Psychosocial effects of SARS on hospital staff: survey of a large tertiary care institution

BackgroundThe outbreak of SARS in 2003 had a dramatic effect on the health care system in Toronto. The main objective of this study was to investigate the psychosocial effects associated with working in a hospital environment during this outbreak.MethodsQuestionnaires were distributed to all willing employees of Sunnybrook and Women''s College Health Sciences Centre between Apr. 10 and 22, 2003. The survey included questions regarding concern about SARS, precautionary measures, personal well-being and sociodemographic characteristics; a subsample also received the 12-item version of the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12).ResultsOf the 4283 questionnaires distributed, 2001 (47%) were returned, representing 27% of the total hospital employee population of 7474. The proportions of respondents who were allied health care professionals, nurses and doctors and who worked in areas other than patient care were representative of the hospital staff population as a whole. Of the 2001 questionnaires, 510 contained the GHQ-12. Two-thirds of the respondents reported SARS-related concern for their own or their family''s health. A total of 148 respondents (29%) scored above the threshold point on the GHQ-12, indicating probable emotional distress; the rate among nurses was 45%. Masks were reported to be the most bothersome infection control precaution. Logistic regression analysis identified 4 factors as being significantly associated with increased levels of concern for personal or family health: perception of a greater risk of death from SARS (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 5.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6–9.6), living with children (adjusted OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.5–2.3), personal or family lifestyle affected by SARS outbreak (adjusted OR 3.3, 95% CI 2.5–4.3) and being treated differently by people because of working in a hospital (adjusted OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2–2.1). Four factors were identified as being significantly associated with the presence of emotional distress: being a nurse (adjusted OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.5–5.5), part-time employment status (adjusted OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.2–5.4), lifestyle affected by SARS outbreak (adjusted OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4–3.5) and ability to do one''s job affected by the precautionary measures (adjusted OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.9–4.6).InterpretationOur findings indicate that the SARS outbreak had significant psychosocial effects on hospital staff. These effects differed with respect to occupation and risk perception. The effect on families and lifestyle was also substantial. These findings highlight the need for interventions to address psychosocial distress and concern and to provide support for employees during such crises.During the spring of 2003, Toronto was in the midst of the first of 2 phases of a SARS outbreak. As the principal tertiary referral hospital, Sunnybrook and Women''s College Health Sciences Centre (SWC) admitted 71 patients with SARS, of whom 23 were health care workers, between Mar. 14 and May 24. Over 1000 patients were seen at the SWC SARS assessment clinic.The effect of SARS on the health care system in the greater Toronto area was dramatic.^1,2,3,4,5,6 At various times during the outbreak, 3 hospitals were closed. Health care workers were at increased risk and many were quarantined, which resulted in severe staff shortages. On Mar. 28, following the closure of a second hospital, new and intensive infection control directives were issued for all hospitals in the greater Toronto area and surrounding area. At SWC the directives included cancellation of all hospital-based outpatient clinics, significant visitor restrictions, mandatory wearing of surgical masks by all staff at all times (and N95 masks in patient care areas), limited hospital entrance and mandatory screening of everyone entering the building (symptom/exposure questionnaire and temperature reading). Health care workers were instructed to work at 1 health care institution only, and off-work contact between health care workers from different institutions was discouraged. The SWC SARS Management Team met daily to implement Ministry of Health directives, organize care of patients with and without SARS and deal with staffing issues. With clinic and operating room closures and quarantined staff, staff redeployment to screening at entrances and other essential services became necessary. After Apr. 17, staff not involved in patient care no longer had to wear masks; however, most of the other infection control directives were kept in place well into the summer months.Little is known about the psychological effects of this type of disease outbreak on health care and other hospital workers. Maunder and colleagues¹ described the experiences of a small number of patients and staff at a Toronto hospital during the initial SARS outbreak. They observed that the staff were fearful for their own and their family''s health and found caring for colleagues as patients emotionally difficult. Mitchell and associates⁷ reported increased feelings of stigmatization among nurses during an outbreak of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in a hospital in Australia; feelings of alienation and isolation were also noted. A literature review revealed no large, systematic studies of the effect of a disease outbreak on hospital staff, particularly in cases with a high risk of nosocomial spread, as is the case with SARS.^2,4,8,9,10The main objectives of this study were (a) to determine the self-reported psychosocial effects associated with working in a hospital environment during the peak of a disease outbreak, specifically psychological distress and effects on the work and personal lives of employees, and (b) to examine the determinants of these effects.     

Clandestine induced abortion: prevalence,incidence and risk factors among women in a Latin American country

Background

Clandestine induced abortions are a public health problem in many developing countries where access to abortion services is legally restricted. We estimated the prevalence and incidence of, and risk factors for, clandestine induced abortions in a Latin American country.

Methods

We conducted a large population-based survey of women aged 18–29 years in 20 cities in Peru. We asked questions about their history of spontaneous and induced abortions, using techniques to encourage disclosure.

Results

Of 8242 eligible women, 7992 (97.0%) agreed to participate. The prevalence of reported induced abortions was 11.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.9%– 12.4%) among the 7962 women who participated in the survey. It was 13.6% (95% CI 12.8%– 14.5%) among the 6559 women who reported having been sexually active. The annual incidence of induced abortion was 3.1% (95% CI 2.9%– 3.3%) among the women who had ever been sexually active. In the multivariable analysis, risk factors for induced abortion were higher age at the time of the survey (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95% CI 1.07– 1.15), lower age at first sexual intercourse (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.84– 0.91), geographic region (highlands: OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.23– 1.97; jungle: OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.41– 2.31 [v. coastal region]), having children (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68– 0.98), having more than 1 sexual partner in lifetime (2 partners: OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.23– 2.09; ≥ 3 partners: OR 2.79, 95% CI 2.12– 3.67), and having 1 or more sexual partners in the year before the survey (1 partner: OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01– 1.72; ≥ 2 partners: OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.14– 2.02). Overall, 49.0% (95% CI 47.6%– 50.3%) of the women who reported being currently sexually active were not using contraception.

Interpretation

The incidence of clandestine, potentially unsafe induced abortion in Peru is as high as or higher than the rates in many countries where induced abortion is legal and safe. The provision of contraception and safer-sex education to those who require it needs to be greatly improved and could potentially reduce the rate of induced abortion.In most developing countries, induced abortion is legal only if the pregnancy threatens the health or life of the mother. Many women, therefore, seek clandestine abortions, which are too often unsafe and place the woman at risk of complications and death.¹Forty percent of women live in countries where abortion is legally restricted.² In 2003, an estimated 55% of induced abortions in developing countries were unsafe, and 97% of all unsafe abortions were in developing countries.³ Induced abortion is highly restricted in most countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.¹ According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the region of Latin America and the Caribbean has the same estimated incidence of clandestine induced abortions as Africa (3% per year among women aged 15–44 years).⁴ It also has the highest proportion of maternal death from unsafe abortion (12%).⁵ Women who have complications from clandestine abortions may not seek medical help for fear of being reported to legal authorities by health care workers.^6,7Elimination of unsafe abortions is a key component of sexual and reproductive health care.⁸ There is a public health need to determine more accurately the burden of, and risk factors for, clandestine induced abortion in different countries. Because of data limitations, the WHO reports only regional estimates.⁴ The lack of official records and underreporting by those involved make this task difficult, requiring that estimates calculated by different methods be compared.Rates of clandestine induced abortion are estimated with the use of either direct methods, such as population-based surveys and surveys of providers of illegal abortions, or indirect methods, such as the application of multipliers to recorded rates of hospital admission or death attributed to induced abortions.^4,9We performed a large, representative, population-based survey to determine the prevalence and incidence of, and risk factors for, induced abortion in an urban population of a Latin American country where access to abortion services is legally restricted.     

The effect of traumatic brain injury on the health of homeless people

Background

We sought to determine the lifetime prevalence of traumatic brain injury and its association with current health conditions in a representative sample of homeless people in Toronto, Ontario.

