BackgroundAudit and feedback interventions may be strengthened using social interaction. With this in mind, the Calgary office of the Alberta Physician Learning Program developed a process for audit and group feedback for physician groups. As a part of a larger project to develop a practical approach to the design and implementation of audit and group feedback projects, we explored patterns of physician behavior during facilitated audit and group feedback sessions.MethodsSix audit and group feedback sessions were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically to derive a conceptual model of physicians’ behaviors during audit and group feedback sessions.ResultsA predictable cycle of behaviors emerged from audit and group feedback sessions. This cycle would repeat with discussion of each new data element: reacting to the data, questioning and understanding the data, justifying and contextualizing, sharing and reflecting on the data and relevant guidelines, and planning for change. “Change cues” that emerged within groups reliably pivoted the discussion towards action planning.ConclusionsIn audit and group feedback sessions, physicians display a predictable series of behaviors as they move towards commitment to change. Establishing the meaning and credibility of the data is a necessary precursor to reflection. Group reflection leads to “change cues” triggered by group members, which stimulate action planning.

BackgroundAudit and feedback interventions may be strengthened using social interaction. The Calgary office of the Alberta Physician Learning Program (CPLP) developed a process for audit and group feedback for physicians. This paper extends previous work in which we developed a conceptual model of physician responses to audit and group feedback based on a qualitative analysis of six audit and group feedback sessions. The present study explored the mediating factors for successfully engaging physician groups in change planning through audit and group feedback.MethodsTo understand why some groups were more interactive than others, we completed a comparative case analysis of the six audit and group feedback projects from the prior study. We used framework analysis to build the case studies, triangulated our observations across data sources to validate findings, compared the case studies for similarities and differences that influenced social interaction (mediating factors), and thematically categorized mediating factors into an organizing framework.ResultsMediating factors for socially interactive AGFS were a pre-existing relationship between the program team and the physician group, projects addressing important, actionable questions, easily interpretable data visualization in the reports, and facilitation of the groups that included reflective questioning. When these factors were in place (cases 1, 2A, 3), the audit and group feedback sessions were dynamic, with physicians sharing and comparing practices, and raising change cues (such as declaring commitments to de-prescribing, planning educational interventions, and improving documentation). In cases 2C–D, the mediating factors were less well established and in these cases, the sessions showed little physician reflection or change planning. We organized the mediating factors into a framework linking the factors for successful sessions to the conceptual model of physician behaviors which these mediating factors drive.ConclusionsWe propose the Calgary Audit and Feedback Framework as a practical tool to help foster socially constructed learning in audit and group feedback sessions. Ensuring that the four factors, relationship, question choice, data visualization, and facilitation, are considered for design and implementation of audit and group feedback will help physicians move from reactions to their data towards planning for change.

Intersectionality is a widely adopted theoretical orientation in the field of women and gender studies. Intersectionality comes from the work of black feminist scholars and activists. Intersectionality argues identities such as gender, race, sexuality, and other markers of difference intersect and reflect large social structures of oppression and privilege, such as sexism, racism, and heteronormativity. The reach of intersectionality now extends to the fields of public health and knowledge translation. Knowledge translation (KT) is a field of study and practice that aims to synthesize and evaluate research into an evidence base and move that evidence into health care practice. There have been increasing calls to bring gender and other social issues into the field of KT. Yet, as scholars outline, there are few guidelines for incorporating the principles of intersectionality into empirical research. An interdisciplinary, team-based, national health research project in Canada aimed to bring an intersectional lens to the field of knowledge translation. This paper reports on key moments and resulting tensions we experienced through the project, which reflect debates in intersectionality: discomfort with social justice, disciplinary divides, and tokenism. We consider how our project advances intersectionality practice and suggests recommendations for using intersectionality in health research contexts. We argue that while we encountered many challenges, our process and the resulting co-created tools can serve as a valuable starting point and example of how intersectionality can transform fields and practices.

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate trends in prescribing of the second-generation antipsychotic medication quetiapine to adults in the province of Alberta from 2008 to 2013 through examination of dispensed prescriptions, and diagnoses associated with users of quetiapine in 2013.MethodsWe analysed administrative data from Alberta Health; the Alberta Pharmaceutical Information Network (PIN) Dispenses health data set, the Practitioner Payments (Fee-For-Service claims) health data set and the Population Registry health data set. These data sets allowed us to identify discrete quetiapine recipients for each calendar year from 2008 to 2013. To evaluate diagnoses associated with users of quetiapine, we evaluated diagnostic codes used by physicians in billings claims in 2013.ResultsQuetiapine use increased over the 6-year time period studied. In 2008, there were 16 087 unique quetiapine recipients in Alberta (7.2 per 1000). By 2013, there were 35 314 unique quetiapine recipients (13.3 per 1000). Use by women was higher than men at all time points. Depression was most common diagnosis associated with quetiapine recipients, which was present in 56% of users of quetiapine. Other common diagnoses associated with quetiapine use included neurotic disorders, bipolar disorder and sleep disturbances.ConclusionsThe current study of quetiapine use in the province of Alberta provides confirmatory data of the increasing use of quetiapine for the treatment of depression and anxiety disorders. Safe and rational prescribing practices must be encouraged in light of the modest advantages of quetiapine over no treatment as an adjunctive treatment of major depression, and the known harms of this medication.

The majority of antipsychotic use in children in Alberta is off-label and associated with disruptive behavior disorders, depression, and anxiety disorders. The vast majority of children prescribed antipsychotic medications do not undergo recommended laboratory tests.