Evaluation of video visit appropriateness for common symptoms seen in primary care: A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about which conditions seen in primary care are appropriate for video visits. This study evaluated video visits compared to office visits for six conditions: abdominal pain, joint pain, back pain, headache, chest pain, and dizziness.

METHODS

Six hundred charts of adult patients from our institution's same-day outpatient clinic were reviewed in this study. Charts for video visits evaluating the aforementioned chief complaints that occurred between August and October 2020 were reviewed and compared with charts for office visits that occurred from August to September 2019. Frequencies of 3-week follow-up visits, Emergency Room visits, imaging, and referrals for office and video visits were measured. Reasons for in-person evaluation for patients seen by video were determined by review of clinician notes.

RESULTS

Three-week in-person follow-up was more frequent for patients presenting with chest pain (52% vs 18%, p = 0.0007) and joint pain (24% vs 8%, p = 0.05) after video evaluation, relative to an office evaluation. Three-week in-person follow-up was also more frequent for patients presenting with dizziness (38% vs 28%) and low back pain (24% vs 14%); however, this difference was not statistically significant. Patients presenting with headache and abdominal pain did not have a higher rate of follow-up.

DISCUSSION

Based on the frequency of in-person follow-up, this study suggests that video visits are generally adequate for evaluating headache and abdominal pain. Patients with dizziness and chest pain have the highest frequency of in-person and Emergency Room follow-up within 3 weeks when first seen by video compared to other conditions evaluated and may be less suitable for an initial video visit. Institutions can consider these findings when scheduling and providing guidance to patients on what type of visit is most appropriate for their symptoms.

A quality-improvement approach to urgent-care antibiotic stewardship for respiratory tract infections during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned

OBJECTIVE

We investigated a decrease in antibiotic prescribing for respiratory illnesses in 2 academic urgent-care clinics during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic using semistructured clinician interviews.

METHODS

We conducted a quality-improvement project from November 2020 to May 2021. We investigated provider antibiotic decision making using a mixed-methods explanatory design including interviews. We analyzed transcripts using a thematic framework approach to identify emergent themes. Our performance measure was antibiotic prescribing rate (APR) for encounters with respiratory diagnosis billing codes. We extracted billing and prescribing data from the electronic medical record and assessed differences using run charts, p charts and generalized linear regression.

RESULTS

We observed significant reductions in the APR early during the COVID-19 pandemic (relative risk [RR], 0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17-0.25), which was maintained over the study period (P < .001). The average APRs were 14% before the COVID-19 pandemic, 4% during the QI project, and 7% after the project. All providers prescribed less antibiotics for respiratory encounters during COVID-19, but only 25% felt their practice had changed. Themes from provider interviews included changing patient expectations and provider approach to respiratory encounters during COVID-19, the impact of increased telemedicine encounters, and the changing epidemiology of non-COVID-19 respiratory infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the decrease in APR was likely multifactorial. The average APR decreased significantly during the pandemic. Although the APR was slightly higher after the QI project, it did not reach prepandemic levels. Future studies should explore how these factors, including changing patient expectations, can be leveraged to improve urgent-care antibiotic stewardship.

Sustained Reduction in Urgent Care Antibiotic Prescribing During the COVID-19 pandemic: An Academic Medical Center’s Experience

We compared antibiotic prescribing before and during the ­coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at 2 academic urgent care clinics and found a sustained decrease in prescribing driven by respiratory encounters and despite transitioning to telemedicine. Antibiotics were rarely prescribed during encounters for COVID-19 or COVID-19 symptoms. COVID-19 revealed opportunities for outpatient stewardship programs.

160. Urgent Care Prescriber Perspectives on Antibiotic Prescribing During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background

Urgent care practices were significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies conducted early in the pandemic demonstrated dramatic decreases in outpatient antibiotic prescribing, particularly amongst agents typically used for respiratory infections. We observed a 33% decline in urgent care antibiotics prescribing during the COVID-19 pandemic in our urgent care clinics. We investigated the prescriber experience to elucidate factors influencing antibiotic use for respiratory conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic at two academic urgent care clinics.