Methods

We surveyed 601 men and 303 women at homeless shelters and meal programs in 2004–2005 (response rate 76%). We defined traumatic brain injury as any self-reported head injury that left the person dazed, confused, disoriented or unconscious. Injuries resulting in unconsciousness lasting 30 minutes or longer were defined as moderate or severe. We assessed mental health, alcohol and drug problems in the past 30 days using the Addiction Severity Index. Physical and mental health status was assessed using the SF-12 health survey. We examined associations between traumatic brain injury and health conditions.

Results

The lifetime prevalence among homeless participants was 53% for any traumatic brain injury and 12% for moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. For 70% of respondents, their first traumatic brain injury occurred before the onset of homelessness. After adjustment for demographic characteristics and lifetime duration of homelessness, a history of moderate or severe traumatic brain injury was associated with significantly increased likelihood of seizures (odds ratio [OR] 3.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8 to 5.6), mental health problems (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.5 to 4.1), drug problems (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.5), poorer physical health status (–8.3 points, 95% CI –11.1 to –5.5) and poorer mental health status (–6.0 points, 95% CI –8.3 to –3.7).

Interpretation

Prior traumatic brain injury is very common among homeless people and is associated with poorer health.Traumatic brain injury is caused by “a blow or jolt to the head or a penetrating head injury that disrupts the normal function of the brain” and most commonly results from falls, motor vehicle traffic crashes and assaults.¹ Traumatic brain injury is a leading cause of permanent disability in North America.¹ Traumatic brain injury may be common in the homeless population.² Exposure to physical abuse during childhood, which could result in traumatic brain injury, is a known risk factor for homelessness as an adult.³ Substance abuse increases the risk of homelessness⁴ and the risk of traumatic brain injury.⁵ Homeless people experience high rates of injury of all types and are frequently victims of assault.^6,7 Finally, traumatic brain injury could be a factor contributing to the 3%–8% prevalence of cognitive dysfunction among homeless adults.^8,9Providing health care for homeless patients can be challenging for various reasons, including difficult behavioural patterns. These behaviours may be related in part to unrecognized sequelae of traumatic brain injury and may include cognitive impairment, attention deficits, disinhibition, impulsivity and emotional lability.¹ Appropriate support services may be able to minimize the adverse impact of these behaviours.Two previous studies have reported the prevalence of traumatic brain injury among homeless people in London, England, and Milwaukee, Wisconsin. These studies were limited by small sample sizes, recruitment at a single shelter and a lack of data from women.^10,11 We conducted this study to determine the lifetime prevalence of traumatic brain injury in a representative sample of homeless men and women across an entire city, and to identify the temporal relation between traumatic brain injury and the onset of homelessness. We also sought to characterize the association between a history of traumatic brain injury and current health problems in this population. Our primary hypothesis was that a history of traumatic brain injury would be associated with poor current health.     

Willingness of patients to change surgeons for a shorter waiting time for joint arthroplasty

Background

To improve access to care, many jurisdictions have proposed waiting-time benchmarks and guarantees. We assessed the willingness of patients to consider changing their surgeon to one with a shorter waiting time for arthroplasty.

Methods

We mailed a questionnaire to 2 random samples of patients who either were awaiting hip or knee replacement arthroplasty or had had one of these procedures within the preceding 3–12 months. We used logistic regression to assess the determinants of patients'' likelihood to consider changing surgeons.

Results

Of 1200 responses from a sample of 2000, 557 (46%) were from patients awaiting surgery and 643 (54%) were from people who had undergone surgery. The mean age of respondents was 69.9 years (standard deviation 10.8), and 682 (57%) were women. The median waiting time for surgery was 8 months. Overall, 753 (63%) of the patients were unlikely to consider changing surgeons. Increased likelihood of changing surgeons was associated with male sex (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10–2.02), a high school education or higher (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.15– 2.62) and having already undergone surgery (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.19– 2.46). Decreased likelihood was associated with preference for a particular surgeon before referral (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42– 0.79), a better score on the EuroQol (EQ-5D) index (a measure of health-related quality of life) (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24– 0.66), perception that the waiting time to see the surgeon was acceptable (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.36–0.70), perception that the waiting time to surgery was acceptable (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43–0.91) and perceived fairness of treatment (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36– 0.78).

Interpretation

Despite long waits for surgery, most patients, if given the choice, would be unlikely to change their surgeon to one with a shorter waiting time.Long waiting times for elective surgery are a concern in countries with publicly funded health care systems.¹ To try to improve access, governments in Canada and some other countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development have proposed or implemented waiting-time benchmarks and care guarantees.² These benchmarks, typically between 3 and 12 months, usually refer to the time between assessment by a specialist and in-patient treatment.³Waiting times for hip and knee arthroplasty are perceived as excessive in many countries, including Canada.^4–6 In 2005, Canada''s federal, provincial and territorial health ministers set a target waiting time of 26 weeks for hip and knee arthroplasty, and in 2007 they agreed to establish waiting-time guarantees by 2010 in selected priority areas, including joint arthroplasty.⁷ A waiting-time guarantee implies that, if necessary medical treatment for a publicly insured service is not available within a medically acceptable timeframe, patients may receive treatment at another facility, even outside their home province, at public expense. This change in the location of treatment implies that another surgeon would perform the surgery. However, patients are not always willing to accept re-referral to a provider with a shorter waiting time.^8–12Most other studies investigating patient choice in the context of long waiting times have referred to the choice of an alternative hospital rather than the choice of an alternative surgeon. Even though many patients may indicate that they are willing to travel to another hospital, fewer actually choose such a change.¹¹ In addition to waiting time,^8,13 other factors influencing provider choice are the hospital''s reputation, follow-up care and travel time.^8,13,14 Little is known about what factors patients consider and what information they want and can use when choosing a provider.^11,15We sought to assess patients'' willingness to consider changing to a surgeon with a shorter waiting time for hip and knee arthroplasty. We formulated the following research questions: Would patients consider changing to a surgeon with shorter waiting times? What factors influence patients'' willingness to consider changing surgeons? Do patients waiting for surgery have a different perspective than patients who have already undergone their surgery?     

Sex-and age-based differences in the delivery and outcomes of critical care

Background

Previous studies have suggested that a patient''s sex may influence the provision and outcomes of critical care. Our objective was to determine whether sex and age are associated with differences in admission practices, processes of care and clinical outcomes for critically ill patients.

Methods

We used a retrospective cohort of 466 792 patients, including 24 778 critically ill patients, admitted consecutively to adult hospitals in Ontario between Jan. 1, 2001, and Dec. 31, 2002. We measured associations between sex and age and admission to the intensive care unit (ICU); use of mechanical ventilation, dialysis or pulmonary artery catheterization; length of stay in the ICU and hospital; and death in the ICU, hospital and 1 year after admission.

Results

Of the 466 792 patients admitted to hospital, more were women than men (57.0% v. 43.0% for all admissions, p < 0.001; 50.1% v. 49.9% for nonobstetric admissions, p < 0.001). However, fewer women than men were admitted to ICUs (39.9% v. 60.1%, p < 0.001); this difference was most pronounced among older patients (age ≥ 50 years). After adjustment for admission diagnoses and comorbidities, older women were less likely than older men to receive care in an ICU setting (odds ratio [OR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66–0.71). After adjustment for illness severity, older women were also less likely than older men to receive mechanical ventilation (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.81– 0.97) or pulmonary artery catheterization (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73– 0.88). Despite older men and women having similar severity of illness on ICU admission, women received ICU care for a slightly shorter duration yet had a longer length of stay in hospital (mean 18.3 v. 16.9 days; p = 0.006). After adjustment for differences in comorbidities, source of admission, ICU admission diagnosis and illness severity, older women had a slightly greater risk of death in the ICU (hazard ratio 1.20, 95% CI 1.10–1.31) and in hospital (hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI 1.00–1.16) than did older men.

