Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Donna Manca is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Donna Manca.


Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine | 2009

Building a Pan-Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network: Initial Development and Moving Forward

Richard Birtwhistle; Karim Keshavjee; Anita Lambert-Lanning; Marshall Godwin; Michelle Greiver; Donna Manca; Claudia Lagacé

The development of a pan-Canadian network of primary care research networks for studying issues in primary care has been the vision of Canadian primary care researchers for many years. With the opportunity for funding from the Public Health Agency of Canada and the support of the College of Family Physicians of Canada, we have planned and developed a project to assess the feasibility of a network of networks of family medicine practices that exclusively use electronic medical records. The Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network will collect longitudinal data from practices across Canada to assess the primary care epidemiology and management of 5 chronic diseases: hypertension, diabetes, depression, chronic obstructive lung disease, and osteoarthritis. This article reports on the 7-month first phase of the feasibility project of 7 regional networks in Canada to develop a business plan, including governance, mission, and vision; develop memorandum of agreements with the regional networks and their respective universities; develop and obtain approval of research ethics board applications; develop methods for data extraction, a Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network database, and initial assessment of the types of data that can be extracted; and recruitment of 10 practices at each network that use electronic medical records. The project will continue in phase 2 of the feasibility testing until April 2010.


Maternal and Child Nutrition | 2014

The Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition (APrON) cohort study: rationale and methods

Bonnie J. Kaplan; Gerald F. Giesbrecht; Brenda Leung; Catherine J. Field; Deborah Dewey; Rhonda C. Bell; Donna Manca; Maeve O'Beirne; David W. Johnston; Victor J. M. Pop; Nalini Singhal; Lisa Gagnon; Francois P. Bernier; Misha Eliasziw; Linda J. McCargar; Libbe Kooistra; Anna Farmer; Marja Cantell; Laki Goonewardene; Linda Casey; Nicole Letourneau; Jonathan W. Martin; APrON Study Team

The Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition (APrON) study is an ongoing prospective cohort study that recruits pregnant women early in pregnancy and, as of 2012, is following up their infants to 3 years of age. It has currently enrolled approximately 5000 Canadians (2000 pregnant women, their offspring and many of their partners). The primary aims of the APrON study were to determine the relationships between maternal nutrient intake and status, before, during and after gestation, and (1) maternal mood; (2) birth and obstetric outcomes; and (3) infant neurodevelopment. We have collected comprehensive maternal nutrition, anthropometric, biological and mental health data at multiple points in the pregnancy and the post-partum period, as well as obstetrical, birth, health and neurodevelopmental outcomes of these pregnancies. The study continues to follow the infants through to 36 months of age. The current report describes the study design and methods, and findings of some pilot work. The APrON study is a significant resource with opportunities for collaboration.


Annals of Family Medicine | 2014

Validating the 8 CPCSSN Case Definitions for Chronic Disease Surveillance in a Primary Care Database of Electronic Health Records

Tyler Williamson; Michael Green; Richard Birtwhistle; Shahriar Khan; Stephanie Garies; Sabrina T. Wong; Nandini Natarajan; Donna Manca; Neil Drummond

PURPOSE The Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) is Canada’s first national chronic disease surveillance system based on electronic health record (EHR) data. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate case definitions and case-finding algorithms used to identify 8 common chronic conditions in primary care: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), dementia, depression, diabetes, hypertension, osteoarthritis, parkinsonism, and epilepsy. METHODS Using a cross-sectional data validation study design, regional and local CPCSSN networks from British Columbia, Alberta (2), Ontario, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland participated in validating EHR case-finding algorithms. A random sample of EHR charts were reviewed, oversampling for patients older than 60 years and for those with epilepsy or parkinsonism. Charts were reviewed by trained research assistants and residents who were blinded to the algorithmic diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPVs, NPVs) were calculated. RESULTS We obtained data from 1,920 charts from 4 different EHR systems (Wolf, Med Access, Nightingale, and PS Suite). For the total sample, sensitivity ranged from 78% (osteoarthritis) to more than 95% (diabetes, epilepsy, and parkinsonism); specificity was greater than 94% for all diseases; PPV ranged from 72% (dementia) to 93% (hypertension); NPV ranged from 86% (hypertension) to greater than 99% (diabetes, dementia, epilepsy, and parkinsonism). CONCLUSIONS The CPCSSN diagnostic algorithms showed excellent sensitivity and specificity for hypertension, diabetes, epilepsy, and parkinsonism and acceptable values for the other conditions. CPCSSN data are appropriate for use in public health surveillance, primary care, and health services research, as well as to inform policy for these diseases.


