Assessing Disparities in Video-Telehealth Use and eHealth Literacy Among Hospitalized Patients: Cross-sectional Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Medicare coverage for audio-only telehealth is slated to end this year after the public health emergency concludes. When the time comes, many patients may be unable to make the transition from audio-only to video telehealth due to digital inexperience. This study explores the second digital divide within video telehealth use, which is primarily characterized by skills and capabilities rather than access, by measuring eHealth literacy (eHL) and video capabilities in hospitalized patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate video capabilities, eHealth literacy, and engagement with video telehealth among hospitalized patients. METHODS: The study design is a cross-sectional observational study of adult inpatients at the University of Chicago Medical Center. We assessed self-reported rates of audio versus video telehealth usage as well as the participants' self-reported willingness to use video telehealth for future health care visits. We used a multivariable binary logistic regression to determine the odds ratio for being unwilling to use video telehealth, adjusted for age, sex, race or ethnicity, educational level, eHL literacy scale (eHEALS), health literacy (brief health literacy screen), technology access, internet access, and video capability. RESULTS: Of the 297 enrolled participants, median age was 58 years, most (n=185, 62%) identified as Black, half (n=149, 50%) were female, one-quarter (n=66, 22%) lacked home internet access, and one-third (n=102, 34%) had inadequate eHL. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low eHL reported greater participation in audio-only telehealth over video telehealth, of which the former may lose its flexible pandemic reimbursement policy. This may widen the existing health disparities as older adults and patients with low eHL face challenges in accessing video telehealth services. Low eHL is associated with lack of web-based skills, lower rates of video telehealth usage, and lower willingness to use video technology. The study results raise the question of how to improve video capability among patients who, despite having access to smartphones and laptops, face challenges in using telehealth optimally.

eHealth Literacy and Patient Portal Use and Attitudes: Cross-sectional Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, patient portals have become more widely used tools of patient care delivery. However, not all individuals have equivalent access or ability to use patient portals. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the relationships between eHealth literacy (eHL) and patient portal awareness, use, and attitudes among hospitalized patients. METHODS: Inpatients completed patient portal surveys; eHL was assessed (eHealth Literacy Scale). Multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusted for age, self-reported race, gender, and educational attainment were completed with significance at P<.006 (Bonferroni correction). RESULTS: Among 274 participants, most identified as Black (n=166, 61%) and female (n=140, 51%), mean age was 56.5 (SD 16.7) years, and 178 (65%) reported some college or higher educational attainment. One-quarter (n=79, 28%) had low eHL (mean 27, SD 9.5), which was associated with lower odds of portal access awareness (odds ratio 0.11, 95% CI 0.05-0.23; P<.001), having ever used portals (odds ratio 0.19, 95% CI 0.10-0.36; P<.001), less perceived usefulness of portals (odds ratio 0.20, 95% CI 0.10-0.38; P=.001), and lower likelihood of planning to use portals in the coming years (odds ratio 0.12, 95% CI 0.06-0.25; P<.001). As time through the COVID-19 pandemic passed, there was a trend toward increased perceived usefulness of patient portals (53% vs 62%, P=.08), but average eHL did not increase through time (P=.81). CONCLUSIONS: Low eHL was associated with less awareness, use, and perceived usefulness of portals. Perceived usefulness of portals likely increased through the COVID-19 pandemic, but patients' eHL did not. Interventions tailored for patients with low eHL could ensure greater equity in health care delivery through the COVID-19 pandemic.

Estimated cost-savings from optimizing use of inhaled medications for inpatients with obstructive lung disease.

CONCLUSIONS: Models representing transitions from all-nebulized to nebulizer-plus-MDI respiratory medications resulted in cost savings, largely from the reduction of labor cost of nebulizer administration with nebs-only treatment. Therefore, transitioning from nebs to MDIs can lead to cost savings and could allow greater opportunities for inhaler education.

Prevalence and Characteristics of Advocacy Curricula in U.S. Medical Schools.

