"Faces on a screen": A qualitative study of the virtual and in-person conference experience.

Introduction: The strengths and weaknesses of virtual and in-person formats within continuing professional development (CPD) are incompletely understood. This study sought to explore attendees' perspectives across multiple specialties regarding benefits and limitations of conference formats and strategies for successful virtual and hybrid (i.e., in-person conferences with a virtual option) conferences. Methods: From December 2020 to January 2021, semistructured interviews were conducted with participants who attended both virtual and in-person CPD conferences. Purposive sampling was utilized to ensure diverse representation of gender, years in practice, location, academic rank, specialty, and practice type. Multiple specialties were intentionally sought to better understand the broader experience among physicians in general, rather than among a specific specialty. Using modified grounded theory approach with a constructivist-interpretivist paradigm, two investigators independently analyzed all interview transcripts. Discrepancies were resolved by in-depth discussion and negotiated consensus. Results: Twenty-six individuals across 16 different specialties were interviewed. We identified three overarching concepts: motivations to attend conferences, benefits and limitations of different conference formats, and strategies to optimize virtual and hybrid conferences. Specific motivators included both professional and personal factors. Benefits of in person included networking/community, immersion, and wellness, while the major limitation was integration with personal life. Benefits of virtual were flexibility, accessibility, and incorporation of technology, while limitations included technical challenges, distractions, limitations for tactile learning, and communication/connection. Benefits of hybrid included more options for access, while limitations included challenges with synchrony of formats and dilution of experiences. Strategies to improve virtual/hybrid conferences included optimizing technology/production, facilitating networking and engagement, and deliberate selection of content. Conclusions: This study identified several benefits and limitations of each medium as well as strategies to optimize virtual and hybrid CPD conferences. This may help inform future CPD conference planning for both attendees and conference planners alike.

Trends of Pandemic Parenting in Medical Academia.

INTRODUCTION: The pandemic has been difficult on physicians, with two fifths of doctors in one survey reporting that their mental health is now worse than before the pandemic. It is likely that a significant proportion of these physicians are parents of children necessitating childcare, as approximately 32% of the US workforce has someone in their household under the age of 14. We sought to study the impact of the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on physician parents in academia. Our goal was to investigate the intersection of professional and personal challenges, as well as perceived impact on domestic life and professional development secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Using Survey Monkey, we developed a 37-question survey to address the aim of this study. Questions were grouped into four categories: demographics; impact on childcare; impact on care; and impact on mental health/wellness. Most of the questions were multiple choice with a few fill-in-the-blank options to allow participants to provide additional information related to their experiences as physicians during the pandemic. A link to the survey was disseminated via email to physicians at our home institution, Rush University Medical Center (Chicago), via our own intra- and interdepartmental communications, We used private social media accounts such as Facebook physician groups to reach out to physicians at other academic medical centers. Survey responses were voluntary and collected anonymously over an eight-week period, without identifiable data. Inclusion criteria included any physician identifying themselves as working full or full or part time in an academic facility in the US and caregivers for children <18 years. RESULTS: Survey respondents were mostly female (83.2%), practicing in the Midwest (61.2%), and ranked as assistant professor (59.5%). The majority of respondents had two children (65.1%) who were <11 years in age (85.6%). Most respondents worked full time with 72.8% working over 50% clinically. Childcare was disrupted for 171 of 232 respondents (73.7%); 62.9% struggled with balancing work with childcare; 81.9% worried often or very often about fulfilling their responsibilities. A vast majority, 210 of 232 respondents (90.5%) had some degree of concern about feeling overburdened by their roles. More than half (57.3%) worried that their professional advancement was impacted by the pandemic, and 53.9% considered making adjustments to their clinical workload/. Over half (51.6%) thought that increased domestic responsibilities impacted their professional advancement. CONCLUSION: In the survey, which was completed primarily by early-career women physicians practicing in a variety of specialties and geographic regions, we noted that childcare disruption amidst the pandemic was extremely prevalent. The majority of respondents reported full-time equivalent work; thus, it is reasonable to assume that significant workloads and limitations in remote work in combination with childcare constraints resulted in significant burden. A large number felt the challenges were negatively impacting their professional development and felt overburdened by their various roles.

Use of Telemedicine to Expedite and Expand Care During COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) created challenges with access to care including increased burden on healthcare systems and potential exposure risks for vulnerable patients. To address these needs, Rush University Medical Center created a virtual, urgent care program specifically designed to address these challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This was a retrospective study analyzing adult patients with COVID-19-related telemedicine visits performed between March 1-June 30, 2020. COVID-19-related telemedicine visits refer to those who used the "Concern for Coronavirus" module. We assessed the total number of telemedicine visits using this module, percentage with a subsequent emergency department (ED) visit within seven days, and outcomes (ie, hospitalization status, intubation, and death) of patients who presented to the ED for evaluation. Data are presented using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 2,974 adult patients accessed the program via the COVID-19 module over the four-month period. Of those, 142 patients (4.8%) had an ED visit within seven days. Only 14 patients (0.5%) required admission. One patient was intubated, and there were no deaths among the telemedicine population. CONCLUSION: The data suggests that telemedicine may be a safe and effective way to screen and treat patients with possible COVID-19, while reducing potential burdens on EDs.