Development of a Patient-Reported Experience Measure Tool for Ambulatory Patients With Acute Unexpected Needs: The APEX Questionnaire.

Background: The aim of this study was to develop a patient-reported experience measure (PREM) for comparing the experience of care received by ambulatory patients with acute unexpected needs presenting in emergency departments (EDs), walk-in clinics, and primary care practices. Methods: The Ambulatory Patient EXperience (APEX) questionnaire was developed using a 5-phase mixed-methods approach. The questionnaire was pretested by asking potential users to rate its clarity, usefulness, redundancy, content and face validities, and discrimination on a 9-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 9 = strongly agree). The pre-final version was then tested in a pilot study. Results: The final questionnaire is composed of 61 questions divided into 7 sections. In the pretest (n = 25), median responses were 8 and above for all dimensions assessed. In the pilot study, 63 participants were enrolled. Adjusted results show that access, cleanliness, and feeling treated with respect and dignity by nurses and physicians were significantly better in the clinics than in the ED. Conclusion: We developed a questionnaire to assess and compare experience of ambulatory care in different clinical settings.

Socioeconomic disparities and concentration of the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic in the province of Quebec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection may be greater in more densely populated areas and in cities with a higher proportion of persons who are poor, immigrant, or essential workers. This study examines spatial inequalities in SARS-CoV-2 exposure in a health region of the province of Quebec in Canada. METHODS: The study was conducted on the 1206 Canadian census dissemination areas in the Capitale-Nationale region of the province of Quebec. The observation period was 21 months (March 2020 to November 2021). The number of cases reported daily in each dissemination area was identified from available administrative databases. The magnitude of inequalities was estimated using Gini and Foster-Greer-Thorbecke (FGT) indices. The association between transmission and socioeconomic deprivation was identified based on the concentration of transmission in socially disadvantaged areas and on nonparametric regressions relating the cumulative incidence rate by area to ecological indicators of spatial disadvantage. Quantification of the association between median family income and degree of exposure of dissemination areas was supplemented by an ordered probit multiple regression model. RESULTS: Spatial disparities were elevated (Gini = 0.265; 95% CI [0.251, 0.279]). The spread was more limited in the less densely populated areas of the Quebec City agglomeration and outlying municipalities. The mean cumulative incidence in the subsample made up of the areas most exposed to the pandemic was 0.093. The spread of the epidemic was concentrated in the most disadvantaged areas, especially in the densely populated areas. Socioeconomic inequality appeared early and increased with each successive pandemic wave. The models showed that areas with economically disadvantaged populations were three times more likely to be among the areas at highest risk for COVID-19 (RR = 3.55; 95% CI [2.02, 5.08]). In contrast, areas with a higher income population (fifth quintile) were two times less likely to be among the most exposed areas (RR = 0.52; 95% CI [0.32, 0.72]). CONCLUSION: As with the H1N1 pandemics of 1918 and 2009, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic revealed social vulnerabilities. Further research is needed to explore the various manifestations of social inequality in relation to the pandemic.

A systematic review of tools for predicting complications in patients with acute infectious diarrhea.

OBJECTIVE: To identify tools that predict the risk of complications in patients presenting to outpatient clinics or emergency departments (ED) with acute infectious diarrhea. METHODS: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and CINAHL were searched from inception to July 2021. Articles reporting on the derivation or validation of a score to stratify the risk of intravenous rehydration or hospitalization among patients with acute infectious diarrhea in the ED or outpatient clinic were retained for analysis. RESULTS: Five articles reporting on two different tools were identified. Developed to assess the risk of hospitalization of children, the EsVida scale has not been externally validated. Developed originally to assess the level of dehydration in children, the Clinical Dehydration Scale (CDS) was evaluated as a risk stratification tool. For predicting intravenous rehydration, a CDS score ≥ 1 showed a sensitivity between 0.73 and 0.88 and specificity between 0.38 and 0.69, whereas a CDS score ≥ 5 showed a sensitivity between 0.06 and 0.32 and specificity between 0.94 and 0.99. For predicting hospitalization, a CDS score ≥ 1 showed a sensitivity between 0.74 and 1.00 and specificity between 0.34 and 0.38, whereas a CDS score ≥ 5 showed a sensitivity between 0.26 and 0.62 and specificity between 0.66 and 0.96. High heterogeneity among studies and unclear risk of bias precluded meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: As a risk-stratification tool, the CDS has been validated only for children. Further research is needed to develop and validate a tool suitable for adults in the ED.

Disparities in high schools' vaccination coverage (COVID-19). A natural experiment in the Province of Quebec.

