Gender Microaggressions During Virtual Residency Interviews and Impact on Ranking of Programs During the Residency Match.

Background: Microaggressions are one form of gender bias contributing to gender disparities and mistreatment, but their prevalence during virtual residency interviews has not been explored. Objective: To explore applicants' recall of experiencing gender microaggressions during virtual residency interviews and whether these experiences affected programs' rank position on applicants' rank lists. Methods: Fourth-year medical students at a single institution who participated in the 2021 Match were surveyed after submitting their rank lists. Students were surveyed categorically on (1) their recall of the frequency they experienced 17 gender microaggressions during interviews, and (2) how these affected reported ranking of programs on their rank lists. Results: Sixty-one percent (103 of 170) of eligible students responded to the survey. Seventy-two percent (36 of 50) of women experienced at least one microaggression compared to 30% (9 of 30) of men. The largest difference was in the experience of environmental microaggressions, which are demeaning cues communicated individually or institutionally, delivered visually, or that refer to climate (P<.001). Women experienced more microaggressions than men in nonsurgical (P=.003) and surgical specialties excluding obstetrics and gynecology (P=.009). When microaggressions were experienced at 1 to 2 programs, 36% of applicants (26 of 73) reported significantly lowering program ranking, compared to 5% (1 of 19) when microaggressions occurred at more than 5 programs (P=.038). Conclusions: Women applicants experience more microaggressions than men do during nonsurgical and male-dominated surgical specialty residency interviews. Respondents who recalled experiencing microaggressions at fewer programs were more likely to report significantly lowering the rank of those programs compared to those who experienced them at more programs.

A Longitudinal Comparison of Telemedicine Versus In-Person Otolaryngology Clinic Efficiency and Patient Satisfaction During COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Telemedicine was increasingly adopted in otolaryngology as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, but how it compares to in-person visits over the longitudinal course of the pandemic has not been characterized. This study compares telemedicine visits to in-person visits on measures of clinical efficiency and patient satisfaction. METHODS: We examined all in-person and telemedicine encounters that occurred during the 13-month period from April 1, 2020 to April 30, 2021 at a pediatric otolaryngology clinic associated with a large tertiary care children's hospital. We compared patient demographics, primary encounter diagnoses, completions, cancellations, no-shows, cycle time, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 19 541 (90.5%) in-person visits and 2051 (9.5%) telemedicine visits were scheduled over the study period. There was no difference in patient age or gender between the visit types. There was a difference in race (75% White or Caucasian for in-person and 73% for telemedicine, P = .007) and average travel distance (53.3 miles for in-person vs 71.0 for telemedicine, P = .000). The most common primary diagnosis was Eustachian tube dysfunction for in-person visits (11.8%) and sleep disordered breathing for telemedicine visits (13.7%). Completion rate was greater for telemedicine visits (52.4% in-person vs 62.5% telemedicine). Cancellations were greater for in-person visits (42.6% in-person vs 24.2% telemedicine), but no-shows were greater for telemedicine (5.0% in-person vs 13.3% telemedicine, all P = .000). Average cycle time was shorter for telemedicine visits (56.5 minutes in-person vs 47.6 minutes telemedicine, P = .000). Patient satisfaction with provider interactions and overall care experience was high for both visit types. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine was utilized more during months of heightened COVID-19 cases, with higher completion rates, fewer cancellations, shorter cycle times, saved travel distance, and comparable patient satisfaction to in-person visits. Telemedicine has the potential to remain an efficient mode of care delivery in the post-pandemic era.

Adoption of Telemedicine for Multidisciplinary Care in Pediatric Otolaryngology.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced a period of social isolation that has challenged the ability of providers to uphold in-person patient care. Although commonplace in pediatric otolaryngology, multidisciplinary clinics pose a unique challenge during this time due to increased infection risk from multiple patient-provider interactions. Guidance on the application of telemedicine for multidisciplinary clinics in pediatric otolaryngology is limited. METHODS: We provide comprehensive guidance on best practices for conducting telemedicine visits for a number of multidisciplinary otolaryngology clinics using our experiences at a single tertiary care children's hospital. A review of literature to support the adoption of telemedicine in multidisciplinary pediatric otolaryngology is also incorporated. RESULTS: Telemedicine was successfully adopted for 7 multidisciplinary pediatric clinics with a variety of specialists: aerodigestive disorders, congenital hearing loss, microtia/aural atresia, orofacial clefting, sleep disorders, tracheostomy care, and velopharyngeal dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine is feasible for a variety of multidisciplinary clinics and its optimization is critical for providing care to complex pediatric otolaryngology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.