Learning Outcomes in a Live Virtual versus In-Person Curriculum for Medical and Pharmacy Students.

Background: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been a source of disruption, changing the face of medical education. In response to infection control measures at the University of California, San Diego, the hybrid in-person and recorded preclerkship curriculum was converted to a completely virtual format. The impact of this exclusive virtual teaching platform on the quality of trainee education is unknown. Objective: To determine the efficacy of a virtual course, relative to traditional hybrid in-person and recorded teaching, and to assess the impact of supplementary educational material on knowledge acquisition. Methods: A retrospective observational cohort study was performed to assess an introductory course, held mostly in person in 2019 versus completely virtual in 2020, for first-year medical students and second-year pharmacy students at the University of California, San Diego, School of Medicine and Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences. Results: The midterm and final examination scores were similar for the hybrid and virtual courses. There was no association between the hours of recorded lectures watched and final examination scores for either course. In the 2019 in-person and recorded course, students who demonstrated consistent on-time use of practice quizzes scored statistically higher on the final examination (P = 0.0066). In the 2020 virtual course, students who downloaded quizzes regularly had statistically higher scores on the midterm examination (P < 0.0001). Conclusion: The similar examination scores for the hybrid in-person and recorded and exclusively virtual courses suggest that the short-term knowledge acquired was equivalent, independent of the modality with which the content was delivered. Consistent on-time use of practice quizzes was associated with higher examination scores. Future studies are needed to assess the difference between a completely in-person versus virtual curriculum.

Virtual interviewing for graduate medical education recruitment and selection: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 80.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused graduate medical education (GME) programs to pivot to virtual interviews (VIs) for recruitment and selection. This systematic review synthesizes the rapidly expanding evidence base on VIs, providing insights into preferred formats, strengths, and weaknesses. METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, ERIC, PsycINFO, MedEdPublish, and Google Scholar were searched from 1 January 2012 to 21 February 2022. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, full texts, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias using the Medical Education Research Quality Instrument. Findings were reported according to Best Evidence in Medical Education guidance. RESULTS: One hundred ten studies were included. The majority (97%) were from North America. Fourteen were conducted before COVID-19 and 96 during the pandemic. Studies involved both medical students applying to residencies (61%) and residents applying to fellowships (39%). Surgical specialties were more represented than other specialties. Applicants preferred VI days that lasted 4-6 h, with three to five individual interviews (15-20 min each), with virtual tours and opportunities to connect with current faculty and trainees. Satisfaction with VIs was high, though both applicants and programs found VIs inferior to in-person interviews for assessing 'fit.' Confidence in ranking applicants and programs was decreased. Stakeholders universally noted significant cost and time savings with VIs, as well as equity gains and reduced carbon footprint due to eliminating travel. CONCLUSIONS: The use of VIs for GME recruitment and selection has accelerated rapidly. The findings of this review offer early insights that can guide future practice, policy, and research.

Online learning developments in undergraduate medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 69.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic spurred an abrupt transition away from in-person educational activities. This systematic review investigated the pivot to online learning for nonclinical undergraduate medical education (UGME) activities and explored descriptions of educational offerings deployed, their impact, and lessons learned. METHODS: The authors systematically searched four online databases and conducted a manual electronic search of MedEdPublish up to December 21, 2020. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts, performed data extraction and assessed risk of bias. A third author resolved discrepancies. Findings were reported in accordance with the STORIES (STructured apprOach to the Reporting in healthcare education of Evidence Synthesis) statement and BEME guidance. RESULTS: Fifty-six articles were included. The majority (n = 41) described the rapid transition of existing offerings to online formats, whereas fewer (n = 15) described novel activities. The majority (n = 27) included a combination of synchronous and asynchronous components. Didactics (n = 40) and small groups (n = 26) were the most common instructional methods. Teachers largely integrated technology to replace and amplify rather than transform learning, though learner engagement was often interactive. Thematic analysis revealed unique challenges of online learning, as well as exemplary practices. The quality of study designs and reporting was modest, with underpinning theory at highest risk of bias. Virtually all studies (n = 54) assessed reaction/satisfaction, fewer than half (n = 23) assessed changes in attitudes, knowledge or skills, and none assessed behavioral, organizational or patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: UGME educators successfully transitioned face-to-face instructional methods online and implemented novel solutions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although technology's potential to transform teaching is not yet fully realized, the use of synchronous and asynchronous formats encouraged virtual engagement, while offering flexible, self-directed learning. As we transition from emergency remote learning to a post-pandemic world, educators must underpin new developments with theory, report additional outcomes and provide details that support replication.

Implementation of Patient Engagement Tools in Electronic Health Records to Enhance Patient-Centered Communication: Protocol for Feasibility Evaluation and Preliminary Results.

