Patient Satisfaction with Telehealth at an Academic Medical Center Primary Care Clinic.

Objective: To determine whether the quality of the patient experience differs between video visits and in-person visits for primary care. Methods: Using patient satisfaction survey results from patients who had visits with the internal medicine faculty primary care practice at a large urban academic hospital in New York City from 2018 to 2022, we compared results regarding satisfaction with the clinic, physician, and ease of access to care between patients who attended a video visit and those who attended an in-person appointment. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine if there was a statistically significant difference in patient experience. Results: In total, 9,862 participants were included in analysis. Mean age of respondents attending in-person visits was 59.0; mean age of respondents attending telemedicine visits was 56.0. There was no statistically significant difference in scores between the in-person and telemedicine groups for likelihood of recommending the practice to others, quality of time spent with the doctor, and how well the clinical team explained care. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the telemedicine group compared with the in-person group for ability to get an appointment when needed (4.48 ± 1.00 vs. 4.34 ± 1.04, p < 0.001), how helpful and courteous the person who assisted them was (4.64 ± 0.83 vs. 4.61 ± 0.79, p = 0.009), and ease of reaching the office through phone (4.55 ± 0.97 vs. 4.46 ± 0.96, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This analysis demonstrated parity in patient satisfaction for traditional in-person visits and telemedicine visits in primary care.

Hands down, COVID-19 will change medical practice.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has challenged us to incorporate technology into engaging, interacting with, and caring for patients, using televisits and video conferencing in ways that have previously been resisted or derided.

Prevalence of fatigue among postgraduate trainees in the United States and Japan.

BACKGROUND: The difference in prevalence of fatigue among postgraduate trainees between the United States and Japan is unknown. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey using Iowa Fatigue Scale was administered on postgraduate trainees in two internal medicine residency programs in New York and five postgraduate residency programs in Japan. RESULTS: Of the 393 trainees, 135 (34%) completed the survey. Seventy-seven (57%) were US trainees. Both fatigue (42% vs 81%) and severe fatigue (4% vs 19%) were more prevalent in Japan (P < .01). US trainees felt more productive during work hours but less fatigued. CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue was more prevalent among postgraduate trainees in Japan.