PURPOSE Despite evidence on the benefits of case management for the care of patients with complex needs in primary care, implementing the program-necessary to achieve its benefits-has been challenging worldwide. Evidence on factors affecting implementation remains disparate. Accordingly, the objective of this systematic review was to identify barriers to and facilitators of case management, from the perspectives of health care professionals, in primary care settings around the world. METHODSWe conducted a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative findings. In collaboration with 2 librarians, we searched 3 electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE) for studies related to factors affecting case management function in primary care. Two researchers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for inclusion, then assessed included studies for quality. Results from included studies were synthesized by thematic synthesis, and a framework was developed. RESULTSOf 1,640 unique records identified, 22 studies, originating from 6 countries, met the inclusion criteria. We identified 9 barriers and facilitators: family context; policy and available resources; physician buy-in and understanding of the case manager role; relationship building; team communication practices; autonomy of case managers; training in technology; relationships with patients; and time pressure and workload. We describe these factors, then present a framework demonstrating the relationships among them.CONCLUSIONS Our study's findings show that multiple factors influence case management implementation. These findings have implications for researchers, clinicians, and policy makers who strive to implement or reform case management programs in local or larger primary care settings.

BackgroundFrequent users of healthcare services are often categorised as ‘heavy-cost patients’. In the recent years, many jurisdictions have attempted to implement different public policies to optimise the use of health services by frequent users. However, throughout this process, little attention has been paid to their experience as patients.ObjectiveTo thematically synthesise qualitative studies that explore the experience of frequent users of primary care and emergency department services.DesignQualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis.SettingPrimary care and emergency department.ParticipantsFrequent users of primary care and emergency department services.MethodsA qualitative systematic review was conducted using three online databases (MEDLINE with full text, CINAHL with full text and PsycINFO). This search was combined to an extensive manual search of reference lists and related citations. A thematic synthesis was performed to develop descriptive themes and analytical constructs.Study selectionTwelve studies were included. All included studies met the following inclusion criteria: qualitative design; published in English; discussed frequent users’ experiences from their own perspectives and users’ experiences occurred in primary care and/or emergency departments.ResultsThe predominant aspects of frequent users’ experiences were: (1) the experience of being ill and (2) the healthcare experience. The experience of being ill encompassed four central themes: physical limitations, mental suffering, impact on relationships and the role of self-management. The healthcare experience embraced the experience of accessing healthcare and the global experience of receiving care.ConclusionThis synthesis sheds light on potential changes to healthcare delivery in order to improve frequent users’ experiences: individualised care plans or case management interventions to support self-management of symptoms and reduce psychological distress; and giving greater importance on the patient–providers relationship as a central facet of healthcare delivery. This synthesis also highlights future research directions that would benefit frequent users.

Background The influence of sex and gender on the risk of dementia, its clinical presentation and progression is increasingly being recognized. However, current dementia strategies have not explicitly considered sex and gender differences in the management of dementia to ensure equitable care. The objective of this study was to examine the moderating effect of sex on the quality of care following the implementation of the Quebec Alzheimer Plan (QAP). Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of the evaluation of the QAP consisting of a retrospective chart review of 945 independent, randomly-selected patient charts of males and females 75+ years old with dementia and a visit to one of 13 participating Family Medicine Groups before (October 2011–July 2013) and after (October 2014 – July 2015). The quality of dementia care score, based on Canadian and international recommendations and consensus guidelines, consisted of documented assessments in 10 domains. We used a mixed linear regression model to measure the interaction between sex and the implementation of the QAP on the quality of dementia care score, adjusting for age and number of medications. Results We found that improvements in the quality of dementia care following the QAP were larger for men than women (mean difference = 4.97; 95%CI: 0.08, 9.85). We found that men had a larger improvement in four indicators (driving assessments, dementia medication management, Alzheimer Society referrals, and functional status evaluation), while women had a smaller improvement in three (home care needs, behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia, and weight). Men were prescribed fewer anticholinergics post-QAP, while women were prescribed more. Cognitive testing improved in men but decreased for women following the QAP; the opposite was observed for caregiver needs. Conclusion While the overall quality of care improved after the implementation of the QAP, this study reveals differences in dementia management between men and women. While we identified areas of inequalities in the care received, it is unclear whether this represents inequities in access to care and health outcomes. Future research should focus on better understanding sex and gender-specific needs in dementia to bridge this gap and better inform dementia strategies.

No abstract

No abstract