Trends in emergency department visits during cold weather seasons among patients experiencing homelessness in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective population-based cohort study.

PURPOSE: Recent anecdotal reports suggest increasing numbers of people experiencing homelessness are visiting emergency departments (EDs) during cold weather seasons due to inadequate shelter availability. We examined monthly ED visits among patients experiencing homelessness to determine whether there has been a significant increase in such visits in 2022/2023 compared to prior years. METHODS: We used linked health administrative data to identify cohorts experiencing homelessness in Ontario between October and March of the 2018/2019 to 2022/2023 years. We analyzed the monthly rate of non-urgent ED visits as a proxy measure of visits plausibly attributable to avoidance of cold exposure, examining rates among patients experiencing homelessness compared to housed patients. We excluded visits for overdose or COVID-19. We assessed level and significance of change in the 2022/2023 year as compared to previous cold weather seasons using Poisson regression. RESULTS: We identified a total of 21,588 non-urgent ED visits across the observation period among patients experiencing homelessness in Ontario. Non-urgent ED visits increased 27% (RR 1.24 [95% CI 1.14-1.34]) in 2022/2023 compared to previous cold weather seasons. In Toronto, such visits increased by 70% (RR 1.68 [95% CI 1.57-1.80]). Among housed patients, non-urgent ED visits did not change significantly during this time period. CONCLUSION: Rates of ED visits plausibly attributable to avoidance of cold exposure by individuals experiencing homelessness increased significantly in Ontario in 2022/2023, most notably in Toronto. This increase in ED visits may be related to inadequate access to emergency shelter beds and warming services in the community.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Des rapports anecdotiques récents suggèrent qu'un nombre croissant de personnes en situation d'itinérance visitent les services d'urgence (SU) pendant les saisons froides en raison de la disponibilité insuffisante d'hébergement d'urgence. Nous avons examiné les visites mensuelles aux urgences chez les personnes en situation d'itinérance afin de déterminer s'il y a eu une augmentation significative de ces visites en 2022-2023 par rapport aux années précédentes. MéTHODES: Nous avons utilisé des données administratives de santé liées pour identifier les cohortes de personnes en situation d'itinérance en Ontario entre octobre et mars des années 2018/2019 à 2022/2023. Nous avons analysé le taux mensuel de visites aux urgences non urgentes comme mesure approximative des visites vraisemblablement attribuables à l'évitement de l'exposition au froid, en examinant les taux chez les personnes en situation d'itinérance par rapport aux patients logés. Nous avons exclu les visites pour surdose ou COVID-19. Nous avons évalué le niveau et l'importance du changement dans l'année 2022/2023 par rapport aux saisons froides précédentes en utilisant la régression de Poisson. RéSULTATS: Nous avons recensé un total de 21 588 visites non urgentes aux urgences au cours de la période d'observation chez des personnes en situation d'itinérance en Ontario. Les visites aux urgences non urgentes ont augmenté de 27 % (RR 1,24 [IC à 95 % 1,14-1,34]) en 2022­2023 par rapport aux saisons froides précédentes. À Toronto, ces visites ont augmenté de 70 % (RR 1,68 [IC à 95 % 1,57-1,80]). Parmi les patients logés, les visites aux urgences non urgentes n'ont pas changé de façon significative pendant cette période. CONCLUSIONS: Les taux de visites aux urgences attribuables vraisemblablement à l'évitement de l'exposition au froid par les personnes en situation d'itinérance ont augmenté considérablement en Ontario en 2022­2023, surtout à Toronto. Cette augmentation du nombre de visites aux urgences peut être liée à un accès inadéquat aux lits des refuges d'urgence et aux services de réchauffement dans la collectivité.

"Whatever journey you want to take, I'll support you through": a mixed methods evaluation of a peer worker program in the hospital emergency department.

