Explore the vast range of titles available.

Telemedicine, the use of telecommunications to deliver health services, expertise and information, is a promising but unproven tool for improving the quality of diabetes care. We summarized the effectiveness of different methods of telemedicine for the management of diabetes compared with usual care. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases (to November 2015) and reference lists of existing systematic reviews for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing telemedicine with usual care for adults with diabetes. Two independent reviewers selected the studies and assessed risk of bias in the studies. The primary outcome was glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) reported at 3 time points (≤ 3 mo, 4–12 mo and > 12 mo). Other outcomes were quality of life, mortality and episodes of hypoglycemia. Trials were pooled using randomeffects meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic. From 3688 citations, we identified 111 eligible RCTs (n = 23 648). Telemedicine achieved significant but modest reductions in HbA1C in all 3 follow-up periods (difference in mean at ≤ 3 mo: −0.57%, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.74% to −0.40% [39 trials]; at 4–12 mo: −0.28%, 95% CI −0.37% to −0.20% [87 trials]; and at > 12 mo: −0.26%, 95% CI −0.46% to −0.06% [5 trials]). Quantified heterogeneity (I2 statistic) was 75%, 69% and 58%, respectively. In meta-regression analyses, the effect of telemedicine on HbA1C appeared greatest in trials with higher HbA1C concentrations at baseline, in trials where providers used Web portals or text messaging to communicate with patients and in trials where telemedicine facilitated medication adjustment. Telemedicine had no convincing effect on quality of life, mortality or hypoglycemia. Compared with usual care, the addition of telemedicine, especially systems that allowed medication adjustments with or without text messaging or a Web portal, improved HbA1C but not other clinically relevant outcomes among patients with diabetes.

Public health measures to reduce COVID-19 transmission include masking in public places, physical distancing, staying home when ill, avoiding high-risk locations, using a contact tracing app, and being willing to take a COVID-19 vaccine. However, adoption of these measures varies greatly. We aimed to improve health messaging to increase adherence to public health behaviours to reduce COVID-19 transmission by: 1) determining attitudes towards public health measures and current behaviours; 2) identifying barriers to following public health measures; and, 3) identifying public health communication strategies. We recruited participants from a random panel of 3000 phone numbers across Alberta to fill a predetermined quota: age (18–29; 30–59; 60+ years), geographic location (urban; rural), and whether they had school-age children. Two researchers coded and themed all transcripts. We performed content analysis and in-depth thematic analysis. Nine focus groups were conducted with 2–8 participants/group in August-September, 2020. Several themes were identified: 1) importance of public health measures; 2) compliance with public health measures; 3) critiques of public health messaging; and 4) suggestions for improving public health messaging. Physical distancing and masking were seen as more important than using a contact tracing app. There were mixed views around willingness to take COVID-19 vaccine. Current public health messaging was perceived as conflicting. Participants felt that consistent messaging and using social media to reach younger people would be helpful. In conclusion, these findings provide insights that can be used to inform targeted (e.g., by age, current behaviour) public health communications to encourage behaviors that reduce COVID-19 transmission.

