Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Am J Public Health ; 111(3): 369-370, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2289745
2.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 24(4): 410-418.e9, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2271390

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To examine the prevalence of coping behaviors during the first 2 waves of the COVID-19 pandemic among caregivers of assisted living residents and variation in these behaviors by caregiver gender and mental health. DESIGN: Cross-sectional and longitudinal survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Family/friend caregivers of assisted living residents in Alberta and British Columbia. METHODS: A web-based survey, conducted twice (October 28, 2020 to March 31, 2021 and July 12, 2021 to September 7, 2021) on the same cohort obtained data on caregiver sociodemographic characteristics, anxiety and depressive symptoms, and coping behaviors [seeking counselling, starting a psychotropic drug (sedative, anxiolytic, antidepressant), starting or increasing alcohol, tobacco and/or cannabis consumption] during pandemic waves 1 and 2. Descriptive analyses and multivariable (modified) Poisson regression models identified caregiver correlates of each coping behavior. RESULTS: Among the 673 caregivers surveyed at baseline, most were women (77%), White (90%) and age ≥55 years (81%). Alcohol (16.5%) and psychotropic drug (13.3%) use were the most prevalent coping behaviors reported during the initial wave, followed by smoking and/or cannabis use (8.0%), and counseling (7.4%). Among the longitudinal sample (n = 386), only alcohol use showed a significantly lower prevalence during the second wave (11.7% vs 15.1%, P = .02). During both waves, coping behaviors did not vary significantly by gender, however, psychotropic drug and substance use were significantly more prevalent among caregivers with baseline anxiety and depressive symptoms, including in models adjusted for confounders [eg, anxiety: adjusted risk ratio = 3.87 (95% CI 2.50-6.00] for psychotropic use, 1.87 (1.28-2.73) for alcohol use, 2.21 (1.26-3.88) for smoking/cannabis use). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Assisted living caregivers experiencing anxiety or depressive symptoms during the pandemic were more likely to engage in drug and substance use, potentially maladaptive responses. Public health and assisted living home initiatives that identify caregiver mental health needs and provide targeted support during crises are required to mitigate declines in their health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Substance-Related Disorders , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Male , Caregivers/psychology , Pandemics , Depression/diagnosis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Adaptation, Psychological , Substance-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Health Status , Psychotropic Drugs , Alberta
3.
J Fam Nurs ; : 10748407221124159, 2022 Sep 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2230987

ABSTRACT

Family or friend caregivers' concerns about assisted living (AL) residents' mental health are reflective of poor resident and caregiver mental health. COVID-19-related visiting restrictions increased caregiver concerns, but research on these issues in AL is limited. Using web-based surveys with 673 caregivers of AL residents in Western Canada, we assessed the prevalence and correlates of moderate to severe caregiver concerns about residents' depressed mood, loneliness, and anxiety in the 3 months before and after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Caregiver concerns doubled after the start of the pandemic (resident depressed mood: 23%-50%, loneliness: 29%-62%, anxiety: 24%-47%). Generalized linear mixed models identified various modifiable risk factors for caregiver concerns (e.g., caregivers' perception that residents lacked access to counseling services or not feeling well informed about and involved in resident care). These modifiable factors can be targeted in efforts to prevent or mitigate caregiver concerns and resident mental health issues.

