Purpose: Telemedicine was rapidly and ubiquitously adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there are growing discussions as to its role postpandemic. Methods and Materials: We surveyed patients, radiation oncology (RO) attendings, and RO residents to assess their experience with telemedicine. Surveys addressed quality of patient care and utility of telemedicine for teaching and learning core competencies. Satisfaction was rated on a 6-point Likert-type scale. The quality of teaching and learning was graded on a 5point Likert-type scale, with overall scores calculated by the average rating of each core competency required by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (range, 1-5). Results: Responses were collected from 56 patients, 12 RO attendings, and 13 RO residents. Patient feedback was collected at 17 new-patient, 22 on-treatment, and 17 follow-up video visits. Overall, 88% of patients were satisfied with virtual visits. A lower proportion of on-treatment patients rated their virtual visit as "very satisfactory" (68.2% vs 76.5% for new patients and 82.4% for follow-ups). Only 5.9% of the new patients and none of the follow-up patients were dissatisfied, and 27% of on-treatment patients were dissatisfied. The large majority of patients (88%) indicated that they would continue to use virtual visits as long as a physical examination was not needed. Overall scores for medical training were 4.1 out of 5 (range, 2.8-5.0) by RO residents and 3.2 (range, 2.0-4.0) by RO attendings. All residents and 92% of attendings indicated they would use telemedicine again; however, most indicated that telemedicine is best for follow-up visits. Conclusions: Telemedicine is a convenient means of delivering care to patients, with some limitations demonstrated for on-treatment patients. The majority of both patients and providers are interested in using telemedicine again, and it will likely continue to supplement patient care.

Ectopic pregnancies are the leading cause of maternal mortality in the first trimester, with an incidence of 5%–10% of all pregnancy-related deaths. Diagnosis of ectopic pregnancies is difficult due to clinical mimics and non-specific symptoms of abdominal pain and vaginal bleeding. The current standard for ectopic pregnancy diagnosis includes ultrasound imaging and β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) monitoring. In addition to β-hCG, serum markers are being explored as a potential for diagnosis, with activin-AB and pregnancy-associated plasma protein A specifically showing promise. Other diagnostic methods include endometrial sampling, with dilation and curettage showing the highest specificity; however, frozen section reduces the diagnostic timeline which may improve outcomes. Treatment options for confirmed ectopic pregnancies include medical, surgical, and expectant management. Chosen treatment methodology is based on β-hCG levels, hematologic stability, and risk of ectopic pregnancy rupture. Current innovations in ectopic pregnancy management aim to preserve fertility and include laparoscopic partial tubal resection with end-to-end anastomosis and uterine artery embolization with intrauterine infusion of methotrexate. Psychological interventions to improve patient mental health surrounding ectopic pregnancy diagnosis and treatment are also valuable innovations. This literature review aims to bring light to current ectopic pregnancy diagnostics, treatments, and future directions.

During the unprecedented workplace disruption from the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health care workers have been particularly vulnerable to increased work-related stress and anxiety. This may have a negative effect on job performance and personal well-being. Personal safety, job security, and childcare needs are essential concerns that must be addressed by health care organizations to ensure stability of its workforce. In addition, workplace morale is also damaged by the many daily changes brought about by social distancing. Thus, opportunities exist for departments to address the loss of social bonding and cohesiveness needed for successful team building. In this report, we describe the efforts of our departmental workplace culture committee during this pandemic.

CRT followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). 60 patients in the consolidation chemotherapy group received two cycles XELOX between CRT and TME, while 84 patients in the standard treatment group without consolidation chemotherapy. Two groups were matched according to age, gender, TNM staging, and ECOG grade. The pCR (ypT0N0), tumor downstaging (ypT0-2N0) after TME and adverse events (AEs) during and post treatment were compared between the treatment groups using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: The consolidation chemotherapy group improved pCR rate (19.3% versus 4.9%, p Z 0.01) and tumor downstaging rate (45.8% versus 24.6%, p Z 0.009) compared to the standard treatment group. After adjustment for clinical tumor stage, clinical nodal stage and time interval to surgery, patients with consolidation chemotherapy were more likely to reach pCR (adjusted odds ratio 4.91, 95%CI 1.01-23.79, p Z 0.048). adverse events (AEs) during and post treatment in the two groups were 54.1% versus 49.3% (p Z 0.57), respectively. In addition, the incidence of any grade 1-2 AEs in the two groups was 93.4% versus 95.1% (p Z 0.93), while the incidence of grade 3 adverse events was 1.6% versus 2.4% (p Z 0.74), respectively. No grade 4 AEs were occurred in two groups Conclusion: Adding neoadjuvant consolidation chemotherapy after CRT significantly improved the pCR rate without increasing during and post treatment in patients with LARC.