Interpretation

Among patients 50 years or older, women appear less likely than men to be admitted to an ICU and to receive selected life-supporting treatments and more likely than men to die after critical illness. Differences in presentation of critical illness, decision-making or unmeasured confounding factors may contribute to these findings.It is generally believed that access to an intensive care unit (ICU), the care received and subsequent clinical outcomes are determined primarily by need and severity of illness. However, in other areas of health care, sociodemographic characteristics have been found to influence treatment decisions and care delivery.^1–6 For example, women are believed to have a lower incidence of coronary artery disease than men;² however, they are also less likely to undergo intensive evaluation and treatment for this condition and may have a higher rate of early mortality after acute myocardial infarction.^7,8 Previous studies from various jurisdictions have suggested that there may be sex-based differences in critical illness and ICU admission patterns,^3,4,6,9 although there have been no consistent findings of sex-based differences in the provision of care or clinical outcomes.^{1,3,4,6,10–12}The Canadian health care system is based on the principle of equal access for all citizens. This presents a unique opportunity to explore sex-related differences in ICU care. We hypothesized that age and sex might be associated with differences in admission practices, processes of care and clinical outcomes for critically ill patients, and we explored these relations over a 2-year period in a diverse sample of hospitals in Ontario.     

Effectiveness of the Antenatal Psychosocial Health Assessment (ALPHA) form in detecting psychosocial concerns: a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundA pregnant woman''s psychological health is a significant predictor of postpartum outcomes. The Antenatal Psychosocial Health Assessment (ALPHA) form incorporates 15 risk factors associated with poor postpartum outcomes of woman abuse, child abuse, postpartum depression and couple dysfunction. We sought to determine whether health care providers using the ALPHA form detected more antenatal psychosocial concerns among pregnant women than providers practising usual prenatal care.MethodsA randomized controlled trial was conducted in 4 communities in Ontario. Family physicians, obstetricians and midwives who see at least 10 prenatal patients a year enrolled 5 eligible women each. Providers in the intervention group attended an educational workshop on using the ALPHA form and completed the form with enrolled women. The control group provided usual care. After the women delivered, both groups of providers identified concerns related to the 15 risk factors on the ALPHA form for each patient and rated the level of concern. The primary outcome was the number of psychosocial concerns identified. Results were controlled for clustering.ResultsThere were 21 (44%) providers randomly assigned to the ALPHA group and 27 (56%) to the control group. A total of 227 patients participated: 98 (43%) in the ALPHA group and 129 (57%) in the control group. ALPHA group providers were more likely than control group providers to identify psychosocial concerns (odds ratio [OR] 1.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1–3.0; p = 0.02) and to rate the level of concern as “high” (OR 4.8, 95% CI 1.1–20.2; p = 0.03). ALPHA group providers were also more likely to detect concerns related to family violence (OR 4.8, 95% CI 1.9–12.3; p = 0.001).InterpretationUsing the ALPHA form helped health care providers detect more psychosocial risk factors for poor postpartum outcomes, especially those related to family violence. It is a useful prenatal tool, identifying women who would benefit from additional support and interventions.The psychosocial health of a pregnant woman and her family is a significant predictor of intrapartum, newborn and postpartum outcomes.^1,2,3,4 A critical review of the literature has identified an association between antenatal psychosocial risk factors and the poor postpartum outcomes of woman abuse, child abuse, postpartum depression and couple dysfunction.⁵Clinicians have indicated that a practical tool to help them systematically collect and record prenatal psychosocial information would be helpful.⁶Although specific and often well-validated tools are available to predict or detect child abuse, woman abuse or depression,^7,8,9,10 clinicians are unlikely to use them because of time constraints.¹ Other forms aid in collecting more comprehensive antenatal psychosocial data,^11,12,13,14 but they are not evidence-based, and were developed to predict obstetric or newborn rather than psychosocial outcomes.In contrast, the Antenatal Psychosocial Health Assessment (ALPHA) form (Appendix 1) was designed to identify antenatal psychosocial risk factors for poor postnatal psychosocial outcomes. It incorporates 15 risk factors found through critical literature review⁵ to be associated with woman abuse, child abuse, postpartum depression and couple dysfunction.¹⁵ These risk factors are grouped intuitively by topic, with suggested questions, into 4 categories: family factors, maternal factors, substance use and family violence. The ALPHA form has been field-tested by obstetricians, family physicians, midwives and nurses,^15,16 who have found using it to be feasible and useful.¹⁵ Pregnant women appreciate and feel comfortable with the psychosocial enquiry.¹⁵ The ALPHA form was developed as a screening tool to help providers systematically identify areas of psychosocial concern. Once feasibility was established,¹⁵ the next step was to determine whether using it in regular practice would increase the number of concerns identified.We sought to determine whether health care providers using the ALPHA form detected more antenatal psychosocial concerns in their pregnant patients than clinicians practising usual prenatal care. A secondary objective was to determine women''s and providers'' satisfaction with the ALPHA form.     

Information exchange among physicians caring for the same patient in the community

Background

The exchange of information is an integral component of continuity of health care and may limit or prevent costly duplication of tests and treatments. This study determined the probability that patient information from previous visits with other physicians was available for a current physician visit.

Methods

We conducted a multicentre prospective cohort study including patients discharged from the medical or surgical services of 11 community and academic hospitals in Ontario. Patients included in the study saw at least 2 different physicians during the 6 months after discharge. The primary outcome was whether information from a previous visit with another physician was available at the current visit. We determined the availability of previous information using surveys of or interviews with the physicians seen during current visits.

Results

A total of 3250 patients, with a total of 39 469 previous–current visit combinations, met the inclusion criteria. Overall, information about the previous visit was available 22.0% of the time. Information was more likely to be available if the current doctor was a family physician (odds ratio [OR] 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.54–1.98) or a physician who had treated the patient before the hospital admission (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.21–1.46). Conversely, information was less likely to be available if the previous doctor was a family physician (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.32–0.44) or a physician who had treated the patient before the admission (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60–0.86). The strongest predictor of information exchange was the current physician having previously received information about the patient from the previous physician (OR 7.72, 95% CI 6.92–8.63).

Interpretation

Health care information is often not shared among multiple physicians treating the same patient. This situation would be improved if information from family physicians and patients'' regular physicians was more systematically available to other physicians.Continuity of care occurs when patients experience linked care over time and when discrete elements of care are connected.¹ Overall, most studies have shown a benefit of physician continuity, exemplified by lower utilization of emergency and hospital services,^2–5 greater use of preventive interventions,^6–8 improvements in disease-specific symptoms or quality-of-care measures,⁹ and greater patient satisfaction.^10,11Continuity of care has been conceptualized as having 3 primary components:¹ physician continuity, management continuity and information continuity. The root component of information continuity is the availability of data from previous visits by the patient with other physicians. In 3 previous studies, physicians were frequently missing necessary information from visits that patients had made to other physicians.^12–14 However, none of those studies prospectively followed a well-defined cohort of patients.To achieve a better understanding of how information exchange might be improved in the community setting, we sought to identify the patient- and physician-related factors that influence the availability of information from previous visits with other physicians.     

A prospective cohort study of pregnancy risk factors and birth outcomes in Aboriginal women

Background

Aboriginal women have been identified as having poorer pregnancy outcomes than other Canadian women, but information on risk factors and outcomes has been acquired mostly from retrospective databases. We compared prenatal risk factors and birth outcomes of First Nations and Métis women with those of other participants in a prospective study.

Methods

During the 12-month period from July 1994 to June 1995, we invited expectant mothers in all obstetric practices affiliated with a single teaching hospital in Edmonton to participate. Women were recruited at their first prenatal visit and followed through delivery. Sociodemographic and clinical data were obtained by means of a patient questionnaire, and microbiological data were collected at 3 points during gestation: in the first and second trimesters and during labour. Our primary outcomes of interest were low birth weight (birth weight less than 2500 g), prematurity (birth at less than 37 weeks'' gestation) and macrosomia (birth weight greater than 4000 g).

Results

Of the 2047 women consecutively enrolled, 1811 completed the study through delivery. Aboriginal women accounted for 70 (3.9%) of the subjects who completed the study (45 First Nations women and 25 Métis women). Known risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcome were more common among Aboriginal than among non-Aboriginal women, including previous premature infant (21% v. 11%), smoking during the current pregnancy (41% v. 13%), presence of bacterial vaginosis in midgestation (33% v. 13%) and poor nutrition as measured by meal consumption. Although Aboriginal women were less likely than non-Aboriginal women to have babies of low birth weight (odds ratio [OR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52–4.15) or who were born prematurely (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.57–3.72) and more likely to have babies with macrosomia (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.03–4.03), these differences were lower and statistically nonsignificant after adjustment for smoking, cervicovaginal infection and income (adjusted OR for low birth weight 0.85, 95% CI 0.19–3.78; for prematurity 0.90, 95% CI 0.21–3.89; and for macrosomia 2.12, 95% CI 0.84-5.36).

