Search

Introduction: Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, making more use of remote medical solutions has been advertised. The purpose of this study was to assess the willingness of orthopedic trauma patients to conduct an online video consultation (OVC) during the coronavirus pandemic compared to before. Methods: A survey amongst orthopedic and trauma outpatients from three European trauma centers was conducted via paper-based questionnaires, composed of participants' demographics and five open and closed questions between June and November 2019 and between April and July 2020 during Covid-19. The main outcome was the difference between the cohorts regarding the willingness to use an OVC, reasons for and against usage as well as advantages and disadvantages. Sub-analysis was performed for gender, participants' occupation and three age groups (≤ 30 years; 31–55 years; > 55 years). Results: 1400 participants (780 preCovid-19 and 620 Covid-19) were included. There was no difference in willingness to conduct an OVC between the cohorts (57.6% versus 63.9%; p = 0.053). The highest disposition towards an OVC in both cohorts was seen in patients below 30 years of age, followed by 31–55 years and over 55 years. Women were significantly more likely in the Covid-19-group than in the preCovid-19-group to conduct an OVC (p = 0.032). Use of the OVC for "personal questions to the physician" was more often stated in the Covid-19-cohort (p = 0.007). "No danger of an infection" (p = 0.001) and "availability from anywhere" (p = 0.032) as advantages of an OVC were more often stated in the Covid-19-cohort. "No direct contact with the doctor" (p = 0.001) and "relationship to the doctor could change" (p = 0.024) as disadvantages of the OVC were less often stated in the Covid-19-cohort. Conclusion: The majority of the assessed outpatients would use an OVC. Fear of infections have increased, and direct physical contact is less important since the Covid-19 pandemic, but have not increased the disposition for an OVC significantly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The use of electronic learning formats (e-learning) in medical education is reported mainly from individual specialty perspectives. In this study, we analyzed the implementation level of e-learning formats and the institutional support structures and strategies at an institutional level in a cluster of mid-European medical schools. Methods: A 49-item online questionnaire was send to 48 medical schools in Austria, Germany and Switzerland using SurveyMonkey®. Data were collected between February and September of 2013 and analyzed using quantities, statistical and qualitative means. Results: The response rate was 71%. All schools had implemented e-learning, but mainly as an optional supplement to the curriculum. E-learning involved a wide range of formats across all disciplines. Online learning platforms were used by 97% of the schools. Full-time e-learning staff was employed by 50%, and these had a positive and significant effect on the presence of e-learning in the corresponding medical schools. In addition, 81% offered training programs and qualifications for their teachers and 76% awarded performance-oriented benefits, with 17% giving these for e-learning tasks. Realization of e-learning offers was rewarded by 33%, with 27% recognizing this as part of the teaching load. 97% would use curriculum-compatible e-learning tools produced by other faculties. Conclusions: While all participating medical schools used e-learning concepts, this survey revealed also a reasonable support by institutional infrastructure and the importance of staff for the implementation level of e-learning offerings. However, data showed some potential for increasing tangible incentives to motivate teachers to engage in further use of e-learning. Furthermore, the use of individual tools and the distribution of e-learning presentations in various disciplines were quite inhomogeneous. The willingness of the medical schools to cooperate should be capitalized for the future, especially concerning the provision of e-learning tools and concepts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]