BACKGROUND: People who are unhoused, use substances (drugs and/or alcohol), and who have mental health conditions experience barriers to care access and are frequently confronted with discrimination and stigma in health care settings. The role of Peer Workers in addressing these gaps in a hospital-based context is not well characterized. The aim of this evaluation was to 1) outline the role of Peer Workers in the care of a marginalized populations in the emergency department; 2) characterize the impact of Peer Workers on patient care, and 3) to describe how being employed as a Peer Worker impacts the Peer. METHODS: Through a concurrent mixed methods evaluation, we explore the role of Peer Workers in the care of marginalized populations in the emergency department at two urban hospitals in Toronto, Ontario Canada. We describe the demographic characteristics of patients (n = 555) and the type of supports provided to patients collected through a survey between February and June 2022. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were completed with Peer Workers (n = 7). Interviews were thematically analyzed using a deductive approach, complemented by an inductive approach to allow new themes to emerge from the data. RESULTS: Support provided to patients primarily consisted of friendly conversations (91.4%), discharge planning (59.6%), tactics to help the patient navigate their emotions/mental wellbeing (57.8%) and sharing their lived experience (50.1%). In over one third (38.9%) of all patient interactions, Peer Workers shared new information about the patient with the health care team (e.g., obtaining patient identification). Five major themes emerged from our interviews with Peer Workers which include: (1) Establishing empathy and building trust between the patient and their care team through self-disclosure; (2) Facilitating a person-centered approach to patient care through trauma-informed listening and accessible language; (3) Support for patient preferences on harm reduction; (4) Peer worker role facilitating self-acceptance and self-defined recovery; and (5) Importance of supports and resources to help Peer Workers navigate the emotional intensity of the emergency department. CONCLUSIONS: The findings add to the literature on Peer Worker programs and how such interventions are designed to best meet the needs of marginalized populations.

Effect of Free Medicine Distribution on Health Care Costs in Canada Over 3 Years: A Secondary Analysis of the CLEAN Meds Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Few interventions are proven to reduce total health care costs, and addressing cost-related nonadherence has the potential to do so. Objective: To determine the effect of eliminating out-of-pocket medication fees on total health care costs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized clinical trial using a prespecified outcome took place across 9 primary care sites in Ontario, Canada (6 in Toronto and 3 in rural areas), where health care services are generally publicly funded. Adult patients (≥18 years old) reporting cost-related nonadherence to medicines in the past 12 months were recruited between June 1, 2016, and April 28, 2017, and followed up until April 28, 2020. Data analysis was completed in 2021. Interventions: Access to a comprehensive list of 128 medicines commonly prescribed in ambulatory care with no out-of-pocket costs for 3 years vs usual medicine access. Main Outcome and Measures: Total publicly funded health care costs over 3 years, including costs of hospitalizations. Health care costs were determined using administrative data from Ontario's single-payer health care system, and all costs are reported in Canadian dollars with adjustments for inflation. Results: A total of 747 participants from 9 primary care sites were included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 51 [14] years; 421 [56.4%] female). Free medicine distribution was associated with a lower median total health care spending over 3 years of $1641 (95% CI, $454-$2792; P = .006). Mean total spending was $4465 (95% CI, -$944 to $9874) lower over the 3-year period. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, eliminating out-of-pocket medication expenses for patients with cost-related nonadherence in primary care was associated with lower health care spending over 3 years. These findings suggest that eliminating out-of-pocket medication costs for patients could reduce overall costs of health care. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02744963.

SARS-CoV-2 Testing and Complications Across 6 Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Individuals Recently Experiencing Homelessness in Ontario, Canada.

This cohort study compares the rates of SARS-CoV-2 testing and complications across 6 waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada, between individuals recently experiencing homelessness, low-income residents, and the general population.

COVID-19 Disparities Among Arab, Middle Eastern, and West Asian Populations in Toronto: Implications for Improving Health Equity Among Middle Eastern and North African Communities in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Equity-oriented efforts to mitigate and prevent COVID-related disparities are hindered due to methodological limitations of the categorization of racial and ethnic groups, including Arabs and Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) communities, which remain invisible in national data collection efforts. This study highlights the disparities in COVID-related outcomes in Toronto, Canada and supports ongoing calls to collect public health data among MENA communities in the United States. METHODS: Data on racial/ethnic identity and hospitalizations were collected by the Toronto Public Health (TPH) of the Ontario Ministry of Public Health Case between May 20, 2020, and September 30, 2021 from people with a confirmed or probable case of COVID-19. RESULTS: The reported COVID-19 infection rate for Arab, Middle Eastern, West Asians (i.e., categories used to self-identify as MENA in Canada) relative to Whites in Toronto was 3.51. The age-standardized hospitalization rate ratio between Arab, Middle Eastern, West Asians and Whites was 4.59. DISCUSSION: Data from Toronto highlight that Arab, Middle Eastern, and West Asians have higher rates of COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations than their White counterparts. Comparable studies are currently not possible in the United States due to lack of data that can disaggregate MENA individuals. This study underscores the critical need to collect data among MENA communities in the United States to advance our field's goal of promoting and advancing equity.

Can the Healthcare System Improve Food Security? A Need for Collaborative Community Partnerships.

The COVID-19 pandemic has heightened the food insecurity crisis in Canada, and existing supports have been largely insufficient to meet the food needs of communities. In response to increasing reports of food insecurity among Toronto residents during the pandemic, the Food RX program was developed as a collaborative initiative between FoodShare Toronto - a local, community-based food justice organization - and the University Health Network, a large university-affiliated hospital network in downtown Toronto, ON. This commentary describes the Food RX program, highlights the lessons learned during its early implementation and offers a set of recommendations for building community partnerships moving forward.

Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among people experiencing homelessness in Toronto during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: People experiencing homelessness are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This study reports the point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection during testing conducted at sites serving people experiencing homelessness in Toronto during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We also explored the association between site characteristics and prevalence rates. METHODS: The study included individuals who were staying at shelters, encampments, COVID-19 physical distancing sites, and drop-in and respite sites and completed outreach-based testing for SARS-CoV-2 during the period April 17 to July 31, 2020. We examined test positivity rates over time and compared them to rates in the general population of Toronto. Negative binomial regression was used to examine the relationship between each shelter-level characteristic and SARS-CoV-2 positivity rates. We also compared the rates across 3 time periods (T1: April 17-April 25; T2: April 26-May 23; T3: May 24-June 25). RESULTS: The overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 8.5% (394/4657). Site-specific rates showed great heterogeneity with infection rates ranging from 0% to 70.6%. Compared to T1, positivity rates were 0.21 times lower (95% CI: 0.06-0.75) during T2 and 0.14 times lower (95% CI: 0.04-0.44) during T3. Most cases were detected during outbreak testing (384/394 [97.5%]) rather than active case finding. CONCLUSION: During the first wave of the pandemic, rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection at sites for people experiencing homelessness in Toronto varied significantly over time. The observation of lower rates at certain sites may be attributable to overall time trends, expansion of outreach-based testing to include sites without known outbreaks, and/or individual site characteristics.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Les personnes en situation d'itinérance courent un risque accru de contracter une infection par le SRAS-CoV-2. Notre étude rend compte de la prévalence ponctuelle des infections par le SRAS-CoV-2 au cours de tests de dépistage menés dans des lieux de services aux personnes en situation d'itinérance de Toronto au cours de la première vague de la pandémie de COVID-19. Nous avons aussi exploré l'association entre les caractéristiques de ces lieux et les taux de prévalence. MéTHODE: L'étude a inclus les personnes séjournant dans des refuges, des campements, des lieux de distanciation physique et des centres d'accueil et de répit et ayant subi un test de dépistage de proximité du SRAS-CoV-2 entre le 17 avril et le 31 juillet 2020. Nous avons examiné les taux de positivité des tests au fil du temps et nous les avons comparés aux taux dans la population générale de Toronto. Des analyses de régression binomiales négatives ont été effectuées pour étudier la relation entre chaque caractéristique au niveau des refuges et les taux de positivité au SRAS-CoV-2. Nous avons aussi comparé les taux de trois intervalles (I1: 17 au 25 avril; I2: 26 avril au 23 mai; I3: 24 mai au 25 juin). RéSULTATS: La prévalence globale des infections par le SRAS-CoV-2 était de 8,5 % (394/4 657). Les taux d'infection spécifiques aux lieux de services ont présenté une grande hétérogénéité, soit de 0 % à 70,6 %. Comparés au 1er intervalle (I1), les taux de positivité ont été 0,21 fois plus faibles (IC de 95% : 0,06 ­ 0,75) durant l'I2 et 0,14 fois plus faibles (IC de 95% : 0,04 ­ 0,44) durant l'I3. La plupart des cas ont été détectés lors d'un dépistage en cours d'éclosion (384/394 [97,5%]) et non lors d'une recherche active de cas. CONCLUSION: Au cours de la première vague de la pandémie, les taux d'infection par le SRAS-CoV-2 dans les lieux de services aux personnes en situation d'itinérance de Toronto ont varié de façon significative au fil du temps. L'observation de taux plus faibles dans certains lieux pourrait s'expliquer par les tendances temporelles globales, par l'expansion des activités de dépistage de proximité pour inclure les lieux sans éclosion connue et/ou par les caractéristiques individuelles des lieux.

