Clinical Population Medicine: Integrating Clinical Medicine and Population Health in Practice

The Role of Primary Care in Improving Population Health

Policy Points Systems based on primary care have better population health, health equity, and health care quality, and lower health care expenditure. Primary care can be a boundary-spanning force to integrate and personalize the many factors from which population health emerges. Equitably advancing population health requires understanding and supporting the complexly interacting mechanisms by which primary care influences health, equity, and health costs.

A Conceptual Framework for Continuing Medical Education and Population Health

ISSUE

Health systems have been increasingly called upon to address population health concerns and continuing medical education (CME) is an important means through which clinical practices can be improved. This manuscript elaborates on existing conceptual frameworks in order to support CME practitioners, funders, and policy makers to develop, implement, and evaluate CME vis-a-vis population health concerns.

EVIDENCE

Existing CME conceptual models and conceptions of CME effectiveness require elaboration in order to meet goals of population health improvement. Frameworks for the design, implementation and evaluation of CME consistently reference population health, but do not adequately conceptualize it beyond the aggregation of individual patient health. As a pertinent example, opioid prescribing CME programs use the opioid epidemic to justify their programs, but evaluation approaches are inadequate for demonstrating population health impacts. CME programs that are built to have population health outcomes using frameworks intended primarily for physician performance and patient health outcomes are thus not able to recognize either non-linear associations or negative unintended consequences.

IMPLICATIONS

This proposed conceptual framework draws on the fields of clinical population medicine, the social determinants of health, health equity, and philosophies of population health to build conceptual bridges between the CME outcome levels of physician performance and patient health to population health. The authors use their experience developing, delivering, and evaluating opioid prescribing- and poverty-focused CME programs to argue that population health-focused CME must be re-oriented in at least five ways. These include: 1) scaling effective CME programs while evaluating at population health levels; 2) (re)interpreting evidence for program content from a population perspective; 3) incorporating social determinants of health into clinically-oriented CME activities; 4) explicitly building fluency in population health concepts and practices among health care providers and CME planners; and 5) attending to social inequity in every aspect of CME programs.

Patient- and Community-Oriented Primary Care Approaches for Health in Rural, Remote and Resource-Dependent Places: Insights for Eco-Social Praxis

Accelerating ecological and societal changes require re-imagining the role of primary care and public health to address eco-social concerns in rural and remote places. In this narrative review, we searched literatures on: community-oriented primary care, patient-oriented research engagement, public health and primary care synergies, and primary care addressing social determinants of health. Our analysis was guided by questions oriented to utility for addressing concerns of social-ecological systems in rural, remote contexts characterized by a high degree of reliance on resource extraction and development (e.g., forestry, mining, oil and gas, fisheries, agriculture, ranching and/or renewables). We describe a range of useful frameworks, processes and tools that are oriented toward bolstering the resilience and engagement of both primary care and public health, though few explicitly incorporated considerations of eco-social approaches to health or broader eco-social context(s). In synthesizing the existing evidence base for integration between primary care and public health, the results signal that for community-oriented primary care and related frameworks to be useful in rural and remote community settings, practitioners are required to grapple with complexity, durable relationships, sustainable resources, holistic approaches to clinician training, Indigenous perspectives, and governance.

Chronic Pain and Opioid Prescribing: Three Ways for Navigating Complexity at the Clinical‒Population Health Interface

Clinically focused interventions for people living with pain, such as health professional education, clinical decision support systems, prescription drug monitoring programs, and multidisciplinary care to support opioid tapering, have all been promoted as important solutions to the North American opioid crisis. Yet none have so far delivered substantive beneficial opioid-related population health outcomes. In fact, while total opioid prescribing has leveled off or reduced in many jurisdictions, population-level harms from opioids have continued to increase dramatically. We attribute this failure partly to a poor recognition of the epistemic and ethical complexities at the interface of clinical and population health. We draw on a framework of knowledge networks in wicked problems to identify 3 strategies to help navigate these complexities: (1) designing and evaluating clinically focused interventions as complex interventions, (2) reformulating evidence to make population health dynamics apparent, and (3) appealing to the inseparability of facts and values to support decision-making in uncertainty. We advocate that applying these strategies will better equip clinically focused interventions as complements to structural and public health interventions to achieve the desired beneficial population health effects. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S1):S56-S65. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306500).

Evaluations of Continuing Health Provider Education Focused on Opioid Prescribing: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Continuing health provider education (HPE) is an important intervention supported by health policy to counter the opioid epidemic; knowledge regarding appropriate program design and evaluation is lacking. The authors aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of evaluations of opioid-related continuing HPE programs and their appropriateness as interventions to improve population health.

