A qualitative exploration of medical students’ placement experiences with telehealth during COVID-19 and recommendations to prepare our future medical workforce

Background Clinical practice is increasingly being digitalised. Little is known about how medical students learn and were exposed to telehealth during COVID-19. This is particularly important if we wish to further improve healthcare access and equity in rural areas and vulnerable populations. This formative study sought to explore the exposure and attitudes of medical students on telehealth and COVID-19 during their rural clinical placement in 2020 and provide recommendations. Methods Focus groups were held in August 2020 after completion of a 12-month rural placement. Questions centred around students’ exposure and experiences with telehealth during COVID-19. Data was analysed using thematic analysis. Results There has been a clear shift in students now acknowledging the importance of telehealth and, more importantly, expressing a clear wish for telehealth to be embedded in the curriculum starting in their first year. In tandem with this, students expressed the need for their clinical supervisors or hospital teams to have the capability to practice telehealth efficiently as this will improve the telehealth experience and lead to better engagement for both staff and students. Furthermore, it was felt that rural clinicians should play a lead role in telehealth implementation given it is integral to rural practice. Conclusions Medical students are more exposed to and more interested to learn about telehealth since COVID-19 and wish to see telehealth training built into their curriculum from the outset of medical school. Themes that emerged from this formative study can potentially assist in planning for telehealth education during and post COVID-19 and inform further telehealth research. Embedding telehealth skills training and guidelines into the medical program, and particularly rural medicine training programs, is essential to prepare the future medical workforce to ensure access and quality patient care during pandemics and also to improve access for rural Australians.

POS0063-PARE IMPLEMENTING SHARED DECISION MAKING TO ADVANCE PATIENT CENTRED RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS CARE: A ROLE FOR A PATIENT ORGANISATION

Background:In rheumatoid arthritis (RA) care, patients and professionals face treatment decisions regularly due to the high number of treatment options, the chronic character of the disease and challenges around multi-morbidity. Recent studies have underlined the added value of shared decision making (SDM) between patients and professionals in RA care for health outcomes (i.e. disease activity, pain and joint damage) 1-4. Therefore, effort is needed to facilitate the implementation of SDM in daily clinical practice in order to advance patient centred RA care.Objectives:The aim of this implementation project was to improve SDM about treatment options for patients with RA. In addition the use of (Patient Reported) Outcome Measures in the process of SDM was taken into account.Methods:An implementation programme was developed by the National Association ReumaZorg Nederland (RZN) in co-creation with patientpartners and RMD professionals. Three hospital departments of rheumatology in the Netherlands participated in the project between January 2020 and March 2021. The implementation of SDM was supported by a project team of RZN.Results:The implementation programme started with the recording of RMD consultations in three participating departments of rheumatology. The consultations were then evaluated on the process of SDM (OPTION5) and discussed during the training of professionals that followed. Three observed improvements in SDM in RA care were: a. A more explicit introduction of choice for a patient is needed during the consultation; b. Tasks within the process of SDM should be allocated clearly among RMS specialists and nurses working together, in order to avoid unnecessary repetition of the same - or even inconsistent information; c. Besides the use of (patient reported) outcome measures in the SDM process, it is also important to include patients’ values (what matters to them?) when deciding on the best fitting treatment option. After the training, implementation support for SDM was given and aids to support the SDM process (i.e. redesign of health care processes, task allocation, hand card with explanation of the 4 steps of SDM) were developed. The implementation programme was tailored to the needs and stage of change for each hospital. Implementation materials for the hospital teams were developed in co-creation with patientpartners and the professionals. At the end of the project, a second set of consultations was recorded and evaluated on SDM. The hospital teams concluded that a continuous improvement cycle is needed to further enhance SDM.Conclusion:A continuous implementation programme on shared decision making could stimulate the enhancement of patient centred care in daily practice. Patient organisations could take a significant role in such a programme.References:[1]Pablos JL et al. Patient. 2020 Feb;13(1):57-69.[2]Fautrel B et al. Rheumatol Int. 2018 Jun;38(6):935-947. doi: 10.1007/s00296-018-4005-5.[3]Mathijssen EGE et al. RMD Open. 2020 Jan;6(1):e001121. doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2019-001121.[4]Nota, I. 2017. Shared Decision-Making in rheumatology: What matters to patients? Thesis, University of Twente.Acknowledgements:This project of the National Association ReumaZorg Nederland (RZN) was made possible thanks to the effort of the following patientpartners, RMD specialists and researchers within the field of RMDs:Helene R Voogdt-Pruis, (AP PhD, RZN projectmanager Shared Decision Making within RMD care), Bertha Maat (RZN patient research partner), Theo Foekens (RZN patient research partner), Laura Kranenburg-van Koppen (MD, Msc, rheumatologist Erasmus and IJsselland Medical Centre), Annelieke Pasma (PhD, researcher Erasmus Medical Centre), Jos Hoes (MD PhD, rheumatologist Bravis Medical Centre), Inge Schoonen-Nuijten (RMD nurse, Bravis Medical Centre), Marijke van den Dikkenberg, (MSc, researcher Maasstad Medical Centre), Natalja Basoski (MD MSc, rheumatologist Maasstad Medical Centre), Angelique Weel-Koenders (Prof. Dr., rheumatologist Maasstad Medical Centre, Erasmus University), Gerardine Willemsen- de Mey (MSc, Chair of RZN).Disclosure of Interests:None declared.

