Home

A comparative analysis of centralized waiting lists for patients without a primary care provider implemented in six Canadian provinces: study protocol

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Breton, Mylaine
dc.contributor.author Green, Michael
dc.contributor.author Kreindler, Sara
dc.contributor.author Sutherland, Jason
dc.contributor.author Jbilou, Jalila
dc.contributor.author Wong, Sabrina T
dc.contributor.author Shaw, Jay
dc.contributor.author Crooks, Valorie A
dc.contributor.author Contandriopoulos, Damien
dc.contributor.author Smithman, Mélanie A
dc.contributor.author Brousselle, Astrid
dc.date.accessioned 2017-01-23T15:28:24Z
dc.date.available 2017-01-23T15:28:24Z
dc.date.issued 2017-01-21
dc.identifier.citation BMC Health Services Research. 2017 Jan 21;17(1):60
dc.identifier.uri http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2007-8
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1993/32063
dc.description.abstract Abstract Background Having a regular primary care provider (i.e., family physician or nurse practitioner) is widely considered to be a prerequisite for obtaining healthcare that is timely, accessible, continuous, comprehensive, and well-coordinated with other parts of the healthcare system. Yet, 4.6 million Canadians, approximately 15% of Canada’s population, are unattached; that is, they do not have a regular primary care provider. To address the critical need for attachment, especially for more vulnerable patients, six Canadian provinces have implemented centralized waiting lists for unattached patients. These waiting lists centralize unattached patients’ requests for a primary care provider in a given territory and match patients with providers. From the little information we have on each province’s centralized waiting list, we know the way they work varies significantly from province to province. The main objective of this study is to compare the different models of centralized waiting lists for unattached patients implemented in six provinces of Canada to each other and to available scientific knowledge to make recommendations on ways to improve their design in an effort to increase attachment of patients to a primary care provider. Methods A logic analysis approach developed in three steps will be used. Step 1: build logic models that describe each province’s centralized waiting list through interviews with key stakeholders in each province; step 2: develop a conceptual framework, separate from the provincially informed logic models, that identifies key characteristics of centralized waiting lists for unattached patients and factors influencing their implementation through a literature review and interviews with experts; step 3: compare the logic models to the conceptual framework to make recommendations to improve centralized waiting lists in different provinces during a pan Canadian face-to-face exchange with decision-makers, clinicians and researchers. Discussion This study is based on an inter-provincial learning exchange approach where we propose to compare centralized waiting lists and analyze variations in strategies used to increase attachment to a regular primary care provider. Fostering inter-provincial healthcare systems connectivity to improve centralized waiting lists’ practices across Canada can lever attachment to a regular provider for timely access to continuous, comprehensive and coordinated healthcare for all Canadians and particular for those who are vulnerable.
dc.title A comparative analysis of centralized waiting lists for patients without a primary care provider implemented in six Canadian provinces: study protocol
dc.type Journal Article
dc.language.rfc3066 en
dc.rights.holder The Author(s).
dc.date.updated 2017-01-21T07:02:13Z


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Research Publications [1106]
    This collection contains full text research publications authored or co-authored by University of Manitoba researchers.

Show simple item record

View Statistics