IntroductionRural emergency departments (EDs) are important safety nets for the 20% of Canadians who live there. A serious problem in access to health care services in these regions has emerged. However, there are considerable geographic disparities in access to trauma center in Canada. The main objective of this project was to compare access to local 24/7 support services in rural EDs in Quebec and Ontario as well as distances to Levels 1 and 2 trauma centers.Materials and MethodsRural EDs were identified through the Canadian Healthcare Association's Guide to Canadian Healthcare Facilities. We selected hospitals with 24/7 ED physician coverage and hospitalization beds that were located in rural communities. There were 26 rural EDs in Quebec and 62 in Ontario meeting these criteria. Data were collected from ministries of health, local health authorities, and ED statistics. Fisher’s exact test, the t-test or Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test, were performed to compare rural EDs of Quebec and Ontario.ResultsAll selected EDs of Quebec and Ontario agreed to participate in the study. The number of EDs visits was higher in Quebec than in Ontario (19 322 ± 6 275 vs 13 446 ± 8 056, p = 0.0013). There were no significant differences between Quebec and Ontario’s local population and small town population density. Quebec’s EDs have better access to advance imaging services such as CT scanner (77% vs 15%, p < .0001) and most the consultant support and ICU (92% vs 31%, p < .0001). Finally, more than 40% of rural EDs in Quebec and Ontario are more than 300 km away from Levels 1 and 2 trauma centers.ConclusionsConsidering that Canada has a Universal health care system, the discrepancies between Quebec and Ontario in access to support services are intriguing. A nationwide study is justified to address this issue.

Introduction: Although emergency departments (EDs) in Canada's rural areas serve approximately 20% of the population, a serious problem in access to health care services has emerged. Objective: The objective of this project was to compare access to support services in rural EDs between British Columbia and Quebec. Methods: Rural EDs were identified through the Canadian Healthcare Association's Guide to Canadian Healthcare Facilities. We selected hospitals with 24/7 ED physician coverage and hospitalization beds that were located in rural communities (using the rural and small town definition from Statistics Canada). Data were collected from ministries of health, local health authorities, and ED statistics. A telephone interview was administered to collect denominative user data statistics and determine the status of services. Results: British Columbia has more rural EDs (n 5 34) than Quebec (n 5 26). EDs in Quebec have higher volumes (19,310 versus 7,793 annual visits). With respect to support services, 81% of Quebec rural EDs have a 24/7 on-call general surgeon compared to 12% for British Columbia. Nearly 75% of Quebec rural EDs have 24/7 access to computed tomography versus only 3% for British Columbia. Rural EDs in Quebec are also supported by a greater proportion of intensive care units (88% versus 15%); however, British Columbia appears to have more medevac aircraft/helicopters than Quebec. Conclusions: The results suggest that major differences exist in access to support services in rural EDs in British Columbia and Quebec. A nationwide study is justified to address this issue of variability in rural and remote health service delivery and its impact on interfacility transfers and patient outcomes.