Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26742115›Full record

ArticleHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2015

Barriers and Facilitators for Primary Care Reform in Canada: Results from a Deliberative Synthesis across Five Provinces.

Jean-Frédéric Levesque, Jeannie L Haggerty, William Hogg, Frederick Burge, Sabrina T Wong, Alan Katz, Dominique Grimard, Jan-Willem Weenink, Raynald Pineault

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. On redesigning public health in Québec: lessons learned from the pandemic.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Primary care renewal strategies in Manitoba: Family physicians' perceptions.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jean-Frédéric LevesqueCentre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Bureau of Health Information Sydney, Australia.
Jeannie L HaggertyDepartment of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, QC.
William HoggDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON.
Frederick BurgeDepartment of Family Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS.
Sabrina T WongSchool of Nursing Culture, Gender and Health Research Unit, Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC.
Alan KatzFamily Medicine and Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB.
Dominique GrimardDirection de santé publique de l'Agence de la santé et des services sociaux de Montréal and Institut national de santé publique du Québec, Montréal, QC.
Jan-Willem WeeninkScientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare (IQ Healthcare), Radboud University Medical Center, The Netherlands.
Raynald PineaultDirection de santé publique de l'Agence de la santé et des services sociaux de Montréal and Institut national de santé publique du Québec, Montréal, QC.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSince 2000, primary care (PC) reforms have been implemented in various Canadian provinces. Emerging organizational models and policies are at various levels of implementation across jurisdictions. Few cross-provincial analyses of these reforms have been realized. The aim of this study is to identify the factors that have facilitated or hindered implementation of reforms in Canadian provinces between 2000 and 2010.

methodsA literature and policy scan identified evaluation studies across Canadian jurisdictions. Experts from British Columbia, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Quebec were asked to review the scope of published evaluations and draft provincial case descriptions. A one-day deliberative forum was held, bringing together researchers (n = 40) and decision-makers (n = 20) from all the participating provinces.

resultsDespite a relative lack of published evaluations, our results suggest that PC reform has varied with regard to the scope and the policy levers used to implement change. Some provinces implemented specific PC models, while other provinces designed overarching policies aiming at changing professional behaviour and practice. The main perceived barriers to reform were the lack of financial investment, resistance from professional associations, too overtly prescriptive approaches lacking adaptability and an overly centralized governance model. The main perceived facilitators were a strong financial commitment using various allocation and payment approaches, the cooperation of professional associations and an incremental emergent change philosophy based on a strong decentralization of decisions allowing adaptation to local circumstances. So far the most beneficial results of the reforms seem to be an increase in patients' affiliation with a usual source of care, improved experience of care by patients and a higher workforce satisfaction.

conclusionPC reforms currently under consideration in other jurisdictions could learn from the factors identified as promoting or hindering change in the provinces that have been most proactive.

Indexed as

British ColumbiaHealth Care ReformHumansManitobaNova ScotiaOntarioOrganizational InnovationPrimary Health CareQuality of Health CareQuebec

Identifiers

PMID26742115
PMCPMC4729282

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.