PURPOSE: Recent national events, including the COVID-19 pandemic and protests of racial inequities, have drawn attention to the role of physicians in advocating for improvements in the social, economic, and political factors that affect health. Characterizing the current state of advocacy training in U.S. medical schools may help set expectations for physician advocacy and predict future curricular needs. METHOD: Using the member school directory provided by the Association of American Medical Colleges, the authors compiled a list of 154 MD-granting medical schools in the United States in 2019-2020. They used multiple search strategies to identify online course catalogues and advocacy-related curricula using variations of the terms "advocacy," "policy," "equity," and "social determinants of health." They used an iterative process to generate a preliminary coding schema and to code all course descriptions, conducting content analysis to describe the structure of courses and topics covered. RESULTS: Of 134 medical schools with any online course catalogue available, 103 (76.9%) offered at least 1 advocacy course. Required courses were typically survey courses focused on general content in health policy, population health, or public health/epidemiology, whereas elective courses were more likely to focus specifically on advocacy skills building and to feature field experiences. Of 352 advocacy-specific courses, 93 (26.4%) concentrated on a specific population (e.g., children or persons with low socioeconomic status). Few courses (n = 8) focused on racial/ethnic minorities and racial inequities. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that while most U.S. medical schools offer at least 1 advocacy course, the majority are elective rather than required, and the structure and content of advocacy-related courses vary substantially. Given the urgency to address social, economic, and political factors affecting health and health equity, this study provides an important and timely overview of the prevalence and content of advocacy curricula at U.S. medical schools.

COVID-19 Threatens Progress Toward Gender Equity Within Academic Medicine.

Women remain underrepresented within academic medicine despite past and present efforts to promote gender equity. The authors discuss how the COVID-19 pandemic could stymie progress toward gender parity within the biomedical workforce and limit the retention and advancement of women in science and medicine. Women faculty face distinct challenges as they navigate the impact of shelter-in-place and social distancing on work and home life. An unequal division of household labor and family care between men and women means women faculty are vulnerable to inequities that may develop in the workplace as they strive to maintain academic productivity and professional development without adequate assistance with domestic tasks and family care. Emerging data suggest that gender differences in academic productivity may be forthcoming as a direct result of the pandemic. Existing gender inequities in professional visibility, networking, and collaboration may be exacerbated as activities transition from in-person to virtual environments and create new barriers to advancement. Meanwhile, initiatives designed to promote gender equity within academic medicine may lose key funding due to the economic impact of COVID-19 on higher education. To ensure that the gender gap within academic medicine does not widen, the authors call upon academic leaders and the broader biomedical community to support women faculty through deliberate actions that promote gender equity, diversity, and inclusion. The authors provide several recommendations, including faculty needs assessments; review of gender bias within tenure-clock-extension offers; more opportunities for mentorship, sponsorship, and professional recognition; and financial commitments to support equity initiatives. Leadership for these efforts should be at the institutional and departmental levels, and leaders should ensure a gender balance on task forces and committees to avoid overburdening women faculty with additional service work. Together, these strategies will contribute to the development of a more equitable workforce capable of transformative medical discovery and care.

Who Gets the Benefit of the Doubt? Performance Evaluations, Medical Errors, and the Production of Gender Inequality in Emergency Medical Education.

Why do women continue to face barriers to success in professions, especially male-dominated ones, despite often outperforming men in similar subjects during schooling? With this study, we draw on role expectations theory to understand how inequality in assessment emerges as individuals transition from student to professional roles. To do this, we leverage the case of medical residency so that we can examine how changes in role expectations shape assessment while holding occupation and organization constant. By analyzing a dataset of 2,765 performance evaluations from a three-year emergency medicine training program, we empirically demonstrate that women and men are reviewed as equally capable at the beginning of residency, when the student role dominates; however, in year three, when the colleague role dominates, men are perceived as outperforming women. Furthermore, when we hold resident performance somewhat constant by comparing feedback to medical errors of similar severity, we find that in the third year of residency, but not the first, women receive more harsh criticism and less supportive feedback than men. Ultimately, this study suggests that role expectations, and the implicit biases they can trigger, matter significantly to the production of gender inequality, even when holding organization, occupation, and resident performance constant.

Development and testing of a module to promote generic oral contraceptive prescribing among nurse practitioners.

Although generic oral contraceptives (OCPs) can improve adherence and reduce health care expenditures, use of generic OCPs remains low, and the factors that affect generic prescribing are not well understood. We aimed to understand the barriers and facilitators of generic OCP prescribing and potential solutions to increase generic OCP prescribing, as well as pilot an educational module to address clinician misconceptions about generic OCPs. We developed focus group scripts using the 4D model of appreciative inquiry. A total of four focus groups occurred, two at the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (AANP) national conference and two at the American College of Physicians (ACP) Internal Medicine meeting. Focus group transcripts were analyzed using a constant comparative method with no a priori hypothesis to generate emerging and reoccurring themes. Findings from these focus groups were used to develop an educational module promoting generic OCP prescribing. Participants were recruited from the AANP Network for Research and the ACP Research Panel. This study demonstrates that health system factors, workflow factors, clinician factors, and patient factors were the main barriers to and facilitators of generic OCP prescribing. Nurse practitioners were responsive to an educational module and reported increased willingness to discuss and prescribe generic OCPs after completing the module. Interventions to increase generic OCP prescribing must address clinician and patient factors within the context of workflow and larger health system factors.