Methods

We employed a mix method approach, first distributing a survey to all full-time prescribers. We then followed up with qualitative interviews (12 of 22 prescribers) which was conducted by a single, trained interviewer using a standardized guide. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Each transcription was independently reviewed and coded by two blinded investigators using standardized themes and adjudicated by a third investigator for stability, robustness, and interrater reliability. Individually, researchers identified and coded key themes and statements. These themes were then discussed as a group and combined where they shared meaning. This project was reviewed and deemed to be non-human subjects research by the Stanford University School of Medicine Panel on Human Subjects in Medical Research.

Results

A total of 20 of the 22 prescribers (13 MDs and 9 APPs) completed the survey (91% response rate). Notably, only 25% of prescribers agreed that COVID-19 had changed their antibiotic prescribing practices for patients with respiratory infections despite objective data that all prescribed less. In the qualitative interviews, we identified four major themes impacting the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing practices as shown in Table 1.

Conclusion

Urgent care prescribers attributed a decrease in antibiotic prescribing during COVID-19 to changes in patient expectations and knowledge base, a switch to telemedicine-based encounters, and changing epidemiology. These shifts could be utilized by outpatient antimicrobial stewardship efforts to sustain low prescribing rates for conditions in which antibiotics are generally not indicated.

Disclosures

Marisa Holubar, MD, MS, Nothing to disclose

Qualitative Assessment of Rapid System Transformation to Primary Care Video Visits at an Academic Medical Center

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic spurred health systems across the world to quickly shift from in-person visits to safer video visits.

OBJECTIVE

To seek stakeholder perspectives on video visits' acceptability and effect 3 weeks after near-total transition to video visits.

DESIGN

Semistructured qualitative interviews.

SETTING

6 Stanford general primary care and express care clinics at 6 northern California sites, with 81 providers, 123 staff, and 97 614 patient visits in 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

53 program participants (overlapping roles as medical providers [n = 20], medical assistants [n = 16], nurses [n = 4], technologists [n = 4], and administrators [n = 13]) were interviewed about video visit transition and challenges.

INTERVENTION

In 3 weeks, express care and primary care video visits increased from less than 10% to greater than 80% and from less than 10% to greater than 75%, respectively. New video visit providers received video visit training and care quality feedback. New system workflows were created to accommodate the new visit method.

MEASUREMENTS

9 faculty, trained in qualitative research methods, conducted 53 stakeholder interviews in 4 days using purposeful (administrators and technologists) and convenience (medical assistant, nurses, and providers) sampling. A rapid qualitative analytic approach for thematic analysis was used.

RESULTS

The analysis revealed 12 themes, including Pandemic as Catalyst; Joy in Medicine; Safety in Medicine; Slipping Through the Cracks; My Role, Redefined; and The New Normal. Themes were analyzed using the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework to identify critical issues for continued program utilization.

LIMITATIONS

Evaluation was done immediately after deployment. Although viewpoints may have evolved later, immediate evaluation allowed for prompt program changes and identified broader issues to address for program sustainability.

CONCLUSION

After pandemic-related systems transformation at Stanford, critical issues to sustain video visit long-term viability were identified. Specifically, technology ease of use must improve and support multiparty videoconferencing. Providers should be able to care for their patients, regardless of geography. Providers need decision-making support with virtual examination training and home-based patient diagnostics. Finally, ongoing video visit reimbursement should be commensurate with value to the patients' health and well-being.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Stanford Department of Medicine and Stanford Health Care.

Impact of a Family Medicine Minor Procedure Service on Cost of Care for a Health Plan

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Academic medical centers (AMC) are among some of the most expensive places to provide care. One way to cut costs is by decreasing unnecessary referrals to specialists for procedures that can be provided by well-trained primary care physicians. Our goal is to measure the financial impact of an office-based minor procedure service driven entirely by family physicians.

