Background New York City was the international epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. Health care providers responded by rapidly transitioning from in-person to video consultations. Telemedicine (ie, video visits) is a potentially disruptive innovation; however, little is known about patient satisfaction with this emerging alternative to the traditional clinical encounter. Objective This study aimed to determine if patient satisfaction differs between video and in-person visits. Methods In this retrospective observational cohort study, we analyzed 38,609 Press Ganey patient satisfaction survey outcomes from clinic encounters (620 video visits vs 37,989 in-person visits) at a single-institution, urban, quaternary academic medical center in New York City for patients aged 18 years, from April 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020. Time was categorized as pre–COVID-19 and COVID-19 (before vs after March 4, 2020). Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests and multivariable linear regression were used for hypothesis testing and statistical modeling, respectively. Results We experienced an 8729% increase in video visit utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the same period last year. Video visit Press Ganey scores were significantly higher than in-person visits (94.9% vs 92.5%; P<.001). In adjusted analyses, video visits (parameter estimate [PE] 2.18; 95% CI 1.20-3.16) and the COVID-19 period (PE 0.55; 95% CI 0.04-1.06) were associated with higher patient satisfaction. Younger age (PE –2.05; 95% CI –2.66 to –1.22), female gender (PE –0.73; 95% CI –0.96 to –0.50), and new visit type (PE –0.75; 95% CI –1.00 to –0.49) were associated with lower patient satisfaction. Conclusions Patient satisfaction with video visits is high and is not a barrier toward a paradigm shift away from traditional in-person clinic visits. Future research comparing other clinic visit quality indicators is needed to guide and implement the widespread adoption of telemedicine.

No abstract

No abstract

Further study is required to determine if Pilates can actually treat pelvic floor dysfunction.

I.

No abstract

Our aim was to determine the cost-effectiveness of a policy of elective C-section for macrosomic infants to prevent maternal anal incontinence, urinary incontinence, and newborn brachial plexus injuries. We used a decision analytic model to compare the standard of care with a policy whereby all primigravid patients in the United States would undergo an ultrasound at 39 weeks gestation, followed by an elective C-section for any fetus estimated at > or =4500 g. The following clinical consequences were considered crucial to the analysis: brachial plexus injury to the newborn; maternal anal and urinary incontinence; emergency hysterectomy; hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion; and maternal mortality. Our outcome measures included (1) number of brachial plexus injuries or cases of incontinence averted, (2) incremental monetary cost per 100,000 deliveries, (3) expected quality of life of the mother and her child, and (4) "quality-adjusted life years" (QALY) associated with the two policies. For every 100,000 deliveries, the policy of elective C-section resulted in 16.6 fewer permanent brachial plexus injuries, 185.7 fewer cases of anal incontinence, and cost savings of $3,211,000. Therefore, this policy would prevent one case of anal incontinence for every 539 elective C-sections performed. The expected quality of life associated with the elective C-section policy was also greater (quality of life score 0.923 vs 0.917 on a scale from 0.0 to 1.0 and 53.6 QALY vs 53.2). A policy whereby primigravid patients in the United States have a 39 week ultrasound-estimated fetal weight followed by C-section for any fetuses > or =4500 g appears cost effective. However, the monetary costs in our analysis were sensitive to the probability estimates of urinary incontinence following C-section and vaginal delivery and the cost estimates for urinary incontinence, vaginal delivery, and C-section.

Severe symphyseal rupture during vaginal delivery can be managed without surgery. Risk factors for rupture are not well defined. Based on a literature review, there is a significant risk of repeat symphyseal rupture with subsequent vaginal delivery.