COVID-19 Pandemic Adversely Affects the Provision of Desired Newborn Circumcision: Perinatal Physician Perspectives

Over half of boys in the United States undergo circumcision, which has its greatest health benefits and lowest risks when performed during the newborn period under local anesthesia. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected delivery of patient care in many ways and likely also influenced the provision of newborn circumcisions. Prior to the pandemic, we planned to conduct a qualitative study to ascertain physician perspectives on providing newborn circumcision care. The interviews incidentally coincided with the onset of the pandemic and thus, pandemic-related changes emerged as a theme. We elected to analyze this theme in greater detail. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with perinatal physicians in a large urban city from 4/2020 to 7/2020. Physicians that perform or counsel regarding newborn circumcision and physicians with knowledge of or responsibility for hospital policies were eligible. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and qualitative coding was performed. Twenty-three physicians from 11 local hospitals participated. Despite no specific COVID-19 related questions in the interview guide, nearly half of physicians identified that the pandemic affected delivery of newborn circumcision care with 8 pandemic-related sub-themes. The commonest sub-themes included COVID-19 related changes in: (1) workflow processes, (2) staffing and availability of circumcision proceduralists, and (3) procedural settings. In summary, this qualitative study revealed unanticipated COVID-19 pandemic-related changes with primarily adverse effects on the provision of desired newborn circumcisions. Some of these changes may become permanent resulting in broad implications for policy makers that will likely need to adapt and redesign the processes and systems for the delivery of newborn circumcision care.

Physician Perspectives on the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Family-Centered Rounds

BACKGROUND The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has required modifications to family-centered rounds (FCR), although the specific changes and the effects on patients, families, and providers are not well known. In this study, we explore physician perspectives on changes made to FCR during the initial wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and recommendations for the future. METHODS Semistructured individual interviews were conducted with 20 pediatric attending and resident physicians who cared for hospitalized patients between March and May 2020 on pediatric hospital medicine and subspecialty services that typically perform FCR. Transcripts were reviewed by using principles of framework analysis to iteratively develop a codebook. Review of coded segments, with attention to code co-occurrences, was used to clarify themes in the data relating to the research objective and the conceptual framework. RESULTS The rounding format changed for all providers and varied on the basis of clinical service and phase of the pandemic. Themes highlighted specific areas of change: (1) the process of FCR, (2) reaching consensus with families, (3) collaboration with members of the medical team, and (4) resident education, modeling, and supervision. Participants offered recommendations, including standardization of rounds, intentional involvement of nursing staff, and inclusion of families through virtual or small-group bedside rounds. CONCLUSIONS The pandemic led to a variety of modifications to FCR, and these changes had varied effects on communication and education. These findings provide insight into the state of FCR during the pandemic and may frame future recommendations for the development of shared guidelines for circumstances requiring limited bedside rounding.

Resident Perspectives on Palliative Care at an Urban Teaching Hospital

Background There has been an increasing need to address end of life (EOL) care and palliative care in an era when measures to extend life for terminal illnesses are often initiated without consideration of quality of life. Addressing the barriers for resident physicians to initiate EOL conversations with patients is an important step towards eliminating the disconnect between patient wishes and provider goals. Purpose To assess resident physician perspectives on initiating palliative care conversations with terminally ill patients at an urban teaching hospital. Methods This paper solicited the experiences of pediatric, general surgery, and internal medicine residents through an anonymous survey to assess exposure to palliative care during training, comfort with providing palliative care, and barriers to implementing effective palliative care. Results 45% of residents reported exposure to palliative care prior to medical training. Ninety-three percent of these residents reported being formally introduced to palliative care during medical training through formal lecture, although the majority reported also being exposed through either small group discussions or informal teaching sessions. Time constraints and lack of knowledge on how to initiate and continue conversations surrounding EOL care were the greatest barriers to effectively caring for patients with terminal illnesses. Residents concurred that either attending physicians or hospital-designated palliative care providers should initiate palliative care discussions, with care managed by an interdisciplinary palliative care team; this consensus demonstrates a potential assumption that another provider will initiate EOL discussions. Conclusions This study evaluated the current state of physician training in EOL care and provided support for the use of experience-based training as an important adjunct to traditional didactic lectures in physician education.

Physician Perspectives on Codeine Accessibility, Patterns of Use, Misuse, and Dependence in Saudi Arabia

In Saudi Arabia, there are concerning rates of non-compliance with pharmaceutical regulations prohibiting the pharmacy dispensing of prescription-only medications without a physician prescription. This is the first study in the Middle East which examines physicians’ perceptions regarding misuse of codeine, listed as a narcotic, controlled, and prescription-only drug. The CODEMISUSED survey was adapted to the Saudi Arabian context and pilot tested, prior to cross-sectional administration to physicians in Riyadh, Jeddah, Abha, and Jazan (n = 105). Descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentage) present physician level of agreement, neutrality, and disagreement with statements regarding codeine prescribing, patient awareness and use, online and community pharmacy availability, and dependence. The study indicates concern by physicians regarding patient intentional use of codeine to enhance mood, misuse patterns, lack of awareness around habit-forming use and iatrogenic dependence, and sourcing via illegal dispensing. It underscores the imperatives to address pharmacy compliance with pharmaceutical regulatory controls, implement enhanced pharmacovigilance, and improve awareness around safe use.