Rationale Severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19, and consequent social distancing directives have been observed to negatively impact social relationships but the impact of these changes on the quality of social relationships at a population level has not been explored. Objective To evaluate changes in social relationships in a U.S. population sample during a time of social distancing. Methods We deployed a matched, longitudinal survey design of the National Institutes of Health Adult Social Relationship Scales to assess the social aspects of emotional support, instrumental support, friendship, loneliness, perceived hostility, and perceived rejection from a time without social distancing (February 2018) to a time where social distancing directives were active (May 2020). Changes in social relationships were compared using paired t-tests, and generalized linear regression models were constructed to identify subpopulations experiencing differential changes in each subdomain of social relationships during social distancing. Results Within our sample population, individuals experienced an increased sense of emotional support, instrumental support, and loneliness, and decreased feelings of friendship and perceived hostility during a period of social distancing. Individuals with low self-rated health experienced a decreased sense of emotional support, and females experienced increased feelings of loneliness compared with males. Conclusions Social distancing measurably impacts social relationships and may have a disproportionate impact on females and individuals with lower self-rated health. If novel emergent infectious diseases become more commonplace, social interventions may be needed to mitigate the potential adverse impact of social distancing on social relationships.

Background Myocarditis following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) has been increasingly reported. Incidence rates in the general population are lacking, with pericarditis rather than myocarditis diagnostic codes being used to estimate background rates. This comparison is critical for balancing the risk of vaccination with the risk of no vaccination. Methods A retrospective case series was performed using the Mayo Clinic COVID-19 Vaccine Registry. We measured the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for myocarditis temporally related to COVID-19 mRNA vaccination compared with myocarditis in a comparable population from 2016 through 2020. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of the affected patients were collected. A total of 21 individuals were identified, but ultimately 7 patients met the inclusion criteria for vaccine-associated myocarditis. Results The overall IRR of COVID-19–related myocarditis was 4.18 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.63–8.98), which was entirely attributable to an increased IRR among adult males (IRR, 6.69; 95% CI, 2.35–15.52) compared with females (IRR 1.41; 95% CI, .03–8.45). All cases occurred within 2 weeks of a dose of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, with the majority occurring within 3 days (range, 1–13) following the second dose (6 of 7 patients, 86%). Overall, cases were mild, and all patients survived. Conclusions Myocarditis is a rare adverse event associated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. It occurs in adult males with significantly higher incidence than in the background population. Recurrence of myocarditis after a subsequent mRNA vaccine dose is not known at this time.

Introduction Telehealth service provision has accelerated during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. As the pandemic continues, clinical practices have discovered ways to resume operations. Opportunities exist to understand patient preferences for telehealth clinical services and to tailor offerings to different demographic groups. Methods We conducted a survey of patients receiving telehealth services through our outpatient practice to understand the types of healthcare services for which patients report preferences for telehealth. Results We received 551 survey responses (response rate = 20.8%; 551/2650). More than half of patients indicated being ‘very likely’ to use telehealth services to refill medication(s) (67.3%), prepare for an upcoming visit (66.1%), review test results (60.3%), or receive education (54.2%). Males had lower odds of preferring telehealth services for reviewing test results (odds ratio (OR) = 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.34–0.94) or mental health issues (OR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.38–0.77). Respondents who received a video visit were significantly more likely than those who received a telephone visit to report preferences for using telehealth for education, care plan discussions, long-term health issues, and mental health. Discussion Patient preferences for telehealth services vary by services provided and respondent demographics. Experience with telehealth increases the likelihood for future use of these services.

BackgroundMedicare hospital Value-based purchasing (VBP) program that links Medicare payments to quality of care will become effective from 2013. It is unclear whether specific hospital characteristics are associated with a hospital’s VBP score, and consequently incentive payments.The objective of the study was to assess the association of hospital characteristics with (i) the mean VBP score, and (ii) specific percentiles of the VBP score distribution. The secondary objective was to quantify the associations of hospital characteristics with the VBP score components: clinical process of care (CPC) score and patient satisfaction score.MethodsObservational analysis that used data from three sources: Medicare Hospital Compare Database, American Hospital Association 2010 Annual Survey and Medicare Impact File. The final study sample included 2,491 U.S. acute care hospitals eligible for the VBP program. The association of hospital characteristics with the mean VBP score and specific VBP score percentiles were assessed by ordinary least square (OLS) regression and quantile regression (QR), respectively.ResultsVBP score had substantial variations, with mean score of 30 and 60 in the first and fourth quartiles of the VBP score distribution. For-profit status (vs. non-profit), smaller bed size (vs. 100–199 beds), East South Central region (vs. New England region) and the report of specific CPC measures (discharge instructions, timely provision of antibiotics and beta blockers, and serum glucose controls in cardiac surgery patients) were positively associated with mean VBP scores (p<0.01 in all). Total number of CPC measures reported, bed size of 400–499 (vs. 100–199 beds), a few geographic regions (Mid-Atlantic, West North Central, Mountain and Pacific) compared to the New England region were negatively associated with mean VBP score (p<0.01 in all). Disproportionate share index, proportion of Medicare and Medicaid days to total inpatient days had significant (p<0.01) but small effects. QR results indicate evidence of differential effects of some of the hospital characteristics across low-, medium- and high-quality providers.ConclusionsAlthough hospitals serving the poor and the elderly are more likely to score lower under the VBP program, the correlation appears small. Profit status, geographic regions, number and type of CPC measures reported explain the most variation among scores.

No abstract