Regional Municipality of Durham

This commentary illustrates a recent case study within Ontario, Canada, in which the application of sociodemographic and health data was used by public health to support a legal case to oppose a retail licence application to consume liquor at a corner store located within a neighbourhood that has experienced low socio-economic factors, including low income, high unemployment and low educational attainment levels. Communities in a similar situation may draw from this situation to prevent expansion of alcohol retail availability in neighbourhoods that have low socio-economic status populations and high unemployment and other factors associated with high rates of alcohol-related harms.

Introduction/background: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted the availability of community support and resources to vulnerable populations, including persons experiencing homeless within the Regional Municipality of Durham, Ontario, Canada. In response, the Region developed pilot community hubs to address escalating unmet housing, healthcare and support needs. Why did you do it? The community hub evaluation project is a community-based research co-created by a research team from Ontario Tech University and community stakeholders to measure the community hubs' effectiveness in addressing service users' unmet needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Who is it for? The project is relevant to healthcare and social service policymakers and service providers, service users, researchers, and community organizers involved in researching, funding, designing and delivering healthcare and social services for vulnerable populations. Who did you involve and engage with? The project collaborators comprised a research team from Ontario Tech University and an advisory committee of community hub staff members and service users convened by the research team. All aspects of the project’s design and implementation, including creating the data collection tools, participant recruitment, data collection, data analysis and developing the knowledge translation products, were completed in collaboration with the research advisory committee that met monthly. Service users on the advisory committee were compensated for their time and contribution. What did you do? A mixed-methods research design was used to explore the experiences of the community hub service users, staff members and subject matter experts. Service users were recruited from the community hubs. Staff members were recruited through virtual staff meetings. Face-to-face surveys were administered to 75 service users at the community hubs. Staff online surveys were self-administered by 15 direct service staff. Virtual interviews were conducted with five community hub managerial staff and two subject matter experts. Quantitative data were calculated using the SPSS statistical software. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. What results did you get? What impact did you have? The integrated service model was described as saving service users’ lives. Adequate, core funding is required for the sustainability of the community hubs. Results from the evaluation provided the regional government with data to help inform its strategic priorities for vulnerable populations. What is the learning for the international audience? The needs of vulnerable populations including persons experiencing homelessness are deep and entrenched. Community hubs integrate a range of healthcare and social support services, including the social determinants of health that respond to service users’ immediate and emerging needs. What are the next steps? Knowledge translation through conferences, symposiums, presentations at regional sector tables and peer-reviewed publications. Collaborating with the community hubs to utilize the research findings to support improvement in future service design and delivery.

The Public Health Leadership program administered by the Public Health Branch at the Regional Municipality of York, ON, focused on enhancing people-centred competencies of managers to effectively support staff during the pandemic. The program aimed to boost participative management competencies and resiliency skills of managers by providing them with peer mentorship, ready-to-use resiliency tools, debriefing supports and actionable strategies in the form of e-blasts. Program participants provided feedback collected through two program evaluation surveys. This article describes the results of the qualitative evaluation by highlighting the key strategies and approaches that managers found most useful for enhancing their leadership practice. Key themes emerging from the evaluation indicate that the mentorship component had the most impact on the participants' leadership skills and confidence as a leader.

Background:Most patients transported by Ontario paramedics to the emergency department have non-emergent conditions and may be more appropriately served by subacute community-based care centres. We sought to determine consensus on a set of patient characteristics that could be useful to classify retrospective emergency department visits that had a high probability of being primary care–like and potentially redirectable to a subacute care centre by paramedics.Methods:We conducted a modified Delphi study to assess expert consensus on characteristics of patients transported by paramedics to the emergency department from August to October 2021. An expert Delphi committee was constructed of emergency and family physicians in Ontario using purposive sampling. Experts rated whether each characteristic was useful to be included in a classification to identify potentially redirectable visits retrospectively, as well as characteristic details (e.g., upper and lower bounds). Consensus was considered 75% agreement.Results:Sixteen experts participated in the study; the experts were mostly male (75%) and evenly divided between emergency and family medicine. After 2 rounds, consensus was achieved on 8 of 9 characteristics (89%). Four characteristics were determined as useful to classify potentially redirectable emergency department visits: age (81%), triage acuity (100%), specialist consult in the emergency department (94%) and emergency department visit outcome (81%). Specifications of each characteristic were refined as follows: young and middle-aged adults with a non-emergent triage acuity, did not receive a specialist physician consult in the emergency department and discharged from the emergency department.Interpretation:Strong consensus was achieved to specify a classification system for potentially redirectable emergency department visits. These results will be combined with knowledge of which subacute care centres could conduct the main physician interventions to retrospectively identify emergency department visits that could have been suitable for paramedic redirection for further research.Study registration:ID ISRCTN22901977.

