PURPOSE Telehealth is a care delivery model that promises to increase the flexibility and reach of health services. Our objective is to describe patient experiences with video visits performed with their established primary care clinicians. METHODSWe constructed semistructured, in-depth qualitative interviews with adult patients following video visits with their primary care clinicians at a single academic medical center. Data were analyzed with a content analysis approach. RESULTS:Of 32 eligible patients, 19 were successfully interviewed. All patients reported overall satisfaction with video visits, with the majority interested in continuing to use video visits as an alternative to in-person visits. The primary benefits cited were convenience and decreased costs. Some patients felt more comfortable with video visits than office visits and expressed a preference for receiving future serious news via video visit, because they could be in their own supportive environment. Primary concerns with video visits were privacy, including the potential for work colleagues to overhear conversations, and questions about the ability of the clinician to perform an adequate physical examination.CONCLUSIONS Primary care video visits are acceptable in a variety of situations. Patients identified convenience, efficiency, communication, privacy, and comfort as domains that are potentially important to consider when assessing video visits vs in-person encounters. Future studies should explore which patients and conditions are best suited for video visits. INTRODUCTIONT elemedicine, or telehealth, includes telecommunication via a variety of platforms designed to enhance patient-centered health care.1-3 Telehealth in its many forms offers conveniences including increased care accessibility, decreased transportation barriers, and patient empowerment. [4][5][6][7][8] Studies of video visits have demonstrated these benefits in specialty settings including wound care, prenatal genetic screening, family planning, cardiovascular care, and home care. [9][10][11][12][13][14][15] One study of patient experiences with video visits in rural areas found that they were associated with decreased travel costs and lost time/wages, increased access to social support, and better ability to tailor care delivery to patient and family needs. 16Because of these benefits, video visits are being adopted in a variety of settings. Uptake in the United States has occurred most rapidly where reimbursement is favorable. Medicare reimburses for video visits in health professional shortage areas and for specific approved services.17 As a result, much knowledge about patient experiences with video visits is limited to specific disease-related applications and to use in rural settings. [18][19][20] Video visits are increasingly used in other settings, including primary care, but there are limited data on patient experiences with primary care video visits. One study tested video visits with patients communicating via webcam with their primary care physician w...

BackgroundPrevious studies of drug trials submitted to regulatory authorities have documented selective reporting of both entire trials and favorable results. The objective of this study is to determine the publication rate of efficacy trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in approved New Drug Applications (NDAs) and to compare the trial characteristics as reported by the FDA with those reported in publications.Methods and FindingsThis is an observational study of all efficacy trials found in approved NDAs for New Molecular Entities (NMEs) from 2001 to 2002 inclusive and all published clinical trials corresponding to the trials within the NDAs. For each trial included in the NDA, we assessed its publication status, primary outcome(s) reported and their statistical significance, and conclusions. Seventy-eight percent (128/164) of efficacy trials contained in FDA reviews of NDAs were published. In a multivariate model, trials with favorable primary outcomes (OR = 4.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33–17.1, p = 0.018) and active controls (OR = 3.4, 95% CI 1.02–11.2, p = 0.047) were more likely to be published. Forty-one primary outcomes from the NDAs were omitted from the papers. Papers included 155 outcomes that were in the NDAs, 15 additional outcomes that favored the test drug, and two other neutral or unknown additional outcomes. Excluding outcomes with unknown significance, there were 43 outcomes in the NDAs that did not favor the NDA drug. Of these, 20 (47%) were not included in the papers. The statistical significance of five of the remaining 23 outcomes (22%) changed between the NDA and the paper, with four changing to favor the test drug in the paper (p = 0.38). Excluding unknowns, 99 conclusions were provided in both NDAs and papers, nine conclusions (9%) changed from the FDA review of the NDA to the paper, and all nine did so to favor the test drug (100%, 95% CI 72%–100%, p = 0.0039).ConclusionsMany trials were still not published 5 y after FDA approval. Discrepancies between the trial information reviewed by the FDA and information found in published trials tended to lead to more favorable presentations of the NDA drugs in the publications. Thus, the information that is readily available in the scientific literature to health care professionals is incomplete and potentially biased.

No abstract

IMPORTANCETelehealth has emerged as a means of improving access and reducing cost for medical oncology care; however, use by specialists prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic still remained low. Medical oncology professionals' perceptions of telehealth for cancer care are largely unknown, but are critical to telehealth utilization and expansion efforts. OBJECTIVE To identify medical oncology health professionals' perceptions of the barriers to and benefits of telehealth video visits.

No abstract

PAT utilizing telemedicine reduced overall patient time in the PAT and improved patient satisfaction without increasing the operative case cancellation rate.

No abstract

No abstract