Interpretation

After adjustment for potential confounding factors, we found no statistically significant relation between Aboriginal status and birth outcome.It is generally recognized that Aboriginal women experience poorer birth outcomes than other North American women, including higher rates of stillbirth,¹ low-birth-weight infants^1,2,3 and prematurity.^2,3 Although significant efforts have been made to reduce Aboriginal infant mortality rates, these rates remain higher than for other infants in both Canada⁴ and the United States.⁵ Little is known about the reasons for differences in birth outcomes, although social, economic, medical and prenatal care factors have been suggested. Recent publications, based on retrospective analyses of large databases, have confirmed disparities in birth outcomes between Aboriginal and all other groups,^3,6,7 but there is a paucity of prospective data. In addition, although the term “Aboriginal” refers to a heterogeneous population comprising First Nations people, Métis and Inuit, there are few comparisons between specific Aboriginal groups or of Aboriginal groups with the general population.We report here the results of a prospective study in a general obstetric population, comparing birth outcomes and known pregnancy risk factors of Aboriginal women with those of non-Aboriginal Canadian women. In addition to well-recognized socioeconomic and reproductive risk factors, we investigated the prevalence of maternal cervicovaginal infections, which have been increasingly linked to prematurity.^8,9     

Access to health care among status Aboriginal people with chronic kidney disease

Background

Ethnic disparities in access to health care and health outcomes are well documented. It is unclear whether similar differences exist between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people with chronic kidney disease in Canada. We determined whether access to care differed between status Aboriginal people (Aboriginal people registered under the federal Indian Act) and non-Aboriginal people with chronic kidney disease.

Methods

We identified 106 511 non-Aboriginal and 1182 Aboriginal patients with chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m²). We compared outcomes, including hospital admissions, that may have been preventable with appropriate outpatient care (ambulatory-care–sensitive conditions) as well as use of specialist services, including visits to nephrologists and general internists.

Results

Aboriginal people were almost twice as likely as non-Aboriginal people to be admitted to hospital for an ambulatory-care–sensitive condition (rate ratio 1.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.46–2.13). Aboriginal people with severe chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate < 30 mL/min/1.73 m²) were 43% less likely than non-Aboriginal people with severe chronic kidney disease to visit a nephrologist (hazard ratio 0.57, 95% CI 0.39–0.83). There was no difference in the likelihood of visiting a general internist (hazard ratio 1.00, 95% CI 0.83–1.21).

Interpretation

Increased rates of hospital admissions for ambulatory-care–sensitive conditions and a reduced likelihood of nephrology visits suggest potential inequities in care among status Aboriginal people with chronic kidney disease. The extent to which this may contribute to the higher rate of kidney failure in this population requires further exploration.Ethnic disparities in access to health care are well documented;^1,2 however, the majority of studies include black and Hispanic populations in the United States. The poorer health status and increased mortality among Aboriginal populations than among non-Aboriginal populations,^3,4 particularly among those with chronic medical conditions,^5,6 raise the question as to whether there is differential access to health care and management of chronic medical conditions in this population.The prevalence of end-stage renal disease, which commonly results from chronic kidney disease, is about twice as common among Aboriginal people as it is among non-Aboriginal people.^7,8 Given that the progression of chronic kidney disease can be delayed by appropriate therapeutic interventions^9,10 and that delayed referral to specialist care is associated with increased mortality,^11,12 issues such as access to health care may be particularly important in the Aboriginal population. Although previous studies have suggested that there is decreased access to primary and specialist care in the Aboriginal population,^13–15 these studies are limited by the inclusion of patients from a single geographically isolated region,¹³ the use of survey data,¹⁴ and the inability to differentiate between different types of specialists and reasons for the visit.¹⁵In addition to physician visits, admission to hospital for ambulatory-care–sensitive conditions (conditions that, if managed effectively in an outpatient setting, do not typically result in admission to hospital) has been used as a measure of access to appropriate outpatient care.^16,17 Thus, admission to hospital for an ambulatory-care–sensitive condition reflects a potentially preventable complication resulting from inadequate access to care. Our objective was to determine whether access to health care differs between status Aboriginal (Aboriginal people registered under the federal Indian Act) and non-Aboriginal people with chronic kidney disease. We assess differences in care by 2 measures: admission to hospital for an ambulatory-care–sensitive condition related to chronic kidney disease; and receipt of nephrology care for severe chronic kidney disease as recommended by clinical practice guidelines.¹⁸     

Attitudes toward vaccination: a survey of Canadian chiropractic students

BackgroundAlthough the Canadian Chiropractic Association and the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CMCC) endorse vaccination, the prevalence of anti-vaccination attitudes among Canadian chiropractors is unknown. This study describes the prevalence of anti-vaccination attitudes among Canadian chiropractic students.MethodsAn 11-item questionnaire about attitudes toward vaccination was distributed to students enrolled at CMCC during the 1999/2000 academic year. The responses for the 11 items were then summed to arrive at a total score ranging from 0 (most negative attitude toward vaccination) to 22 (most positive attitude toward vaccination). Respondents'' perceptions of sources of vaccine information were also investigated.ResultsOver 75% of the students (467 of 621) completed the questionnaire. Most students (53.3%) reported that in general they agreed with vaccination. This was especially true among first-year students (60.7%). However, among fourth year students, only 39.5% agreed with vaccination. The proportion of respondents who stated that they were against vaccination in general was 5 (4.5%) of 112 first-year students, 10 (8.3%) of 121 second-year students, 16 (13.9%) of 115 third-year students and 35 (29.4%) of 119 fourth-year students. The mean scores on the questionnaire were progressively lower with each higher year of study at the College. The mean survey scores for each year of study were first year, 15.9 (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.2–16.6); second year, 16.1 (95% CI 15.3–17.0); third year, 14.5 (95% CI 13.5–15.4); and fourth year, 12.8 (95% CI 11.7–13.9). The mean scores varied among year of study and were statistically significant using one-way ANOVA (p < 0.0001). Among students who relied primarily on informal sources of vaccine information, such as the chiropractic literature and informal talks at CMCC, anti-vaccination attitudes were more prevalent in later years. InterpretationMost CMCC students reported pro-vaccination attitudes, but there appeared to be an increase in anti-vaccination attitudes as students progressed through the CMCC program. This pattern was seen almost exclusively among students who relied primarily on informal sources of vaccine information rather than on core CMCC lectures or prior lectures at university. Chiropractic is the third-largest regulated health care profession in North America, after allopathic medicine and dentistry, and it is growing rapidly.^1,2 A 1997 Angus Reid poll revealed that 25% of all Canadians use, or have made use of, chiropractic.³ Additional studies have reported a substantial pediatric sample within this population.^4,5,6 Chiropractors are therefore likely to play an increasingly influential role in the formulation of societal perceptions on public health issues such as vaccination. Vaccination, however, remains a contentious issue for a vocal subpopulation of the Canadian chiropractic profession,^7,8,9 despite the positive official stance of the Canadian Chiropractic Association (CCA).¹⁰Currently there are approximately 5000 practising chiropractors in Canada, of whom 4000 are members of the CCA.¹¹ Furthermore, approximately 80% of Canadian chiropractors are graduates of the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CMCC),⁶ the only English-language chiropractic college in Canada. It is possible that attitudes formed during the 4-year program at CMCC will be indicative of attitudes held by practising chiropractors.¹² This study reports the findings of a survey of students attending CMCC during the 1999/2000 academic year, which was designed to investigate their attitudes toward vaccination.     

Volume of screening mammography and performance in the Quebec population-based Breast Cancer Screening Program

Background

In the Quebec Breast Cancer Screening Program (Programme québécois de dépistage du cancer du sein [PQDCS]), radiologists'' and facilities'' volumes of screening mammography vary considerably. We examined the relation of screening-mammography volume to rates of breast cancer detection and false-positive readings in the PQDCS.