4.
BMJ Open ; 12(9): e067608, 2022 09 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2053226

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The emergence of COVID-19 introduced a dual public health emergency in British Columbia, which was already in the fourth year of its opioid-related overdose crisis. The public health response to COVID-19 must explicitly consider the unique needs of, and impacts on, communities experiencing marginalisation including people with opioid use disorder (PWOUD). The broad move to virtual forms of primary care, for example, may result in changes to healthcare access, delivery of opioid agonist therapies or fluctuations in co-occurring health problems that are prevalent in this population. The goal of this mixed-methods study is to characterise changes to primary care access and patient outcomes following the rapid introduction of virtual care for PWOUD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use a fully integrated mixed-methods design comprised of three components: (a) qualitative interviews with family physicians and PWOUD to document experiences with delivering and accessing virtual visits, respectively; (b) quantitative analysis of linked, population-based administrative data to describe the uptake of virtual care, its impact on access to services and downstream outcomes for PWOUD; and (c) facilitated deliberative dialogues to co-create educational resources for family physicians, PWOUD and policymakers that promote equitable access to high-quality virtual primary care for this population. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval for this study has been granted by Research Ethics British Columbia. We will convene PWOUD and family physicians for deliberative dialogues to co-create educational materials and policy recommendations based on our findings. We will also disseminate findings via traditional academic outputs such as conferences and peer-reviewed publications.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Drug Overdose , Opioid-Related Disorders , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Drug Overdose/drug therapy , Humans , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Primary Health Care
5.
CMAJ Open ; 10(3): E818-E830, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2040403

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 imposed substantial health and economic burdens. Comprehensive population-based estimates of health care costs for COVID-19 are essential for planning and policy evaluation. We estimated publicly funded health care costs in 2 Canadian provinces during the pandemic's first wave. METHODS: In this historical cohort study, we linked patients with their first positive SARS-CoV-2 test result by June 30, 2020, in 2 Canadian provinces (British Columbia and Ontario) to health care administrative databases and matched to negative or untested controls. We stratified patients by highest level of initial care: community, long-term care, hospital (without admission to the intensive care unit [ICU]) and ICU. Mean publicly funded health care costs for patients and controls, mean net (attributable to COVID-19) costs and total costs were estimated from 30 days before to 120 days after the index date, or to July 31, 2020, in 30-day periods for patients still being followed by the start of each period. RESULTS: We identified 2465 matched people with a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2 in BC and 28 893 in Ontario. Mean age was 53.4 (standard deviation [SD] 21.8) years (BC) and 53.7 (SD 22.7) years (Ontario); 55.7% (BC) and 56.1% (Ontario) were female. Net costs in the first 30 days after the index date were $22 010 (95% confidence interval [CI] 19 512 to 24 509) and $15 750 (95% CI 15 354 to 16 147) for patients admitted to hospital, and $65 828 (95% CI 58 535 to 73 122) and $56 088 (95% CI 53 721 to 58 455) for ICU patients in BC and Ontario, respectively. In the community and long-term care settings, net costs were near 0. Total costs for all people, from 30 days before to 30 days after the index date, were $22 128 330 (BC) and $175 778 210 (Ontario). INTERPRETATION: During the first wave, we found that mean costs attributable to COVID-19 were highest for patients with ICU admission and higher in BC than Ontario. Reducing the number of people who acquire COVID-19 and severity of illness are required to mitigate the economic impact of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , British Columbia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Health Care Costs , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ontario/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
6.
BMC Geriatr ; 22(1): 662, 2022 08 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1993329

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Family and friend caregivers play significant roles in advocating for and ensuring quality health and social care of residents in Assisted Living (AL) homes. However, little is known about how the COVID-19 pandemic and related visitor restrictions affected their health and mental well-being. We examined the prevalence and correlates of anxiety and depressive symptoms among caregivers of AL residents during the initial wave of COVID-19 in two Canadian provinces. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted among family/friend caregivers of AL residents in Alberta and British Columbia (Oct 28, 2020-Mar 31, 2021) to collect data on their sociodemographic, health and caregiving characteristics, as well as concerns about residents' health and social care before and during the first wave of the pandemic. A clinically significant anxiety disorder and depressive symptoms were assessed with the GAD-7 and CES-D10 instruments, respectively. Separate multivariable (modified) Poisson regression models identified caregiver correlates of each mental health condition. RESULTS: Among the 673 caregivers completing the survey (81% for Alberta residents), most were women (77%), white (90%) and aged ≥ 55 years (81%). Clinically significant anxiety and depression were present in 28.6% and 38.8% of caregivers respectively. Both personal stressors (comorbidity level, income reduction, low social support) and caregiving stressors exacerbated by the pandemic were independently associated with caregiver anxiety and depression. The latter included increased concern about the care recipients' depression (adjusted risk ratio [adjRR] = 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19-2.85 for caregiver anxiety and adjRR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.26-2.44 for caregiver depressive symptoms) and reported intention to withdraw the resident from AL because of COVID-19 (adjRR = 1.24, 95%CI 0.95-1.63 for caregiver anxiety and adjRR = 1.37, 95%CI 1.13-1.67 for caregiver depressive symptoms). CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers of residents in AL homes reported significant personal and caregiving-related stressors during the initial wave of COVID-19 that were independently associated with an increased likelihood of experiencing clinically significant anxiety and depressive symptoms. Healthcare providers and AL staff should be aware of the prevalence and varied correlates of caregivers' mental health during public health crises so that appropriate screening and support may identified and implemented.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Caregivers , Alberta , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Caregivers/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Prevalence
7.
CMAJ ; 194(30): E1078-E1082, 2022 08 08.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1987173
8.
CMAJ ; 194(21): E741-E745, 2022 05 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1875140
9.
BMJ Open ; 12(2): e059711, 2022 Feb 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1807416

