Show all 12 comments
  • Annonymous 13 March 2020


  • Annonymous 20 May 2020


  • Profile Photo
    Amber Daugherty 03 June 2021


  • Profile Photo
    Brian M. Wong 03 June 2021

    this is a great poster

  • Profile Photo
    Allison Brown 22 June 2021

    Great job Dr. Spenard et al! I really appreciate your use of figures and tables to summarize this initiative and the outcomes. I notice a huge increase in the treatment rate for anemia screening after the third and fourth intervention that were introduced simultaneously, can you share any insight regarding whether or not you have a sense of what was most impactful at that time when treatment rates started to decline - educating providers and patients or creating a process that is triggered for patients who meet the criteria? I know education and training staff about a new intervention can be very helpful to increase uptake in the short-term but can be tricky in sustaining individual behaviour changes in the long term without having an intervention that targets the system. Again, well done!

  • Profile Photo
    Christine Soong 24 June 2021

    Great work in an important area! A few comments/questions: 1. 'readiness' is not defined making it unclear how it enables improved outcomes 2. more description of the intervention would help others decide if feasible in their settings 3. it would be helpful to display outcomes data as SPC or run charts. It is not clear from the bar graphs whether the differences observed is statistically significant 4. what were the balancing/process measures and their results?

  • Profile Photo 29 June 2021

    Congratulations Dr. Spenard et al. for the OPRA study! Your data is well presented and within a few months, you have already improved rate of preoperative anemia treatment and reduced perioperative transfusion. It would be interesting to know what % of preoperative anemia you are hoping to reach with your interventions. Also, I would like to know the impact of your interventions on postoperative complications such as VTE, SSI, length of stay. Good work!

  • Joanne Goldman 02 July 2021

    Your poster very nicely presents the range of factors that participants identified as likely to influence the success of the PPH bundle implementation as well as the system-level factors contributing to management delay. I'm wondering if you identified any patterns of perceived facilitators or barriers by professional group in your results? If yes, are there implications for the intervention strategy?

  • Blanca Bolea 06 May 2022

    The SCOPE Mental Health Program: supporting family doctors and their patients in the era of Covid-19. Purpose To evaluate use of the SCOPE Mental Health (SCOPE-MH) program by primary care practitioners (PCPs) and patients, over the period January 1, 2022 to October 31, 2022. Aim To summarize information on the use of SCOPE-MH by PCPs and patients, and to understand PCP and patient views of the program. Benefit Will provide an understanding of the effectiveness of the SCOPE-MH program., and inform future expansion of the program to different regions and populations Calculated key indicators of program reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (as per RE-AIM framework)

  • Joanne Goldman 24 May 2022

    Hello, thank you for sharing this interesting work on community pharmacy practice during the COVID-19 pandemic with attention to implications following the pandemic. I'm wondering if you can share further details about how you conceptualized 'safety' in relation to the review question - " keep community pharmacies safe in Canada during the pandemic..."? Can you also share more details or your reflections regarding the types of data/findings found in the electronic databases versus the grey literature? What are the implications for having identified 5 studies in the databases and 449 items in the grey literature?

  • Joanne Goldman 24 May 2022

    Thank you for an excellent poster and video about your study of the experience of a novel emergency response intubation collaboration during the pandemic. The poster and video very nicely report on the range of significant issues related to interprofessional collaboration in this particular clinical context. The number of responses you received from participants is impressive! From your data, is it possible to gain insights into how participants adapted to the challenges they experienced such as ED nurses struggling to balance role with ERIT vs ED team or ED physicians hesitancy to adopting a passive role? Is this intervention continuing in some way? If there are plans for 'areas for improvement' such as the joint simulation or shared decision making, would be greatly interested in hearing more about how these interventions will be planned/studied to address the range of issues identified in your findings (e.g., criteria for ERIT activation, roles during intubation, handover details), which as you note, are relevant to other interprofessional collaboration activities.

  • Joanne Goldman 1 hour ago

    Thanks for sharing your study in a visually impactful way and for the video explanation. Interesting analysis of the similarities and differences in adverse event rates in mental health services and those commonly seen in a medical hospital setting. I'm wondering if you can elaborate on the implications of your findings - will you be developing/using a tool informed by the findings to continue to collect data? How will the findings inform subsequent QI work?


Total Views

CQUIPS+ support

Questions or comments about CQUIPS+?
Connect with us at

Copyright © 2022 CQUIPS+. All rights reserved.