Une formation complémentaire et appliquée : un besoin pour la relève en recherche interventionnelle en santé des populations

La recherche interventionnelle en santé des populations (RISP) est un champ de recherche émergeant et distinct, qui appelle à la rencontre des milieux scientifiques et de pratique de santé publique. Or, la formation académique traditionnelle universitaire, qui repose sur des ancrages disciplinaires spécifiques, est insuffisante pour outiller adéquatement les nouveaux chercheurs en RISP. Dans ce commentaire, nous soutenons l’idée que la RISP nécessite la mise en œuvre d’un éventail de compétences et de connaissances distinctes, qui sont plus aisément acquises et développées à travers une formation complémentaire et appliquée. En nous appuyant sur notre expérience comme boursiers du Programme stratégique de formation 4P, nous avons identifié les éléments qui ont contribué à préparer notre carrière de futurs et nouveaux chercheurs en RISP. Nous croyons que les programmes de formation complémentaires et appliqués, tels que le Programme 4P, représentent une stratégie prometteuse pour former et soutenir la relève en RISP dans son rôle d’amélioration de la santé des populations.Population Health Intervention Research (PHIR) is an emerging and distinct field that combines scientific research and public health practice. However, traditional academic training in research, which is founded on specific disciplinary orientations, does not sufficiently inform and prepare new PHIR researchers. In this commentary, we advance the idea that PHIR requires a broader range of competencies and knowledge that must be developed through a complementary and applied training program. Drawing on our experience as 4P Strategic Training Program fellows, we identified key elements of the program that have helped prepare us in our careers as future and new PHIR researchers. We believe that complementary and applied training programs such as the 4P Program are a promising strategy in training and supporting the next generation of PHIR researchers in their efforts to improve population health

Socioeconomic differences in help seeking for colorectal cancer symptoms during COVID-19: a UK-wide qualitative interview study of patient experiences in primary care

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has led to rapid changes in healthcare delivery, raising concern that these changes may exacerbate existing inequalities in patient outcomes. AIM: To understand how patients' help-seeking experiences in primary care for colorectal cancer symptoms during COVID-19 were affected by their socioeconomic status (SES). DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative semi-structured interviews with males and females across the UK, recruited using purposive sampling by SES. METHOD: Interviews were carried out with 39 participants (20 higher SES; 19 lower SES) who contacted primary care about possible symptoms of colorectal cancer during COVID-19. Data were analysed using framework analysis followed by comparative thematic analysis to explore differences between groups. RESULTS: Three themes were identified with differences between SES groups: 1) how people decided to seek medical help through appraisal of symptoms; 2) how people navigated services; and 3) impact of COVID-19 on how patients interacted with healthcare professionals. The lower SES group expressed uncertainty appraising symptoms and navigating services (in terms of new processes resulting from COVID-19 and worries about infection). There was also potential for increased disparity in diagnosis and management, with other methods of getting in touch (for example, email or 111) taken up more readily by higher SES patients. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that COVID-19 exacerbated disparities between higher and lower SES participants. This study raises awareness around challenges in help seeking in the context of the pandemic, which are likely to persist (post-COVID-19) as healthcare systems settle on new models of care (for example, digital). Recommendations are provided to reduce inequalities of care

Healthcare Professional and Patient Perceptions of Changes in Colorectal Cancer Care Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Impact on Health Inequalities

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic changed the way in which people were diagnosed and treated for cancer. We explored healthcare professional and patient perceptions of the main changes to colorectal cancer delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic and how they impacted on socioeconomic inequalities in care. METHODS: In 2020, using a qualitative approach, we interviewed patients (n = 15) who accessed primary care with colorectal cancer symptoms and were referred for further investigations. In 2021, we interviewed a wide range of healthcare professionals (n = 30) across the cancer care pathway and gathered national and local documents/guidelines regarding changes in colorectal cancer care. RESULTS: Changes with the potential to exacerbate inequalities in care, included: the move to remote consultations; changes in symptomatic triage, new COVID testing procedures/ways to access healthcare, changes in visitor policies and treatment (e.g., shorter course radiotherapy). Changes that improved patient access/convenience or the diagnostic process have the potential to reduce inequalities in care. DISCUSSION: Changes in healthcare delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic have the ongoing potential to exacerbate existing health inequalities due to changes in how patients are triaged, changes to diagnostic and disease management processes, reduced social support available to patients and potential over-reliance on digital first approaches. We provide several recommendations to help mitigate these harms, whilst harnessing the gains

Socioeconomic differences in help-seeking experiences in primary care for symptoms related to colorectal cancer during COVID-19: A UK-wide qualitative interview study

Background COVID-19 has led to rapid changes in healthcare delivery, raising concern that these changes may exacerbate existing inequalities in patient outcomes.Aim To understand how patients’ help-seeking experiences in primary care for colorectal cancer symptoms during COVID-19 were affected by their socioeconomic status (SES).Design and setting Qualitative semi-structured interviews with males and females across the UK, recruited using purposive sampling by SES.Method Interviews were carried out with 39 participants (20 higher SES; 19 lower SES) who contacted primary care about possible symptoms of colorectal cancer during COVID-19. Data were analysed using framework analysis followed by comparative thematic analysis to explore differences between groups.Results Three themes were identified with differences between SES groups: 1) how people decided to seek medical help through appraisal of symptoms; 2) how people navigated services; and 3) impact of COVID-19 on how patients interacted with healthcare professionals. The lower SES group expressed uncertainty appraising symptoms and navigating services (in terms of new processes resulting from COVID-19 and worries about infection). There was also potential for increased disparity in diagnosis and management, with other methods of getting in touch (for example, email or 111) taken up more readily by higher SES patients.Conclusion The findings suggest that COVID-19 exacerbated disparities between higher and lower SES participants. This study raises awareness around challenges in help seeking in the context of the pandemic, which are likely to persist (post-COVID-19) as healthcare systems settle on new models of care (for example, digital). Recommendations are provided to reduce inequalities of care