Transitioning to Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Patient Perspectives and Attendance at an HIV Clinic in San Francisco.

Approximately 1.2 million people are living with HIV in the United States, with 16,000 in San Francisco. Many HIV-positive individuals have difficulty maintaining follow-up clinic visits under normal circumstances, and this is complicated by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic as many institutions transition to a telehealth-focused model of care to maintain patient and provider safety. However, it was unknown how telehealth would impact patient attendance and perceptions about their care, particularly in populations at high risk of appointment nonattendance. To quantify the impact of telehealth on retention in care for a vulnerable HIV-infected population and to identify patient perspectives of telehealth and its effect on appointment attendance, we studied patients at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) 360 Wellness Center, an HIV primary care clinic in urban San Francisco, California. Anonymous surveys were conducted to assess patient perceptions of telehealth, and 21% of patients sent surveys responded. Appointment attendance rates for all visits were analyzed before and after the shelter-in-place order in San Francisco on March 16, 2020. With the transition to telehealth, the overall nonattendance rate decreased by ∼3%. Most common perceived strengths of telehealth included convenience and safety, whereas disadvantages included technical barriers and unfamiliarity. Despite barriers and disadvantages listed by patients, a majority are willing to attend telehealth visits, as 80.5% of respondents reported being equally or more likely to attend telehealth visits. This is a critical finding during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond; we believe that telehealth can improve appointment attendance for vulnerable populations who often face barriers to receiving health care.

A Multi-Institution Collaboration to Define Core Content and Design Flexible Curricular Components for a Foundational Medical School Course: Implications for National Curriculum Reform.

Medical educators have not reached widespread agreement on core content for a U.S. medical school curriculum. As a first step toward addressing this, five U.S. medical schools formed the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Reimagining Medical Education collaborative to define, create, implement, and freely share core content for a foundational medical school course on microbiology and immunology. This proof-of-concept project involved delivery of core content to preclinical medical students through online videos and class-time interactions between students and facilitators. A flexible, modular design allowed four of the medical schools to successfully implement the content modules in diverse curricular settings. Compared with the prior year, student satisfaction ratings after implementation were comparable or showed a statistically significant improvement. Students who took this course at a time point in their training similar to when the USMLE Step 1 reference group took Step 1 earned equivalent scores on National Board of Medical Examiners-Customized Assessment Services microbiology exam items. Exam scores for three schools ranged from 0.82 to 0.84, compared with 0.81 for the national reference group; exam scores were 0.70 at the fourth school, where students took the exam in their first quarter, two years earlier than the reference group. This project demonstrates that core content for a foundational medical school course can be defined, created, and used by multiple medical schools without compromising student satisfaction or knowledge. This project offers one approach to collaboratively defining core content and designing curricular resources for preclinical medical school education that can be shared.