COVID-19 – An Opportunity to Improve Access to Primary Care Through Organizational Innovations? (preprint)

Background: COVID-19 catalyzed a rapid and substantial reorganization of primary care, accelerating the spread of existing strategies and fostering a proliferation of innovations. Access to primary care is an essential component of a health care system, particularly during a pandemic. We describe organizational innovations aiming to improve access to primary care and related contextual changes, during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in two Canadian provinces, Quebec and Nova Scotia. Methods: We conducted a multiple case studies, based on 63 semi-structured interviews (n=33 in Quebec, n=30 in Nova Scotia) conducted between October 2020 and May 2021 and a review of related internal documents from both jurisdictions. We recruited a diverse range of provincial and regional stakeholders (e.g., policymakers, decision-makers, family physicians, nurses) involved in reorganizing primary care during COVID-19 using purposeful sampling (e.g., based on role, region). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was conducted in NVivo12. Emerging results were discussed by team members to identify salient themes and organized into logic models. Results: We identified and analyzed six organizational innovations. Four of these - centralized public online booking systems, centralized access centers for unattached patients, and interim primary care clinics for unattached patients and community connector to health and social services for older adults – pre-dated COVID-19 but were accelerated by the pandemic context. The remaining two innovations were created to specifically address pandemic-related needs: COVID-19 hotlines and COVID dedicated primary healthcare clinics. Innovation spread and proliferation was influenced by several factors such as a strengthened sense of community amongst providers, decreased patient demand at the beginning of the first wave, renewed policy and provider interest in population-wide access (versus attachment of patients only), suspended performance targets (e.g., continuity ≥80%) in Quebec, in modality of care delivery, modified fee codes, and greater regional flexibility to implement tailored innovations. Conclusion: COVID-19 accelerated the uptake and creation of organizational innovations to potentially improve access to primary healthcare, removing, at least temporarily, certain longstanding barriers. Many stakeholders believed this reorganization would have positive impacts on access to primary care after COVID-19. Further studies should analyze the effectiveness and sustainability of innovations adapted, developed, and implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Learning from Public Health and Hospital Resilience to the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: Protocol for a Multiple Case Study (Brazil, Canada, China, France, Japan, and Mali). (preprint)

Background: All prevention efforts currently being implemented for COVID-19 are aimed at reducing the burden on strained health systems and human resources. There has been little research conducted to understand how SARS-CoV-2 has affected healthcare systems and professionals in terms of their work. Finding effective ways to share the knowledge and insight between countries, including lessons learned, is paramount to the international containment and management of the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this project is to compare the pandemic response to COVID-19 in Brazil, Canada, China, France, Japan, and Mali. This comparison will be used to identify strengths and weaknesses in the response, including challenges for health professionals and health systems.Methods:  We will use a multiple case study approach with multiple levels of nested analysis. We chose these countries as they represent different continents and different stages of the pandemic. We will focus on several major hospitals and two public health interventions (contact tracing and testing). It is a multidisciplinary research approach that will use qualitative data through observations, document analysis, and interviews, as well as quantitative data based on disease surveillance data and other publicly available data. Given that the methodological approaches of the project are largely qualitative, the ethical risks are minimal. For the quantitative component, the data being used are publicly available.Discussion: We will deliver lessons learned based on a rigorous process and on strong evidence to enable operational-level insight for national and international stakeholders.