METHOD

In January 2020, the authors conducted a systematic search of 7 databases, seeking studies of HPE programs on opioid analgesic prescribing and overdose prevention. Reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts of all studies and then assessed the full texts of all studies potentially eligible for inclusion. The authors extracted a range of data using categories for evaluating complex programs: the use of theory, program purpose, inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes, and industry involvement. Results were reported in a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine reports on 32 distinct HPE programs met inclusion criteria. Of these 32, 31 (97%) were U.S./Canadian programs and 28 (88%) were reported after 2010. Measurements of changes in knowledge and confidence were common. Performance outcomes were less common and typically self-reported. Most studies (n = 27 [84%]) used concerns of opioid-related harms at the population health level to justify the educational intervention, but only 5 (16%) measured patient- or population-level outcomes directly related to the educational programs. Six programs (19%) had direct or indirect opioid manufacturer involvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuing HPE has been promoted as an important means of addressing population-level opioid-related harms by policymakers and educators, yet published evaluations of HPE programs focusing on opioid analgesics inadequately evaluate patient- or population-level outcomes. Instead, they primarily focus on self-reported performance outcomes. Conceptual models are needed to guide the development and evaluation of continuing HPE programs intended to have population health benefits.

Population Health and Trauma-Informed Practice: Implications for Programs, Systems, and Policies

Population studies indicate that trauma exposure is ubiquitous and has a significant impact on health. Trauma-informed practice seeks to address the health consequences of trauma through integrative responses that incorporate an understanding of the effects of trauma, the multiple pathways to recovery, and the potential for re-traumatization. Current trauma-informed practice considers trauma exposure an individual clinical problem rather than a societal problem with population health consequences. Population health refers to the aggregated health status of individuals who share some characteristic, such as trauma exposure, and includes the study of determinants that shape the distribution of health outcomes in specific populations. In this paper, we describe a population health perspective for trauma-informed practice that complements the current clinical perspective, and then discuss implications of that perspective for programs, systems, and policies. We summarize essential concepts about trauma over the life course and describe principles of population health science relevant to trauma-informed practice. We then discuss implications of these principles by identifying four priorities for trauma-informed practice from a population health perspective: (a) adopting trauma-informed policies to prevent trauma exposure and to foster resilience in the aftermath of trauma; (b) infusing trauma-informed practice into everyday activities so it is a routine part of interpersonal transactions; (c) incorporating trauma-informed practices into existing service systems; and (d) adapting existing treatments to incorporate trauma-informed principles for population health impact.

Integrating clinical medicine and population health: where to from here?

Efforts to contain healthcare costs have led a renewed clinician interest in addressing population-level outcomes, with some proposing that the integration of population health into clinical practice represents a novel concept entitled "clinical population medicine" (CPM). This commentary offers an examination of the function and utility of CPM. In reviewing relevant literature, we note several inconsistencies in CPM's purported mandate, which ranges from simply incorporating the social determinants of health into clinical practice to broad involvement in community health planning. The latter of these seems to overlap, and potentially conflict, with the work of public health practitioners, and cited examples of activities used to define "CPM" seem to apply a label to established clinician activities around the determinants of health that would be captured more simply as research, evaluation, or advocacy undertaken by clinicians in other areas of practice. Our analysis suggests that CPM may have value in encouraging clinicians to incorporate community determinants and contextual considerations into their practices, but must take care to remain complementary and distinct from public health practice.

Letter to the Editor - Eulogy for the Canadian health-promoting hospitals movement

This letter is in preparation for the death of the Canadian HPH movement.

Employment Interventions in Health Settings: A Systematic Review and Synthesis

PURPOSE

Employment is a key social determinant of health. People who are unemployed typically have worse health than those employed. Illness and disability can result in unemployment and be a barrier to regaining employment. We combined a systematic review and knowledge synthesis to identify both studies of employment interventions in health care settings and common characteristics of successful interventions.

METHODS

We searched the peer-reviewed literature (1995-2017), and titles and abstracts were screened for inclusion and exclusion criteria by 2 independent reviewers. We extracted data on the study setting, participants, intervention, methods, and findings. We also conducted a narrative synthesis and iteratively developed a conceptual model to inform future primary care interventions.

RESULTS

Of 6,729 unique citations, 88 articles met our criteria. Most articles (89%) focused on people with mental illness. The majority of articles (74%) tested interventions that succeeded in helping participants gain employment. We identified 5 key features of successful interventions: (1) a multidisciplinary team that communicates regularly and collaborates, (2) a comprehensive package of services, (3) one-on-one and tailored components, (4) a holistic view of health and social needs, and (5) prospective engagement with employers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings can inform new interventions that focus on employment as a social determinant of health. Although hiring a dedicated employment specialist may not be feasible for most primary care organizations, pathways using existing resources with links to external agencies can be created. As precarious work becomes more common, helping patients engage in safe and productive employment could improve health, access to health care, and well-being.