Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Prior to the pandemic, Canada lagged behind other Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development countries in the uptake of virtual care. The onset of COVID-19, however, resulted in a near-universal shift to virtual primary care to minimise exposure risks. As jurisdictions enter a pandemic recovery phase, the balance between virtual and in-person visits is reverting, though it is unlikely to return to pre-pandemic levels. Our objective was to explore Canadian family physicians’ perspectives on the rapid move to virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic, to inform both future pandemic planning for primary care and the optimal integration of virtual care into the broader primary care context beyond the pandemic. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with 68 family physicians from four regions in Canada between October 2020 and June 2021. We used a purposeful, maximum variation sampling approach, continuing recruitment in each region until we reached saturation. Interviews with family physicians explored their roles and experiences during the pandemic, and the facilitators and barriers they encountered in continuing to support their patients through the pandemic. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed for recurrent themes. Results We identified three prominent themes throughout participants’ reflections on implementing virtual care: implementation and evolution of virtual modalities during the pandemic; facilitators and barriers to implementing virtual care; and virtual care in the future. While some family physicians had prior experience conducting remote assessments, most had to implement and adapt to virtual care abruptly as provinces limited in-person visits to essential and urgent care. As the pandemic progressed, initial forays into video-based consultations were frequently replaced by phone-based visits, while physicians also rebalanced the ratio of virtual to in-person visits. Medical record systems with integrated capacity for virtual visits, billing codes, supportive clinic teams, and longitudinal relationships with patients were facilitators in this rapid transition for family physicians, while the absence of these factors often posed barriers. Conclusion Despite varied experiences and preferences related to virtual primary care, physicians felt that virtual visits should continue to be available beyond the pandemic but require clearer regulation and guidelines for its appropriate future use.

ObjectivesRural–urban healthcare disparities exist globally. Various countries have used a rurality index for evaluating the disparities. Although Japan has many remote islands and rural areas, no rurality index exists. This study aimed to develop and validate a Rurality Index for Japan (RIJ) for healthcare research.DesignWe employed a modified Delphi method to determine the factors of the RIJ and assessed the validity. The study developed an Expert Panel including healthcare professionals and a patient who had expertise in rural healthcare.SettingThe panel members were recruited from across Japan including remote islands, mountain areas and heavy snow areas. The panel recruited survey participants whom the panel considered to have expertise.ParticipantsThe initial survey recruited 100 people, including rural healthcare providers, local government staff and residents.Primary outcome measuresFactors to include in the RIJ were identified by the Expert Panel and survey participants. We also conducted an exploratory factor analysis on the selected factors to determine the factor structure. Convergent validity was examined by calculating the correlation between the index for physician distribution and the RIJ. Criterion-related validity was assessed by calculating the correlation with average life expectancy.ResultsThe response rate of the final survey round was 84.8%. From the Delphi surveys, four factors were selected for the RIJ: population density, direct distance to the nearest hospital, remote islands and whether weather influences access to the nearest hospital. We employed the factor loadings as the weight of each factor. The average RIJ of every zip code was 50.5. The correlation coefficient with the index for physician distribution was −0.45 (p<0.001), and the correlation coefficients with the life expectancies of men and women were −0.35 (p<0.001) and −0.12 (p<0.001), respectively.ConclusionThis study developed the RIJ using a modified Delphi method. The index showed good validity.

Background Planning for surge capacity, that is, the ability of a health service to expand beyond normal capacity and meet an increased demand for clinical care, is an essential component of public health emergency preparedness. During the COVID-19 pandemic, family physicians (FPs) were called upon to provide surge capacity in settings such as hospital units and emergency departments while also maintaining their primary care responsibilities. Most research reports on projection models, hospital settings, or the use of virtual care, with limited focus on the firsthand experiences of FPs in this role. To address this gap, this study examines the experiences of FPs and their roles in supporting surge capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods As part of a mixed methods, multiple case study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with FPs between October 2020 and June 2021 across four Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Ontario, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador). During the interviews, FPs were asked about the roles they assumed during the different stages of the pandemic and the factors that impacted their ability to fulfil these roles. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a thematic analysis approach was employed to identify recurring themes. Results We interviewed a total of 68 FPs across the four provinces and identified two overarching themes: (1) mechanisms used to create surge capacity by FPs, and (2) key considerations for an organized surge capacity program. During the pandemic, surge capacity was achieved by extending FP working hours, expanding the FP workforce, and redeploying FPs to new roles and settings. The effective implementation of FP surge capacity requires organized communication and coordination mechanisms, policies to clarify scope of practice during redeployment, training and mentorship related to new redeployment roles, FPs holding hospital privileges, and policies that help to preserve primary care capacity. Conclusions FPs make critical contributions to surge capacity but require structured support to balance their redeployment roles with their ongoing primary care responsibilities. Ensuring adequate coverage for their practices and employing strong communication and coordination mechanisms are essential for maintaining high-quality care and managing the strain on FPs and the health system during public health emergencies.

