CONTEXT: Transition from the pediatric to the adult health care system is a complex process that should include medical, psychosocial, educational, recreational, and vocational considerations. OBJECTIVE: In this systematic review, we aim to synthesize the evidence on transitional care interventions (TCIs) to improve the quality of life (QoL) for adolescents and young adults with childhood-onset disabilities, including neurodevelopmental disorders. DATA SOURCES: Four electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) were searched. STUDY SELECTION: In the included studies, researchers examined TCIs for adolescents and young adults (12-24 years of age) with childhood-onset disabilities. Studies were experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational studies published in the last 26 years. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently completed study screening, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies were included. Five studies reported on QoL, but statistically significant improvements were noted in only 1 of these studies. Significant improvements were also found in secondary outcomes including disability-related knowledge and transitional readiness. TCIs targeted patients, families and/or caregivers, and health care providers and exhibited great heterogeneity in their characteristics and components. LIMITATIONS: Inconsistent reporting on interventions between studies hindered synthesis of the relationships between specific intervention characteristics and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is limited evidence on the impact of TCIs on the QoL for youth with childhood-onset disabilities, there is indication that they can be effective in improving patient and provider outcomes. The initiation of transition-focused care at an early age may contribute to improved long-term health outcomes in this population.

Background Neurological disorders may negatively impact community integration and/or quality of life. Peer support has emerged as a potential strategy to enhance patients’ efficacy in managing their own health. This review examines the key characteristics and impact of peer support interventions for adults with acquired brain injury, cerebral palsy, and spina bifida on community integration and quality of life. Methods Eligible studies reported on peer support interventions for adults (16 years of age or older) with acquired brain injury, cerebral palsy, or spina bifida. Only randomized controlled trials published in English in the last 10 years were included. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were used to conduct the literature search. Two reviewers independently screened studies, abstracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias (for individual study elements and overall) using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Results The systematic review included 6 trials reporting on acquired brain injury only. Of these studies, 4 reported on stroke and 2 reported on traumatic brain injury. Two studies found significant improvements in quality of life following peer support. No studies reported significant results on community integration. Considerable heterogeneity existed in the key characteristics of interventions. Conclusions There are a limited number of studies on the impact of peer support interventions for adults with acquired brain injury, cerebral palsy, or spina bifida on community integration and quality of life. Standardization of key intervention characteristics may aid the global adoption of peer support as a formalized, evidence-based practice. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4110-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is estimated to affect 10 million people annually, making it a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. One cost-effective intervention that has been shown to minimize some of the negative sequelae after TBI is peer support. However, the evidence supporting the benefits of peer support for individuals with TBI is sparse and of low quality. Integrated knowledge translation (iKT) may be one approach to optimizing the evaluation of peer support programs among individuals with TBI. Therefore, the objectives are: (1) To understand key informants’ perspectives of the barriers and facilitators of participating in peer support research and programs among individuals with TBI; (2) to understand key informants’ perspectives on the perceived impacts of peer support programs on individuals with TBI; and, (3) to demonstrate how an iKT approach can inform the development and implementation of a pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial (RCT). Methods A qualitative descriptive approach using one-on-one semi-structured interviews was used. Purposive sampling of 22 key informants included 8 peer support mentors, 4 individuals with TBI who received peer support, 3 caregivers of individuals with TBI, 4 peer support program staff, and 3 academics in peer support and/or TBI. Results There were five main themes related to the barriers and facilitators to participating in peer support research and programs: knowledge, awareness, and communication; logistics of participating; readiness and motivation to participate; need for clear expectations; and matching. There were three main themes related to the perceived impact of peer support: acceptance, community, social experiences; vicarious experience/learning through others: shared experiences, role-modelling, encouragement; and “I feel better.” Discussions with our Research Partner led to several significant adaptations to our trial protocol, including removing the twice/week intervention arm, shortening of the length of trial, and changing the measure for the community integration outcome. Discussion/Conclusion This is the first study to use an iKT approach to inform a trial protocol and the first to assess the barriers and facilitators to participating in peer support research.

