Newborn Circumcision Techniques.

Newborn male circumcision is a common elective surgical procedure for the removal of foreskin covering the glans penis. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the American Academy of Family Physicians recognize that there are health benefits of newborn male circumcision but do not universally recommend the procedure. Performing male circumcision during the neonatal period has several advantages, including a lower risk of complications, faster healing, and lower cost. The three most common techniques for newborn male circumcision utilize the Mogen clamp, the Gomco clamp, or the Plastibell device. Complications are uncommon and can include bleeding, injury to the penis, adhesions, excessive skin removal, phimosis, and meatal stenosis. Anatomic and medical contraindications may require that the procedure be deferred beyond the neonatal period. Infants with anatomic abnormalities should be referred to a pediatric urologist. Physicians should present information about potential benefits and risks rather than withholding or recommending circumcision. Parents should weigh the health benefits and risks and consider their own religious, cultural, and personal preferences when making the decision.

Assessment of Patient and Provider Satisfaction With the Change to Telehealth From In-Person Visits at an Academic Safety Net Institution During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) caused a global pandemic that forced medical providers to rapidly alter methods of health care delivery. One month into this pandemic, we surveyed providers and patients to assess satisfaction or concerns with the change from in-person visits. METHODS: We surveyed internal medicine (IM) and family medicine (FM) faculty and residents to ascertain satisfaction or concerns with the change to telehealth from in-person visits. RESULTS: Of patients surveyed (129 IM, 94 FM), 84.4% of IM patients and 94% of FM patients agreed or strongly agreed that they enjoyed the televisits, and 82.9% of IM providers (47 surveyed) and 64% of FM providers (25 surveyed) felt the same. For continued televisits, 76.74% of IM patients and 84.1% of FM patients agreed or strongly agreed that they would not mind having virtual visits after the pandemic, compared with 89.44% of IM providers and 88% of FM providers, and 91% of IM providers and 88% of FM providers felt comfortable managing visits virtually. CONCLUSION: Patients are open to the expanded use of telemedicine, and providers and hospital systems should be prepared to embrace it for the benefit of patient care.