Methods

The study population included 307 314 asymptomatic women aged 50–69 years screened during 1998–2000. Breast cancer detection rates were analyzed by comparing all women with screening-detected breast cancer (n = 1709) and a 10% random sample of those without (n = 30 560). False-positive rates were analyzed by comparing the 3159 women with false-positive readings and the 27 401 others in the 10% random sample. Characteristics of participants, radiologists and facilities were obtained from the PQDCS information system. Data were analyzed by means of logistic regression.

Results

The rate of breast cancer detection appeared to be unrelated to the radiologist''s screening-mammography volume but increased with the facility''s screening-mammography volume. The breast cancer detection rate ratio for facilities performing 4000 or more screenings per year, compared with those performing fewer than 2000, was 1.28 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07–1.52). In contrast, the frequency of false-positive readings was unrelated to the facility''s screening volume but was inversely related to the radiologist''s screening volume: the rate ratio for readers of 1500 or more screenings per year compared with those reading fewer than 250 was 0.53 (95% CI 0.35–0.79).

Interpretation

Radiologists'' and facilities'' caseloads showed independent and complementary associations with performance of screening mammography in the PQDCS. Radiologists who worked in larger facilities and read more screening mammograms had higher breast cancer detection rates while maintaining lower false-positive rates.Caseload of health care providers and organizations has been linked with performance.^1,2,3,4 Providers with larger volumes of patients or procedures have often been shown to have better outcomes.^2,5 However, a recent comprehensive review of the literature underlined the methodologic limitations of published studies, especially poor adjustment for case mix and failure to account for characteristics of providers and organizations simultaneously.⁶The population-based Quebec Breast Cancer Screening Program (Programme québécois de dépistage du cancer du sein [PQDCS]), launched in 1998, follows the North American standard of a minimum annual reading volume of 480 mammographic examinations (diagnostic and screening combined) for each collaborating radiologist.⁷ In addition, facilities in urban areas have to perform at least 4000 diagnostic or screening examinations each year to be eligible for the program.⁸ However, there is a large variability in radiologists'' and facilities'' volumes of screening examinations.The objective of our study was to assess whether differences in screening volume were associated with rates of breast cancer detection and of false-positive readings. We examined the separate and combined effects of radiologists'' and facilities'' screening-mammography volumes.     

Fluoroquinolones compared with β-lactam antibiotics for the treatment of acute bacterial sinusitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The presumed superiority of newer fluoroquinolones for the treatment of acute bacterial sinusitis is based on laboratory data but has not yet been established on clinical grounds.

Methods

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness and safety of fluoroquinolones and β-lactams in acute bacterial sinusitis.

Results

We identified 8 randomized controlled trials investigating the newer “respiratory” fluoroquinolones moxifloxacin, levofloxacin and gatifloxacin. In the primary effectiveness analysis involving 2133 intention-to-treat patients from 5 randomized controlled trials, the extent of clinical cure and improvement did not differ between fluoroquinolones and β-lactams (odds ratio [OR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85–1.39) at the test-of-cure assessment, which varied from 10 to 31 days after the start of treatment. Fluoroquinolones were associated with an increased chance of clinical success among the clinically evaluable patients in all of the randomized controlled trials (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03–1.63) and in 4 blinded randomized controlled trials (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.05–2.00). There was no statistically significant difference between fluoroquinolones and amoxicillin–clavulanate (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.93–1.65). Eradication or presumed eradication of the pathogens isolated before treatment was more likely with fluoroquinolone treatment than with β-lactam treatment (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.09–4.08). In the primary safety analysis, adverse events did not differ between treatments (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.86–1.59). However, more adverse events occurred with fluoroquinolone use than with β-lactam use in 2 blinded randomized controlled trials. The associations described here were generally consistent when we included 3 additional studies involving other fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin and sparfloxacin) in the analysis.

Interpretation

In the treatment of acute bacterial sinusitis, newer fluoroquinolones conferred no benefit over β-lactam antibiotics. The use of fluoroquinolones as first-line therapy cannot be endorsed.Acute bacterial sinusitis (more accurately known as rhinosinusitis, given that the nasal mucosa is commonly involved¹) is one of the most frequent health disorders;² it has an adverse impact on patients'' quality of life³ and accounts for nearly 3 million ambulatory care visits in the United States annually⁴ and substantial health care costs.⁵Acute bacterial sinusitis typically follows an episode of viral upper respiratory tract illness.² The diagnosis of bacterial disease in routine clinical practice is usually based on the presence of a constellation of clinical manifestations.¹ The bacterial pathogens most commonly involved are Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and, to a lesser degree, Moraxella catarrhalis.^6,7 Over the years, these pathogens have acquired various degrees of resistance to many traditional antibiotics.⁸The benefit of older antibiotics over placebo in the treatment of acute bacterial sinusitis appears limited, mostly because of the high success rate achieved with placebo.^9,10 However, newer, third-and fourth-generation fluoroquinolones possess excellent in vitro activity against the most common respiratory pathogens,¹¹ and for this reason these drugs are often designated as “respiratory.” Based on analysis of the available laboratory data, current guidelines give the newer fluoroquinolones the highest ranking, in terms of expected clinical effectiveness, among the antimicrobials used to treat acute bacterial sinusitis (although admittedly the difference is marginal).⁷The presumed clinical advantage of the respiratory fluoroquinolones over other classes of antimicrobials has not been clearly demonstrated in comparative clinical trials or meta-analyses.^9,10 We aimed to comprehensively reassess the role of fluoroquinolones in the treatment of acute bacterial sinusitis, in terms of effectiveness and safety, by performing a meta-analysis of relevant randomized controlled trials.     

Impact of patient communication problems on the risk of preventable adverse events in acute care settings

Background

Up to 50% of adverse events that occur in hospitals are preventable. Language barriers and disabilities that affect communication have been shown to decrease quality of care. We sought to assess whether communication problems are associated with an increased risk of preventable adverse events.

Methods

We randomly selected 20 general hospitals in the province of Quebec with at least 1500 annual admissions. Of the 145 672 admissions to the selected hospitals in 2000/01, we randomly selected and reviewed 2355 charts of patients aged 18 years or older. Reviewers abstracted patient characteristics, including communication problems, and details of hospital admission, and assessed the cause and preventability of identified adverse events. The primary outcome was adverse events.

Results

Of 217 adverse events, 63 (29%) were judged to be preventable, for an overall population rate of 2.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1%–3.4%). We found that patients with preventable adverse events were significantly more likely than those without such events to have a communication problem (odds ratio [OR] 3.00; 95% CI 1.43–6.27) or a psychiatric disorder (OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.09–5.05). Patients who were admitted urgently were significantly more likely than patients whose admissions were elective to experience an event (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.07–2.52). Preventable adverse events were mainly due to drug errors (40%) or poor clinical management (32%). We found that patients with communication problems were more likely than patients without these problems to experience multiple preventable adverse events (46% v. 20%; p = 0.05).

Interpretation

Patients with communication problems appeared to be at highest risk for preventable adverse events. Interventions to reduce the risk for these patients need to be developed and evaluated.Patient safety is a priority in modern health care systems. From 3% to 17% of hospital admissions result in an adverse event,^1–8 and almost 50% of these events are considered to be preventable.^3,9–12 An adverse event is an unintended injury or complication caused by delivery of clinical care rather than by the patient''s condition. The occurrence of adverse events has been well documented; however, identifying modifiable risk factors that contribute to the occurrence of preventable adverse events is critical. Studies of preventable adverse events have focused on many factors, but researchers have only recently begun to evaluate the role of patient characteristics.^2,9,12,13 Older patients and those with a greater number of health problems have been shown to be at increased risk for preventable adverse events.^10,11 However, previous studies have repeatedly suggested the need to investigate more diverse, modifiable risk factors.^{3,6,7,10,11,14–16}Language barriers and disabilities that affect communication have been shown to decrease quality of care;^16–20 however, their impact on preventable adverse events needs to be investigated. Patients with physical and sensory disabilities, such as deafness and blindness, have been shown to face considerable barriers when communicating with health care professionals.^20–24 Communication disorders are estimated to affect 5%–10% of the general population,²⁵ and in one study more than 15% of admissions to university hospitals involved patients with 1 or more disabilities severe enough to prevent almost any form of communication.²⁶ In addition, patients with communication disabilities are already at increased risk for depression and other comorbidities.^27–29 Determining whether they are at increased risk for preventable adverse events would permit risk stratification at the time of admission and targeted preventive strategies.We sought to estimate the extent to which preventable adverse events that occurred in hospital could be predicted by conditions that affect a patient''s ability to communicate.     

