Physician Satisfaction With Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Mayo Clinic Florida Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate physician perceptions and attitudes toward telemedicine use at a tertiary care academic institution in northeast Florida during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An anonymous 38-question cross-sectional survey was developed using Qualtrics survey software (Qualtrics) and e-mailed to all staff physicians from all specialty disciplines at Mayo Clinic in Florida. The survey was open from August 17, 2020, through September 1, 2020. Collected data included general demographic characteristics and employment information, attitude and experience with telemedicine use before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, perception of patients' experience, and the effect of telemedicine on burnout. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 529 eligible physicians at our institution, with 103 physicians responding (20%). The distribution of specialties was 22% primary care specialties, 41% other internal medicine subspecialties, and 18% surgical specialties. Collectively, 63% found comparable quality of care when provided virtually (vs in-person) whereas 80% perceived telemedicine as cost-effective. A total of 76% of physicians felt that telemedicine increased flexibility and control over patient care activities, with 36% reporting improved work-life balance and 30% reporting improved burnout symptoms. Overall, 42% preferred using telemedicine over in-person visits when possible. CONCLUSION: Physicians generally had positive attitudes regarding the adoption of telemedicine and perceived that the quality of health care delivery as generally comparable to in-person care. Future studies are needed to explore attitudes regarding telemedicine after the pandemic and how this virtual technology may be further used to improve physicians' professional and personal well-being.

Reducing Blood Loss by Changing to Small Volume Tubes for Laboratory Testing.

OBJECTIVE: To reduce diagnostic blood loss by using small volume tubes for routine laboratory testing throughout the hospital, as blood loss from laboratory testing can be substantial for patients and may lead to hospital-acquired anemia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Diagnostic blood loss was evaluated in hospitalized patients between April 1, 2017, and June 1, 2018. The preintervention, during intervention, and postintervention mean diagnostic blood loss per hospitalized patient was compared across the floors and for each type of tube for hematology, basic metabolic panel, and coagulation tests. Mean hemoglobin levels, blood transfusions per hospitalized patient, and percent redraws were also compared. RESULTS: The total volume of blood drawn for all the 3 tests decreased across each implementation phase; however, only patients admitted to the transplant and critical care (T/CC) units had increased hemoglobin levels. In addition, there was a significant reduction in transfusions across implementation phases. The incidence risk ratio for transfusion reduced even more in patients admitted to the T/CC units. Finally, there was no significant difference in the overall percent redraws across all the units. CONCLUSION: The use of small volume tubes in exchange for standard sized tubes markedly decreased diagnostic blood loss by 25.7% in all the units and 22.9% in the T/CC units. Also, the number of transfusions decreased across units, with the greatest decrease in the T/CC units. An increase in mean hemoglobin levels was observed specifically in patients admitted to the T/CC units, with no corresponding change in percent redraws across all the units.