In order to improve the youth mental health system, there is an international movement toward developing community-based service hubs that provide integrated, collaborative care to youth. However, the implementation of multisystem collaboration is complex and can be hampered by barriers. This paper presents a formative evaluation of the YouthCan IMPACT integrated youth services project based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), to identify facilitators and barriers to successful implementation. Results highlight that previous positive working relationships along with collaborative investment of resources from partnering organizations are essential to implement an integrated youth service model. In addition, it is important that representative members of all key stakeholder groups, including staff, youth, and caregivers, be involved in the development and execution of the project to ensure effective implementation. Attention to the facilitators and barriers to implementation may help teams seeking to implement highly collaborative, integrated models of service delivery for youth in the community.From Planning to Implementation of the YouthCan IMPACT Project HENDERSON ET AL.

ObjectivesOut-of-pocket medication costs can contribute to financial insecurity and many Canadians have trouble affording medicines. This study aimed to determine if the effect of eliminating out-of-pocket medication costs on individual’s financial security varied by gender, racialisation, income and location.DesignIn this post hoc subgroup analysis of the CLEAN Meds trial, a binary logistic regression model was fitted and a qualitative inductive thematic analysis of comments related to participant’s ability to make ends meet was carried out.SettingPrimary care patients in Ontario, Canada.ParticipantsAdult patients (786) who reported not being able to afford medicines during the previous 12 months.InterventionFree access to a comprehensive list of essential medicines for 24 months.Primary outcome measureAbility to make ends meet or afford basic necessities.ResultsThere were no significant differences in the effect of free medicine distribution by gender (OR for male 0.82; 95% CI 0.51 to 1.33, p=0.76), age (older than 65 years OR 1.28; 95 % CI 0.62 to 2.64, p=0.73), racialisation (OR 0.85; 95 % CI 0.51 to 1.45, p=0.66), household income level (above US$30 000 per year OR 1.08; 95 % CI 0.64 to 1.80, p=0.99) or location (urban OR 0.47; 95 % CI 0.23 to 0.96, p=0.10). The main theme in the qualitative analysis was insufficient income, and there were three related themes: out-of-pocket medication expenses, cost-related non-adherence and the importance of medication coverage. In the intervention group, additional themes identified included improved health, functioning and access to basic needs.ConclusionsProviding free essential medications improved financial security across subgroups in a trial population who all had trouble affording medicines. Free access to medicines could improve health directly by improving medicine adherence and indirectly by making other necessities more accessible to people who have an insufficient income.Trial registration numberNCT02744963.