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Sleep-time blood pressure correlates more strongly with adverse cardiovascular events than does daytime blood pressure. The BedMed trial evaluates whether bedtime antihypertensive administration, as compared with conventional morning use, reduces major adverse cardiovascular events. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: DesignProspective randomised, open-label, blinded end-point trial.ParticipantsHypertensive primary care patients using blood pressure lowering medication and free from glaucoma.SettingCommunity primary care providers in 5 Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario) are mailing invitations to their eligible patients. Social media campaigns (Google, Facebook) are additionally running in the same provinces.InterventionConsenting participants are allocated via central randomisation to bedtime vs morning use of all antihypertensives.Follow-up(1) Telephone or email questionnaire at 1 week, 6 weeks, 6 months and every 6 months thereafter, and (2) accessing linked governmental healthcare databases tracking hospital and community medical services.Primary outcomeComposite of all-cause death, or hospitalisation for myocardial infarction/acute-coronary syndrome, stroke or congestive heart failure.Secondary outcomesEach primary outcome element on its own, all-cause hospitalisation or emergency department visit, long-term care admission, non-vertebral fracture, new glaucoma diagnosis, 18-month cognitive decline from baseline (via Short Blessed Test).Select other outcomesSelf-reported nocturia burden at 6 weeks and 6 months (no, minor or major burden), 1-year self-reported overall health score (EQ-5D-5L), self-reported falls, total cost of care (acute and community over study duration) and mean sleep-time systolic blood pressure after 6 months (via 24-hour monitor in a subset of 302 sequential participants).Primary outcome analysisCox proportional hazards survival analysis.Sample sizeThe trial will continue until a projected 254 primary outcome events have occurred.Current statusEnrolment ongoing (3227 randomised to date). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: BedMed has ethics approval from six research ethics review boards and will publish results in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02990663.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Glaucoma , Alberta , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Diseases/drug therapy , Glaucoma/chemically induced , Humans , Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic , Prospective Studies , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Research Design , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
10.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; 9: 100232, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1747709

ABSTRACT

We will likely look back on 2020 as a turning point. The pandemic put a spotlight on existing societal issues, accelerated the pace of change in others, and created some new ones too. For example, concerns about inequalities in health by income and race are not new, but they became more apparent to a larger number of people during 2020. The speed and starkness of broadening societal conversation, including beyond the direct effects of COVID-19, create an opportunity and motivation to reassess our understanding of health. Perhaps more importantly, it is an opportunity to reduce inequities in who has access to, who uses, and who benefits from the resources that promote health and well-being. To this end, we offer three questions to guide thinking about health and health inequities after 2020: (1) what do we mean by "health" and "health inequality and inequity"? (2) what are the structures and policies we put in place to support or promote health, and how effective are they? And (3) who has the power to shape structures and policies, and whose interests do those structures and policies serve?

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL