Breslin, Lauren

Introduction Medical students experience higher rates of distress and burnout compared with their age-similar peers overall. Coaching has been proposed as one means of combating distress and burnout within the medical profession. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesise the current evidence on the effects of coaching interventions on medical student well-being, including engagement, resilience, quality of life, professional fulfilment and meaning in work and distress, including burnout, anxiety and depressive symptoms. Methods and analysis We will conduct a systematic review of interventional and observational comparative studies that assess the effects of coaching interventions on well-being, including engagement, resilience, quality of life, professional fulfilment and meaning in work and distress, including burnout, anxiety and depressive symptoms among undergraduate medical students internationally. We will search PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase (OVID), PsycINFO (OVID), Scopus, ERIC, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (OVID) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (OVID) from their respective inception dates using the following search terms: (medical students OR medical student OR undergraduate medical education) AND (coach OR coaching OR coaches). Studies in any language will be eligible. Studies that report one or more outcomes of distress or well-being among medical students who receive a coaching intervention will be included. Data on participant and intervention characteristics, outcomes and instruments used will be collected as well as quality/risk of bias assessments. Two reviewers will screen studies against the inclusion criteria and perform data extraction. We will conduct a narrative synthesis, with meta-analysis if evidence permits quantitative pooling of results. Heterogeneity of results across studies according to study design, learner level and study risk of bias will be evaluated, as well as publication bias. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required for this review. Results will be disseminated by publication in a scientific journal. PROSPERO registration number CRD42022322503.

ImportanceThere was a shift in patient volume from in-person to video telemedicine visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.ObjectiveTo determine the concordance of provisional diagnoses established at a video telemedicine visit with diagnoses established at an in-person visit for patients presenting with a new clinical problem.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis is a diagnostic study of patients who underwent a video telemedicine consultation followed by an in-person outpatient visit for the same clinical problem in the same specialty within a 90-day window. The provisional diagnosis made during the video telemedicine visit was compared with the reference standard diagnosis by 2 blinded, independent medical reviewers. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine factors significantly related to diagnostic concordance. The study was conducted at a large academic integrated multispecialty health care institution (Mayo Clinic locations in Rochester, Minnesota; Scottsdale and Phoenix, Arizona; and Jacksonville, Florida; and Mayo Clinic Health System locations in Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota) between March 24 and June 24, 2020. Participants included Mayo Clinic patients residing in the US without age restriction. Data analysis was performed from December 2020 to June 2021.ExposuresNew clinical problem assessed via video telemedicine visit to home using Zoom Care Anyplace integrated into Epic.Main Outcomes and MeasuresConcordance of provisional diagnoses established over video telemedicine visits compared against a reference standard diagnosis.ResultsThere were 2393 participants in the analysis. The median (IQR) age of patients was 53 (37-64) years; 1381 (57.7%) identified as female, and 1012 (42.3%) identified as male. Overall, the provisional diagnosis established over video telemedicine visit was concordant with the in-person reference standard diagnosis in 2080 of 2393 cases (86.9%; 95% CI, 85.6%-88.3%). Diagnostic concordance by International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision chapter ranged from 64.7% (95% CI, 42.0%-87.4%) for diseases of the ear and mastoid process to 96.8% (95% CI, 94.7%-98.8%) for neoplasms. Diagnostic concordance by medical specialty ranged from 77.3% (95% CI, 64.9%-89.7%) for otorhinolaryngology to 96.0% (92.1%-99.8%) for psychiatry. Specialty care was found to be significantly more likely than primary care to result in video telemedicine diagnoses concordant with a subsequent in-person visit (odds ratio, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.24-2.30; P < .001).Conclusions and RelevanceThis diagnostic study of video telemedicine visits yielded a high degree of diagnostic concordance compared with in-person visits for most new clinical concerns. Some specific clinical circumstances over video telemedicine were associated with a lower diagnostic concordance, and these patients may benefit from timely in-person follow-up.

Importance: Adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) are twice as likely as their peers without disabilities to have had a physical exam in the past year; however, as a result of challenging behavior during office visits, they are significantly less likely to have received recommended health screenings. Challenging behaviors in clinical settings have been identified as a barrier to providing adequate care for this population. Objective: This scoping review examined the within-session effects of multisensory environments (MSEs) on people with IDD to determine the clinical utility of MSEs for this population. Data Sources: Studies published between January 1, 2000, and August 1, 2018, were identified using Summon and Google Scholar. Study Selection: Studies were included in the review if they systematically collected and reported data on within-session effects of an MSE intervention on people with IDD. Findings: Thirteen studies met criteria for this review: 4 with Level I evidence, 2 with Level II evidence, 3 with Level III evidence, and 4 with Level IV evidence. Studies examined the effects of MSEs on maladaptive behaviors, positive behaviors, distress and discomfort, activity and alertness states, and cost of care for people with IDD. Conclusion and Relevance: Preliminary support was found for the use of MSEs in clinical settings to reduce anxiety and challenging behaviors in patients with IDD during clinical care. Further research is needed to determine the efficacy of MSEs for producing the effects described in this review. What This Article Adds: The findings support the potential of MSEs as a tool that occupational therapy practitioners can use to support their clients with IDD who have sensory sensitivities in clinical settings. This article also highlights a multidisciplinary approach whereby medical providers and occupational therapy practitioners could work together in nontraditional ways to support this population.