Abstract P120: The Covid Effect on Stroke Response

Background & Significance: The Covid-19 pandemic has created a host of challenges for healthcare systems and hospital teams that have put unprecedented stress on staff and leaders to re-design care and management of not only the Covid positive patient but also the hospitalized non-Covid patient. As this large healthcare system began to prepare for a Covid surge of patients, stroke program leaders recognized the need for alternative placement and management plans. With the re-designation of units and beds and deployment of staff into non-primary units, program leaders were concerned with not only placement of stroke patients outside of regular stroke and Neurocritical Care Units but also with non-trained stroke nursing staff caring for the patient. In response, this stroke program convened a working group to create alternative guidelines for care of the stroke patient during Covid surge and critical bed shortages. Design & Methods: The need for established criteria to guide all sites in the care of patients post IV thrombolytic or mechanical thrombectomy was the key objective. The alternative guideline was drafted and submitted to the system Covid clinical command center for emergent approval. Once approval given, education was provided to all stroke coordinators and key leaders at each site. To provide full access, guidelines were posted and available on the system SharePoint site for access to all team members. Results: The drafting of alternative stroke guidelines allowed for improved patient safety during our 27-hospital healthcare systems Covid surge. Care of multiple patients occurred outside normal critical care and stroke units with a decreased number of assessments for patients from the standard, pre-Covid and without increase safety events or adverse outcomes. The success of the alternative guidelines and this Covid effect on stroke care management not only helped our staff and patients during a time of need in safe care but also provided a new model of care for our stroke program leaders to consider and implement across our organizations.

Work of a paediatric bioethics centre during the COVID-19 pandemic first phase

ObjectivesDecisions with an ethical component have been controversial during the COVID-19 pandemic, whether leaked intensive care unit (ICU)-rationing documents, transfer of people to care-homes to ‘protect the National Health Service’ or the duty to treat patients despite inadequate personal protective equipment. To counter criticism of ethics per se, and to help those planning ethics support we describe the practical work of a children’s hospital bioethics team in supporting children, families and clinicians during this unprecedented period.Design/settingThree phases of activity: (i) preparation: we composed several documents to support/guide hospital teams and, together with colleagues, provided them to regional inpatient, community and hospice settings. We adapted existing mechanisms to combat workforce moral injury; (ii) activity (March–June 2020): was highest in our rapid response service where children/families consider difficult treatment decisions with medical teams. Education provided ‘pandemic webcasts’ on decision-making and broader child-health concerns. Staff support was essential, especially for those deployed to overwhelmed local adult ICUs. Research ascertained young people’s views on the pandemic; (iii) reflection: focussed on (a) research about future re-deployment to adult services and minimisation of moral distress/injury, (b) remote video-conferencing—parents’/participants’ experience/ability to consider complex ethical issues and (c) role of faith/non-faith in society’s recovery and children’s views.Main outcome/conclusionsOur bioethics team’s role during the pandemic included: case reviews via video-conferencing, many involving innovative therapy for severely unwell children with COVID-19/Paediatric-Inflammatory-Multisystem Syndrome-Temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 together with their parents; processes to protect healthcare staff from moral harm and research/educational activity focused on paediatric-specific ethical arising during the pandemic.