Diabetes is regarded as a coronary heart disease risk equivalent—ie, people with the disorder have a risk of coronary events similar to those with previous myocardial infarction. We assessed whether chronic kidney disease should be regarded as a coronary heart disease risk equivalent. We studied a population-based cohort with measures of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and proteinuria from Alberta, Canada. We used validated algorithms based on hospital admission and medical-claim data to classify participants with baseline history of myocardial infarction or diabetes and to ascertain which patients were admitted to hospital for myocardial infarction during follow-up (the primary outcome). For our primary analysis, we defined baseline chronic kidney disease as eGFR 15–59·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 (stage 3 or 4 disease). We used Poisson regression to calculate unadjusted rates and relative rates of myocardial infarction during follow-up for five risk groups: people with previous myocardial infarction (with or without diabetes or chronic kidney disease), and (of those without previous myocardial infarction), four mutually exclusive groups defined by the presence or absence of diabetes and chronic kidney disease. During a median follow-up of 48 months (IQR 25–65), 11 340 of 1 268 029 participants (1%) were admitted to hospital with myocardial infarction. The unadjusted rate of myocardial infarction was highest in people with previous myocardial infarction (18·5 per 1000 person-years, 95% CI 17·4–19·8). In people without previous myocardial infarction, the rate of myocardial infarction was lower in those with diabetes (without chronic kidney disease) than in those with chronic kidney disease (without diabetes; 5·4 per 1000 person-years, 5·2–5·7, vs 6·9 per 1000 person-years, 6·6–7·2; p<0·0001). The rate of incident myocardial infarction in people with diabetes was substantially lower than for those with chronic kidney disease when defined by eGFR of less than 45 mL/min per 1·73 m2 and severely increased proteinuria (6·6 per 1000 person-years, 6·4–6·9 vs 12·4 per 1000 person-years, 9·7–15·9). Our findings suggest that chronic kidney disease could be added to the list of criteria defining people at highest risk of future coronary events. Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research.

Low values of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) predispose to acute kidney injury, and proteinuria is a marker of kidney disease. We aimed to investigate how eGFR and proteinuria jointly modified the risks of acute kidney injury and subsequent adverse clinical outcomes. We did a cohort study of 920 985 adults residing in Alberta, Canada, between 2002 and 2007. Participants not needing chronic dialysis at baseline and with at least one outpatient measurement of both serum creatinine concentration and proteinuria (urine dipstick or albumin-creatinine ratio) were included. We assessed hospital admission with acute kidney injury with validated administrative codes; other outcomes were all-cause mortality and a composite renal outcome of end-stage renal disease or doubling of serum creatinine concentration. During median follow-up of 35 months (range 0–59 months), 6520 (0·7%) participants were admitted with acute kidney injury. In those with eGFR 60 mL/min per 1·73 m 2 or greater, the adjusted risk of admission with this disorder was about 4 times higher in those with heavy proteinuria measured by dipstick (rate ratio 4·4 vs no proteinuria, 95% CI 3·7–5·2). The adjusted rates of admission with acute kidney injury and kidney injury needing dialysis remained high in participants with heavy dipstick proteinuria for all values of eGFR. The adjusted rates of death and the composite renal outcome were also high in participants admitted with acute kidney injury, although the rise associated with this injury was attenuated in those with low baseline eGFR and heavy proteinuria. These findings suggest that information on proteinuria and eGFR should be used together when identifying people at risk of acute kidney injury, and that an episode of acute kidney injury provides further long-term prognostic information in addition to eGFR and proteinuria. The study was funded by an interdisciplinary team grant from Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research.

Many factors beyond patient need influence the care that patients receive, including the way physicians are paid, and how services are delivered. In Alberta, outpatient non-invasive cardiac imaging (\"cardiac imaging\") is paid for publicly but performed at private, for-profit (investor/physician owned) facilities. We investigated patient, physician, and geographic factors associated with cardiac imaging in patients at low cardiovascular risk seeing specialist physicians in Alberta, Canada. This was a population-based retrospective cohort study using administrative health data from Alberta, Canada, where nearly all outpatient cardiac imaging is done at privately for-profit community-based facilities. We used administrative health data to identify a cohort of adult (aged ≥18 years) patients at low cardiovascular risk who were assessed by a cardiologist or internal medicine specialist for a new outpatient visit for a cardiac-related reason between April 1, 2011 and December 30, 2019 in Alberta. The primary outcome was cardiac imaging. Explanatory variables included patient and physician characteristics, including payment model (fee for service (FFS) or salary-based), and geography. We used multilevel, multivariable logistic regression models to measure the association between these factors and cardiac imaging. We identified 398,095 patients at low cardiovascular risk, of whom 27.5% received at least one cardiac imaging test. Compared to those seen by FFS cardiologists (and controlling for patient and geographic differences), patients seen by salary-based internal medicine specialists had the lowest odds of receiving cardiac imaging (OR=0.055, P < 0.001, CI 0.036-0.086), followed by those seen by FFS internal medicine specialists (OR=0.010, P < 0.001, CI 0.068-0.14), and salary-based cardiologists (OR=0.27, P < 0.001, CI 0.16-0.45). Findings were robust across multiple sensitivity analyses. Physician payment models and specialty are strongly associated with non-invasive cardiac imaging among patients at low cardiovascular risk.