IntroductionGiven the recurrent risk of respiratory illness-based pandemics, and the important roles family physicians play during public health emergencies, the development of pandemic plans for primary care is imperative. Existing pandemic plans in Canada, however, do not adequately incorporate family physicians’ roles and perspectives. This policy and planning oversight has become increasingly evident with the emergence of the novel coronavirus disease, COVID-19, pandemic. This study is designed to inform the development of pandemic plans for primary care through evidence from four provinces in Canada: British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, and Ontario.Methods and analysisWe will employ a multiple-case study of regions in four provinces. Each case consists of a mixed methods design which comprises: (1) a chronology of family physician roles in the COVID-19 pandemic response; (2) a provincial policy analysis; and (3) qualitative interviews with family physicians. Relevant policy and guidance documents will be identified through targeted, snowball and general search strategies. Additionally, these policy documents will be analysed to identify gaps and/or emphases in existing policies and policy responses. Interviews will explore family physicians’ proposed, actual and potential roles during the pandemic, the facilitators and barriers they have encountered throughout and the influence of gender on their professional roles. Data will be thematically analysed using a content analysis framework, first at the regional level and then through cross-case analyses.Ethics and disseminationApproval for this study has been granted by the Research Ethics of British Columbia, the Health Research Ethics Board of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Nova Scotia Health Authority Research Ethics Board and the Western University Research Ethics Board. Findings will be disseminated via conferences and peer-reviewed publications. Evidence and lessons learnt will be used to develop tools for government ministries, public health units and family physicians for improved pandemic response plans for primary care.

Background Family physicians (FPs) fill an essential role in public health emergencies yet have frequently been neglected in pandemic response plans. This exclusion harms FPs in their clinical roles and has unintended consequences in the management of concurrent personal responsibilities, many of which were amplified by the pandemic. The objective of our study was to explore the experiences of FPs during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to better understand how they managed their competing professional and personal priorities. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with FPs from four Canadian regions between October 2020 and June 2021. Employing a maximum variation sampling approach, we recruited participants until we achieved saturation. Interviews explored FPs’ personal and professional roles and responsibilities during the pandemic, the facilitators and barriers that they encountered, and any gender-related experiences. Transcribed interviews were thematically analysed. Results We interviewed 68 FPs during the pandemic and identified four overarching themes in participants’ discussion of their personal experiences: personal caregiving responsibilities, COVID-19 risk navigation to protect family members, personal health concerns, and available and desired personal supports for FPs to manage their competing responsibilities. While FPs expressed a variety of ways in which their personal experiences made their professional responsibilities more complicated, rarely did that affect the extent to which they participated in the pandemic response. Conclusions For FPs to contribute fully to a pandemic response, they must be factored into pandemic plans. Failure to appreciate their unique role and circumstances often leaves FPs feeling unsupported in both their professional and personal lives. Comprehensive planning in anticipation of future pandemics must consider FPs’ varied responsibilities, health concerns, and necessary precautions. Having adequate personal and practice supports in place will facilitate the essential role of FPs in responding to a pandemic crisis while continuing to support their patients’ primary care needs.

Background Despite well-documented increased demands and shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) during previous disease outbreaks, health systems in Canada were poorly prepared to meet the need for PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the primary care sector, PPE shortages impacted the delivery of health services and contributed to increased workload, fear, and anxiety among primary care providers. This study examines family physicians’ (FPs) response to PPE shortages during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to inform future pandemic planning. Methods As part of a multiple case study, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with FPs across four regions in Canada. During the interviews, FPs were asked to describe the pandemic-related roles they performed over different stages of the pandemic, facilitators and barriers they experienced in performing these roles, and potential roles they could have filled. Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis approach was employed to identify recurring themes. For the current study, we examined themes related to PPE. Results A total of 68 FPs were interviewed across the four regions. Four overarching themes were identified: 1) factors associated with good PPE access, 2) managing PPE shortages, 3) impact of PPE shortages on practice and providers, and 4) symbolism of PPE in primary care. There was a wide discrepancy in access to PPE both within and across regions, and integration with hospital or regional health authorities often resulted in better access than community-based practices. When PPE was limited, FPs described rationing and reusing these resources in an effort to conserve, which often resulted in anxiety and personal safety concerns. Many FPs expressed that PPE shortages had come to symbolize neglect and a lack of concern for the primary care sector in the pandemic response. Conclusions During the COVID-19 pandemic response, hospital-centric plans and a lack of prioritization for primary care led to shortages of PPE for family physicians. This study highlights the need to consider primary care in PPE conservation and allocation strategies and to examine the influence of the underlying organization of primary care on PPE distribution during the pandemic.

