CLOSE
Advanced searchCitation search
Suggested Terms:
Skip main navigation

Search Result

1 - 9of9
per page:
Relevance
Filters

You do not have any saved searches

  • OPEN ACCESS
    Applying a Bauhaus design approach to conceptualize an integrated system of mental health care: Lessons from a large urban hospital
    FACETS • Vol. 1 • pp. 173 - 186
    We have applied a Bauhaus design lens to inform a visual conceptual framework for a rational mental health care system. We believe that Canada’s healthcare system can often be fragmented and does not always allow for service delivery to easily meet patient care needs. Within our proposed framework, the form of services provided follows patient- and healthcare-centred needs. The framework is also informed by the ethics and values of social responsibility, population health, and principles of quality of care. We review evidence for this framework (based on need, acuity, risk, service intensity, and provider level) and describe patient care pathways from intake/triage to three patient-centred tiers of care: (1) primary care (low needs), (2) acute ambulatory transitional care (moderate needs), and (3) acute hospital and complex care (high needs). Within each tier, various models of care are organized from low to high service intensity as informed by reports from the British Columbia Ministry of Health and the World Health Organization. We hope that our model may help to better conceptualize and organize our mental health care system and help providers clarify roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities to improve quality of care.
  • OPEN ACCESS
    Oceans and human health—navigating changes on Canada’s coasts
    FACETS • Vol. 5 • No. 1 • pp. 1037 - 1070
    Ocean conditions can affect human health in a variety of ways that are often overlooked and unappreciated. Oceans adjacent to Canada are affected by many anthropogenic stressors, with implications for human health and well-being. Climate change further escalates these pressures and can expose coastal populations to unique health hazards and distressing conditions. However, current research efforts, education or training curriculums, and policies in Canada critically lack explicit consideration of these ocean–public health linkages. The objective of this paper is to present multiple disciplinary perspectives from academics and health practitioners to inform the development of future directions for research, capacity development, and policy and practice at the interface of oceans and human health in Canada. We synthesize major ocean and human health linkages in Canada, and identify climate-sensitive drivers of change, drawing attention to unique considerations in Canada. To support effective, sustained, and equitable collaborations at the nexus of oceans and human health, we recommend the need for progress in three critical areas: (i) holistic worldviews and perspectives, (ii) capacity development, and (iii) structural supports. Canada can play a key role in supporting the global community in addressing the health challenges of climate and ocean changes.
  • OPEN ACCESS
    Fundamental limitations of contact tracing for COVID-19
    FACETS • Vol. 6 • pp. 1993 - 2001
    Contact tracing has played a central role in COVID-19 control in many jurisdictions and is often used in conjunction with other measures such as travel restrictions and social distancing mandates. Contact tracing is made ineffective, however, by delays in testing, calling, and isolating. Even if delays are minimized, contact tracing triggered by testing of symptomatic individuals can only prevent a fraction of onward transmissions from contacts. Without other measures in place, contact tracing alone is insufficient to prevent exponential growth in the number of cases in a population with little immunity. Even when used effectively with other measures, occasional bursts in call loads can overwhelm contact tracing systems and lead to a loss of control. We propose embracing approaches to COVID-19 contact tracing that broadly test individuals without symptoms, in whatever way is economically feasible—either with fast and cheap tests that can be deployed widely, with pooled testing, or with screening of judiciously chosen groups of high-risk individuals. These considerations are important both in regions where widespread vaccination has been deployed and in those where few residents have been immunized.
  • OPEN ACCESS
    Royal society of Canada COVID-19 report: Enhancing COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in Canada
    FACETS • Vol. 6 • pp. 1184 - 1246
    COVID-19 vaccine acceptance exists on a continuum from a minority who strongly oppose vaccination, to the “moveable middle” heterogeneous group with varying uncertainty levels about acceptance or hesitancy, to the majority who state willingness to be vaccinated. Intention for vaccine acceptance varies over time. COVID-19 vaccination decisions are influenced by many factors including knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs; social networks; communication environment; COVID-19 community rate; cultural and religious influences; ease of access; and the organization of health and community services and policies.Reflecting vaccine acceptance complexity, the Royal Society of Canada Working Group on COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance developed a framework with four major factor domains that influence vaccine acceptance (people, communities, health care workers; immunization knowledge; health care and public health systems including federal/provincial/territorial/indigenous factors)—each influencing the others and all influenced by education, infection control, extent of collaborations, and communications about COVID-19 immunization. The Working Group then developed 37 interrelated recommendations to support COVID vaccine acceptance nested under four categories of responsibility: 1. People and Communities, 2. Health Care Workers, 3. Health Care System and Local Public Health Units, and 4. Federal/Provincial/Territorial/Indigenous. To optimize outcomes, all must be engaged to ensure co-development and broad ownership.
  • OPEN ACCESS
    How not to manage a pandemic, and how to recover from it: Lessons from Ecuador
    FACETS • Vol. 7 • pp. 1367 - 1384
    Since the initial outbreak in December 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in more than four million deaths worldwide. Ecuador initially experienced one of the worst coronavirus outbreaks in the world. The pandemic quickly overwhelmed health care systems resulting in excess deaths of 37 000 from March to October, 2020. The public health measures taken to stop the spread of the virus had a devastating impact on the economy. There was a sharp contraction (7.8%) in Ecuador’s GDP in 2020. Furthermore, income poverty and inequality increased dramatically. The lasting effects of the pandemic will be harder to overcome. This article recounts and analyzes the COVID-19 pandemic in Ecuador, to draw lessons from this complex experience, and from the benefit of limited but important successes. We also aim to provide suggestions for best practices moving forward.
