Patients' experience with virtual care during COVID-19 pandemic in primary care practice.

Context: The advent of COVID-19 pandemic in March of 2020 galvanized primary care practices into adopting telemedicine to be able to continue delivering care to patients safely. As recipients of care delivered virtually, capturing patients' experience is key to evaluating its success and shortcomings. Objective: To describe patients' experience and perceptions with virtual care during COVID-19 pandemic. Study Design/Population: A survey was distributed to 900 adult patients across primacy care practices in MW Minnesota and Arizona from September through October, 2020. Questions asked included: mode of virtual care received (virtual visit, phone visit, secured patient on-line portal or POL), device used, and likelihood of using virtual care for different visit reasons (acute visit, persistent problem, routine/wellness visit or chronic care). Results: Five hundred ninety surveys (65.5%) were returned. Majority (72%) of responders' experience with virtual care was through use of POL to view test results or messages from their care team; 43% of responders also sought clinic advice though this avenue. Thirty percent (n=177) had phone visits compared to 26% video visits. Those over 64 years had more phone than video visits. This age group which comprised 23 % (n=139) of responders, reported more negative experience with video visits compared to other age groups. Only five percent of all responders had negative experience with POL for clinical communications. Across all age groups, responders were "very likely" to engage in virtual visits for routine/wellness care such as medication refills; those in 30-64 age groups were more likely to utilize virtual visits from mental health and chronic disease care than the younger (18-29 years) and older (65 and up) groups. Interestingly, 84% (n=496) of responders had smart phones and only 28% had computers with video cameras. Conclusion: Patients have varying experiences in virtual care which should be taken into consideration as this method of care delivery becomes more integrated into primary care practice. Majority of patients surveyed had access to smartphones than computers with video camera which creates an opportunity for exploring the use of this modality to expand care delivered through telemedicine.

Experience and Attitudes Toward Telehealth in Student-Run Free Clinics (SRFC).

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: Telehealth services expanded during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Student-run free clinics (SRFC) deliver important health care services to underserved populations, who may face barriers to telehealth use. This study characterizes telehealth usage, experiences, and attitudes among individuals working in SRFCs. METHODS: In November 2021, a survey adapted from the COVID-19 Healthcare Coalition Telehealth Impact Physician Survey was sent to all registrants who identified themselves as students at the 2020 Society of Student-Run Free Clinics Annual Conference. RESULTS: Thirty-eight individuals of 576 registrants (7%) representing 21 of 88 (24%) SRFCs completed the survey. Twenty-one (58%) individuals reported using telehealth in their clinic. Those that did not cited lack of infrastructure as a barrier (eg, broadband, Internet challenges, technology investments), were more likely to serve homeless (P = .01), and less likely to serve non-English speaking populations (P = .02). There were increases in telehealth and decreases in in-person visits after March 11, 2020 though changes did not reach statistical significance. At least 15 (68%) wanted to continue chronic disease management, preventative care, and mental/behavioral health via telehealth after COVID-19. Most felt that telehealth was easy to use and improved the health, safety, and timeliness of care of patients, but not work satisfaction or access to care. Difficulty accessing physical devices, Internet, and data was the most-cited barrier to maintaining and accessing telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly all participants cited significant benefits and barriers to telehealth that impacted perceived access to care and sustainability. SRFCs' experiences may be modulated by their underserved populations and role in student education. Addressing barriers, particularly patient- and clinic-level technology challenges, could work to improve inequities in telehealth uptake.

Pharmacist-Led Education for Increasing Physician Comfort Prescribing Oral COVID-19 Antivirals.

Randall J. Fritz, DVM, Mayo Clinic, substantively edited the manuscript. The Scientific Publications staff at Mayo Clinic provided proofreading, administrative, and clerical support.

One year of COVID: primary care learning experiences in a health system.

