Comparison of COVID-19 Rates Among In-Person and Virtual Attendees of a National Surgical Society Meeting in the US.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Silver CM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9453540 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Comparison of COVID-19 Rates Among In-Person and Virtual Attendees of a National Surgical Society Meeting in the US.
Silver Casey M CM Joung Rachel H RH Morris Melanie S MS Wang Kasper S KS Ghaferi Amir A AA Bilimoria Karl Y KY Clarke Callisia N CN
JAMA network open 20220901 9
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionMany surgical societies have recently resumed in-person meetings after canceling or adopting virtual formats during the COVID-19 pandemic. These meetings implemented safety measures to limit viral exposure and ensure participant safety. While there have been anecdotal reports of COVID-19 cases after attendance, no large-scale assessments have been undertaken. The objective of this study was to evaluate COVID-19 positivity following an in-person surgical society meeting.MethodsAn online survey was administered to participants of the Society for Asian Academic Surgeons annual meeting, which was held in Chicago, Illinois in September 2021. This survey assessed vaccination status, in-person versus virtual conference attendance, and COVID-19 testing and symptoms in the 7 d immediately following the meeting.ResultsAmong the 220 meeting participants, 173 attended in person (79%). There were 91 survey respondents (41% response rate): 67% attending physicians, 27% trainees, and 6% medical students. Nearly, all (99%) reported being fully vaccinated against COVID-19. COVID-19 testing was sought within 7 d of the meeting by 15% of in-person respondents, and all reported negative results. Among individuals who were not tested, no one reported development of symptoms (cough, shortness of breath, fever, new loss of taste/smell, etc.).ConclusionsAmong in-person attendees of a recent surgical society meeting, no one reported positive COVID-19 testing after the meeting, and individuals who were not tested denied developing symptoms. While these results are encouraging, societies hosting meetings should continue to proactively assess the safety of in-person meetings to promptly identify outbreaks and opportunities for improvement.
| S-EPMC9058023 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8556790 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7479776 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacted breast cancer treatment in 2020. Guidelines initially halted elective procedures, subsequently encouraging less invasive surgeries and restricting breast reconstruction options. We examined the effects of COVID-19 on oncologic breast surgery and reconstruction rates during the first year of the pandemic.MethodsUsing the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, we performed an observational examination of female surgical breast cancer patients from 2017 to 2020. We analyzed annual rates of lumpectomy, mastectomy (unilateral/contralateral prophylactic/bilateral prophylactic), and breast reconstruction (alloplastic/autologous) and compared 2019 and 2020 reconstruction cohorts to evaluate the effect of COVID-19.ResultsFrom 2017 to 2020, 175 949 patients underwent lumpectomy or mastectomy with or without reconstruction. From 2019 to 2020, patient volume declined by 10.7%, unilateral mastectomy rates increased (70.5% to 71.9%, p = 0.003), and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy rates decreased. While overall reconstruction rates were unchanged, tissue expander reconstruction increased (64.0% to 68.4%, p < 0.001) and direct-to-implant and autologous reconstruction decreased. Outpatient alloplastic reconstruction increased (65.7% to 73.8%, p < 0.0001), and length of hospital stay decreased for all reconstruction patients (p < 0.0001).ConclusionsIn 2020, there was a nearly 11% decline in breast cancer surgeries, comparable mastectomy and reconstruction rates, increased use of outpatient alloplastic reconstruction, and significantly reduced in-hospital time across all reconstruction types.
| S-EPMC9088456 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionRural patients face barriers to accessing surgical care and often need to travel long distance for pre- or post-surgical consultations. Although adaptation to the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the efficacy of virtual care, there is minimal data available to evaluate patient satisfaction with this modality and consequent health service utilization if virtual services are not available.MethodsAn online survey was conducted with participants living in rural British Columbia, Canada who had undergone surgery within 12 months of data collection and had either virtual or face-to-face pre- or post-surgical consultations. It was supplemented by an in-person survey administered in two rural sites to all patients who had a virtual visit prior to undergoing procedural care. A ten-point scale was used to assess satisfaction. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected and analyzed.ResultsFindings from the province-wide survey (n = 163) revealed no significant differences in average satisfaction ratings between people with in-person and virtual surgical consultations (8.03 versus 8.38, p = 0.26). However, most participants indicated that virtual appointments saved them time traveling, energy, and money and made them less dependent on others, accruing significant social benefit.In the community-focused sample (n = 71), 38% said they would not have had the procedure without a virtual visit option and 21% said that they would have delayed the procedure. Virtual consultations saved patients an average of 9 h (range 1-90). Participants traveled an average of 427 kilometers round trip to have the procedures.ConclusionFindings reveal costs and time saved in accessing care due to the introduction of pre- and post-operative virtual care visits, and further investments in virtual care are warranted. This will contribute to promoting equitable access to healthcare for rural residents.
