Jann Paquette-Warren

Impact of a quality improvement program on primary healthcare in Canada: A mixed-method evaluation

PURPOSE Rigorous comprehensive evaluations of primary healthcare (PHC) quality improvement (QI) initiatives are lacking. This article describes the evaluation of the Quality Improvement and Innovation Partnership Learning Collaborative (QIIP-LC), an Ontario-wide PHC QI program targeting type 2 diabetes management, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, access to care, and team functioning. METHODS This article highlights the primary outcome results of an external retrospective, multi-measure, mixed-method evaluation of the QIIP-LC, including: (1) matched-control pre-post chart audit of diabetes management (A1c/foot exams) and rate of CRC screening; (2) post-only advanced access survey (third-next available appointment); and (3) post-only semi-structured interviews (team functioning). RESULTS Chart audit data was collected from 34 consenting physicians per group (of which 88% provided access data). Between-group differences were not statistically significant (A1c [p=0.10]; foot exams [p=0.45]; CRC screening [p=0.77]; advanced access [p=0.22]). Qualitative interview (n=42) themes highlighted the success of the program in helping build interdisciplinary team functioning and capacity. CONCLUSION The rigorous design and methodology of the QIIP-LC evaluation utilizing a control group is one of the most significant efforts thus far to demonstrate the impact of a QI program in PHC, with improvements over time in both QIIP and control groups offering a likely explanation for the lack of statistically significant primary outcomes. Team functioning was a key success, with team-based chronic care highlighted as pivotal for improved health outcomes. Policy makers should strive to endorse QI programs with proven success through rigorous evaluation to ensure evidence-based healthcare policy and funding.

Improving chronic care through continuing education of interprofessional primary healthcare teams: a process evaluation

Abstract Process evaluations assess program structures and implementation processes so that outcomes can be accurately interpreted. This article reports the results of a process evaluation of Partnerships for Health, an initiative targeting interprofessional primary healthcare teams to improve chronic care in Southwestern Ontario, Canada. Program documentation, participant observation, and in-depth interviews were used to capture details about the program structure, implementation process, and experience of implementers and participants. Results suggest that the intended program was modified during implementation to better meet the needs of participants and to overcome participation barriers. Elements of program activities perceived as most effective included series of off-site learning/classroom sessions, practice-based/workplace information-technology (IT) support, and practice coaching because they provided: dedicated time to learn how to improve chronic care; team-building/networking within and across teams; hands-on IT training/guidance; and flexibility to meet individual practice needs. This process evaluation highlighted key program activities that were essential to the continuing education (CE) of interprofessional primary healthcare teams as they attempted to transform primary healthcare to improve chronic care.

The Diabetes Evaluation Framework for Innovative National Evaluations (DEFINE): Construct and Content Validation Using a Modified Delphi Method

OBJECTIVES In order to scale-up successful innovations, more evidence is needed to evaluate programs that attempt to address the rising prevalence of diabetes and the associated burdens on patients and the healthcare system. This study aimed to assess the construct and content validity of the Diabetes Evaluation Framework for Innovative National Evaluations (DEFINE), a tool developed to guide the evaluation, design and implementation with built-in knowledge translation principles. METHODS A modified Delphi method, including 3 individual rounds (questionnaire with 7-point agreement/importance Likert scales and/or open-ended questions) and 1 group round (open discussion) were conducted. Twelve experts in diabetes, research, knowledge translation, evaluation and policy from Canada (Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia) and Australia participated. Quantitative consensus criteria were an interquartile range of ≤1. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically and confirmed by participants. An importance scale was used to determine a priority multi-level indicator set. Items rated very or extremely important by 80% or more of the experts were reviewed in the final group round to build the final set. RESULTS Participants reached consensus on the content and construct validity of DEFINE, including its title, overall goal, 5-step evaluation approach, medical and nonmedical determinants of health schematics, full list of indicators and associated measurement tools, priority multi-level indicator set and next steps in DEFINEs development. CONCLUSIONS Validated by experts, DEFINE has the right theoretic components to evaluate comprehensively diabetes prevention and management programs and to support acquisition of evidence that could influence the knowledge translation of innovations to reduce the burden of diabetes.

Case study of evaluations that go beyond clinical outcomes to assess quality improvement diabetes programmes using the Diabetes Evaluation Framework for Innovative National Evaluations (DEFINE).