Opportunity to inform social needs within a hospital setting using data-driven patient engagement.

BACKGROUND: High-risk patients account for a disproportionate amount of healthcare use, necessitating the development of care delivery solutions aimed specifically at reducing this use. These interventions have largely been unsuccessful, perhaps due to a lack of attention to patients' social needs and engagement of patients in developing solutions. METHODS: The project team used a combination of administrative data, information culled from charts and interviews with high-risk patients to understand social needs, the current experience of addressing social needs in the hospital, and patient preferences and identified opportunities for improvement. Interviews were conducted in March and April 2020, and patients were asked to reflect on their experiences both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 4579 patients with 26 168 visits to the emergency department and 2904 inpatient admissions in the previous year were identified. Qualitative analysis resulted in three themes: (1) the interaction between social needs, demographics, and health; (2) the hospital's role in addressing social needs; and (3) the impact of social needs on experiences of care. Themes related to experiences before and during COVID-19 did not differ. Three opportunities were identified: (1) training for staff related to stigma and trauma, (2) improved documentation of social needs and (3) creation of navigation programmes. DISCUSSION: Certain demographic factors were clearly associated with an increased need for social support. Unfortunately, many factors identified by patients as mediating their need for such support were not consistently captured. Going forward, high-risk patients should be included in the development of quality improvement initiatives and programmes to address social needs.

Adherence at 2 years with distribution of essential medicines at no charge: The CLEAN Meds randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to medicines is low for a variety of reasons, including the cost borne by patients. Some jurisdictions publicly fund medicines for the general population, but many jurisdictions do not, and such policies are contentious. To our knowledge, no trials studying free access to a wide range of medicines have been conducted. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We randomly assigned 786 primary care patients who reported not taking medicines due to cost between June 1, 2016 and April 28, 2017 to either free distribution of essential medicines (n = 395) or to usual medicine access (n = 391). The trial was conducted in Ontario, Canada, where hospital care and physician services are publicly funded for the general population but medicines are not. The trial population was mostly female (56%), younger than 65 years (83%), white (66%), and had a low income from wages as the primary source (56%). The primary outcome was medicine adherence after 2 years. Secondary outcomes included control of diabetes, blood pressure, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol in patients taking relevant treatments and healthcare costs over 2 years. Adherence to all appropriate prescribed medicines was 38.7% in the free distribution group and 28.6% in the usual access group after 2 years (absolute difference 10.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.3 to 16.9, p = 0.004). There were no statistically significant differences in control of diabetes (hemoglobin A1c 0.27; 95% CI -0.25 to 0.79, p = 0.302), systolic blood pressure (-3.9; 95% CI -9.9 to 2.2, p = 0.210), or LDL cholesterol (0.26; 95% CI -0.08 to 0.60, p = 0.130) based on available data. Total healthcare costs over 2 years were lower with free distribution (difference in median CAN$1,117; 95% CI CAN$445 to CAN$1,778, p = 0.006). In the free distribution group, 51 participants experienced a serious adverse event, while 68 participants in the usual access group experienced a serious adverse event (p = 0.091). Participants were not blinded, and some outcomes depended on participant reports. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that free distribution of essential medicines to patients with cost-related nonadherence substantially increased adherence, did not affect surrogate health outcomes, and reduced total healthcare costs over 2 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02744963.

