ABSTRACT
Background: Morbidity and mortality (M&M) conferences are essential components for resident education and provide a valuable tool to improve patient safety and quality of care. M&M conferences help identify important gaps in safety and reduce avoidable events in future patient care. Active methods to improve the utilization of M&M conferences have been shown to enhance their educational value for residents, faculty and multidisciplinary teams in healthcare institutions. Objective: The purpose of this study was to use a survey-based methodology to assess how morbidity and mortality conferences are conducted in residency programs, including characteristics such as frequency, involvement of personnel and the effects of COVID-19. Methods: From February to October 2021, a validated 19 question survey was electronically distributed to residency program directors in anesthesiology, emergency medicine and general surgery, after a search for email addresses in the ACGME database. The survey was created and hosted on Google Forms. Results: A total of 125 of 713 program directors (17.5%) responded to the survey. Eighty-three percent of respondent programs reported mandatory participation for residents, with residents providing most of the presentations. Case presentations utilized various formats including SBAR, adverse event analysis and root cause analysis as the most common modalities. Though most programs reported no change in frequency of M&M conferences due to COVID-19, most respondents reported a shift to a virtual or hybrid platform. Conclusion: M&M conferences are an important educational and quality improvement modality, and many residency directors changed practice to incorporate virtual platforms due to the COVID-19 pandemic to maintain uninterrupted educational sessions. Nonetheless, significant variation still exists in how these conferences are conducted between different institutions.
ABSTRACT
PRCIS: Telepresence robots (TR) present the versatility to effectively provide remote educational sessions for patients affected by glaucoma to improve disease knowledge. Given COVID-19's effect on clinical practice, TR can maintain social distancing when educating patients. PURPOSE: TR are devices that allow remote users to have a mobile presence anywhere. We compared the effect of an education session given by an in-person educator versus a TR on glaucoma knowledge and identified factors that impact patient education. METHODS: Eighty-five glaucoma patients were split into control, human, and TR groups. We measured glaucoma knowledge scores (KS) using the National Eye Institute's Eye-Q Test. Human and TR groups had the education session with a human or TR followed by the questionnaire. The control group was administered the questionnaire without an education session. Treatment regimen recall (RR) >90% was considered a success. We used linear regression and binary logistic regression to determine variables that affect KS and RR, respectively. RESULTS: Mean age was 58.3±2.8 years. 49% were female. Mean KS were 5.8±0.7 in the control group (n=31), 7.9±0.5 in the TR group (n=26), and 8.4±0.5 in the human group (n=28). Control participants had a lower mean KS than the human or TR groups (P<0.001). Having the education session (2.5, P<0.001), education greater than high school (0.8, P=0.016), and diabetes (-0.7, P=0.037) affected KS. Having diabetes (odds ratio=0.14, P=0.014) negatively affected RR. Having the education session may affect RR (odds ratio=5.47, P=0.07), warranting additional studies. CONCLUSIONS: Education sessions with a human and TR improved patients' glaucoma KS. TRs may serve as an alternative to in-person education sessions and allow educators to safely and effectively educate patients remotely to adhere to COVID-19 social distancing guidelines.