An Educational Needs Assessment of Telehealth in Primary Care Among US Internal Medicine Residents.

OBJECTIVES: As a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, many Internal Medicine (IM) residency programs converted to telehealth for primary care. Our objectives in this study were to better understand resident past and present telehealth education, their perceived barriers to telehealth practice, and their perceived solutions to improving telehealth use and education. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional needs assessment survey between November 2020 and February 2021 among residents at 10 IM residency programs across the United States. Our primary measures were telehealth use in resident continuity clinics before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, telehealth training, and confidence and barriers in using telehealth. RESULTS: Of 857 residents contacted, 314 (36.6%) responded. Residents reported low rates of education in telehealth prepandemic with significant improvements after the start of the pandemic across all visit domains (range of 10.7%-19.6% prepandemic compared with 25.6%-55.7% postpandemic, all P < 0.001). Resident confidence levels were significantly lower (P < 0.001) for video visits and telephone visits compared with in-person visiting across domains of communication, history taking, using an interpreter, making a diagnosis, counseling patients, providing psychosocial support, performing medical management, and coordinating after-visit care. Reported barriers included patient resources, clinic resources, lack of preceptor feedback, and lack of observation. Reported resources for improvement included tutorials on physical examination techniques, clinical space for telehealth, and patient resources for telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: To effectively address the educational needs for telehealth practice by IM residents, educators must consider not only curricular needs but also clinical, preceptor, and patient barriers to the high-quality use of telehealth for primary care.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention and diagnosis in COVID-19: Practice patterns and outcomes at 33 hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Early reports of increased thrombosis risk with SARS-CoV-2 infection led to changes in venous thromboembolism (VTE) management. Real-world data on the prevalence, efficacy and harms of these changes informs best practices. OBJECTIVE: Define practice patterns and clinical outcomes related to VTE diagnosis, prevention, and management in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) using a multi-hospital US sample. METHODS: In this retrospective cross-sectional study of 1121 patients admitted to 33 hospitals, exposure was dose of anticoagulant prescribed for VTE prophylaxis (standard, intensified, therapeutic), and primary outcome was VTE (pulmonary embolism [PE] and deep vein thrombosis [DVT]); secondary outcomes were PE, DVT, arterial thromboembolism (ATE), and bleeding events. Multivariable logistic regression models accounting for clustering by site and adjusted for risk factors were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs). Inverse probability weighting was used to account for confounding by indication. RESULTS: 1121 patients (mean age 60 ± 18, 47% female) admitted with COVID-19 between February 2, 2020 and December 31, 2020 to 33 US hospitals were included. Pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis was prescribed in 86%. Forty-seven patients (4.2%) had PE, 51 (4.6%) had DVT, and 23 (2.1%) had ATE. Forty-six patients (4.1%) had major bleeding and 46 (4.1%) had clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Compared to standard prophylaxis, adjusted odds of VTE were 0.67 (95% CI 0.21-2.1) with no prophylaxis, 1.0 (95% CI 0.06-17) with intensified, and 3.0 (95% CI 0.89-10) with therapeutic. Adjusted odds of bleeding with no prophylaxis were 5.6 (95% CI 3.0-11) and 5.3 (95% CI 3.0-10) with therapeutic (no events on intensified dosing). CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic anticoagulation was associated with a 3-fold increased odds of VTE and 5-fold increased odds of bleeding. While higher bleeding rates with high-intensity prophylaxis were likely due to full-dose anticoagulation, we conclude that high thrombosis rates were due to clinical concern for thrombosis before formal diagnosis.

Adapting Interdisciplinary Transitional Ambulatory Practice to Meet the Challenges of COVID-19.

COVID-19 restructured the health care delivery process, catapulting telemedicine to the mainstream. The Johns Hopkins After Care Clinic (JHACC) continued transprofessional health care delivery in the telemedicine space by shifting to remote, asynchronous collaboration and a triage system. In 1 month after starting telemedicine, the JHACC had 907 encounters for 376 unique patients. Most patients reported satisfaction with their visits. Telemedicine lengthened visit completion times. Providers encountered many failed call attempts and limited access to videoconferencing. Barriers to sustainable interprofessional telemedicine include poor social determinants of health, limited reimbursement for nonphysician health professionals, and increased clinical and administrative time.