Physical violence against intimate partners and related exposures to violence among South African men

Background

Despite high rates of intimate partner violence in South Africa, there have been no national studies of men''s perpetration of violence against female partners.

Methods

We analyzed data from the South Africa Stress and Health Study, a cross-sectional, nationally representative study, specifically examining data for men who had ever been married or had ever cohabited with a female partner. We calculated the prevalence of physical violence against intimate female partners and used logistic regression to examine associations with physical abuse during childhood and exposure to parental and community violence.

Results

A total of 834 male participants in the South Africa Stress and Health Study met the study criteria. Of these, 27.5% reported using physical violence against their current or most recent female partner during their current or most recent marriage or cohabiting relationship. Crude odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) indicated significant associations between perpetration of violence against an intimate partner and witnessing parental violence (OR 3.91, 95% CI 2.66–5.73) or experiencing physical abuse during childhood (OR 3.24, 95% CI 2.27–4.63), but not exposure to community violence (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.88–1.88). The 2 significant associations persisted in adjusted analyses: OR 3.22 (95% CI 1.94–5.33) for witnessing parental violence and OR 1.73 (95% CI 1.07–2.79) for experiencing physical abuse during childhood.

Interpretation

We found a high prevalence of physical violence perpetrated by men against their intimate partners. Men who experienced physical abuse during childhood or were exposed to parental violence were at the greatest risk.Most research about men''s perpetration of violence against female intimate partners has concentrated on elucidating the factors that put women at risk for experiencing such violence and identifying the related service needs. Less work has been done to investigate the factors affecting men''s risk of perpetrating violence against women. Such work is needed to inform development of empirically based public health programs to reduce men''s use of such violence. Intimate partner violence is of pandemic proportions, with global estimates indicating that 15% to 75% of women have experienced such abuse.^1,2 Such violence may confer grave health consequences, including transmission of HIV/AIDS.³The overwhelming majority of research on violence against intimate partners perpetrated by men has been conducted in Western countries, with the focus on men at high risk for such activity (e.g., prisoners, people enrolled in intervention programs for batterers).^4,5 This work has highlighted the importance of exposure to violence early in life (e.g., witnessing parental violence, experiencing child abuse) in predicting perpetration of violence against a partner during adulthood.⁶ Recently, the potential relations between community violence and men''s perpetration of violence against intimate partners have also been examined.⁷Fewer studies have been done in developing nations, but several notable investigations have recently assessed men''s perpetration of violence against intimate partners in South Africa, specifically in Eastern Cape and Cape Town. Two of these studies have indicated high rates of violence against intimate partners: 31.8% in Eastern Cape⁸ and 42.3% in Cape Town.⁹ The extent to which these findings reflect national rates is unknown. Furthermore, work with both men and women in South Africa has demonstrated strong relations between violence (men''s perpetration and women''s victimization) and higher rates of sexually risky behaviours.^3,8 Associations between women''s experience as victims of intimate partner violence and HIV infection have also been documented.³ These data strongly suggest that men''s perpetration of violence against intimate partners is common in South Africa and that it may play an important role in this nation''s HIV epidemic,^3,8 which currently ranks highest in the world with respect to the number of people living with HIV.¹⁰In the study reported here, we sought to build upon prior work by using a national sample of South African men to examine the prevalence of physical violence perpetrated by men against their female intimate partners and potential violence-related risk factors (i.e., exposure to parental violence, experience of abuse in childhood and exposure to community violence).     

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in health care workers from 10 hospitals in Quebec,Canada: a cross-sectional study

Background:The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected health care workers. We sought to estimate SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among hospital health care workers in Quebec, Canada, after the first wave of the pandemic and to explore factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.Methods:Between July 6 and Sept. 24, 2020, we enrolled health care workers from 10 hospitals, including 8 from a region with a high incidence of COVID-19 (the Montréal area) and 2 from low-incidence regions of Quebec. Eligible health care workers were physicians, nurses, orderlies and cleaning staff working in 4 types of care units (emergency department, intensive care unit, COVID-19 inpatient unit and non-COVID-19 inpatient unit). Participants completed a questionnaire and underwent SARS-CoV-2 serology testing. We identified factors independently associated with higher seroprevalence.Results:Among 2056 enrolled health care workers, 241 (11.7%) had positive SARS-CoV-2 serology. Of these, 171 (71.0%) had been previously diagnosed with COVID-19. Seroprevalence varied among hospitals, from 2.4% to 3.7% in low-incidence regions to 17.9% to 32.0% in hospitals with outbreaks involving 5 or more health care workers. Higher seroprevalence was associated with working in a hospital where outbreaks occurred (adjusted prevalence ratio 4.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.63–6.57), being a nurse or nursing assistant (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.34, 95% CI 1.03–1.74) or an orderly (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.49, 95% CI 1.12–1.97), and Black or Hispanic ethnicity (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.41, 95% CI 1.13–1.76). Lower seroprevalence was associated with working in the intensive care unit (adjusted prevalence ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.30–0.71) or the emergency department (adjusted prevalence ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.39–0.98).Interpretation:Health care workers in Quebec hospitals were at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly in outbreak settings. More work is needed to better understand SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics in health care settings.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected health care workers. In France, Spain, Italy, Germany and the United States, at least 10% of cases reported in spring 2020 were in health care workers.¹ In Quebec, 25% (14 177 of 56 565) of all cases declared during the first wave of the pandemic, from March to July 2020, were in health care workers,² about one-third of whom were working in acute care hospitals.¹ The Montréal area was the most affected region in Quebec and Canada during the first wave, reaching a COVID-19 incidence rate of 1336 per 100 000 population.²The number of COVID-19 cases reported among health care workers underestimated the number of those infected with SARS-CoV-2 during that period, given limited testing leading to undiagnosed asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic infections.³ Seroprevalence studies are an important tool to determine the proportion of people infected with SARS-CoV-2, both in the general population and among health care workers.⁴ After the first wave in Quebec, SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in adults aged 18–69 years was found to be low (3.1% in Montréal and 1.3% in less affected regions), but this proportion could be much higher among health care workers who had to work despite the general shutdown of social and economic activities, especially if they were exposed to major outbreaks.⁵Only 2 other Canadian studies provide SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence estimates among health care workers, and both studies were from a single centre.^6,7 Outside Canada, most seroprevalence studies among health care workers include a single site and do not provide a representative estimate for a defined region.⁸ Several studies have reported a higher seroprevalence among health care workers from units treating patients with COVID-19 (COVID-19 units) compared with other units (non–COVID-19 units), emergency departments or intensive care units.^9,10 Other studies have not identified such associations.^11,12 In this study, we aimed to assess the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibody among hospital health care workers from a variety of settings after the first pandemic wave in Quebec, and to explore factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.     

Changes in health indicator gaps between First Nations and other residents of Manitoba

Background:The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada has called for better reporting of health disparities between First Nations people and other Canadians to close gaps in health outcomes. We sought to evaluate changes in these disparities using indicators of health and health care use over the last 2 decades.Methods:We used linked, whole-population, administrative claims data from the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy for fiscal years 1994/95 to 1998/99 and 2012/13 to 2016/17. We measured indicators of health and health care use among registered First Nations and all other Manitobans, and compared differences between these groups over the 2 time periods.Results:Over time, the relative gap between First Nations and all other Manitobans widened by 51% (95% confidence interval [CI] 42% to 60%) for premature mortality rate. For potential years of life lost, the gap widened by 54% (95% CI 51% to 57%) among women and by 32% (95% CI 30% to 35%) among men. The absolute gap in life expectancy widened by 3.14 years (95% CI 2.92 to 3.36) among men and 3.61 years (95% CI 3.38 to 3.84) among women. Relative gaps widened by 20% (95% CI 12% to 27%) for ambulatory specialist visits, by 14% (95% CI 12% to 16%) for hospital separations and by 50% (95% CI 39% to 62%) for days spent in hospital, but narrowed by 33% (95% CI −36% to −30%) for ambulatory primary care visits, by 22% (95% CI −27% to −16%) for mammography and by 27% (95% CI −40% to −23%) for injury hospitalizations.Interpretation:Disparities between First Nations and all other Manitobans in many key indicators of health and health care use have grown larger over time. New approaches are needed to address these disparities and promote better health with and for First Nations.