Background: The long-term consequences of traumatic brain injury can create major barriers to community integration. Peer support represents a sustainable model of support across this transition. The objective of the current study was to determine the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial on the Ontario Brain Injury Association Peer Support Program and the preliminary effectiveness of the program on community integration, mood, health-related quality of life, and self-efficacy; Methods: A pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial with an embedded qualitative component was conducted. Mentees with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (n = 13) were randomized to a weekly intervention or waitlist control group. Interviews were conducted with a subset of mentees and peer mentors (n = 10). Integration of the quantitative and qualitative data was completed using a joint display approach; Results: No statistically significant results were found for community integration, mood, or self-efficacy; however, changes in these outcomes were accompanied by moderate-to-large effect sizes. Within health-related quality of life, the mean pain score of the intervention group was significantly lower than that of the control group at the two-month timepoint but not at completion. Interviews revealed proximal improvements in knowledge, skills, and goals, and identified two domains related to trial acceptability: (1) environmental context and resources, and (2) reinforcement; Conclusions: Given the conceivable importance of proximal improvements in domains such as knowledge, skills, and/or goals for the attainment of more distal outcomes, modifications to the existing Peer Support Program may be warranted. The introduction of program recommendations which promote discussion around particular domains may help facilitate long-term improvements in health outcomes.

Background:The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated pre-existing challenges with respect to access to elective surgery across Canada, and a single-entry model (SEM) approach has been proposed as an equitable and efficient method to help manage the backlog. With Ontario's recent investment in centralized surgical wait-list management, we sought to understand the views of health system leaders on the role of SEMs in managing the elective surgery backlog.Methods: We used the qualitative method of interpretive description to explore participant perspectives and identify practical strategies for policy-makers, administrators and clinical leaders. We conducted semistructured interviews with health system leaders from across Ontario on Zoom between March and June 2021. We used snowball and purposive sampling. Inclusion criteria included Ontario health care leaders, fluent in English or French, in positions relevant to managing the elective surgery backlog. Exclusion criteria were individuals who work outside Ontario, or do not hold relevant roles.Results: Our interviews with 10 health system leaders -including hospital chief executive officers, surgeons, administrators and policy experts -resulted in 5 emergent domains: perceptions of the backlog, operationalizing and financing SEMs, barriers, facilitators, and equity and patient factors. All participants emphasized the need for clinical leaders to champion SEMs and the utility of SEMs in managing wait-lists for high-volume, low-acuity, low-complexity and low-variation surgeries.Interpretation: Although SEMs are no panacea, the participants in our study stated that they believe SEMs can improve quality and reduce variability in wait times when SEMs are designed to address local needs and are implemented with buy-in from champions. Health care leaders should consider SEMs for improving surgical backlog management in their local jurisdictions.

No abstract

As a key component of overall health and quality of life, oral health is recognized by public health organizations globally as a basic human right. Dentists are oral health experts involved in the primary prevention of oral injury and the detection and management of oral diseases. As regulated healthcare professionals, dentists identify and treat dental caries, gum disease, oral cancers, and edentulism, among other conditions. Oral diseases that go undetected and/or untreated burden patients with increased severity of disease and worse health outcomes. The Canadian Dental Association (CDA) advises most Canadians to visit a dentist every 6 months, yet routine access to primary oral healthcare is not covered by Canada’s publicly funded healthcare insurance. Investments by the federal government into dental services for high-risk groups have failed to resolve pervasive oral health disparities among Canadians related to dental care affordability, accessibility, and availability. Vulnerable groups across Canada, including children, seniors in long-term care, Indigenous peoples, new immigrants with refugee status, people with special needs, and the low-income population, have been identified as having challenges accessing regular dental care. Herein, an equity-focused commentary on the current climate of oral healthcare in Canada is presented. We outline how addressing disparities in Canadian dental care will require the engagement of physicians on multiple levels of care, negotiation with both dentists and policymakers, as well as sustained oral health data collection to inform provincial and national decision-making/strategies.

No abstract