Background The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid shift in primary health care from predominantly in-person to high volumes of virtual care. The pandemic afforded the opportunity to conduct a deep regional examination of virtual care by family physicians in London and Middlesex County, Ontario, Canada that would inform the foundation for virtual care in our region post-pandemic. Objectives: (1) to determine volumes of in-person and virtual family physicians visits and characteristics of the family physicians and patients using them during the early COVID-19 pandemic; (2) to determine how virtual visit volumes changed over the pandemic, compared to in-person; and (3) to explore family physicians’ experience in virtual visit adoption and implementation. Methods We conducted a concurrent mixed-methods study of family physicians from March to October 2020. The quantitative component examined mean weekly number of total, in-person and virtual visits using health administrative data. Differences in outcomes according to physician and practice characteristics for pandemic periods were compared to pre-pandemic. The qualitative study employed Constructivist Grounded Theory, conducting semi-structured family physicians interviews; analyzing data iteratively using constant comparative analysis. We mapped themes from the qualitative analysis to quantitative findings. Results Initial volumes of patients decreased, driven by fewer in-person visits. Virtual visit volumes increased dramatically; family physicians described using telephone almost entirely. Rural family physicians reported video connectivity issues. By early second wave, total family physician visit volume returned to pre-pandemic volumes. In-person visits increased substantially; family physicians reported this happened because previously scarce personal protective equipment became available. Patients seen during the pandemic were older, sicker, and more materially deprived. Conclusion These results can inform the future of virtual family physician care including the importance of continued virtual care compensation, the need for equitable family physician payment models, and the need to attend to equity for vulnerable patients. Given the move to virtual care was primarily a move to telephone care, the modality of care delivery that is acceptable to both family physicians and their patients must be considered.

Background The relative ease of movement of physicians across the Canada/US border has led to what is sometimes referred to as a ‘brain drain’ and previous analysis estimated that the equivalent of two graduating classes from Canadian medical schools were leaving to practice in the US each year. Both countries fill gaps in physician supply with international medical graduates (IMGs) so the movement of Canadian trained physicians to the US has international ramifications. Medical school enrolments have been increased on both sides of the border, yet there continues to be concerns about adequacy of physician human resources. This analysis was undertaken to re-examine the issue of Canadian physician migration to the US. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the 2015 American Medical Association (AMA) Masterfile to identify and locate any graduates of Canadian schools of medicine (CMGs) working in the United States in direct patient care. We reviewed annual reports of the Canadian Resident Matching Service (CaRMS); the Canadian Post-MD Education Registry (CAPER); and the Canadian Collaborative Centre for Physician Resources (C3PR). Results Beginning in the early 1990s the number of CMGs locating in the U.S. reached an all-time high and then abruptly dropped off in 1995. CMGs are going to the US for post-graduate training in smaller numbers and, are less likely to remain than at any time since the 1970’s. Conclusions This four decade retrospective found considerable variation in the migration pattern of CMGs to the US. CMGs’ decision to emigrate to the U.S. may be influenced by both ‘push’ and ‘pull’ factors. The relative strength of these factors changed and by 2004, more CMGs were returning from abroad than were leaving and the current outflow is negligible. This study supports the need for medical human resource planning to assume a long-term view taking into account national and international trends to avoid the rapid changes that were observed. These results are of importance to medical resource planning.

Purpose Strong leadership in primary care is necessary to coordinate an effective pandemic response; however, descriptions of leadership roles for family physicians are absent from previous pandemic plans. This study aims to describe the leadership roles and functions family physicians played during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada and identify supports and barriers to formalizing these roles in future pandemic plans. Design/methodology/approach This study conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with family physicians across four regions in Canada as part of a multiple case study. During the interviews, participants were asked about their roles during each pandemic stage and the facilitators and barriers they experienced. Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis approach was used to identify recurring themes. Findings Sixty-eight family physicians completed interviews. Three key functions of family physician leadership during the pandemic were identified: conveying knowledge, developing and adapting protocols for primary care practices and advocacy. Each function involved curating and synthesizing information, tailoring communications based on individual needs and building upon established relationships. Practical implications Findings demonstrate the need for future pandemic plans to incorporate formal family physician leadership appointments, as well as supports such as training, communication aides and compensation to allow family physicians to enact these key roles. Originality/value The COVID-19 pandemic presents a unique opportunity to examine the leadership roles of family physicians, which have been largely overlooked in past pandemic plans. This study’s findings highlight the importance of these roles toward delivering an effective and coordinated pandemic response with uninterrupted and safe access to primary care.

McWhinney's Textbook of Family Medicine is one of the seminal texts in the field, defining the principles and practices of family medicine as a distinct field of practice. The fourth edition presents new information on stewardship of resources, patient information and data, delivery of care in the home, and consultation and referral as well as six new clinical chapters of common problems in family medicine.