Rationale, aims and objectives Investments in efforts to reduce the burden of diabetes on patients and health care are critical; however, more evaluation is needed to provide evidence that informs and supports future policies and programmes. The newly developed Diabetes Evaluation Framework for Innovative National Evaluations (DEFINE) incorporates the theoretical concepts needed to facilitate the capture of critical information to guide investments, policy and programmatic decision making. The aim of the study is to assess the applicability and value of DEFINE in comprehensive real-world evaluation. Method Using a critical and positivist approach, this intrinsic and collective case study retrospectively examines two naturalistic evaluations to demonstrate how DEFINE could be used when conducting real-world comprehensive evaluations in health care settings. Results The variability between the cases and the evaluation designs are described and aligned to the DEFINE goals, steps and sub-steps. The majority of the theoretical steps of DEFINE were exemplified in both cases, although limited for knowledge translation efforts. Application of DEFINE to evaluate diverse programmes that target various chronic diseases is needed to further test the inclusivity and built-in flexibility of DEFINE and its role in encouraging more comprehensive knowledge translation. Conclusions This case study shows how DEFINE could be used to structure or guide comprehensive evaluations of programmes and initiatives implemented in health care settings and support scale-up of successful innovations. Future use of the framework will continue to strengthen its value in guiding programme evaluation and informing health policy to reduce the burden of diabetes and other chronic diseases.Abstract Rationale, aims and objectives Investments in efforts to reduce the burden of diabetes on patients and health care are critical; however, more evaluation is needed to provide evidence that informs and supports future policies and programmes. The newly developed Diabetes Evaluation Framework for Innovative National Evaluations (DEFINE) incorporates the theoretical concepts needed to facilitate the capture of critical information to guide investments, policy and programmatic decision making. The aim of the study is to assess the applicability and value of DEFINE in comprehensive real‐world evaluation. Method Using a critical and positivist approach, this intrinsic and collective case study retrospectively examines two naturalistic evaluations to demonstrate how DEFINE could be used when conducting real‐world comprehensive evaluations in health care settings. Results The variability between the cases and the evaluation designs are described and aligned to the DEFINE goals, steps and sub‐steps. The majority of the theoretical steps of DEFINE were exemplified in both cases, although limited for knowledge translation efforts. Application of DEFINE to evaluate diverse programmes that target various chronic diseases is needed to further test the inclusivity and built‐in flexibility of DEFINE and its role in encouraging more comprehensive knowledge translation. Conclusions This case study shows how DEFINE could be used to structure or guide comprehensive evaluations of programmes and initiatives implemented in health care settings and support scale‐up of successful innovations. Future use of the framework will continue to strengthen its value in guiding programme evaluation and informing health policy to reduce the burden of diabetes and other chronic diseases.

Developing community-driven quality improvement initiatives to enhance chronic disease care in Indigenous communities in Canada: The FORGE AHEAD program protocol

BackgroundGiven the dramatic rise and impact of chronic diseases and gaps in care in Indigenous peoples in Canada, a shift from the dominant episodic and responsive healthcare model most common in First Nations communities to one that places emphasis on proactive prevention and chronic disease management is urgently needed.MethodsThe Transformation of Indigenous Primary Healthcare Delivery (FORGE AHEAD) Program partners with 11 First Nations communities across six provinces in Canada to develop and evaluate community-driven quality improvement (QI) initiatives to enhance chronic disease care. FORGE AHEAD is a 5-year research program (2013–2017) that utilizes a pre-post mixed-methods observational design rooted in participatory research principles to work with communities in developing culturally relevant innovations and improved access to available services. This intensive program incorporates a series of 10 inter-related and progressive program activities designed to foster community-driven initiatives with type 2 diabetes mellitus as the action disease. Preparatory activities include a national community profile survey, best practice and policy literature review, and readiness tool development. Community-level intervention activities include community and clinical readiness consultations, development of a diabetes registry and surveillance system, and QI activities. With a focus on capacity building, all community-level activities are driven by trained community members who champion QI initiatives in their community. Program wrap-up activities include readiness tool validation, cost-analysis and process evaluation. In collaboration with Health Canada and the Aboriginal Diabetes Initiative, scale-up toolkits will be developed in order to build on lessons-learned, tools and methods, and to fuel sustainability and spread of successful innovations.DiscussionThe outcomes of this research program, its related cost and the subsequent policy recommendations, will have the potential to significantly affect future policy decisions pertaining to chronic disease care in First Nations communities in Canada.Trial registrationCurrent ClinicalTrial.gov protocol ID NCT02234973. Date of Registration: July 30, 2014.

Investments in Diabetes Strategies: Time to Evaluate!

1499-2671/

The FORGE AHEAD clinical readiness consultation tool: a validated tool to assess clinical readiness for chronic disease care mobilization in Canada’s First Nations

e see front matter 2014 Canadian Dia http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjd.2014.02.029 Diabetes is one of the most common and preventable chronic diseases, yet an estimated 3.7 million Canadians are projected to develop the disease by 2018/2019 (1). Diabetes poses a significant burden on our economy, with a rise of

Impact of a primary healthcare quality improvement program on diabetes in Canada: evaluation of the Quality Improvement and Innovation Partnership (QIIP)

4.7 billion (nearly 70%) since 2000 to an estimated

What do practitioners think? A qualitative study of a shared care mental health and nutrition primary care program

11.7 billion in 2010 (2). Over the past decade, government investment to address the growing burden of diabetes has been significant (1,3,4). In 2005, the federal government allocated

Results of a Mixed-Methods Evaluation of Partnerships for Health: A Quality Improvement Initiative for Diabetes Care

18 million per year for the Canadian Diabetes Strategy,which focuses on the prevention andmanagement of diabetes. In 2010/2011,