BACKGROUND: Patient-physician communication during clinical encounters is essential to ensure quality of care. Many studies have attempted to improve patient-physician communication. Incorporating patient priorities into agenda setting and medical decision-making are fundamental to patient-centered communication. Efficient and scalable approaches are needed to empower patients to speak up and prepare physicians to respond. Leveraging electronic health records (EHRs) in engaging patients and health care teams has the potential to enhance the integration of patient priorities in clinical encounters. A systematic approach to eliciting and documenting patient priorities before encounters could facilitate effective communication in such encounters. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we report the design and implementation of a set of EHR tools built into clinical workflows for facilitating patient-physician joint agenda setting and the documentation of patient concerns in the EHRs for ambulatory encounters. METHODS: We engaged health information technology leaders and users in three health care systems for developing and implementing a set of EHR tools. The goal of these tools is to standardize the elicitation of patient priorities by using a previsit "patient important issue" questionnaire distributed through the patient portal to the EHR. We built additional EHR documentation tools to facilitate patient-staff communication when the staff records the vital signs and the reason for the visit in the EHR while in the examination room, with a simple transmission method for physicians to incorporate patient concerns in EHR notes. RESULTS: The study is ongoing. The anticipated completion date for survey data collection is November 2021. A total of 34,037 primary care patients from three health systems (n=26,441; n=5136; and n=2460 separately recruited from each system) used the previsit patient important issue questionnaire in 2020. The adoption of the digital previsit questionnaire during the COVID-19 pandemic was much higher in one health care system because it expanded the use of the questionnaire from physicians participating in trials to all primary care providers midway through the year. It also required the use of this previsit questionnaire for eCheck-ins, which are required for telehealth encounters. Physicians and staff suggested anecdotally that this questionnaire helped patient-clinician communication, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: EHR tools have the potential to facilitate the integration of patient priorities into agenda setting and documentation in real-world primary care practices. Early results suggest the feasibility and acceptability of such digital tools in three health systems. EHR tools can support patient engagement and clinicians' work during in-person and telehealth visits. They could potentially exert a sustained influence on patient and clinician communication behaviors in contrast to prior ad hoc educational efforts targeting patients or clinicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03385512; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03385512. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/30431.

The Impact of Inpatient Telemedicine on Personal Protective Equipment Savings During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-sectional Study.

With the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic and shortage of adequate personal protective equipment (PPE), hospitals implemented inpatient telemedicine measures to ensure operational readiness and a safe working environment for clinicians. The utility and sustainability of inpatient telemedicine initiatives need to be evaluated as the number of COVID-19 inpatients is expected to continue declining. In this viewpoint, we describe the use of a rapidly deployed inpatient telemedicine workflow at a large academic medical center and discuss the potential impact on PPE savings. In early 2020, videoconferencing software was installed on patient bedside iPads at two academic medical center teaching hospitals. An internal website allowed providers to initiate video calls with patients in any patient room with an activated iPad, including both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Patients were encouraged to use telemedicine technology to connect with loved ones via native apps or videoconferencing software. We evaluated the use of telemedicine technology on patients' bedside iPads by monitoring traffic to the internal website. Between May 2020 and March 2021, there were a total of 1240 active users of the Video Visits website (mean 112.7, SD 49.0 connection events per month). Of these, 133 (10.7%) connections were made. Patients initiated 63 (47.4%) video calls with family or friends and sent 37 (27.8%) emails with videoconference connection instructions. Providers initiated a total of 33 (24.8%) video calls with the majority of calls initiated in August (n=22, 67%). There was a low level of adoption of inpatient telemedicine capability by providers and patients. With sufficient availability of PPE, inpatient providers did not find a frequent need to use the bedside telemedicine technology, despite a high census of patients with COVID-19. Compared to providers, patients used videoconferencing capabilities more frequently in September and October 2020. We did not find savings of PPE associated with the use of inpatient telemedicine.

Pre-clinical remote undergraduate medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has necessitated a sudden transition to remote learning in medical schools. We aimed to assess perceptions of remote learning among pre-clinical medical students and subsequently to identify pros and cons of remote learning, as well as uncover gaps to address in ongoing curricular development. METHODS: A survey was distributed to first- and second-year medical students at the University of California San Diego School of Medicine in March 2020. Frequencies of responses to structured multiple-choice questions were compared regarding impacts of remote learning on quality of instruction and ability to participate, value of various remote learning resources, living environment, and preparedness for subsequent stages of training. Responses to open-ended questions about strengths and weaknesses of the remote curriculum and overall reflections were coded for thematic content. RESULTS: Of 268 students enrolled, 104 responded (53.7% of first-year students and 23.9% of second-year students). Overall, students felt that remote learning had negatively affected the quality of instruction and their ability to participate. Most (64.1%) preferred the flexibility of learning material at their own pace. Only 25.5% of respondents still felt connected to the medical school or classmates, and feelings of anxiety and isolation were noted negatives of remote learning. Most second-year students (56.7%) felt their preparation for the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 exam was negatively affected, and 43.3% felt unprepared to begin clerkships. In narrative responses, most students appreciated the increased flexibility of remote learning, but they also identified several deficits that still need to be addressed, including digital fatigue, decreased ability to participate, and lack of clinical skills, laboratory, and hands-on learning. CONCLUSIONS: Videocasted lectures uploaded in advance, electronic health record and telehealth training for students, and training for teaching faculty to increase technological fluency may be considered to optimize remote learning curricula.

Student Perspectives on Remote Medical Education in Clinical Core Clerkships During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: To assess student perceptions of remote learning curricula implemented by clinical clerkships at a single US medical school during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: Students enrolled in core clinical clerkships at the UC San Diego School of Medicine from March to April 2020 were sent an anonymous online survey, assessing components of remote learning curricula via quantitative rating and free-response questions. RESULTS: Of 132 students enrolled, 96 (73%) completed the survey. Online question banks, remote progress reviews, and telehealth sessions were rated as the most valuable resources, while textbooks were rated least valuable. Most students felt that the number of resources was adequate (69/94, 74%), the quantity of required content was appropriate (77/93, 83%), and there was a good balance of rigidity versus flexibility in the schedule (81/94, 86%). Most students felt "prepared" or "somewhat prepared" for the shelf examination (61/91, 67%) and for the next year of medical training (73/94, 78%). In narrative reflections, students valued the flexibility afforded by remote curricula but desired some weekly structure. Students enjoyed expanded access to learning resources and participating in interactive remote sessions. Students expressed anxiety about the pandemic and uncertainty regarding medical education, but transparent communication from clerkship directors helped assuage these concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Student participation in direct patient care is fundamental to medical school core clerkships and was negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategic incorporation of select remote learning components into clinical clerkships may permit a favorable student experience even when opportunities for on-site participation are limited.