Furst, Joseph W.

Over 37% of pregnant women report excessive daytime sleepiness or hypersomnia during the first trimester, and commonly throughout the remaining trimesters of pregnancy and the postpartum period. The clinical presentation and symptoms of central disorders of hypersomnolence (CDH) such as narcolepsy, idiopathic hypersomnia, or excessive daytime sleepiness secondary to shift work or obstructive sleep apnea may be confounded by physiological changes in sleep architecture and hormonal fluctuations occurring during pregnancy. These overlapping features may cause delays in diagnosis and treatment, impacting quality of life, maternal functioning, and overall health. Management of CDH during pregnancy and lactation requires careful consideration of maternal benefits, potential side effects of medications and fetal and neonatal safety. Here, we present a case of idiopathic hypersomnia and detail management and outcomes during pregnancy and lactation. We briefly review the existing literature on prevalence, pathophysiological mechanisms, diagnostic challenges, objective findings, and risks posed by CDH in pregnancy and lactation. In this narrative review for primary care clinicians, we also summarize currently available evidence regarding the efficacy, teratogenic and other risks of pharmacologic agents used in the treatment of CDH in pregnancy and lactation. Lastly, we provide a clinical algorithm for management of CDH during pregnancy and lactation.

Objective: Compare demographics, treatment, and follow-up rates for patients with complaints of vulvovaginitis suggestive of candida infection evaluated via e-visit, face-to-face (F2F) visits, or nurse-administered phone protocol. Methods: Manual review of 150 vaginitis visits of each visit type (e-visit, F2F, and phone protocol) completed between May 5, 2018 through January 31, 2020 by Mayo Clinic patients residing in Minnesota. Outcomes: Comparison between the three visit types of patient characteristics, treatment rates, type of treatment, follow-up rates, and types of follow-up. Results: Patients utilizing phone visits were significantly older than those seeking care via e-visit ( p < 0.0001) or F2F ( p = 0.001) and were more likely to be treated with oral fluconazole than those treated by e-visit ( p < 0.0001) or F2F ( p < 0.0001) encounters. Patients were significantly less likely to receive fungal directed treatment at a F2F visit than an e-visit ( p < 0.0001) or phone encounter ( p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in follow-up rates between the three groups. Conclusion: Virtual visits (non-F2F) for suspected vulvovaginal candidiasis are unlikely to result in more follow-up visits than F2F encounters; however, prescriptions for antifungals are significantly higher with virtual visits.

Introduction: The once-in-a-generation COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the pace at which virtual care (VC) was advanced to triage, evaluate, and care for patients. An early adopter of VC delivery, Mayo Clinic had provided video visits and other remote care options for more than 5 years, yet the need for VC during the pandemic surpassed our available capacity for telehealth care. Methods: To continue providing high-quality care while preventing exposure of patients and staff to high-risk environments, staff from Primary Care and Express Care (minor acute services) collaborated to expand the outpatient VC service to triage patients with acute or chronic symptoms and to address concerns that could be managed remotely. We aimed to maximize the treatment options available outside of high-cost settings and also aimed to accelerate development of longer-term solutions for improving care coordination and continuous population management. Results: Patient use of virtual visits showed an unprecedented increase after changes were implemented that expanded the existing virtual visit menu, facilitated patient self-triage and direct scheduling, streamlined physical connections for virtual appointments, and incorporated additional language (medical interpreter) support. The combination of patient convenience, ease of scheduling, and added safety for providers and patients, in conjunction with other telehealth options, resulted in a better overall patient experience. Conclusion: Any organization that is considering deploying a sustainable program of VC must put patient needs and safety at the center. Organizations should seize opportunities to agilely adjust and advance any emergency-response solutions to serve a longer-term purpose.

Although U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved and CLIA-waived point-of-care (POC) molecular systems are being implemented in routine clinical practice, instrument reliability, test performance in the hands of end users, and the potential for environmental contamination resulting from use of POC molecular systems have not been extensively evaluated.

Objective The objective of this research paper is to compare antibiotic treatment, follow-up rates, and types of follow-up encounters among eVisits, phone calls, and in-person encounters for pediatric conjunctivitis. Study design A retrospective chart review of pediatric patients evaluated for conjunctivitis between May 1, 2016 and May 1, 2017, was performed. A total of 101 eVisits, 202 in-person retail clinic visits, and 202 nurse phone calls for conjunctivitis were manually reviewed for outcomes. Exclusion criteria included previous encounter for conjunctivitis in the past 14 days, treatment with an oral antibiotic at the initial encounter, or patient outside Minnesota at the time of encounter. Comparison among the three encounter types with regard to follow-up rates, follow-up encounter type within 14 days of initial evaluation, and prescribing rates was performed. Results Patients completing non-face-to-face encounters were significantly more likely to have follow-up care (34.6% and 45.5%) than those who had a face-to-face visit at the retail clinic (7.4%), p ≤ 0.0001. Patients initially evaluated by eVisit were more likely to have follow-up at the retail clinic while patients initially evaluated by phone call were more likely to have follow-up in their primary care office. Treatment rates with antibiotics were significantly higher in phone call encounters (41.6%) than in eVisits (25.7%) or face-to-face encounters (19.8%), p < 0.0001. Conclusions Non-face-to-face visits have significantly higher rates of follow-up when compared to face-to-face encounters. Antibiotic prescribing is greater with phone call triage encounters; however, there was no significant difference in antibiotic prescribing rates between eVisits and face-to-face visits. Follow-up type varied according to site of initial encounter.

AbstractRationale, aims and objectivesAchieving control over elevated lipid parameters, particularly low‐density lipoprotein (LDL)‐cholesterol, is an acknowledged quality indicator in primary care. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)'s model for investigation of outbreaks (person–place–time) can be applied to the analysis of quality indicators.MethodsA sample of 322 family medicine patients for whom lipid levels were ordered was extracted. LDL > 100 mg/dL was cross‐tabulated by personal characteristics [age group, gender, body mass index (BMI), diagnoses], month (time) and ordering department (place).ResultsAge (except one age category), gender, time and location were not related to LDL > 100 mg/dL after adjustment for covariates. All levels of BMI above normal elevated the risk of LDL > 100 mg/dL [BMI 25–29.9: odds ratio (OR) = 3.41, confidence interval (CI) = 1.61–7.23, P = 0.0014; BMI 30–34.9: OR = 2.93, CI = 1.28–6.70, P = 0.0109; BMI ≥ 35: OR = 2.75, CI = 1.19–6.37, P = 0.0181]. Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and diabetes mellitus (DM) were at reduced risk for LDL > 100 mg/dL (CAD: OR = 0.47, CI = 0.24–0.91, P = 0.0254; DM: OR = 0.28, CI = 0.14–0.55, P = 0.0002).ConclusionAn outbreak investigation model is useful for analysing variations in this quality indicator. Patients with higher BMI and those not diagnosed with CAD or DM type I/II may be considered for intensified lipid lowering using quality improvement efforts. These might include counselling for lifestyle changes or medication therapy depending upon their calculated cardiac risk.