Educating future physicians for francophone official language minority communities in Canada: a case study.

Background: Over one million Francophone Canadians live in official language minority communities (OLMC) outside of Québec. Availability and accessibility of linguistically appropriate care to these OLMCs is lacking, resulting in poorer quality of care. To help address this health equity gap, the FrancoDoc program was created in 2015 to identify Francophone/Francophile medical students enrolled at medical faculties that use English as their primary language of instruction and equip them with skills to increase their medical French abilities. Little is known, however, about the affordances and limitations of this educational endeavour. Methods: Our qualitative instrumental single case study explored participants' experiences with FrancoDoc, while also examining factors shaping the delivery of linguistically appropriate healthcare services to OLMCs. We conducted semi-structured interviews with medical students from across Canada and thematically analyzed these using a reflexive, inductive approach. Results: Four main themes were derived from 12 interviews: factors facilitating French language learning; barriers to French language learning; contextual factors shaping linguistically appropriate healthcare provision; and recommendations to improve healthcare education to better prepare learners to provide care to OLMCs. Conclusions: Medical student participants are highly motivated to engage in educational activities linked to FrancoDoc. Their efforts are nonetheless frequently impeded by barriers such as time constraints, irregular event programming, lack of regular clinical learning opportunities, and lukewarm support from faculties of medicine. If medical faculties are to realize their obligations to the OLMCs that they serve, recognition of language as a specific social determinant of health and more robust institutional supports for initiatives like FrancoDoc are paramount.

Contexte: Plus d'un million de Canadiens francophones vivent dans des communautés de langue officielle en situation minoritaire (CLOSM) hors Québec. L'accessibilité de soins linguistiquement appropriés aux CLOSM est limitée. Par conséquent, la qualité des services qui leur sont offerts en souffre. Le programme FrancoDoc a été créé en 2015 pour aider à combler cette lacune sur le plan de l'équité en matière de santé. Il vise à offrir aux étudiants en médecine francophones ou francophiles dont l'anglais est la principale langue d'enseignement les moyens d'améliorer leurs compétences en français médical. Cependant, on sait peu de choses sur les possibilités et les limites de cette initiative éducative. Méthodes: Notre étude qualitative instrumentale de cas unique a exploré les expériences des participants au programme FrancoDoc, tout en examinant les facteurs qui influencent la prestation de services de santé linguistiquement appropriés aux CLOSM. Nous avons mené des entrevues semi-structurées avec des étudiants en médecine de tout le Canada et nous en avons analysé le contenu thématiquement en utilisant une approche réflexive et inductive. Résultats: Quatre thèmes principaux ont été dégagés des 12 entrevues réalisées : les facteurs facilitant l'apprentissage du français; les obstacles à l'apprentissage du français; les facteurs contextuels influençant la prestation de soins de santé linguistiquement appropriés; et les recommandations visant à améliorer l'enseignement en soins de santé de manière à préparer les apprenants à servir les CLOSM. Conclusions: Bien que très motivés par le programme FrancoDoc, les étudiants participants se heurtent à des obstacles comme les contraintes de temps, la programmation irrégulière des activités, le manque d'occasions d'apprentissage clinique régulier et la réticence des facultés de médecine. Or, pour remplir leurs obligations envers les CLOSM qu'elles servent, il est essentiel que les facultés de médecine reconnaissent la langue comme un déterminant social spécifique de la santé et qu'elles offrent un soutien solide aux initiatives comme le programme FrancoDoc.

Gaps in knowledge and practices of malaria prevention in Francophone African immigrants in Metropolitan Edmonton.

BACKGROUND: Important knowledge gaps exist in the understanding of the management of the risks of imported malaria in Canada among Francophone immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa (FISSA). The aim of this cross-sectional study was to investigate the malaria related-knowledge, attitude and practices (KAP) of FISSA in Edmonton, where these immigrants are in an official minority language situation and the impact of language barriers on these factors. METHODS: A structured survey was used to examine the KAP of 382 FISSA in the Edmonton area from 2018 to 2019. Fisher's Exact Test was applied to determine if there were associations between knowledge of malaria and different risk factors. RESULTS: Almost all FISSA (97%) had an accurate knowledge of fever as the key symptom of malaria. Interestingly, 60% of participants identified bed nets as a preventive method and only 19% of participants had accurate knowledge of malaria transmission. An accurate knowledge of symptoms was significantly associated with a high perceived risk of contracting malaria [odds ratio (OR) 4.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-20.62]. Furthermore, even though 70% of FISSA had a high perceived risk of contracting malaria in endemic regions, only 52% of travellers had a pre-travel medical encounter. Importantly, language was not the predominant reason for not seeking pre-travel medical advice, although 84% of respondents chose French as their official language of preference when seeking medical advice. Having a French-speaking physician was correlated with satisfactory prevention knowledge (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.16-3.35). With respect to health-seeking behaviour, 88% of respondents with a child < 5 years of age would seek medical care for fever in the child after travel to sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). CONCLUSION: This study highlights that factors other than knowledge, risk assessment, and language might determine the lack of compliance with pre-travel medical encounters. It underscores the need for effective strategies to improve this adherence in minority settings.

Clinical Outcomes of Robotic Surgery Compared to Conventional Surgical Approaches (Laparoscopic or Open): A Systematic Overview of Reviews.

OBJECTIVE: Describe clinical outcomes (eg, postoperative complications, survival) after robotic surgery compared to open or laparoscopic surgery. BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery utilization has increased over the years across a wide range of surgical procedures. However, evidence supporting improved clinical outcomes after robotic surgery is limited. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of systematic reviews from inception to January 2019 for systematic reviews describing postoperative outcomes after robotic surgery. We qualitatively described patient outcomes of commonly performed robotic procedures: radical prostatectomy, hysterectomy, lobectomy, thymectomy, rectal resection, partial nephrectomy, distal gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, hepatectomy, distal pancreatectomy, and cholecystectomy. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-four systematic reviews included 336 studies and 18 randomized controlled trials reporting on patient outcomes after robotic compared to laparoscopic or open procedures. Data from the randomized controlled trials demonstrate that robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy offered fewer biochemical recurrence and improvement in quality of recovery and pain scores only up to 6 weeks postoperatively compared to open radical prostatectomy. When compared to laparoscopic prostatectomy, robotic surgery offered improved urinary and sexual functions. Robotic surgery for endometrial cancer had fewer conversion to open compared to laparoscopic. Otherwise, robotic surgery outcomes were similar to conventional surgical approaches for other procedures except for radical hysterectomy where minimally invasive approaches may result in patient harm compared to open approach. CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery has been widely incorporated into practise despite limited supporting evidence. More rigorous research focused on patient-important benefits is needed before further expansion of robotic surgery.