BMC Family Practice | 2013

Improving chronic disease prevention and screening in primary care: results of the BETTER pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial

Eva Grunfeld; Donna Manca; Rahim Moineddin; Kevin E. Thorpe; Jeffrey S. Hoch; Denise Campbell-Scherer; Christopher Meaney; Jess Rogers; J. Beca; Paul Krueger; Muhammad Mamdani

BackgroundPrimary care provides most of the evidence-based chronic disease prevention and screening services offered by the healthcare system. However, there remains a gap between recommended preventive services and actual practice. This trial (the BETTER Trial) aimed to improve preventive care of heart disease, diabetes, colorectal, breast and cervical cancers, and relevant lifestyle factors through a practice facilitation intervention set in primary care.MethodsPragmatic two-way factorial cluster RCT with Primary Care Physicians’ practices as the unit of allocation and individual patients as the unit of analysis. The setting was urban Primary Care Team practices in two Canadian provinces. Eight Primary Care Team practices were randomly assigned to receive the practice-level intervention or wait-list control; 4 physicians in each team (32 physicians) were randomly assigned to receive the patient-level intervention or wait-list control. Patients randomly selected from physicians’ rosters were stratified into two groups: 1) general and 2) moderate mental illness. The interventions involved a multifaceted, evidence-based, tailored practice-level intervention with a Practice Facilitator, and a patient-level intervention involving a one-hour visit with a Prevention Practitioner where patients received a tailored ‘prevention prescription’. The primary outcome was a composite Summary Quality Index of 28 evidence-based chronic disease prevention and screening actions with pre-defined targets, expressed as the ratio of eligible actions at baseline that were met at follow-up. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted.Results789 of 1,260 (63%) eligible patients participated. On average, patients were eligible for 8.96 (SD 3.2) actions at baseline. In the adjusted analysis, control patients met 23.1% (95% CI: 19.2% to 27.1%) of target actions, compared to 28.5% (95% CI: 20.9% to 36.0%) receiving the practice-level intervention, 55.6% (95% CI: 49.0% to 62.1%) receiving the patient-level intervention, and 58.9% (95% CI: 54.7% to 63.1%) receiving both practice- and patient-level interventions (patient-level intervention versus control, P < 0.001). The benefit of the patient-level intervention was seen in both strata. The extra cost of the intervention was


Implementation Science | 2016

Implementation of the BETTER 2 program: a qualitative study exploring barriers and facilitators of a novel way to improve chronic disease prevention and screening in primary care.

Nicolette Sopcak; Carolina Aguilar; Mary Ann O’Brien; Candace I. J. Nykiforuk; Kris Aubrey-Bassler; Richard M. Cullen; Eva Grunfeld; Donna Manca

26.43CAN (95% CI:


BMC Family Practice | 2013

Finding common ground to achieve a “good death”: family physicians working with substitute decision-makers of dying patients. A qualitative grounded theory study

Amy Tan; Donna Manca

16 to


BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | 2013

The most effective strategy for recruiting a pregnancy cohort: a tale of two cities

Donna Manca; Maeve O’Beirne; Teresa Lightbody; David W. Johnston; Dayna L. Dymianiw; Katarzyna Nastalska; Lubna Anis; Sarah Loehr; Anne Gilbert; Bonnie J. Kaplan

44) per additional action met.ConclusionsA Prevention Practitioner can improve the implementation of clinically important prevention and screening for chronic diseases in a cost-effective manner.


Implementation Science | 2014

Implementation and evaluation of the 5As framework of obesity management in primary care: design of the 5As Team (5AsT) randomized control trial

Denise Campbell-Scherer; Jodie Asselin; Adedayo Osunlana; Sheri Fielding; Robin Anderson; Christian F. Rueda-Clausen; Jeffrey A. Johnson; Ayodele A Ogunleye; Andrew Cave; Donna Manca; Arya M. Sharma

BackgroundBETTER (Building on Existing Tools to Improve Chronic Disease Prevention and Screening in Primary Care) is a patient-based intervention to improve chronic disease prevention and screening (CDPS) for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, and associated lifestyle factors in patients aged 40 to 65. The key component of BETTER is a prevention practitioner (PP), a health care professional with specialized skills in CDPS who meets with patients to develop a personalized prevention prescription, using the BETTER toolkit and Brief Action Planning. The purpose of this qualitative study was to understand facilitators and barriers of the implementation of the BETTER 2 program among clinicians, patients, and stakeholders in three (urban, rural, and remote) primary care settings in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.MethodsWe collected and analyzed responses from 20 key informant interviews and 5 focus groups, as well as memos and field notes. Data were organized using Nvivo 10 software and coded using constant comparison methods. We then employed the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to focus our analysis on the domains most relevant for program implementation.ResultsThe following key elements, within the five CFIR domains, were identified as impacting the implementation of BETTER 2: (1) intervention characteristics—complexity and cost of the intervention; (2) outer setting—perception of fit including lack of remuneration, lack of resources, and duplication of services, as well as patients’ needs as perceived by physicians and patients; (3) characteristics of prevention practitioners—interest in prevention and ability to support and motivate patients; (4) inner setting—the availability of a local champion and working in a team versus working as a team; and (5) process—planning and engaging, collaboration, and teamwork.ConclusionsThe implementation of a novel CDPS program into new primary care settings is a complex, multi-level process. This study identified key elements that hindered or facilitated the implementation of the BETTER approach in three primary care settings in Newfoundland and Labrador. Employing the CFIR as an overarching typology allows for comparisons with other contexts and settings, and may be useful for practices, researchers, and policy-makers interested in the implementation of CDPS programs.