Clinical experience suggests that there are substantial differences in patient complexity across medical specialties, but empirical data are lacking. To compare the complexity of patients seen by different types of physician in a universal health care system. Population-based retrospective cohort study of 2 597 127 residents of the Canadian province of Alberta aged 18 years and older with at least 1 physician visit between April 1, 2014 and March 31, 2015. Data were analyzed in September 2018. Type of physician seeing each patient (family physician, general internist, or 11 types of medical subspecialist) assessed as non-mutually exclusive categories. Nine markers of patient complexity (number of comorbidities, presence of mental illness, number of types of physicians involved in each patient's care, number of physicians involved in each patient's care, number of prescribed medications, number of emergency department visits, rate of death, rate of hospitalization, rate of placement in a long-term care facility). Among the 2 597 127 participants, the median (interquartile range) age was 46 (32-59) years and 54.1% were female. Over 1 year of follow-up, 21 792 patients (0.8%) died, the median (range) number of days spent in the hospital was 0 (0-365), 8.1% of patients had at least 1 hospitalization, and the median (interquartile range) number of prescribed medications was 3 (1-7). When the complexity markers were considered individually, patients seen by nephrologists had the highest mean number of comorbidities (4.2; 95% CI, 4.2-4.3 vs [lowest] 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1), highest mean number of prescribed medications (14.2; 95% CI, 14.2-14.3 vs [lowest] 4.9; 95% CI, 4.9-4.9), highest rate of death (6.6%; 95% CI, 6.3%-6.9% vs [lowest] 0.1%; 95% CI, <0.1%-0.2%), and highest rate of placement in a long-term care facility (2.0%; 95% CI, 1.8%-2.2% vs [lowest] <0.1%; 95% CI, <0.1%-0.1%). Patients seen by infectious disease specialists had the highest complexity as assessed by the other 5 markers: rate of a mental health condition (29%; 95% CI, 28%-29% vs [lowest] 14%; 95% CI, 14%-14%), mean number of physician types (5.5; 95% CI, 5.5-5.6 vs [lowest] 2.1; 95% CI, 2.1-2.1), mean number of physicians (13.0; 95% CI, 12.9-13.1 vs [lowest] 3.8; 95% CI, 3.8-3.8), mean days in hospital (15.0; 95% CI, 14.9-15.0 vs [lowest] 0.4; 95% CI, 0.4-0.4), and mean emergency department visits (2.6; 95% CI, 2.6-2.6 vs [lowest] 0.5; 95% CI, 0.5-0.5). When types of physician were ranked according to patient complexity across all 9 markers, the order from most to least complex was nephrologist, infectious disease specialist, neurologist, respirologist, hematologist, rheumatologist, gastroenterologist, cardiologist, general internist, endocrinologist, allergist/immunologist, dermatologist, and family physician. Substantial differences were found in 9 different markers of patient complexity across different types of physician, including medical subspecialists, general internists, and family physicians. These findings have implications for medical education and health policy.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) fulfills the World Health Organization criteria for mass screening, but screening uptake is low in most countries. CRC screening is resource intensive, and it is unclear if an optimal strategy exists. The objective of this study was to perform an economic evaluation of CRC screening in average risk North American individuals considering all relevant screening modalities and current CRC treatment costs. An incremental cost-utility analysis using a Markov model was performed comparing guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) annually, fecal DNA every 3 years, flexible sigmoidoscopy or computed tomographic colonography every 5 years, and colonoscopy every 10 years. All strategies were also compared to a no screening natural history arm. Given that different FIT assays and collection methods have been previously tested, three distinct FIT testing strategies were considered, on the basis of studies that have reported \"low,\" \"mid,\" and \"high\" test performance characteristics for detecting adenomas and CRC. Adenoma and CRC prevalence rates were based on a recent systematic review whereas screening adherence, test performance, and CRC treatment costs were based on publicly available data. The outcome measures included lifetime costs, number of cancers, cancer-related deaths, quality-adjusted life-years gained, and incremental cost-utility ratios. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed. Annual FIT, assuming mid-range testing characteristics, was more effective and less costly compared to all strategies (including no screening) except FIT-high. Among the lifetimes of 100,000 average-risk patients, the number of cancers could be reduced from 4,857 to 1,393 [corrected] and the number of CRC deaths from 1,782 [corrected] to 457, while saving CAN$68 per person. Although screening patients with FIT became more expensive than a strategy of no screening when the test performance of FIT was reduced, or the cost of managing CRC was lowered (e.g., for jurisdictions that do not fund expensive biologic chemotherapeutic regimens), CRC screening with FIT remained economically attractive. CRC screening with FIT reduces the risk of CRC and CRC-related deaths, and lowers health care costs in comparison to no screening and to other existing screening strategies. Health policy decision makers should consider prioritizing funding for CRC screening using FIT.

Background Public support of public health measures including physical distancing, masking, staying home while sick, avoiding crowded indoor spaces and contact tracing/exposure notification applications remains critical for reducing spread of COVID-19. The aim of our work was to understand current behaviours and attitudes towards public health measures as well as barriers individuals face in following public health measures. We also sought to identify attitudes persons have regarding a COVID-19 vaccine and reasons why they may not accept a vaccine. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in August 2020, in Alberta, Canada in persons 18 years and older. This survey evaluated current behaviours, barriers and attitudes towards public health measures and a COVID-19 vaccine. Cluster analysis was used to identify key patterns that summarize data variations among observations. Results Of the 60 total respondents, the majority of persons were always or often physically distancing (73%), masking (65%) and staying home while sick (67%). Bars/pubs/lounges or nightclubs were visited rarely or never by 63% of respondents. Persons identified staying home while sick to provide the highest benefit (83%) in reducing spread of COVID-19. There were a large proportion of persons who had not downloaded or used a contact tracing/exposure notification app (77%) and who would not receive a COVID-19 vaccine when available (20%) or were unsure (12%). Reporting health authorities as most trusted sources of health information was associated with greater percentage of potential uptake of vaccine but not related to contact tracing app download and use. Individuals with lower concern of getting and spreading COVID-19 showed the least uptake of public health measures except for avoiding public places such as bars. Lower concern regarding COVID-19 was also associated with more negative responses to taking a potential COVID-19 vaccine. Conclusion These results suggest informational frames and themes focusing on individual risks, highlighting concern for COVID-19 and targeting improving trust for health authorities may be most effective in increasing public health measures. With the ultimate goal of preventing spread of COVID-19, understanding persons’ attitudes towards both public health measures and a COVID-19 vaccine remains critical to addressing barriers and implementing targeted interventions and messaging to improve uptake.

In 2014, the federal Advisory Panel on Healthcare Innovation highlighted an urgent need for fundamental changes in how health care is organized, financed and delivered across Canada. The panel noted examples of innovations affecting health outcomes within specific areas of health in some provinces, but also a general failure to scale up successful pilots provincially. England, Scotland and Australia have implemented systemwide formal clinical networks across their health systems, although these networks have varied in composition, target areas, structure and processes. Within Canada, Alberta has established province-wide clinical networks and British Columbia recently implemented such entities to improve care in two distinct clinical domains. We consider evidence of the effect of clinical networks, and discuss potential barriers and enablers of such networks to inform strengthening of health systems in Canada. Canadian provinces developing clinical networks should consider the opportunities and barriers unique to each province, including the ability to partner effectively with components of the health system provincially.