  • OPEN ACCESS
    Strengthening health care in Canada post-COVID-19 pandemic
    FACETS • Vol. 8 • pp. 1 - 10
    The purpose of this policy briefing is to examine our health care systems through the lens of the COVID-19 pandemic and identify how we can strengthen health care in Canada post-pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has provided compelling evidence that substantive changes to our health care systems are needed. Specifically, the pandemic has emphasized structural inequities on a broad scale within Canadian society. These include systemic racial and socioeconomic inequities that must be addressed broadly, including in the delivery of health care. We make recommendations about what we can do to emerge stronger from the pandemic. While these recommendations are not novel, how they are framed and contextualized differs because of the problems in our health care system that have been highlighted and exacerbated by the pandemic.The evidence is clear that socioeconomic circumstances, intergenerational trauma, adverse early life experiences, and educational opportunities are critical factors when it comes to health over the life course. Given the problems in the delivery of health care that the pandemic has revealed, we need a different approach. How health care was organized prior to the COVID-19 pandemic did not produce what people wanted and needed in terms of health care and outcomes. How do we emerge from COVID-19 with an effective, equitable, and resilient health care system for all Canadians?To address health inequities and emerge from the pandemic with strengthened health care in Canada, we must consider how Amartya Sen's capabilities framework on social well-being can be operationalized to achieve better health care and health outcomes. Specifically, we address the need to: strengthen primary care and improve access to primary care;utilize a community-embedded approach to care; andimplement better integration across the care continuum, including integration between primary care and public health.Coherent governance and leadership that are charged with realizing benefits through collaboration will maximize outcomes and promote sustainability. Only when we provide access to high-quality culturally competent care that is centered around the individual and their needs will we be able to make true headway in addressing these long-standing health inequities.
  • OPEN ACCESS
    The humanities and health policy
    FACETS • Vol. 9 • pp. 1 - 10
    COVID-19 was a stark reminder that understanding a novel pathogen is essential but insufficient to protect us from disease. Biomedical and technical solutions are necessary, but they do not prevent or resolve misinformation, vaccine hesitancy, or resistance to public health measures, nor are they sufficient to advance the development of more equitable and effective healthcare systems. Responding to crises such as pandemics requires deep collaboration drawing on multiple methodologies and perspectives. Along with the science, it is imperative to understand cultures, values, languages, histories, and other determinants of human behaviour. This policy briefing argues that the humanities—a group of methodologically diverse fields, including interdisciplinary studies that overlap significantly with the social determinants of health—are an underused source of cultural and social insight that is increasingly important and could be better leveraged in such collaboration. Humanities disciplines approach health and illness as part of the human condition. Their historical perspective could be more effectively mobilized to explore the social and cultural context in which science exists and evolves, in turn, helping us understand the forces shaping perceptions, concerns, and assumptions.
  • OPEN ACCESS
    Food Systems Innovation to Nurture Equity and Resilience Globally (Food SINERGY): insights from the Food SINERGY network
    FACETS • Vol. 9 • pp. 1 - 15
    The international collaboration network Food Systems Innovation to Nurture Equity and Resilience Globally (Food SINERGY) unites food system experts concerned with the confluence of environmental, geopolitical, economic, and public health stressors that weaken food systems and increase inequalities. In March 2023, Food SINERGY participants from universities, research institutes, food policy advocacy groups, Indigenous networks, farmers’ associations, consumer organizations, social enterprises, and non-governmental organizations from around the world met in Mont Orford, Québec, for a forum to revisit food system structures across local-to-global scales and to identify key junctures for transformation. This article summarizes the network's discussions in the context of the existing literature. Key knowledge contributions include the importance of diversification throughout the food system for cultivating resilience; the value of food sovereignty in promoting equity across scales; the reconciliation between food sovereignty and equitable trade; the need for consonance between policy environments at different scales to enable positive societal actions; the pioneering role of food system innovations that challenge conventional political and economic structures, with emphasis on agroecology; and the need for critical self-reflection around knowledge production and knowledge use to better serve equitable food systems. These discussion outcomes provide insights for actors seeking to transform food systems in support of equity and resilience.
  • OPEN ACCESS
    Exploring the use of the RISK21 approach for Indigenous community-based human health risk assessments: two case studies
    FACETS • Vol. 10 • pp. 1 - 16
    Indigenous peoples in North America are disproportionately exposed to environmental contaminants and may face elevated health risks related to unique socio-cultural ties to the land. Conventional human health risk assessment (HHRA) methods do not account for these unique contexts. Regulators (i.e., Health Canada, US EPA) have called for the development of more ethical and efficient HHRA approaches, but to our knowledge no such approaches have been designed in consideration of Indigenous community contexts. RISK21 is a new HHRA approach gaining regulatory attention. We present two case studies piloting RISK21’s use in collaboration with three unique communities (Cold Lake First Nations, Chipewyan Prairie First Nation, Apsáalooke/Crow Nation). Our objectives are first, reflect upon the benefits and challenges of using RISK21 in these contexts; second, compare RISK21-based to conventional assessments; and third, ideate adaptations and improvements to the approach. The RISK21-based analyses had similar descriptive results to the original conventional assessments, including when using less information. We found RISK21 useful for rapid chemical assessment and visually representing data from multiple sources. We recommend areas where RISK21 (and other next-generation HHRA approaches) might be improved for Indigenous community contexts, including increasing the community relevance of communication tools and incorporating holistic and non-conventional information.