Effect on Treatment Adherence of Distributing Essential Medicines at No Charge: The CLEAN Meds Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Nonadherence to treatment with medicines is common globally, even for life-saving treatments. Cost is one important barrier to access, and only some jurisdictions provide medicines at no charge to patients. Objective: To determine whether providing essential medicines at no charge to outpatients who reported not being able to afford medicines improves adherence. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter, unblinded, parallel, 2-group, superiority, outcomes assessor-blinded, individually randomized clinical trial conducted at 9 primary care sites in Ontario, Canada, enrolled 786 patients between June 1, 2016, and April 28, 2017, who reported cost-related nonadherence. Follow-up occurred at 12 months. The primary analysis was performed using an intention-to-treat principle. Interventions: Patients were randomly allocated to receive free medicines on a list of essential medicines in addition to otherwise usual care (n = 395) or usual medicine access and usual care (n = 391). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was adherence to treatment with all medicines that were appropriately prescribed for 1 year. Secondary outcomes were hemoglobin A1c level, blood pressure, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels 1 year after randomization in participants taking corresponding medicines. Results: Among the 786 participants analyzed (439 women and 347 men; mean [SD] age, 51.7 [14.3] years), 764 completed the trial. Adherence to treatment with all medicines was higher in those randomized to receive free distribution (151 of 395 [38.2%]) compared with usual access (104 of 391 [26.6%]; difference, 11.6%; 95% CI, 4.9%-18.4%). Control of type 1 and 2 diabetes was not significantly improved by free distribution (hemoglobin A1c, -0.38%; 95% CI, -0.76% to 0.00%), systolic blood pressure was reduced (-7.2 mm Hg; 95% CI, -11.7 to -2.8 mm Hg), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were not affected (-2.3 mg/dL; 95% CI, -14.7 to 10.0 mg/dL). Conclusions and Relevance: The distribution of essential medicines at no charge for 1 year increased adherence to treatment with medicines and improved some, but not other, disease-specific surrogate health outcomes. These findings could help inform changes to medicine access policies such as publicly funding essential medicines. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02744963.

The Association Between Hospital Concentration And Insurance Premiums In ACA Marketplaces.

Keeping the Affordable Care Act's health insurance Marketplaces financially accessible is critically important to their viability. While the relationship between the number of insurers and Marketplace premiums has received widespread attention, the role of hospital market concentration on premiums has been understudied. We examined the relationship between hospital market concentration and Marketplace insurance premiums in the period 2014-17, the extent to which the number of insurers modified this relationship, and whether community-level characteristics were associated with varying levels of concentration. We found that areas with the highest levels of hospital market concentration had annual premiums that were, on average, 5 percent higher than those in the least concentrated areas. Additionally, while an increased number of insurers was independently associated with lower premiums, that was not sufficient to offset the effects of increased hospital concentration on premium costs. Communities with lower socioeconomic status (as measured by median income) were more likely to have higher hospital market concentration. However, this was not consistent across all measures of socioeconomic status, such as measures of unemployment, use of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and education. These findings help underscore the importance of exploring antitrust policy and other efforts that may reduce hospital concentration and help keep Marketplace premiums affordable.