Primary health care research & development · 2026
Evaluating screening and intervention for poverty in family practice settings in Saskatchewan in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Manalac Loreanne, Collins Madeline, Robertson Olivia, Clay Adam, Kamrul Rejina
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Poverty is a risk factor for poor health. We sought to determine the practices, barriers, knowledge and comfort with poverty screening and intervention amongst family physicians (FPs), family medicine residents (FMRs) and family nurse practitioners (NPs) in Saskatchewan, Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS: A survey was distributed by email and newsletters to FPs, FMRs and NPs in Saskatchewan during 2022.
RESULTS: Eighty-three FPs, 35 FMRs and 25 NPs responded. Time, patient factors, practitioner knowledge and availability of community resources/services were reported barriers. Comfort discussing government benefits with patients was low, with slight differences amongst provider groups (p =.042). Thirty-one (40.3%) FPs, 7 (20.6%) FMRs and 17 (68.0%) NPs had referred a patient to a government benefit. Eight (6%) respondents used the Poverty Screening Tool.
DISCUSSION: Further research and training is needed to integrate poverty screening and intervention into primary care, given practitioners' role as healthcare's initial point of contact.
METHODS: A survey was distributed by email and newsletters to FPs, FMRs and NPs in Saskatchewan during 2022.
RESULTS: Eighty-three FPs, 35 FMRs and 25 NPs responded. Time, patient factors, practitioner knowledge and availability of community resources/services were reported barriers. Comfort discussing government benefits with patients was low, with slight differences amongst provider groups (p =.042). Thirty-one (40.3%) FPs, 7 (20.6%) FMRs and 17 (68.0%) NPs had referred a patient to a government benefit. Eight (6%) respondents used the Poverty Screening Tool.
DISCUSSION: Further research and training is needed to integrate poverty screening and intervention into primary care, given practitioners' role as healthcare's initial point of contact.