Background Interprofessional primary care (IPC) teams provide comprehensive and coordinated care and are ideally equipped to support those populations most at risk of adverse health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic, including older adults, and patients with chronic physical and mental health conditions. There has been little focus on the experiences of healthcare teams and no studies have examined IPC practice during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of the study was to describe the state of interprofessional health provider practice within IPC teams during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Observational cross-sectional design. A web-based survey was deployed to IPC providers working in team-based primary care clinics in the province of Ontario, Canada. The survey included 26 close-ended and six open-ended questions. Close-ended questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Content analysis was used to analyze the open-ended questions. Results 445 surveys were included in the final analysis. Service delivery shifted from in-person care (77% pre-COVID-19) to telephone (76.5% during the COVID-19 pandemic). Less than half of the respondents (40%) reported receiving any training for virtual delivery. Wait times to access team members were reported to have decreased. There has also been a shift in what IPC providers report as the most commonly seen conditions, with increases in visits related to mental health concerns, acute infections (including COVID-19), social isolation, and resource navigation. Respondents also reported a reduction in healthcare provision for multiple chronic conditions including diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and chronic pain. Conclusions IPC teams are rapidly shifting their practice to supporting their patients during the pandemic. A surge in mental health issues has been seen and is expected to continue to increase in response to COVID-19. Understanding early experiences can help plan for future pandemic waves.

No abstract

Aim: The aim of the study was to describe practices that support collaboration in interprofessional primary health care teams, and identify performance indicators perceived to measure the impact of this collaboration from the perspective of interprofessional health providers. Background: Despite the surge of interprofessional primary health care models implemented across Canada, there is little evidence as to whether or not the intended outcomes of primary health care teams have been achieved. Part of the challenge is determining the most appropriate measures that can demonstrate the value of collaborative care. To date, little remains known about performance measurement from the providers contributing to the collaborative care process in interprofessional primary care teams. Having providers from a range of disciplinary backgrounds assist in the development of performance measures can help identify measures most relevant to demonstrate the value of collaborative care on the intended outcomes of interprofessional primary care models. Methods: A qualitative study; part of a larger mixed methods developmental evaluation to examine performance measurement in interprofessional primary health care teams. A stakeholder workshop was conducted at an annual association meeting of interprofessional primary health care teams in the province of Ontario, Canada. Six questions guided the workshop groups and participant responses were documented on worksheets and flip charts. All responses were collected and entered verbatim into a word document. Qualitative analytic strategies were applied to each question. Findings: A total of 283 primary health care providers from 14 health professions working in interprofessional primary health care teams participated. Top three elements of interprofessional collaboration (total n = 628) were communication (n = 146), co-treatment (n = 112) and patient-based conferences (n = 81). Top three performance indicators currently used to demonstrate the value of interprofessional collaboration (total n = 241) were patient experience (n = 71), patient health status (n = 35) and within team referrals (n = 30).

No abstract

Background Workers supporting adults with intellectual disabilities experience significant stress in their essential role during COVID‐19. The purpose of this study was to describe the experience of these workers and determine predictors of emotional distress. Methods Eight hundred and thirty‐eight workers supporting adults with intellectual disabilities completed an online survey about their work during COVID‐19 and their mental health in July 2020. Results One in four workers reported moderate to severe emotional distress. Being older and more experienced, having counselling services available through one's agency, and engaging in regular exercise or hobbies outside work were associated with less distress. Workers who reported increased stress in the workplace, stigma towards their families because of their job, personal fears about spreading COVID‐19, and receipt of medications for mental health conditions or therapy reported greater distress. Conclusions More attention is needed to address the mental health of workers supporting adults with intellectual disabilities as they continue their essential work during the pandemic.

Background People with intellectual and developmental disabilities are at increased health-related risk due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Virtual training programs that support providers in caring for the physical and mental health needs of this population, as well provide psychological support to the providers themselves, are needed during the pandemic. Objective This paper describes the design, delivery, and evaluation of a virtual educational COVID-19–focused Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes program to support providers during the COVID-19 pandemic in caring for the mental health of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Methods A rapid design thinking approach was used to develop a 6-session program that incorporates mindfulness practice, a wellness check, COVID-19–related research and policy updates, a didactic presentation on a combination mental health and COVID-19 related topic, and a case-based discussion to encourage practical learning. We used the first 5 outcome levels of Moore’s evaluation framework—focusing on participation, satisfaction, learning, self-efficacy, and change in practice—which were rated (out of 5) by care providers from health and disability service sectors, as well as additional reflection measures about innovations to the program. Qualitative feedback from open-text responses from participants were analyzed using modified manifest content analysis. Results A total of 104 care providers from health and disability service sectors participated in the program. High levels of engagement (81 participants per session on average) and satisfaction (overall satisfaction score: mean 4.31, SD 0.17) were observed. Self-efficacy (score improvement: 19.8%), support, and coping improved. Participants also rated the newly developed COVID-19 program and its innovative components highly. Open text feedback showed participants felt that the Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes program expanded their knowledge and competency and created a sense of being part of a community of practice; provided value for the COVID-19 innovations; supported resource-sharing within and beyond program participants; and facilitated changes to participants’ approaches to client care in practice and increased participants’ confidence in supporting clients and families. Conclusions The Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes program is an effective model for capacity-building programs with a shared-learning approach. Future iterations should include targeted evaluation of long-term outcomes such as staff burnout.

No abstract

Background Access to high-quality primary care has been identified as a pressing need for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). Adults with IDD live with complex physical and mental health conditions, use health services differently than the general population and continue to face challenges when accessing health services. Interprofessional primary care teams offer comprehensive and coordinated approaches to primary care delivery and are well-positioned to address the needs of adults with IDD and other vulnerable populations. Although interprofessional primary care teams are recommended, there is currently limited understanding of how interprofessional care is delivered and how access to a team of providers improves the health of this population. The aim of this paper is to describe the organizational attributes of interprofessional primary care for adults with IDD within and across models of team-based care in one local health service context. Methods A multiple case study was conducted with five interprofessional primary care teams in Ontario, Canada. Multiple methods were used to generate data including: a survey, document review, electronic medical record report and qualitative interviews. Pattern matching was the primary analytic approach for the within and across case analysis. Results Adults with IDD were found to be a small part of the patient population served and this group was poorly identified in three of five teams. Key organizational attributes that support the delivery of interprofessional primary care for adults with IDD were identified. Two examples of targeted programs of care for this group were also found. Despite the presence of interprofessional health providers in all teams, there were limited organizational processes to engage a wide-range of interprofessional services in the care of this group. There was no consistent reporting of outcomes or processes in place to measure the impact of interprofessional services for this population. Conclusions This study provides important insights into the current state of interprofessional primary care for adults with IDD in Ontario and highlight a critical need for further work in the field to develop organizational structures and processes to engage in team-based care and demonstrate the value of the approach for this population.