Episiotomy practices in France: epidemiology and risk factors in non-operative vaginal deliveries

Episiotomy use has decreased due to the lack of evidence on its protective effects from maternal obstetric anal sphincter injuries. Indications for episiotomy vary considerably and there are a great variety of factors associated with its use. The aim of this article is to describe the episiotomy rate in France between 2013 and 2017 and the factors associated with its use in non-operative vaginal deliveries. In this retrospective population-based cohort study, we included vaginal deliveries performed in French hospitals (N = 584) and for which parity was coded. The variable of interest was the rate of episiotomy, particularly for non-operative vaginal deliveries. Trends in the episiotomy rates were studied using the Cochran-Armitage test. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with episiotomy according to maternal age and parity. Between 2013 and 2017, French episiotomy rates fell from 21.6 to 14.3% for all vaginal deliveries (p < 0.01), and from 15.5 to 9.3% (p < 0.01) for all non-operative vaginal deliveries. Among non-operative vaginal deliveries, epidural analgesia, non-reassuring fetal heart rate, meconium in the amniotic fluid, shoulder dystocia, and newborn weight (≥ 4,000 g) were risk factors for episiotomy, both for nulliparous and multiparous women. On the contrary, prematurity reduced the risk of its use. For nulliparous women, breech presentation was also a risk factor for episiotomy, and for multiparous women, scarred uterus and multiple pregnancies were risk factors. In France, despite a reduction in episiotomy use over the last few years, the factors associated with episiotomy have not changed and are similar to the literature. This suggests that the decrease in episiotomies in France is an overall tendency which is probably related to improved care strategies that have been relayed by hospital teams and perinatal networks.

Hospital deaths dashboard: care indicators

ObjectivesWe wanted to create a medical/nursing led data collection tool to allow for an ongoing audit of the quality of deaths in a teaching hospital. We wanted to be able to produce a visual summary to monitor our involvement, use of PRN medication, recognition of death, treatment escalation plans and communication aspects. We feel these are good surrogate indicators for quality end-of-life care.MethodsWe designed a purpose built spreadsheet which we have designed as an abbreviated version of the UK national audit tools. We involved a number of our core medical trainees to iterate the data collection so it could be done in a timely manner with a simple training guide. Our collective approach meant we have made this as straightforward as possible to roll out and maintain data collection.ResultsWe collected 100 cases over a period of 6 months (August 2019 to January 2020). We created a dashboard looking at the core elements of end-of-life care and found bar treatment escalation planning all aspects were completed the majority of the time with near 100% communication to relevant family and friends.ConclusionsOur sample collection tool provides a useful ongoing indicator for the quality of end-of-life care in the trust and to provide a timely infographic quarterly to feedback to interested members of the trust. We hope to be able to continue over some years to collate themes and trends. We would encourage other hospital teams to adopt our approach.

Abstract 391: Telemetry Talk: A Quality Improvement Initiative To Decrease Inappropriate Telemetry Use

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to identify the percentage of inappropriate telemetry and reduce inappropriate use via a multidisciplinary interventional approach. Background: Nationally studies have demonstrated that up to 43% of telemetry orders are inappropriate and do not change patient outcomes or clinical decision making. Overuse may also lead to unnecessary diagnostic workup, hospital costs, clinical duties, and even hospital divert status. Methods: Using the AHA guidelines and the TUH official policy, we created an updated table of appropriate telemetry indications (Table 1). We used the Epic telemetry column to identify active orders. Then, each patient’s chart was reviewed to determine whether the order was appropriate."We reviewed all active telemetry orders on our medicine services over four days. Results: Teaching services had 72/140 (51%) inappropriate orders while direct-care services had 4/19 (21%) inappropriate orders (Table 2). "Subspecialty teaching services had 10/15 (67%) inappropriate orders. Discussion: Inappropriate telemetry use is a systems-based, multidisciplinary problem requiring interventions at multiple levels Our goal was to reduce overall inappropriate telemetry use from 49% to 35% At our center, interventions underway include: Posting the indications on workstations, Encouraging “Time out for Tele!” review on rounds, Educating hospital teams, Additional Epic modifications. Conclusions: Inappropriate telemetry use on medicine services at our institution is higher than national averages. We increased physician awareness of orders and performed education on appropriate use. We plan to re-assess telemetry use at interval periods to assess for improvement.