Lack of access to primary care providers (PCPs) is a significant hurdle to receiving high-quality comprehensive health care and creates greater reliance on emergency departments and walk-in clinics.

We conducted a rapid review and analysis of the literature that discusses approaches to increasing access to continuous care for patients with no PCP (‘unattached patients’).

Five distinct themes across 38 resources were identified: financial incentives for patients and providers, health care organization, policy intervention, virtual care and health information technology (HIT), and medical education. Approaches that increased attachment were primary care models that combined two or more of these and reflected the Patient’s Medical Home (PMH) model.

Although there are individual initiatives that could allow for temporary relief, long-term and community-wide success lies in designing models of primary care that use multiple tools, meet the needs of the community, and are supported by regional, provincial, and national policies.

To describe the process by which the 12 community-based primary health care (CBPHC) research teams worked together and fostered cross-jurisdictional collaboration, including collection of common indicators with the goal of using the same measures and data sources.

A pan-Canadian mechanism for common measurement of the impact of primary care innovations across Canada is lacking. The Canadian Institutes for Health Research and its partners funded 12 teams to conduct research and collaborate on development of a set of commonly collected indicators.

A working group representing the 12 teams was established. They undertook an iterative process to consider existing primary care indicators identified from the literature and by stakeholders. Indicators were agreed upon with the intention of addressing three objectives across the 12 teams: (1) describing the impact of improving access to CBPHC; (2) examining the impact of alternative models of chronic disease prevention and management in CBPHC; and (3) describing the structures and context that influence the implementation, delivery, cost, and potential for scale-up of CBPHC innovations.

Nineteen common indicators within the core dimensions of primary care were identified: access, comprehensiveness, coordination, effectiveness, and equity. We also agreed to collect data on health care costs and utilization within each team. Data sources include surveys, health administrative data, interviews, focus groups, and case studies. Collaboration across these teams sets the foundation for a unique opportunity for new knowledge generation, over and above any knowledge developed by any one team. Keys to success are each team’s willingness to engage and commitment to working across teams, funding to support this collaboration, and distributed leadership across the working group. Reaching consensus on collection of common indicators is challenging but achievable.

People with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are living longer lives and like many other patients, need a health system better adapted for the management of complex chronic conditions. A key element of system transformation is measuring and reporting on system performance indicators relevant to the different stakeholders. Our objective was to produce a performance measurement framework for assessing the quality of comprehensive community-based primary healthcare for people with HIV.

Semi-structured interviews were performed with HIV providers, advocates, and policy-makers to obtain input on a draft performance framework, constructed using existing HIV-specific indicators, as well as the use of performance data in improving care for people with HIV.

Stakeholders were overwhelmingly supportive of the framework’s comprehensiveness. Many noted the absence of indicators addressing social determinants of health and had mixed opinions on the importance of indicators addressing access to after-hours care and the frequency of routine screening for behavioural risk factors. The draft framework was modified to reflect stakeholder input, triangulated against expert opinion and recently released HIV care guidelines, and finalized at 79 indicators. The resources and infrastructure to collect and use performance data will have to be improved for performance measurement to contribute to improving care for people with HIV.

This framework presents a comprehensive though not exhaustive tool to support performance measurement and improvement in the care for people with HIV. However, advances in data collection and use across the system will be needed to support performance measurement driving quality improvement.