METHODS

We examined claims data for procedures performed on patients insured under our AMC's home-grown accountable care organization-style health plan (Stanford Health Care Alliance [SHCA]). Descriptive statistics was used to compare the volume and cost of procedures performed by family medicine (FM) versus specialty care (SC). We preformed a subanalysis of SC procedures to explore the degree to which consultation and facility fees increased costs for SC. We used mathematical modeling to estimate the impact on cost of care if procedures were shifted from SC to FM and to calculate a return on investment (ROI).

RESULTS

Our data set examined 6,974 outpatient procedures performed on SHCA patients from 2016-2018 at a cost of $5,263,720 to SHCA. FM performed 6% of procedures at an average cost of $236 per procedure, while SC performed 94% of procedures at an average cost of $787 per procedure. FM saved money for all 12 types of skin, musculoskeletal, and reproductive procedures assessed; the average saved per procedure was $551. This represents a 70% cost savings. ROI was 2.33; for every $1 spent on FM procedures, SHCA saved $2.33.

CONCLUSION

A family medicine minor procedure service significantly lowered health spending at our AMC.

Impact of Scribes on Physician Satisfaction, Patient Satisfaction, and Charting Efficiency: A Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Scribes are increasingly being used in clinical practice despite a lack of high-quality evidence regarding their effects. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of medical scribes on physician satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and charting efficiency.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial in which physicians in an academic family medicine clinic were randomized to 1 week with a scribe then 1 week without a scribe for the course of 1 year. Scribes drafted all relevant documentation, which was reviewed by the physician before attestation and signing. In encounters without a scribe, the physician performed all charting duties. Our outcomes were physician satisfaction, measured by a 5-item instrument that included physicians' perceptions of chart quality and chart accuracy; patient satisfaction, measured by a 6-item instrument; and charting efficiency, measured by time to chart close.

RESULTS

Scribes improved all aspects of physician satisfaction, including overall satisfaction with clinic (OR = 10.75), having enough face time with patients (OR = 3.71), time spent charting (OR = 86.09), chart quality (OR = 7.25), and chart accuracy (OR = 4.61) (all P values <.001). Scribes had no effect on patient satisfaction. Scribes increased the proportion of charts that were closed within 48 hours (OR =1.18, P =.028).

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, we have conducted the first randomized controlled trial of scribes. We found that scribes produced significant improvements in overall physician satisfaction, satisfaction with chart quality and accuracy, and charting efficiency without detracting from patient satisfaction. Scribes appear to be a promising strategy to improve health care efficiency and reduce physician burnout.

Are Kenyan healthcare workers willing to receive the pandemic influenza vaccine? Results from a cross-sectional survey of healthcare workers in Kenya about knowledge, attitudes and practices concerning infection with and vaccination against 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1), 2010

Over 1200 cases of 2009 pandemic influenza A H1N1 (pH1N1) have been identified in Kenya since the first case in June 2009. In April 2010 the Kenyan government launched a program to immunize high-risk groups and healthcare workers (HCWs) with pH1N1 vaccines donated by the World Health Organization. To characterize HCWs' knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding pH1N1 vaccination, we conducted a quantitative and qualitative survey in 20 healthcare facilities across Kenya between January 11 and 26, 2010. Of 659 HCWs interviewed, 55% thought there was a vaccine against pH1N1, and 89% indicated that they would receive pH1N1 vaccine if it became available. In focus group discussions, many HCWs said that pH1N1 virus infection did not cause severe disease in Kenyans and questioned the need for vaccination. However, most were willing to accept vaccination if they had adequate information on safety and efficacy. In order for the influenza vaccination campaign to be successful, HCWs must understand that pH1N1 can cause severe disease in Kenyans, that pH1N1 vaccination can prevent HCWs from transmitting influenza to their patients, and that the vaccine has been widely used globally with few recognized adverse events.