Surge capacity and practice management challenges of Canadian family physicians during COVID-19: a qualitative study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Planning for surge capacity, that is, the ability of a health service to expand beyond normal capacity and meet an increased demand for clinical care, is an essential component of public health emergency preparedness. During the COVID-19 pandemic, family physicians (FPs) were called upon to provide surge capacity in settings such as hospital units and emergency departments while also maintaining their primary care responsibilities. Most research reports on projection models, hospital settings, or the use of virtual care, with limited focus on the firsthand experiences of FPs in this role. To address this gap, this study examines the experiences of FPs and their roles in supporting surge capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: As part of a mixed methods, multiple case study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with FPs between October 2020 and June 2021 across four Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Ontario, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador). During the interviews, FPs were asked about the roles they assumed during the different stages of the pandemic and the factors that impacted their ability to fulfil these roles. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a thematic analysis approach was employed to identify recurring themes. RESULTS: We interviewed a total of 68 FPs across the four provinces and identified two overarching themes: (1) mechanisms used to create surge capacity by FPs, and (2) key considerations for an organized surge capacity program. During the pandemic, surge capacity was achieved by extending FP working hours, expanding the FP workforce, and redeploying FPs to new roles and settings. The effective implementation of FP surge capacity requires organized communication and coordination mechanisms, policies to clarify scope of practice during redeployment, training and mentorship related to new redeployment roles, FPs holding hospital privileges, and policies that help to preserve primary care capacity. CONCLUSIONS: FPs make critical contributions to surge capacity but require structured support to balance their redeployment roles with their ongoing primary care responsibilities. Ensuring adequate coverage for their practices and employing strong communication and coordination mechanisms are essential for maintaining high-quality care and managing the strain on FPs and the health system during public health emergencies.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».