Comprehensive data on the health of First Nations people in Canada are urgently needed.^1,2 This is a priority identified by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, which highlights the striking health disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations in Canada and recognizes the disparities in their Calls to Action as “a direct result of previous Canadian government policies.”³ These health disparities are understood to be part of the continuing impact of colonization and genocidal policies aimed specifically at Indigenous people.^4,5The underlying causes of the health gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people, resulting from attempts by European settlers to assimilate Indigenous people into their own societies, have been detailed elsewhere.⁶ The collective trauma that Indigenous populations have experienced through colonial policies and practices include, among others, racism and marginalization in virtually every aspect of their lives; major disruptions of families and communities through forced attendance at residential schools and by the child welfare system; trauma from physical, emotional and sexual abuse, carried over into future generations; and damage to their Indigenous identity through loss of culture, language, traditions and teachings.^6,7 Other social determinants (e.g., poverty, social exclusion and poor access to clean water, quality housing, education and heath services) and the governments’ failure to address these issues also influence the health of First Nations people.^8,9A previous population-based study of First Nations’ health and health care use in Canada, published in 2002, focused on the Manitoba population, which has the highest proportion of First Nations residents among Canadian provinces.¹⁰ It identified substantial gaps in the health of First Nations and their access to health services compared with other Manitobans. Others have since reported on health disparities between Indigenous peoples and other Canadians;^11–14 however, the Manitoba data provide a unique opportunity to compare changes in health-related outcomes over nearly 2 decades. In the present study, we sought to compare indicators of health and health care use between First Nations people and other residents of Manitoba, to determine whether the gap between the 2 groups has changed over the past 18 years and establish whether any progress has been made in improving First Nations’ health.     

Post-acute health care burden after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a retrospective cohort study

Background:The post-acute burden of health care use after SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. We sought to quantify the post-acute burden of health care use after SARS-CoV-2 infection among community-dwelling adults in Ontario by comparing those with positive and negative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results for SARS-CoV-2 infection.Methods:We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving community-dwelling adults in Ontario who had a PCR test between Jan. 1, 2020, and Mar. 31, 2021. Follow-up began 56 days after PCR testing. We matched people 1:1 on a comprehensive propensity score. We compared per-person-year rates for health care encounters at the mean and 99th percentiles, and compared counts using negative binomial models, stratified by sex.Results:Among 531 702 matched people, mean age was 44 (standard deviation [SD] 17) years and 51% were female. Females who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had a mean of 1.98 (95% CI 1.63 to 2.29) more health care encounters overall per-person-year than those who had a negative test result, with 0.31 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.56) more home care encounters to 0.81 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.93) more long-term care days. At the 99th percentile per-person-year, females who tested positive had 6.48 more days of hospital admission and 28.37 more home care encounters. Males who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had 0.66 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.99) more overall health care encounters per-person-year than those who tested negative, with 0.14 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.21) more outpatient encounters and 0.48 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.60) long-term care days, and 0.43 (95% CI −0.67 to −0.21) fewer home care encounters. At the 99th percentile, they had 8.69 more days in hospital per-person-year, with fewer home care (−27.31) and outpatient (−0.87) encounters.Interpretation:We found significantly higher rates of health care use after a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test in an analysis that matched test-positive with test-negative people. Stakeholders can use these findings to prepare for health care demand associated with post-COVID-19 condition (long COVID).

The public health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are difficult to overstate.¹ More than 600 million SARS-CoV-2 infections and 6.5 million deaths have been reported worldwide as of September 2022,² which are likely gross undercounts as many infections go undetected.³Long-term morbidity can be caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection.^4–9 In the first pandedmic wave, as many as 27% of people admitted to hospital died or were readmitted within 60 days, and as many as 70% of people who were not admitted to hospital reported at least 1 symptom 4 months after infection.^10,11 By the World Health Organization (WHO) definition, about 10%–20% of those infected acquire a post-COVID-19 condition (long COVID).^12,13Analysis of 10 prospective surveys and the medical records of 1.1 million patients with COVID-19 diagnosis codes before the emergence of the Omicron variant showed similar findings: 7.8%–17% had symptoms 12 weeks after self-reported COVID-19, with 1.2%–4.8% reporting debilitating symptoms.¹⁴ Estimates of long COVID vary by methodology (e.g., definitions of initial infection and timing of symptoms, timing of data collection), but risk is thought to be influenced by infection severity, type of variant, patient characteristics, vaccination¹⁵ and, potentially, previous infection.¹⁶ Because each new SARS-CoV-2 infection carries some risk of long COVID, everyone remains at risk for developing the condition.Health care funders, policy-makers and clinicians need a clear understanding of the impact of long COVID on use of health care resources to allocate resources equitably now and plan for future needs.¹⁷ We sought to quantify the post-acute burden of health care use after SARS-CoV-2 infection among community-dwelling adults in Ontario.     

Respiratory fluoroquinolones for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

We investigated whether the use of respiratory fluoroquinolones was associated with better clinical outcomes compared with the use of macrolides and β-lactams among adults with pneumonia.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Current Contents, Scopus, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane with no language restrictions. Two reviewers independently extracted data from published trials that compared fluoroquinolones (levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, gemifloxacin) with macrolides or β-lactams or both. A meta-analysis was performed with the clinical outcomes of mortality, treatment success and adverse outcomes.

Results

We included 23 trials in our meta-analysis. There was no difference in mortality among patients who received fluoroquinolones or the comparator antibiotics (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65–1.12). Pneumonia resolved in more patients who received fluoroquinolones compared with the comparator antibiotics for the included outcomes in the intention-to-treat population (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.00–1.36), clinically evaluable population (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.06–1.50) and the microbiologically assessed population (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.28–2.20). Fluoroquinolones were more effective than a combination of β-lactam and macrolide (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.02–1.90). They were also more effective for patients with severe pneumonia (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.02–3.29), those who required admission to hospital (OR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.04–1.61) and those who required intravenous therapy (OR = 1.44, 15% CI 1.13–1.85). Fluoroquinolones were more effective than β-lactam and macrolide in open-label trials (OR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.08–1.69) but not in blinded randomized controlled trials (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.85–1.50).

Interpretation

Fluoroquinolones were associated with higher success of treatment for severe forms of pneumonia; however, a benefit in mortality was not evident. A randomized controlled trial that includes patients with severe pneumonia with or without bacteremia is needed.Community-acquired pneumonia is among the leading reasons for hospital admission¹ and resource consumption.^2,3 It is the most frequent cause of community-acquired infections among patients admitted to intensive care units.⁴ In addition, it is among the leading causes of death worldwide.Physicians must choose an optimal therapeutic regimen that eliminates the infection effectively, minimizes the risk of developing drug resistance and does not compromise the safety of the patient. The combination of β-lactam and macrolide covers the most common possible pathogens involved in the pathogenesis of pneumonia.⁵ More recently, fluoroquinolones with enhanced activity against Streptococcus pneumoniae were introduced in clinical practice. The favourable pharmacokinetic profile of fluoroquinolones allows for once daily administration, often eliminating the need for parenteral treatment. Furthermore, initial treatment with fluoroquinolones was among the predictors of lower treatment failure among patients with pneumonia.⁶In 2007, the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Thoracic Society released new guidelines for the management of care for adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia.⁷ In these guidelines, levofloxacin, gemifloxacin and moxifloxacin were reported to be equally effective as the combination of β-lactam and macrolide, and were proposed to be the preferred treatment option for patients who require admission to hospital, as well as for patients with comorbidity who receive treatment as outpatients. In addition to being safe, these fluoroquinolones are more effective against the most common types of bacteria responsible for the development of community-acquired pneumonia.⁷ For example, S. pneumoniae strains are not fully susceptible to ciprofloxacin. On the other hand, trovafloxacin, clinafloxacin, gatifloxacin and other quinolones are not used because of safety concerns or because they are not widely available. The trials that compared fluoroquinolones with other antibiotics regimens for the treatment of pneumonia were designed on the basis of noninferiority (i.e., an antibiotic is equally effective to a comparator), and several were conducted in order to receive approval from the relevant agencies.We sought to examine whether the use of fluoroquinolones was associated with more advantages or disadvantages than the use of macrolides or β-lactams in terms of mortality, resolution of pneumonia and adverse effects.     

