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.

For over two decades occupational therapists have been encouraged to enhance their roles within primary care and focus on health promotion and prevention activities. While there is a clear fit between occupational therapy and primary care, there have been few practice examples, despite a growing body of evidence to support the role. In 2010, the province of Ontario, Canada provided funding to include occupational therapists as members of Family Health Teams, an interprofessional model of primary care. The integration of occupational therapists into this model of primary care is one of the first large scale initiatives of its kind in North America. The objective of the study was to examine how occupational therapy services are being integrated into primary care teams and understand the structures supporting the integration.

Aim: To examine and describe the current evidence about occupational therapy services in primary care.Background: Interprofessional primary care teams have been introduced to support the changing demographics and provide more comprehensive and coordinated care. Occupational therapists have the opportunity to play an important role in this expanding area of practice. To do so, occupational therapists must develop roles built on evidence and a clear understanding of the care delivery context.Methods: A scoping review was conducted based on the scientific and grey literature. Studies that described or examined the occupational therapy role with clients (individuals, groups, communities, populations) of all ages, conditions or occupational issues in a primary care context and that presented or referred to an occupational therapist working in a primary care setting were included. Studies were excluded if they were not in English or French. The Canadian Model of Occupational Performance and Engagement was used to chart the data.Findings: 129 articles were identified, with 62 non-research and 67 research-focussed articles. A total of 268 assessments and 868 interventions were identified. The top interventions offered by occupational therapists were referring to/advocating for/coordinating/linking to and navigating community services (n= 36 articles), chronic disease management (n= 34 articles)/self-management education (n= 28 articles), health promotion (n= 30 articles) and falls prevention (n= 27 articles). The predominant focus in the literature is on adult and older adult populations.

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).

Background: Following a hip fracture up to 60% of patients are unable to regain their pre-fracture level of mobility. For hospitalized older adults, the deconditioning effect of bedrest and functional decline has been identified as the most preventable cause of ambulation loss. Recent studies demonstrate that this older adult population spends greater than 80% of their time in bed during hospitalization, despite being ambulatory before their fracture. We do not fully understand why there continues to be such high rates of sedentary times, given that evidence demonstrates functional decline is preventable and early mobility recommendations have been available for over a decade. Methods: A descriptive mixed method embedded case study was selected to understand the phenomenon of early mobility after fragility hip fracture surgery. In this study, the main case was one post-operative unit with a history of recommendation implementation, and the embedded units were patients recovering from hip fracture repair. Data from multiple sources provided an understanding of mobility activity initiation and patient participation. Results: Activity monitor data from eighteen participants demonstrated a mean sedentary time of 23.18 h. Median upright time was 24 min, and median number of steps taken was 30. Qualitative interviews from healthcare providers and patients identified two main categories of themes; themes external to the person and themes unique to the person. We identified four factors that can influence mobility; a patient’s pre-fracture functional status, cognitive status, medical unpredictability, and preconceived notions held by healthcare providers and patients. Conclusions: There are multi-level factors that require consideration with implementation of best practice interventions, namely, systemic, healthcare provider related, and patient related. An increased risk of poor outcomes occurs with compounding multiple factors, such as a patient with low pre-fracture functional mobility, cognitive impairment, and a mismatch of expectations. The study reports several variables to be important considerations for facilitating early mobility. Communicating mobility expectations and addressing physical and psychological readiness are essential. Our findings can be used to develop meaningful healthcare provider and patient-centred interventions to address the risks of poor outcomes.

Team-based care can improve integrated health services by increasing comprehensiveness and continuity of care in primary healthcare (PHC) settings. Collaborative models involving providers from different professions can help to achieve coordinated, high-quality person-centred care. In Canada, there has been variation in both the timing/pace of adoption and approach to interprofessional PHC (IPHC) policy. Provinces are at different stages in the development, implementation, and evaluation of team-based PHC models. This paper describes how different policies, contexts, and innovations across four Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, Quebec) facilitate or limit integrated health services through IPHC teams. Systematic searches identified 100 policy documents across the four provinces. Analysis was informed by Walt and Gilson’s Policy Triangle (2008) and Suter et al.’s (2009) health system integration principles. Provincial policy case studies were constructed and used to complete a cross-case comparison. Each province implemented variations of an IPHC based model. Five key components were found that influenced IPHC and integrated health services: patient-centred care; team structures; information systems; financial management; and performance measurement. Heterogeneity of the implementation of PHC teams across Canadian provinces provides an opportunity to learn and improve interprofessional care and integrated health services across jurisdictions.