Context: Patients and communities consider their primary care clinicians (PCC's) to be their most trusted source of information. During the first 12 months of the COVID pandemic, initially reliable, accurate information was scare, evolving, and at times conflicting. From testing, public health prevention, treatment, and vaccinations clinicians had to learn, apply, and convey this information honestly and openly. Objective: This was a survey of a health system's PCC's after the first year of the pandemic. The objective was to determine the clinical, educational, and advisory roles performed by PCC's and the sources of from which PCC's obtained the information necessary to fulfill these roles. Study Design: An intranet survey was sent to members of the system's primary care learning collaborative. Questions were multiple answer with options for open-ended answers. Setting: Large health system. Population: Learning collaborative membership consisting of physicians, nurse practitioners (NP), and physician assistants (PA). Instrument: Brief intranet survey. Outcome measures: Identify clinical and educational roles for PCC. Results: 192 surveys were sent; 109 responses; 72% physicians, 28% NP/PA. 25 unique clinical roles were identified. Most common: discuss vaccine (94%), work excuse/return to work (88%), outpatient care (87%), virtual assessment for COVID (74%). 14 unique educational or advisory roles were identified; the most common being teaching residents (45%) or students (42%), lecture/discussion on COVID (20%) or vaccines (22%) or advising community groups (18%). Sources of information related to COVID were diverse. When asked to identify the three most relied on sources, system (internal COVID website or disseminated by system) (83%), colleagues (34%), and consultants (33%), were the most common source. CME was the least relied upon (7%). Frequently the system utilized information from CDC, state/local health department information along with national organizations. Conclusions: During the pandemic, primary care clinicians provided a broad array of clinical services, and are a source of information for colleagues, patients, and communities. They rely on a broad array of sources for reliable information, mostly relationship-based, not formal CME. The trusted relationships primary care clinicians have with others throughout their communities was essential in promulgating accurate reliable information during the first year of the pandemic.

Association of Telehealth with Short-Interval Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic led to wide adoption of telehealth in primary care. The impact of telehealth on subsequent follow-up visit volume is mixed. This study examines the association of newly expanded telehealth with short-interval follow-up visits during the COVID-19 pandemic in an academic primary care practice. METHODS: Scheduling data were used to compare rates of 0 to 60-day follow-up visits after telehealth and in-person visits before and after onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Compared with in-person visits, telehealth visits were associated with significantly higher rates of total short-interval follow-ups and higher rates of first short-interval follow-ups occurring in 0 to 15 days. DISCUSSION: Higher rates of short-interval follow-up may be due to inefficiencies created by rapid expansion of telehealth including suboptimal scheduling algorithms, pandemic-related safety considerations, and discomfort with the visit modality. Short-interval follow-ups have potential negative impacts on practice access, patient-centered outcomes, and sustainability of telehealth in primary care. CONCLUSION: Newly expanded telehealth visits conducted in the year after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in higher rates and sooner first occurrence of short-interval follow-up visits. Future research should identify optimal scheduling processes for telehealth visits to minimize short-interval follow-ups.

Development and Early Experience of a Primary Care Learning Collaborative in a Large Health Care System.

INTRODUCTION: Primary care clinicians are presented with hundreds of new clinical recommendations and guidelines. To consider practice change clinicians must identify relevant information and develop a contextual framework. Too much attention to information irrelevant to one's practice results in wasted resources. Too little results in care gaps. A small group of primary care clinicians in a large health system sought to address the problem of vetting new information and providing peer reviewed context. This was done by engaging colleagues across the system though a primary care learning collaborative. METHODS: The collaborative was a grass roots initiative between community and academic-based clinicians. They invited all the system's primary care clinicians to participate. They selected new recommendations or guidelines and used surveys as the principal communication instrument. Surveys shared practice experience and also invited members to give narrative feedback regarding their acceptance of variation in care relate to the topic. A description of the collaborative along with its development, processes, and evolution are discussed. Process changes to address needs during the COVID-19 pandemic including expanded information sharing was necessary. RESULTS: Collaborative membership reached across 5 states and included family medicine, internal medicine, and pediatrics. Members found involvement with the collaborative useful. Less variation in care was thought important for public health crises: the COVID pandemic and opioid epidemic. Greater practice variation was thought acceptable for adherence to multispecialty guidelines, such as diabetes, lipid management, and adult ADHD care. Process changes during the pandemic resulted in more communications between members to avoid practice gaps. CONCLUSION: An internet-based learning collaborative in a health system had good engagement from its members. Using novel methods, it was able to provide members with feedback related to the importance of new practice recommendations as perceived by their peers. Greater standardization was thought necessary when adopting measures to address public health crisis, and less necessary when addressing multispecialty guidelines. By employing a learning collaborative, this group was able to keep members interested and engaged. During the first year of the COVID pandemic the collaborative also served as a vehicle to share timely information.

A Case of COVID-19 Vaccine Associated New Diagnosis Myasthenia Gravis.

An 82-year-old man presented with intermittent episodes of slurred speech during his evening meals after receiving the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine. Thorough evaluation was conducted including lab work and EMG confirming a new diagnosis of late-onset myasthenia gravis. Despite treatment, the patient progressed rapidly to severe exacerbation requiring intubation and placement of a PEG tube. Infections provoking new diagnosis and exacerbations of myasthenia gravis have been reported. New diagnosis of myasthenia gravis associated with the COVID-19 vaccine is rarely reported. This case highlights the need for clinicians to be aware of the uncommon presenting symptoms in late-onset myasthenia gravis and the possibility of vaccine provoked diagnoses of immune mediated diseases.