In response to an increase in COVID-19 infection rates in Ontario, several systemic treatment (ST) regimens delivered in the adjuvant setting for breast cancer were temporarily permitted for neoadjuvant-intent to defer nonurgent breast cancer surgical procedures. To examine the use and compare short-term outcomes of neoadjuvant-intent vs adjuvant ST in the COVID-19 era compared with the pre-COVID-19 era. This was a retrospective population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada. Patients with cancer starting selected ST regimens in the COVID-19 era (March 11, 2020, to September 30, 2020) were compared to those in the pre-COVID-19 era (March 11, 2019, to March 10, 2020). Patients were diagnosed with breast cancer within 6 months of starting systemic therapy. Estimates were calculated for the use of neoadjuvant vs adjuvant ST, the likelihood of receiving a surgical procedure, the rate of emergency department visits, hospital admissions, COVID-19 infections, and all-cause mortality between treatment groups over time. Among a total of 10 920 patients included, 7990 (73.2%) started treatment in the pre-COVID-19 era and 7344 (67.3%) received adjuvant ST; the mean (SD) age was 61.6 (13.1) years. Neoadjuvant-intent ST was more common in the COVID-19 era (1404 of 2930 patients [47.9%]) than the pre-COVID-19 era (2172 of 7990 patients [27.2%]), with an odds ratio of 2.46 (95% CI, 2.26-2.69; P < .001). This trend was consistent across a range of ST regimens, but differed according to patient age and geography. The likelihood of receiving surgery following neoadjuvant-intent chemotherapy was similar in the COVID-19 era compared with the pre-COVID-19 era (log-rank P = .06). However, patients with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant-intent hormonal therapy were significantly more likely to receive surgery in the COVID-19 era (log-rank P < .001). After adjustment, there were no significant changes in the rate of emergency department visits over time between patients receiving neoadjuvant ST, adjuvant ST, or ST only during the ST treatment period or postoperative period. Hospital admissions decreased in the COVID-19 era for patients who received neoadjuvant ST compared with adjuvant ST or ST alone (P for interaction = .01 for both) in either setting. In this cohort study, patients were more likely to start neoadjuvant ST in the COVID-19 era, which varied across the province and by indication. There was limited evidence to suggest any substantial impact on short-term outcomes.

As cases of COVID-19 began to increase in Ontario, Canada, throughout 2020, early evidence from surveillance and media highlighted disproportionately higher rates of COVID-19 infection, hospitalization and mortality among racialized and low-income populations. This disproportionate impact on underserved populations calls for a shift in approach away from what has traditionally occurred in health protection, that is the use of a universal approach which assumes everyone is affected and benefits equally from the same type and intensity of interventions. In this article, public health agencies are, therefore, being called to consider moving away from using a purely universal approach, often used in the control of communicable diseases, and apply a more tailored approach and use principles of health equity and proportionate universalism to reduce COVID-19 cases and their impacts among underserved groups and address health inequities exacerbated by the pandemic. We highlight examples from York Region Public Health, one of the largest health units in Ontario, to demonstrate areas of possible impact of this paradigm shift. It is clear that with a health equity lens applied to the pandemic response, the impact of COVID-19 can be further reduced and health inequities that predated the global pandemic can improve.

This study aimed to investigate awareness of type 2 diabetes and how sociodemographic factors influence diabetes knowledge in a rural population of Tamil Nadu, India. Previous research has identified poor awareness of diabetes in several low and middle-income countries, which can lead to a high prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes. India having the second highest prevalence of diabetes globally, it is increasingly important to assess how diabetes can be addressed in rural Indian populations. Systematic random sampling was used to gather study participants in 17 villages within the Krishnagiri district of Tamil Nadu, India. Data on diabetes knowledge was collected using a validated questionnaire. Knowledge score range was 0-8; a score of zero was designated as 'low knowledge', scores 1-4 as 'moderate knowledge', and scores 5-8 as 'good knowledge'. Associations between sociodemographic factors and composite diabetes knowledge score were assessed using a multinomial logistic GLLAMM model in Stata. A total of 753 individuals participated in the study. The average age of participants was 47 years and 55% were women. Overall awareness of diabetes was low, with 66% of individuals having no knowledge of diabetes. Only 16% and 17% achieved a moderate and a good knowledge score, respectively. Achieving a moderate knowledge score was significantly positively associated with education, wealth, participation in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), and business ownership as a source of income. Achieving a good knowledge score was significantly positively associated with education, wealth, rurality, participation in MGNREGA, business ownership as a source of income, and frequency of healthcare utilization. Rurality was significantly negatively associated (relative risk ratio (95% confidence interval)) with both moderate knowledge score (0.34 (0.19-0.59)), and good knowledge score (0.43 (0.24-0.74)). The strongest predictor of having a good knowledge score was having a high-school graduate or post-secondary education (11.07 (4.44-27.61)). Enrolment in MGNREGA employment was the strongest predictor for having a moderate knowledge score (3.27 (1.93-5.54)), as well as strongly associated with having a good knowledge score (2.39 (1.31-4.36)). The low awareness of diabetes among participants of this study raises serious concerns for public health in India. Public health efforts must prioritize health equity to lessen the impacts of diabetes in rural populations, where individuals face systemic barriers to receiving prevention and treatment for conditions such as diabetes.