| S-EPMC10976493 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the patient experience of a virtual otolaryngology clinic visit to an in-person visit, especially with its significantly increased implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsPatient satisfaction (PS) metrics from the Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey were queried from March 1, 2020 to May 1, 2020 for telehealth visits and January 1, 2020 to March 1, 2020 for in-person visits. Overlapping and comparable questions were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U test, Chi-square test for independence, and Student's t-test.ResultsThere were 1284 partial or complete PS surveys from in-person visits and 221 partial or complete virtual PS surveys. There were statistically significantly worse virtual visit evaluations of provider listening, conveyance of information, likelihood to recommend, and overall provider ratings compared to in-person visits.ConclusionTelehealth has become the new norm for most healthcare providers in the United States. This study demonstrates some of the initial shortcomings of telehealth in an otolaryngology practice and identifies challenges with interpersonal communication that may need to be addressed as telehealth becomes increasingly prevalent.Level of evidence3.
| S-EPMC8174012 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose This article compares applicants' perceptions of and experiences with virtual and in-person interviews for surgical retina fellowship. Methods A survey was distributed via email to all applicants of three vitreoretinal surgery fellowship programs for the 2021 to 2022 and 2022 to 2023 application cycles. Main Outcome Measures Participants were surveyed regarding cost; burden of scheduling; number of applications and interviews completed; ability to gain a true feel of the program, location, and preceptor; and number of work and surgical days missed. Results Of 151 applicants contacted, 36 completed the survey (23.8% response rate). Of the respondents, 25.0% attended only virtual interviews, 19.4% attended mostly virtual interviews, 30.6% attended mostly in-person interviews, and 25.0% attended half virtual and half in-person interviews. Average expenditure was significantly lower for applicants with mostly and completely virtual interviews compared with applicants with mostly in-person and half virtual, half in-person ( p < 0.001). Applicants with mostly virtual interviews reported a lower ability to gain a true perception of the program and the program location ( p = 0.003 and p < 0.001, respectively). There was no difference in burden of scheduling, number of interviews completed, or number of work and surgical days missed. When applicants were asked what type of interview format they would prefer if they could repeat the cycle, those who interviewed mostly in-person largely chose in-person as their preference (72.7%), while participants who interviewed mostly or completely virtually were evenly split between in-person, virtual, and hybrid ( p = 0.136). Conclusion As fellowship programs and institutions decide whether they will return to in-person interviews or maintain a virtual interview format in the long term, they must weigh the lower cost of virtual interviews with the improved ability to gain a more accurate perception of the program and location allowed by in-person interviews, as well as potentially greater satisfaction with the in-person format.
| S-EPMC10697792 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this article, we present the pivotal abstracts presented at the 'AACR Virtual Meeting: COVID-19 and Cancer' held in July 2020. Much is unknown regarding the effect of COVID-19 on cancer patients, and this conference presented important updates in therapeutics and epidemiology. Specifically, cancer therapeutics have been hypothesized to treat cytokine release syndrome in patients with COVID-19, and the JAK1/2 inhibitor, ruxolitinib, is currently being used in a Phase III trial to assess its efficacy. Additionally, similar to other studies, morbidity and mortality in patients with COVID-19 and cancer appear to be worse in older patients and in males. We also present various COVID-19 data related to breast cancer, lung cancer, hematologic malignancies, melanoma and prostate cancer.
| S-EPMC7505016 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8233188 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic, several key issues must be addressed to ensure safe treatment and prevent rapid spread of the virus and a consequential medical crisis. Careful evaluation of a patient's condition is crucial for deciding the triage plan, based on the status of the disease and comorbidities. As functionality of the medical care system is greatly affected by the environmental situation, the treatment may differ according to the medical and infectious disease circumstances of the institution. Importantly, all medical staff must prevent nosocomial COVID-19 by minimizing the effects of aerosol spread and developing diagnostic and surgical procedures. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) screening for COVID-19 infection, particularly in asymptomatic patients, should be encouraged as these patients are prone to postoperative respiratory failure. In this article, the Japan Surgical Society addresses the general principles of surgical treatment in relation to COVID-19 infection and advocates preventive measures against viral transmission during this unimaginable COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC7351651 | biostudies-literature