Characteristics of women undergoing repeat induced abortion

Background

Although repeat induced abortion is common, data concerning characteristics of women undergoing this procedure are lacking. We conducted this study to identify the characteristics, including history of physical abuse by a male partner and history of sexual abuse, of women who present for repeat induced abortion.

Methods

We surveyed a consecutive series of women presenting for initial or repeat pregnancy termination to a regional provider of abortion services for a wide geographic area in southwestern Ontario between August 1998 and May 1999. Self-reported demographic characteristics, attitudes and practices regarding contraception, history of relationship violence, history of sexual abuse or coercion, and related variables were assessed as potential correlates of repeat induced abortion. We used χ² tests for linear trend to examine characteristics of women undergoing a first, second, or third or subsequent abortion. We analyzed significant correlates of repeat abortion using stepwise multivariate multinomial logistic regression to identify factors uniquely associated with repeat abortion.

Results

Of the 1221 women approached, 1145 (93.8%) consented to participate. Data regarding first versus repeat abortion were available for 1127 women. A total of 68.2%, 23.1% and 8.7% of the women were seeking a first, second, or third or subsequent abortion respectively. Adjusted odds ratios for undergoing repeat versus a first abortion increased significantly with increased age (second abortion: 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04–1.09; third or subsequent abortion: 1.11, 95% CI 1.07–1.15), oral contraceptive use at the time of conception (second abortion: 2.17, 95% CI 1.52–3.09; third or subsequent abortion: 2.60, 95% CI 1.51–4.46), history of physical abuse by a male partner (second abortion: 2.04, 95% CI 1.39–3.01; third or subsequent abortion: 2.78, 95% CI 1.62–4.79), history of sexual abuse or violence (second abortion: 1.58, 95% CI 1.11–2.25; third or subsequent abortion: 2.53, 95% CI 1.50–4.28), history of sexually transmitted disease (second abortion: 1.50, 95% CI 0.98–2.29; third or subsequent abortion: 2.26, 95% CI 1.28–4.02) and being born outside Canada (second abortion: 1.83, 95% CI 1.19–2.79; third or subsequent abortion: 1.75, 95% CI 0.90–3.41).

Interpretation

Among other factors, a history of physical or sexual abuse was associated with repeat induced abortion. Presentation for repeat abortion may be an important indication to screen for a current or past history of relationship violence and sexual abuse.Repeat pregnancy termination procedures are common in Canada (where 35.5% of all induced abortions are repeat procedures)^1,2 and the United States (where 48% of induced abortions are repeat procedures).^3,4,5,6,7 Rates of repeat induced abortion increased in both countries for an initial period after abortion was legalized, as a result of an increase in the number of women who had access to a first, and consequently to repeat, legal induced abortion.^1,6,8,9 At present, rates of initial and repeat abortion in Canada and the United States appear to be stabilizing.^2,7Research concerning characteristics of women who undergo repeat induced abortions has been limited in scope. In a literature search we identified fewer than 20 studies in this area published over the past 3 decades. However, available research has shown several consistent findings. Women undergoing repeat abortions are more likely than those undergoing a first abortion to report using a method of contraception at the time of conception.^7,8,10,11 In addition, women seeking repeat abortions report more challenging family situations than women seeking initial abortions: they are more likely to be separated, divorced, widowed or living in a common-law marriage, and to report difficulties with their male partner.^1,5,8,11,12 They also are older,^7,13 have more children^1,5,13 and are more often non-white^7,11,13 than women seeking initial abortions.There is little evidence to suggest that women seeking repeat abortion are using pregnancy termination as a method of birth control.^1,5,6,8,11 Evidence also does not indicate that women seeking repeat abortion are psychologically maladjusted.^8,13Our literature review showed that many studies of repeat abortion are 20 to 30 years old and are based on data collected when abortion was a newly legalized procedure.^5,11 Furthermore, in studies of correlates of repeat abortion the investigators did not examine a range of personality characteristics that are known to influence women''s reproductive health outcomes,^14,15 including attitudes about sexuality,¹⁴ health locus of control,^16,17 degree of social integration,¹⁶ attitudes about contraception^18,19 and history of sexual or physical abuse.^20,21,22 The objective of the current study was to identify characteristics of women who undergo repeat induced abortion.     

First Nations status and emergency department triage scores in Alberta: a retrospective cohort study

Background:Previous studies have found that race is associated with emergency department triage scores, raising concerns about potential health care inequity. As part of a project on quality of care for First Nations people in Alberta, we sought to understand the relation between First Nations status and triage scores.Methods:We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of health administrative data from April 2012 to March 2017 to evaluate acuity of triage scores, categorized as a binary outcome of higher or lower acuity score. We developed multivariable multilevel logistic mixed-effects regression models using the levels of emergency department visit, patient (for patients with multiple visits) and facility. We further evaluated the triage of visits related to 5 disease categories and 5 specific diagnoses to better compare triage outcomes of First Nations and non–First Nations patients.Results:First Nations status was associated with lower odds of receiving higher acuity triage scores (odds ratio [OR] 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92–0.94) compared with non–First Nations patients in adjusted models. First Nations patients had lower odds of acute triage for all 5 disease categories and for 3 of 5 diagnoses, including long bone fractures (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.76–0.88), acute upper respiratory infection (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84–0.98) and anxiety disorder (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.60–0.74).Interpretation:First Nations status was associated with lower odds of higher acuity triage scores across a number of conditions and diagnoses. This may reflect systemic racism, stereotyping and potentially other factors that affected triage assessments.

Health outcomes are markedly worse for First Nations than non–First Nations people. Although this is largely because of inequities in the social determinants of health,^1–4 inequities in the provision of health care also exist.^5,6 Emergency departments serve as a point of accessible health care. Status First Nations patients make up 4.8% of unique patients and 9.4% of emergency visits in Alberta,⁷ and Canadian studies describe First Nations patients’ experiences with racism when seeking emergency care.^8,9Evaluating triage contributes empirically to understanding the health care of First Nations patients insofar as triage is a quantifiable, intermediate process by which systemic racism¹⁰ may influence patient outcomes. The Canadian Triage Acuity Scale¹¹ is a 5-level scale used to classify the severity of patient symptoms. Triage nurses use a brief assessment, medical history, and presenting signs and symptoms to assign each patient a triage score that determines the priority in which the patient should be seen by a provider. Therefore, accurate triage is important for patient health outcomes.¹² In practice, triage is a social interaction where local practice, biases, stereotypes and communication barriers come into play. Studies have found that women receive less acute triage scores than men,^13,14 and that racial minority^13,15–17 and Indigenous^18–20 patients receive less acute triage scores than white or non-Indigenous patients. Indeed, Indigenous patients in Canada have described a perception “of social triaging in the [emergency department], whereby decisions about who is seen first seemed to them [to be] based less on triaged clinical priorities but on the social positioning of the patient.”²¹ Differential triage scores for minority populations raise health equity concerns.As part of a larger mixed-methods project evaluating the quality of emergency care for First Nations people in Alberta, we sought to evaluate quantitative differences in emergency visit characteristics and outcomes of First Nations and non–First Nations people in Alberta. Specifically, we aimed to estimate the relation between First Nations status and acuity of triage, and to evaluate whether predictors of acuity differ by First Nations status.