Urgent Care Through Telehealth.

Urgent care as a distinct clinical care entity began in the 1970s to treat low-acuity conditions. Virtual urgent care (VUC) can be provided by the primary care physician (PCP) or home health system of the patient, and many commercial direct-to-consumer (DTC) companies have emerged to provide this service. Quality of care continues to be evaluated, but some studies suggest that DTC providers prescribe antibiotics at a higher rate than PCPs. VUC has been proposed to improve equity and access to care, but early evidence is mixed. New utilization owing to convenience may lead to overall higher health care costs.

Medical assistants identify strategies and barriers to clinic efficiency.

This cross-sectional study explored the ways that medical assistants and physicians can work together to ensure that patients receive appropriate care.

Addressing Post-COVID Symptoms: A Guide for Primary Care Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Post-COVID symptoms, defined as symptoms lasting >4 weeks postinfection, have been identified not only among those patients who were hospitalized with severe symptoms but also among those who were asymptomatic or with only mild symptoms. Primary care providers (PCPs) will often be the first point of contact for patients experiencing potential complications of post-COVID symptoms. The aim of this article is to present a post-COVID management tool for PCPs to use as a quick reference and guide to the initial workup and management of the most common post-COVID symptoms. METHODS: Published guidance, recent literature, and expert specialist opinion were used to create the structure outlining the outpatient evaluation and treatment for post-COVID symptoms. RESULTS: A quick-reference guide for management of post-COVID symptoms was created for PCPs. Educational materials were created for clinicians to share with patients. Our article reviews several common complaints including respiratory, cognitive, and neurological symptoms, chronic fatigue, dysautonomia, and anosmia and presents recommendations for management. CONCLUSIONS: Data on long-term effects of COVID-19 are still emerging, and rapid dissemination of this data to front-line PCPs is crucial. This table was our effort to make the currently available evidence accessible for our PCPs in a simple, easy-to-use format.

Video Visits: Family Physician Experiences With Uptake During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: With the emergence of COVID-19, telemedicine use has increased dramatically as clinicians and patients have looked for alternatives to face-to-face care. Prior research has shown high levels of patient satisfaction and comparable quality of care. Video visits have been hypothesized to be one way to reduce burnout among clinicians, but there has been minimal research on physician views of virtual care. We sought to measure family physician experience with video visits at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We identified all faculty and resident physicians at a large academic department of family medicine who had conducted a video visit in the prior month and conducted an anonymous online 12-question survey about their experiences, satisfaction, and barriers with care. RESULTS: Most eligible physicians responded (102/109, 94%), of whom half (52%) reported this was their first month trying a video visit. There was very high satisfaction (91% very or somewhat satisfied). The majority of respondents felt that video visits were shorter (54%) or took the same amount of time (38%) as in-person visits. There was concern that many physicians had experienced a visit in which they felt video was not the appropriate platform given patient concerns. CONCLUSIONS: This study is among the first to assess physician experience with video visits. As the visits are perceived as shorter, they may offer a unique opportunity to address clinician burnout. There was a high level of satisfaction at our institution despite multiple technical challenges.

The future of cancer screening after COVID-19 may be at home.

LAY SUMMARY: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, cancer screening decreased precipitously; home screening for colorectal cancer diminished less than that for colonoscopy and breast and cervical cancer screening. The authors have highlighted approaches for home cancer screening in addition to telemedicine.

Three large scale surveys highlight the complexity of cervical cancer under-screening among women 45-65years of age in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Large scale United States (US) surveys guide efforts to maximize the health of its population. Cervical cancer screening is an effective preventive measure with a consistent question format among surveys. The aim of this study is to describe the predictors of cervical cancer screening in older women as reported by three national surveys. METHODS: The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS 2016), the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 2017), and the Health Center Patient Survey (HCPS 2014) were analyzed with univariate and multivariate analyses. We defined the cohort as women, without hysterectomy, who were 45-65years old. The primary outcome was cytology within the last 3years. RESULTS: Overall, Pap screening rates were 71% (BRFSS), 79% (HINTS) and 66% (HCPS), among 41,657, 740 and 1571 women, respectively. BRFSS showed that women 60-64years old (aPR=0.88, 95% CI: 0.85, 0.91), and in rural locations (aPR=0.95, 95% CI: 0.92, 0.98) were significantly less likely to report cervical cancer screening than women 45-49-years old or in urban locations. Compared to less than high school, women with more education reported more screening (aPR=1.20, 95% CI: 1.13, 1.28), and those with insurance had higher screening rates than the uninsured (aPR=1.47, 95% CI: 1.33, 1.62). HINTS and HCPS also showed these trends. CONCLUSIONS: All three surveys show that cervical cancer screening rates in women 45-65years are insufficient to reduce cervical cancer incidence. Insurance is the major positive predictor of screening, followed by younger age and more education. Race/ethnicity are variable predictors depending on the survey.

Is your patient on target? Optimizing diabetes management.

As new evidence emerges and guidelines are frequently revised, optimizing diabetes treatment with an eye toward HbA1c, blood pressure, and lipid goals becomes increasingly complex. Here's help.

Otitis media: diagnosis and treatment.

Acute otitis media is diagnosed in patients with acute onset, presence of middle ear effusion, physical evidence of middle ear inflammation, and symptoms such as pain, irritability, or fever. Acute otitis media is usually a complication of eustachian tube dysfunction that occurs during a viral upper respiratory tract infection. Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, and Moraxella catarrhalis are the most common organisms isolated from middle ear fluid. Management of acute otitis media should begin with adequate analgesia. Antibiotic therapy can be deferred in children two years or older with mild symptoms. High-dose amoxicillin (80 to 90 mg per kg per day) is the antibiotic of choice for treating acute otitis media in patients who are not allergic to penicillin. Children with persistent symptoms despite 48 to 72 hours of antibiotic therapy should be reexamined, and a second-line agent, such as amoxicillin/clavulanate, should be used if appropriate. Otitis media with effusion is defined as middle ear effusion in the absence of acute symptoms. Antibiotics, decongestants, or nasal steroids do not hasten the clearance of middle ear fluid and are not recommended. Children with evidence of anatomic damage, hearing loss, or language delay should be referred to an otolaryngologist.