CMAJ Open | 2014

The diagnosis of depression and its treatment in Canadian primary care practices: an epidemiological study

Sabrina T. Wong; Donna Manca; David Barber; Rachael Morkem; Shahriar Khan; Jyoti Kotecha; Tyler Williamson; Richard Birtwhistle; Scott B. Patten

AbstractBackgroundSubstitute decision-makers are integral to the care of dying patients and make many healthcare decisions for patients. Unfortunately, conflict between physicians and surrogate decision-makers is not uncommon in end-of-life care and this could contribute to a “bad death” experience for the patient and family. We aim to describe Canadian family physicians’ experiences of conflict with substitute decision-makers of dying patients to identify factors that may facilitate or hinder the end-of-life decision-making process. This insight will help determine how to best manage these complex situations, ultimately improving the overall care of dying patients.MethodsGrounded Theory methodology was used with semi-structured interviews of family physicians in Edmonton, Canada, who experienced conflict with substitute decision-makers of dying patients. Purposeful sampling included maximum variation and theoretical sampling strategies. Interviews were audio-taped, and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts, field notes and memos were coded using the constant-comparative method to identify key concepts until saturation was achieved and a theoretical framework emerged.ResultsEleven family physicians with a range of 3 to 40 years in clinical practice participated.The family physicians expressed a desire to achieve a “good death” and described their role in positively influencing the experience of death. Finding Common Ground to Achieve a “Good Death” for the Patient emerged as an important process which includes 1) Building Mutual Trust and Rapport through identifying key players and delivering manageable amounts of information, 2) Understanding One Another through active listening and ultimately, and 3) Making Informed, Shared Decisions. Facilitators and barriers to achieving Common Ground were identified. Barriers were linked to conflict. The inability to resolve an overt conflict may lead to an impasse at any point. A process for Resolving an Impasse is described.ConclusionsA novel framework for developing Common Ground to manage conflicts during end-of-life decision-making discussions may assist in achieving a “good death”. These results could aid in educating physicians, learners, and the public on how to achieve productive collaborative relationships during end-of-life decision-making for dying patients, and ultimately improve their deaths.


Implementation Science | 2014

Implementing and evaluating a program to facilitate chronic disease prevention and screening in primary care: A mixed methods program evaluation

Donna Manca; Kris Aubrey-Bassler; Kami Kandola; Carolina Aguilar; Denise Campbell-Scherer; Nicolette Sopcak; Mary Ann O'Brien; Christopher Meaney; Vee Faria; Julia Baxter; Rahim Moineddin; Ginetta Salvalaggio; Lee A. Green; Andrew Cave; Eva Grunfeld

BackgroundPregnant women were recruited into the Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition (APrON) study in two cities in Alberta, Calgary and Edmonton. In Calgary, a larger proportion of women obtain obstetrical care from family physicians than from obstetricians; otherwise the cities have similar characteristics. Despite similarities of the cities, the recruitment success was very different. The purpose of this paper is to describe recruitment strategies, determine which were most successful and discuss reasons for the different success rates between the two cities.MethodsRecruitment methods in both cities involved approaching pregnant women (< 27 weeks gestation) through the waiting rooms of physician offices, distributing posters and pamphlets, word of mouth, media, and the Internet.ResultsBetween May 2009 and November 2010, 1,200 participants were recruited, 86% (1,028/1,200) from Calgary and 14% (172/1,200) from Edmonton, two cities with similar demographics. The most effective strategy overall involved face-to-face recruitment through clinics in physician and ultrasound offices with access to a large volume of women in early pregnancy. This method was most economical when clinic staff received an honorarium to discuss the study with patients and forward contact information to the research team.ConclusionRecruiting a pregnancy cohort face-to-face through physician offices was the most effective method in both cities and a new critically important finding is that employing this method is only feasible in large volume maternity clinics. The proportion of family physicians providing antenatal and post-natal care may impact recruitment success and should be studied further.

Collaboration


Dive into the Donna Manca's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mary Ann O’Brien

Ontario Institute for Cancer Research

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge