Search

As COVID-19 was declared a health emergency in March 2020, there was immense demand for information about the novel pathogen. This paper examines the clinician-reported impact of Project ECHO COVID-19 Clinical Rounds on clinician learning. Primary sources of study data were Continuing Medical Education (CME) Surveys for each session from the dates of March 24, 2020 to July 30, 2020 and impact surveys conducted in November 2020, which sought to understand participants’ overall assessment of sessions. Quantitative analyses included descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney testing. Qualitative data were analyzed through inductive thematic analysis. Clinicians rated their knowledge after each session as significantly higher than before that session. 75.8% of clinicians reported they would ‘definitely’ or ‘probably’ use content gleaned from each attended session and clinicians reported specific clinical and operational changes made as a direct result of sessions. 94.6% of respondents reported that COVID-19 Clinical Rounds helped them provide better care to patients. 89% of respondents indicated they ‘strongly agree’ that they would join ECHO calls again.COVID-19 Clinical Rounds offers a promising model for the establishment of dynamic peer-to-peer tele-mentoring communities for low or no-notice response where scientifically tested or clinically verified practice evidence is limited.

Persistent gaps exist in healthcare workers' capacity to address HIV and tuberculosis in Asia and Africa due to constraints in resources and knowledge. Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) leverages video-enabled technology to build workforce capacity and promote collaboration through mentorship and case-based learning. To understand current perceptions of ECHO participants and develop a comprehensive evaluation framework for ECHO implementation, we utilized modified appreciative inquiry guided focus group discussions (FGD) in India and Tanzania and called it SCORE (Strengths, Challenges, Opportunities, Results, and Evaluation). Content and thematic analysis of transcripts from FGDs and key-informant interviews triangulated perceptions of diverse stakeholders about ECHO implementation and identified key elements for development of the framework. The perceived strengths (S) were capacity building and establishing communities of practice. The perceived challenges (C) included securing resources, engaging leadership, and building systems for monitoring impact. Improved internet connectivity, addressing logistical challenges, encouraging session interactivity, and having strategic scale-up plans were perceived opportunities (O). Additionally, gathering measurable results (R) led to development of a comprehensive evaluation (E) framework. Contextualizing and facilitating SCORE with qualitative analysis of findings 6-12 months post-ECHO implementation may serve as a best practice to assess mid-course corrections to improve ECHO implementation quality.