ABSTRACT
Background and Objectives: Teleneurology is common in clinical practice partly due to the SARS CoV-2 pandemic. Impressions about teleneurology from patients and providers alike are generally favorable; some of the reported benefits include ease of access to specialized health care, savings of time and money, and similar quality of care as an in-person visit. However, comparisons between patient and provider impressions about the same teleneurology encounter have not been described. In this study, we describe patient impressions about a teleneurology encounter and evaluate concordance with provider impressions about the same encounter. Methods: Patients and providers at the University of Pennsylvania Hospital Neurology Department were surveyed about their impressions of teleneurology between April 27, 2020, and June 16, 2020. A convenience sample of patients, whose providers completed a questionnaire, were contacted by telephone to solicit their impressions about the same encounter. Unique questionnaires for patients and providers focused on similar themes, such as adequacy of technology, assessment of history obtained, and overall quality of the visit. Summaries of patient responses are reported with the raw percent agreement between patients and providers for similar questions. Results: One hundred thirty-seven patients completed the survey; 64 (47%) were male and 73 (53%) were female. Sixty-six (47%) patients had a primary diagnosis of PD, 42 (30%) a non-PD/parkinsonism movement disorder, and 29 (21%) a nonmovement disorder neurologic disease. One hundred one (76%) were established patient visits and 36 (26%) were new patient visits. Provider responses from 8 different physicians were included. Most of the patients responded that the ease of joining their visit, their comfort engaging with their physicians during their visit, understanding their plan of care after their visit, and the quality of care from their teleneurology visit were satisfactory. Patients and providers agreed about their impressions of the quality of the history obtained (87% agreement), patient-provider relationship (88% agreement), and overall quality of their experience (70% agreement). Discussion: Patients had favorable impressions about their clinical experience with teleneurology and expressed an interest in incorporating telemedicine visits into their ongoing care. Patients and providers were highly concordant for the history obtained, patient-provider relationship, and overall quality.
ABSTRACT
As the COVID-19 pandemic has strongly disrupted people's daily work and life, a great amount of scientific research has been conducted to understand the key characteristics of this new epidemic. In this manuscript, we focus on four crucial epidemic metrics with regard to the COVID-19, namely the basic reproduction number, the incubation period, the serial interval and the epidemic doubling time. We collect relevant studies based on the COVID-19 data in China and conduct a meta-analysis to obtain pooled estimates on the four metrics. From the summary results, we conclude that the COVID-19 has stronger transmissibility than SARS, implying that stringent public health strategies are necessary.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUNDFrom March 2, 2020, to April 12, 2020, New York City (NYC) experienced exponential growth of the COVID-19 pandemic due to novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Little is known regarding how physicians have been affected. We aimed to characterize the COVID-19 impact on NYC resident physicians.METHODSIRB-exempt and expedited cross-sectional analysis through survey to NYC residency program directors April 3-12, 2020, encompassing events from March 2, 2020, to April 12, 2020.RESULTSFrom an estimated 340 residency programs around NYC, recruitment yielded 91 responses, representing 24 specialties and 2306 residents. In 45.1% of programs, at least 1 resident with confirmed COVID-19 was reported. One hundred one resident physicians were confirmed COVID-19-positive, with an additional 163 residents presumed positive for COVID-19 based on symptoms but awaiting or unable to obtain testing. Two COVID-19-positive residents were hospitalized, with 1 in intensive care. Among specialties with more than 100 residents represented, negative binomial regression indicated that infection risk differed by specialty (P = 0.039). In 80% of programs, quarantining a resident was reported. Ninety of 91 programs reported reuse or extended mask use, and 43 programs reported that personal protective equipment (PPE) was suboptimal. Sixty-five programs (74.7%) redeployed residents elsewhere to support COVID-19 efforts.CONCLUSIONMany resident physicians around NYC have been affected by COVID-19 through direct infection, quarantine, or redeployment. Lack of access to testing and concern regarding suboptimal PPE are common among residency programs. Infection risk may differ by specialty.FUNDINGNational Eye Institute Core Grant P30EY019007; Research to Prevent Blindness Unrestricted Grant; Parker Family Chair; University of Pennsylvania.