Improving Patient Health Literacy During Telehealth Visits Through Remote Teach-Back Methods Training for Family Medicine Residents: Pilot 2-Arm Cluster, Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: As telemedicine plays an increasing role in health care delivery, providers are expected to receive adequate training to effectively communicate with patients during telemedicine encounters. Teach-back is an approach that verifies patients' understanding of the health care information provided by health care professionals. Including patients in the design and development of teach-back training content for providers can result in more relevant training content. However, only a limited number of studies embrace patient engagement in this capacity, and none for remote care settings. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to design and evaluate the feasibility of patient-centered, telehealth-focused teach-back training for family medicine residents to promote the use of teach-back during remote visits. METHODS: We codeveloped the POTENTIAL (Platform to Enhance Teach-Back Methods in Virtual Care Visits) curriculum for medical residents to promote teach-back during remote visits. A patient participated in the development of the workshop's videos and in a patient-provider panel about teach-back. We conducted a pilot, 2-arm cluster, nonrandomized controlled trial. Family medicine residents at the intervention site (n=12) received didactic and simulation-based training in addition to weekly cues-to-action. Assessment included pre- and postsurveys, observations of residents, and interviews with patients and providers. To assess differences between pre- and postintervention scores among the intervention group, chi-square and 1-tailed t tests were used. A total of 4 difference-in-difference models were constructed to evaluate prepost differences between intervention and control groups for each of the following outcomes: familiarity with teach-back, importance of teach-back, confidence in teach-back ability, and ease of use of teach-back. RESULTS: Medical residents highly rated their experience of the teach-back training sessions (mean 8.6/10). Most residents (9/12, 75%) used plain language during training simulations, and over half asked the role-playing patient to use their own words to explain what they were told during the encounter. Postintervention, there was an increase in residents' confidence in their ability to use teach-back (mean 7.33 vs 7.83; P=.04), but there was no statistically significant difference in familiarity with, perception of importance, or ease of use of teach-back. None of the difference-in-difference models were statistically significant. The main barrier to practicing teach-back was time constraints. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights ways to effectively integrate best-practice training in telehealth teach-back skills into a medical residency program. At the same time, this pilot study points to important opportunities for improvement for similar interventions in future larger-scale implementation efforts, as well as ways to mitigate providers' concerns or barriers to incorporating teach-back in their practice. Teach-back can impact remote practice by increasing providers' ability to actively engage and empower patients by using the features (whiteboards, chat rooms, and mini-views) of their remote platform.

"I Don't Want to Go to Work": A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Healthcare Worker Experiences from the Front- and Side-Lines of COVID-19.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers (HCW) were categorized as "essential" and "non-essential", creating a division where some were "locked-in" a system with little ability to prepare for or control the oncoming crisis. Others were "locked-out" regardless of whether their skills might be useful. The purpose of this study was to systematically gather data over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic from HCW through an interprofessional lens to examine experiences of locked-out HCW. This convergent parallel mixed-methods study captured perspectives representing nearly two dozen professions through a survey, administered via social media, and video blogs. Analysis included logistic regression models of differences in outcome measures by professional category and Rapid Identification of Themes from Audio recordings (RITA) of video blogs. We collected 1299 baseline responses from 15 April 2020 to 16 March 2021. Of those responses, 12.1% reported no signs of burnout, while 21.9% reported four or more signs. Qualitative analysis identified four themes: (1) professional identity, (2) intrinsic stressors, (3) extrinsic factors, and (4) coping strategies. There are some differences in the experiences of locked-in and locked-out HCW. This did not always lead to differing reports of moral distress and burnout, and both groups struggled to cope with the realities of the pandemic.

Health and Wellness Coaching: Providers and Practice-A Commentary on Sforzo and Colleagues (2018).

The field of health and wellness coaching holds great promise for making health behavior change interventions available to more individuals. We assert that the health and wellness literature should recognize the potential of lay persons to provide health coaching and lay person health coach studies should be included in the compendium compiled by Sforzo and colleagues. Limiting the field to current health professionals decreases the number of potential coaches unnecessarily. The compendium will be an excellent resource for researchers to compile the existing data to determine the effectiveness of coaching, what aspects of coaching are effective, for what conditions coaching is effective, and what outcomes coaching improves. We provide commentary that researchers exploring health coaching should recognize the importance of physical activity in improving outcomes for a number of different populations and should health behaviors as outcomes in health coaching intervention studies.