Association between school learning models and psychological and social health visits to the emergency room.

Objectives: We aimed to assess the impact of in-person and distance school learning models on children's visits to the emergency department (ED) for psychological or social ("psychosocial") complaints. Methods: We analyzed presentations to one emergency department in a mid-sized Midwestern city. We used the public school system schedule to determine in-person and distance learning periods by the grade level. We calculated the incidence of visits to the emergency department during academic years 2018-2019, 2019-2020, and 2020-2021, with particular attention to the time after March 13, 2020, which was the pandemic period. We compared the incidence of visits during in-person versus distance learning school models. Results: A total of 7181 visits occurred during the academic years studied, 17.1% due to psychosocial complaints. The incidence of psychosocial visits to the ED was lower during distance learning than during the pandemic in-person learning period (given per 1000 student years: 20.5 vs. 24.1, p = 0.14). This difference was statistically significant among middle schoolers (23.3 vs. 46.6, p < 0.001). While not statistically significant, the difference among high schoolers was pragmatically relevant (38.2 vs. 49.3, p = 0.086). Conclusions: Distance learning was associated with a decrease in the incidence of psychosocial visits to the emergency department relative to in-person learning. Future investigation is required to verify results and better understand any causative relationships.

Comparison of emergency department throughput and process times between male and female patients: A retrospective cohort investigation by the Reducing Disparities Increasing Equity in Emergency Medicine Study Group.

Introduction: Health equity for all patients is an important characteristic of an effective healthcare system. Bias has the potential to create inequities. In this study, we examine emergency department (ED) throughput and care measures for sex-based differences, including metrics such as door-to-room (DTR) and door-to-healthcare practitioner (DTP) times to look for potential signs of systemic bias. Methods: We conducted an observational cohort study of all adult patients presenting to the ED between July 2015 and June 2017. We collected ED operational, throughput, clinical, and demographic data. Differences in the findings for male and female patients were assessed using Poisson regression and generalized estimating equations (GEEs). A priori, a clinically significant time difference was defined as 10 min. Results: A total of 106,011 adult visits to the ED were investigated. Female patients had 8-min longer median length-of-stay (LOS) than males (P < 0.01). Females had longer DTR (2-min median difference, P < 0.01), and longer DTP (5-min median difference, P < 0.01). Females had longer median door-to-over-the-counter analgesia time (84 vs. 80, P = 0.58), door-to-advanced analgesia (95 vs. 84, P < 0.01), door-to-PO (by mouth) ondansetron (70 vs. 62, P = 0.02), and door-to-intramuscular/intravenous antiemetic (76 vs. 69, P = 0.02) times compared with males. Conclusion: Numerous statistically significant differences were identified in throughput and care measures-mostly these differences favored male patients. Few of these comparisons met our criteria for clinical significance.

Association between patients' body mass index and emergency department wait times: A multicenter observational cohort investigation by the reducing disparities increasing equity in emergency medicine (REDEEM) study group.

OBJECTIVE: Numerous studies have demonstrated evidence of obesity bias in healthcare settings, however, little is known about obesity bias in the Emergency Department (ED). The objective of this study was to investigate obesity bias in an ED setting by assessing the association between body mass index (BMI) and door-to-room (DTR) or door-to-provider (DTP) times among ED patients. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of all adult patient (age ≥ 18 years of age) visits to 21 Mayo Clinic and Mayo Clinic Health System EDs between November 1, 2018 and March 31, 2020. We compared DTR and DTP times based on BMI category. RESULTS: We found that median DTR and DTP times for adults with class 3 obesity are significantly shorter than patients in the normal weight category. For men with class 3 obesity, median DTR and DTP times were 7.5% and 5.4% shorter than men in the normal weight category. Relative to women in the normal weight category, the median DTR and DTP times were 4.6% and 3.8% faster for women in obesity class 1, 4.9% and 5.1% faster for women in obesity class 2, and DTR was 4.4% faster for women in obesity class 3. These percentage differences translated to slightly shorter wait times of 0.4-1.2 min compared to median wait times for patients with normal BMI. CONCLUSION: We did not find evidence of longer wait times experienced by people with obesity. Rather, patients with obesity often experienced wait times that were shorter than patients of normal weight.

Rapid adaptation and remote delivery of undergraduate research training during the COVID 19 Pandemic.

COVID-19 continues to alter daily life around the globe. Education is particularly affected by shifts to distance learning. This change has poignant effects on all aspects of academic life, including the consequence of increased mental stress reported specifically for students. COVID-19 cancellations of many summer fellowships and internships for undergraduates across the country increased students' uncertainty about their educational opportunities and careers. When the pandemic necessitated elimination of on-campus programming at Mayo Clinic, a new program was developed for remote delivery. Summer Foundations in Research (SFIR) was drafted around 4 aims: 1) support the academic trajectory gap in research science created by COVID-19; 2) build sustainable scientific relationships with mentors, peers, and the community; 3) create opportunities for participants to share and address concerns with their own experiences in the pandemic; and 4) provide support for individual wellbeing. SFIR included research training, but also training in communication through generative Dialogue and resilience through Amit Sood's SMART program. 170 participants were followed for outcomes in these spaces. Knowledge of and interest in careers involving biomedical research rose significantly following SFIR. Participants' mean confidence levels in 12 Key areas of research rose between 0.08 to 1.32 points on a 7-point scale. The strongest gains in mean confidence levels were seen in designing a study and collaborating with others. SFIR participants demonstrated gains in perceived happiness, and measured resilience and a reduction in stress. Participants' qualitative responses indicated exceptionally positive mentor relationships and specific benefit of both the SMART program and Dialogue.

Rapid Adaptation and Remote Delivery of Undergraduate Research Training during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

When COVID-19 caused worldwide cancellations of summer research immersion programs in 2020, Mayo Clinic rallied to create an alternate virtual experience called Summer Foundations in Research (SFIR). SFIR was designed not only to ensure the continuance of science pathways training for undergraduate scientists but also to support undergraduate mental wellbeing, given the known pandemic stressors. A total of 170 participants took part in the program and were surveyed pre-post for outcomes in biomedical research career knowledge, biomedical research career interest, research skills confidence, and three dimensions of mental wellbeing. Knowledge of and interest in careers involving biomedical research rose significantly following participation in SFIR. The participants' mean research skills confidence also rose between 0.08 and 1.32 points on a 7-point scale across 12 items from the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory. Success in science pathways support was accompanied by positive shifts in participant mental wellbeing. Measurable decreases in stress (Perceived Stress Scale, p < 0.0001) accompanied gains in resilience (Brief Resilience Scale, p < 0.0001) and life satisfaction (Satisfaction with Life Scale, p = 0.0005). Collectively, the data suggest that core objectives of traditional in-person summer research programming can be accomplished virtually and that these programs can simultaneously impact student wellbeing. This theoretical framework is particularly salient during COVID-19, but the increased accessibility of virtual programs such as SFIR can continue to bolster science education pathways long after the pandemic is gone.