Adapting to change: exploring perceptions and demands of the coronavirus (COVID-19) workforce changes - an Australian multi-institutional radiation oncology survey.

Objective To evaluate the perceptions of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) initiated workplace strategies implemented in radiation oncology departments across Australia. Methods A multidisciplinary team from Princess Alexandra Hospital developed a survey to address the impact of the pandemic strategies on areas such as patient care, staff education, well-being, flexible working arrangements, and research. The survey was conducted from November 2020 to April 2021. Results Out of 210 respondents from seven institutions, 45% reported burnout and 57% experienced work work-related stress. A significant majority of respondents were in favour of continued remote work (86%, 131/153). Radiation oncologists identified administrative or non-clinical work (92%, 34/37), telehealth clinics (32%, 12/37), or radiation therapy planning (22%, 8/37) as suitable for remote work. Additionally, 54% (21/39) of the radiation oncologists plan to use telehealth more frequently, with 67% (26/39) feeling more confident with the technology. The majority (81%, 171/210) of participants favoured continuation of hybrid in-person and virtual meetings. Virtual solutions were adopted for quality assurance activities (72%, 118/165) and 52% (60/116) indicated preference for ongoing utility of virtual platforms. However, 38% (79/210) of the respondents expressed concerns about the negative impact on junior staff training. Conclusion These findings reveal a strong inclination towards technological advancements and remote work arrangements to enable flexible working conditions. Our study suggests the need for ongoing reforms, focusing on improving clinical service delivery efficiencies and enhancing job satisfaction among clinicians.

Creating Conversion Factors from EHR Event Log Data: A Comparison of Investigator-Derived and Vendor-Derived Metrics for Primary Care Physicians.

Physicians spend a large amount of time with the electronic health record (EHR), which the majority believe contributes to their burnout. However, there are limitedstandardized measures of physician EHR time. Vendor-derived metrics are standardized but may underestimate real-world EHR experience. Investigator-derived metrics may be more reliable but not standardized, particularly with regard to timeout thresholds defining inactivity. This study aimed to enable standardized investigator-derived metrics using conversion factors between raw event log-derived metrics and Signal (Epic System's standardized metric) for primary care physicians. This was an observational, retrospective longitudinal study of EHR raw event logs and Signal data from a quaternary academic medical center and its community affiliates in California, over a 6-month period. The study evaluated 242 physicians over 1370 physician-months, comparing 53.7 million event logs to 6850 Signal metrics, in five different time based metrics. Results show that inactivity thresholds for event log metric derivation that most closely approximate Signal metrics ranged from 90 seconds (Visit Navigator) to 360 seconds ("Pajama time") depending on the metric. Based on this data, conversion factors for investigator-derived metrics across a wide range of inactivity thresholds, via comparison with Signal metrics, are provided which may allow researchers to consistently quantify EHR experience.