroft, Rachelle Bayoumi, Imaan Burge, Frederick Deslauriers, Véronique Lawson, Beverley Mathews, Maria McPherson, Charmaine Moritz, Lauren R Nesto, Sue Stock, David Wong, Sabrina T Andrew, Melissa CUP study: protocol for a comparative analysis of centralised waitlist effectiveness, policies and innovations for connecting unattached patients to primary care providers |
title | CUP study: protocol for a comparative analysis of centralised waitlist effectiveness, policies and innovations for connecting unattached patients to primary care providers |
title_full | CUP study: protocol for a comparative analysis of centralised waitlist effectiveness, policies and innovations for connecting unattached patients to primary care providers |
title_fullStr | CUP study: protocol for a comparative analysis of centralised waitlist effectiveness, policies and innovations for connecting unattached patients to primary care providers |
title_full_unstemmed | CUP study: protocol for a comparative analysis of centralised waitlist effectiveness, policies and innovations for connecting unattached patients to primary care providers |
title_short | CUP study: protocol for a comparative analysis of centralised waitlist effectiveness, policies and innovations for connecting unattached patients to primary care providers |
title_sort | cup study: protocol for a comparative analysis of centralised waitlist effectiveness, policies and innovations for connecting unattached patients to primary care providers |
topic | Health Services Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8905966/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35256440 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049686 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT marshallemilygard cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT bretonmylaine cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT greenmichael cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT edwardslynn cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT ayncaitlyn cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT smithmanmelanieann cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT ryancarsonshannon cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT ashcroftrachelle cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT bayoumiimaan cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT burgefrederick cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT deslauriersveronique cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT lawsonbeverley cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT mathewsmaria cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT mcphersoncharmaine cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT moritzlaurenr cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT nestosue cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT stockdavid cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT wongsabrinat cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders AT andrewmelissa cupstudyprotocolforacomparativeanalysisofcentralisedwaitlisteffectivenesspoliciesandinnovationsforconnectingunattachedpatientstoprimarycareproviders |