Teenagers' vaccination has become crucial to limit the COVID-19 transmission in the population. To increase the vaccination rate of this age group, a school-based vaccination campaign was launched in Québec, Canada from June 7 to 18, 2021. This study aimed to analyze trajectories of vaccination coverage over time among students attending 37 high schools. The study explored whether school-based vaccination campaigns contributed to the progression of the vaccination coverage and attenuated disparities in vaccination coverage across schools. On average, first dose coverage quickly increased from 30.6% to 81.5% between June 6 and 18, 2021, after the launch of the campaign. As of August 13, 2021, first dose coverage had reached 87.9% and 64.9% for the second dose coverage. Public schools with poorer student populations had 6.5 points of percentage lower first dose vaccination rates (95%CI 0.3%; 12.6%) compared to other schools. A higher level of concern related to the pandemic among students was associated with a 4.3 points of percentage increased coverage (95%CI 0.7%; 8.0%). The initial uneven distribution in first dose coverage decreased dramatically by the end of the campaign. Similar trends were observed for the second dose, although between schools' inequality at the end of the period of observation was significantly larger. The school-based vaccination campaign might have initially contributed to a prompt rise in vaccination coverage and helped the disadvantaged schools to reach similar vaccination coverage as seen in other schools. In addition to being an efficient way to achieve rapidly high vaccination coverage, the school-based approach might contribute to increase equity in vaccination distribution.

A Value-Based Comparison of the Management of Ambulatory Respiratory Diseases in Walk-in Clinics, Primary Care Practices, and Emergency Departments: Protocol for a Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, 30%-60% of patients presenting to emergency departments are ambulatory. This category has been labeled as a source of emergency department overuse. Acting on the presumption that primary care practices and walk-in clinics offer equivalent care at a lower cost, governments have invested massively in improving access to these alternative settings in the hope that patients would present there instead when possible, thereby reducing the load on emergency departments. Data in support of this approach remain scarce and equivocal. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the value of care received in emergency departments, walk-in clinics, and primary care practices by ambulatory patients with upper respiratory tract infection, sinusitis, otitis media, tonsillitis, pharyngitis, bronchitis, influenza-like illness, pneumonia, acute asthma, or acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: A multicenter prospective cohort study will be performed in Ontario and Québec. In phase 1, a time-driven activity-based costing method will be applied at each of the 15 study sites. This method uses time as a cost driver to allocate direct costs (eg, medication), consumable expenditures (eg, needles), overhead costs (eg, building maintenance), and physician charges to patient care. Thus, the cost of a care episode will be proportional to the time spent receiving the care. At the end of this phase, a list of care process costs will be generated and used to calculate the cost of each consultation during phase 2, in which a prospective cohort of patients will be monitored to compare the care received in each setting. Patients aged 18 years and older, ambulatory throughout the care episode, and discharged to home with one of the aforementioned targeted diagnoses will be considered. The estimated sample size is 1485 patients. The 3 types of care settings will be compared on the basis of primary outcomes in terms of the proportion of return visits to any site 3 and 7 days after the initial visit and the mean cost of care. The secondary outcomes measured will include scores on patient-reported outcome and experience measures and mean costs borne wholly by patients. We will use multilevel generalized linear models to compare the care settings and an overlap weights approach to adjust for confounding factors related to age, sex, gender, ethnicity, comorbidities, registration with a family physician, socioeconomic status, and severity of illness. RESULTS: Phase 1 will begin in 2021 and phase 2, in 2023. The results will be available in 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The end point of our program will be for deciders, patients, and care providers to be able to determine the most appropriate care setting for the management of ambulatory emergency respiratory conditions, based on the quality and cost of care associated with each alternative. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/25619.

Association Between Anticholinergic Drug Use and Health-Related Quality of Life in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: The use of drugs with anticholinergic properties (AC drugs) has been associated with decreased functioning and impaired cognition in older adults. Studies assessing the association between AC-drug use and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) show conflicting results. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate the association between AC-drug use and HRQoL in community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: The NuAge cohort study enrolled 1793 men and women aged 68-82 years. The participants were free of disabilities in activities of daily living, not cognitively impaired at recruitment and followed annually for 3 years (December 2003-May 2005). AC-drug exposure was assessed using the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden Scale (ACBS). HRQoL was assessed using the physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summaries of the 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36) questionnaire. The association between AC drug and HRQoL was determined by a mixed model analysis using four annual time points. RESULTS: At recruitment the mean age was 74.4 ± 4.2 years, 52% were female and 33% of participants were prescribed at least one AC drug. The mean PCS and MCS (/100) scores were 49.0 ± 8.2 and 54.9 ± 8.1, respectively. In the mixed model analysis, an increase of 1 on the ACBS was associated with a decrease of -0.50 (95% CI -0.68 to -0.31) in the PCS and an increase of 0.19 (95% CI 0.01-0.37) in the MCS. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of generally healthy community-dwelling older adults, AC-drug exposure was associated with a statistically significant decrease in the PCS and increase in the MCS throughout the entire follow-up period. However, the effects on the PCS and MCS were small and likely not clinically relevant.