Implementation of a COVID-19 Vaccine Emergency Department Education Program for Underserved Communities.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has provided an opportunity for significant reflection on our public health response as providers. Throughout the past two years, we learned that administration of COVID-19 vaccines, rapidly and widely across all communities, has been key to halting the spread of the virus. One significant challenge in promoting a large-scale immunization program is the threat of vaccine hesitancy. A general mistrust in healthcare providers exists across the country, especially in underrepresented minority (URM) communities. Objective This study aims to determine reasons for vaccine hesitancy in an urban emergency department and to provide targeted education on the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines to patients. Methods An interprofessional quality improvement team was assembled to develop an educational intervention addressing COVID-19 vaccine safety for vaccine-eligible patients receiving treatment in the emergency department at an urban community hospital where over 70% of patients identify as URM. A survey was conducted to elucidate patients' concerns surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine. Upon completion of the survey, up-to-date safety information and education targeting their surveyed concerns were provided by trained medical students. A follow-up survey was conducted to assess the impact of education on patients' attitudes toward the vaccine. Surveys were developed using standardized scoring systems from the Oxford coronavirus explanations, attitudes, and narratives survey (OCEANS) II study and the Kaiser Foundation. Hesitancy scores before and after education were tabulated to assess the effectiveness of targeted education in improving vaccine hesitancy. Results Patients cited a variety of concerns surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine. The three most common reasons for declining vaccines were potential side effects (67.3% were concerned or extremely concerned), the belief that COVID-19 vaccines are neither effective nor safe (64.5% were concerned to extremely concerned), and the risk of developing COVID-19 infection from the vaccine itself (38.8% were concerned to extremely concerned). This information was used to address these concerns directly with patients, answer questions, clarify information, and encourage patients to get vaccinated. Through this education program, vaccine hesitancy scores improved by an average of 29% indicating an increased likelihood of patients who would get vaccinated in the future. Of patients receiving education, 38% agreed to sign up for a vaccine appointment during the intervention. Conclusion The emergency department often serves vulnerable patient populations. As such, its role in public health in these communities cannot be underestimated. This quality improvement project is a novel method that can be used to develop and implement public health education programs to address specific community needs in the emergency department. These results show that a multidisciplinary healthcare team can provide a measurable change in attitudes about vaccine safety with directed education in the emergency department that can help address vaccine hesitancy in the future.

Evidence Based Scarce Resource Allocation During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study of Bamlanivimab Administration in the Emergency Department.

Background: Patients presenting for emergency department (ED) evaluation may be appropriate for treatment with monoclonal antibodies for mild to moderate COVID-19. While many sites have implemented infusion centers for these agents, EDs will continue to evaluate these patients where appropriate identification and efficient infusion of eligible patients is critical. Objectives: Patients receiving bamlanivimab in the EDs of an academic medical center are described. The primary objective was to describe operational metrics and secondary objectives reported clinical outcomes. Methods: Patients receiving bamlanivimab and discharged from the ED were included from November 16, 2020 to January 16, 2021 in the retrospective, observational cohort. Primary outcome was adherence to institutional criteria. Secondary outcomes included ED visit metrics, clinical characteristics, and return visits within 30 days. Risk factors for return visits were assessed with regression. Results: One hundred nineteen patients were included. Most (71%) were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the ED visit and median symptom duration was 3(IQR 2-5) days. Median number of risk factors for progression to severe disease was 2 (IQR 1-2). Thirty percent had a documented abnormal chest x-ray. Institutional criteria adherence was 99.2%. Median time from ED room to bamlanivimab was 4 (IQR 3.1-5.2) hours. Thirty patients had return visit within 30 days; 19 were COVID-19 related. Two multivariable regression models were analyzed for COVID-19 related return visit. Characteristics on ED presentation were considered in Model I: male gender (OR 3.01[0.97-9.31]), age (per 10 years) (OR 1.49[1.05-2.12]), African-American race (OR 3.46[1.09-11.06]), and symptom duration (per day) (OR 1.34[1.05-1.73]). Model II included labs and imaging acquired in ED. In Model II, age (per 10 years) (OR 1.52[1.07-2.16]) and abnormal CXR (OR 5.74[1.95-16.9]) were associated with COVID-19 related return visits. Conclusions: Administration of bamlanivimab to ED patients can be done efficiently, with the potential to reduce COVID-19 related return visits. Age and abnormal imaging were independent predictors of COVID-19 return visits.

Preparing students for residency interviews in the age of COVID: Lessons learned from a standardized video interview preparation program.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated the widescale adoption of video-based interviewing for residency applications. Video interviews have previously been used in the residency application process through the pilot program of the American Association of Medical Colleges standardized video interview (SVI). We conducted an SVI preparation program with our students over 3 years that consisted of an instructional lecture, deliberate practice in video interviewing, and targeted feedback by emergency medicine faculty. The aim of this investigation was to summarize the feedback students received on their practice SVIs to provide the guidance they need for preparing for the video interviews that will replace in-person interviews with residency programs. Methods: A retrospective thematic analysis was conducted on faculty feedback provided to students who had completed SVI practice videos in preparation for their application to an EM residency between June 2017 and July 2019. Categorized comments were also sorted by type of faculty feedback: positive reinforcement, constructive criticism, or both. Results: Forty-six medical students received 334 feedback elements from three faculty. Feedback was balanced between positive reinforcement statements and constructive criticism. Students performed well on appearance and attire, creating a proper recording environment, and response content. They needed the most guidance with the delivery of content and the technical quality of the video. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate a need for formal instruction in how to communicate effectively through the video medium. Medical educators will need to formally prepare students for tele-interviews with residency programs, with an emphasis on communication skills and techniques for improving the quality of their video presentation, including lighting and camera placement.