In 2022, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)’s Medical Education Community of Practice (MedEdCOP) launched a novel peer-reviewed platform for ID educators to publish chalk talks —concise, high-yield teaching scripts designed for the clinical learning environment. This open-access library enables educators to disseminate their work and offers ready-to-use teaching materials for others to adopt or adapt. We sought to evaluate the impact of chalk talk authorship on contributors' self-assessed teaching skills, professional identity, and connection to the ID education community. Demographic CharacteristicsDemographic Characteristics of Chalk Talk AuthorsFigure 1.Impact of Chalk Talk Authorship on Clinical Teaching Skills by Self-AssessmentChalk talk authors reported a significant improvement in the proficiency of their clinical teaching skills after publishing an IDSA chalk talk (dark purple) compared to before publishing (light purple). Likert scale for skills rating include: 1- Not at all proficient, 2- Minimally proficient, 3- Somewhat proficient, 4- Very proficient, 5- Extremely proficient. * equates p<0.05. N=29. In alignment with best practices in medical education survey design, we developed and distributed an anonymous online survey via Qualtrics LLC. This survey assessed authors' perspectives across the following domains before versus after chalk talk authorship: self-perceived clinical teaching skills, educator identity, value as educators, and sense of connection to IDSA and the MedEdCOP. Paired, two-sided t-tests were used to analyze pre- and post-authorship values. This study was reviewed by the Washington University IRB and classified as exempt.Figure 2.Impact of Chalk Talk Authorship on Professional Identity as a Medical EducatorChalk talk authors reported a significant increase in the degree to which they identified as and felt valued as a medical educator after publishing an IDSA chalk talk (dark purple) compared to before publishing (light purple). Likert scale rating for professional identity includes: 1- Not at all, 2- Minimally, 3- Moderately, 4- Strongly, 5- Very strongly. * equates p<0.05. N=29. Between 2022 and 2024, 60 chalk talks were published by 41 unique authors through two rounds of peer review. Of these, 29 authors (71%) completed the survey (Table 1). Respondents reported statistically significant improvements in self-assessed clinical teaching skills post-authorship (Figure 1). They also experienced strengthened educator identity and greater perceived value as educators (Figure 2). Additionally, 75% reported an increased post-authorship connection to IDSA and the MedEdCOP. Notably, 73% found the experience helpful in demonstrating scholarly contributions. Authorship of IDSA chalk talks meaningfully enhanced participants’ self-assessed teaching skills and professional identity, while fostering a sense of value and community. This initiative supports educational innovation and dissemination, contributes to the recruitment and retention of high-quality educators in infectious diseases, and serves as a model for comparable efforts across IDSA and other professional societies. All Authors: No reported disclosures

Background:Many physician trainees plan pregnancy during residency and fellowship. A study of internal medicine program directors (PDs) demonstrated frequent misinterpretation of American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) leave policies applied to parental leave. The primary aim was to investigate how infectious disease (ID) PDs interpret current ABIM leave policies.Methods:We surveyed 155 ID PDs in an online anonymous questionnaire about knowledge of ABIM leave policies and application toward trainee leaves.Results:Of 155 PDs, 56 (36%) responded to the survey. Nearly 70% incorrectly identified leave limits permitted. A majority mistakenly chose to extend training when a competent fellow was within the allowed duration of leave. PDs reported that the majority of ID trainee maternity/birth parent leaves (60%) were ≤7 weeks and only 7% were ≥12 weeks; 50% of paternity/nonbirth parent leaves were ≤3 weeks.Conclusions:Surveyed ID fellowship PDs often misinterpret ABIM leave policies and apply policies incorrectly when given sample scenarios..

Abstract Background Environmental fungi are threats to personal and public health. Fungal in vitro diagnostics help diagnose invasive fungal infections (IFIs), but clinicians remain underinformed about their use and interpretation. Given the increasing use of social media to share infectious diseases–related content, we designed and implemented a multisite Twitter-based curriculum focused on IFIs and related diagnostics. Methods Questions were posted through a dedicated Twitter account twice weekly over 8 weeks. We surveyed clinicians at 3 US academic centers before and after completion of the curriculum and interviewed a subset of participants. We undertook quantitative and qualitative evaluations and reviewed Twitter analytics. Results We surveyed 450 participants. One hundred twenty-one participants (27%) completed the knowledge assessment precurriculum, 68 (15%) postcurriculum, and 53 (12%) pre- and postcurriculum. We found a significant increase (72% vs 80%, P = .005) in the percentage of correct answers in the pre- versus postcurriculum knowledge assessments. Perceived benefits included a well-executed curriculum that facilitated engagement with appropriately detailed tweetorials from a dedicated Twitter account. Perceived barriers included lack of awareness of tweetorial posts and timing, competing priorities, and the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The Twitter account accrued 1400 followers from 65 countries during the 8-week period. Tweets with multiple-choice questions had a median of 14 904 impressions (interquartile range [IQR], 12 818–16 963), 798 engagements (IQR, 626–1041), and an engagement rate of 6.1% (IQR, 4.2%–6.6%). Conclusions Educators can leverage social media to share content with a large audience and improve knowledge while being mindful of the barriers associated with implementing a curriculum on social media.

Abstract Background Oral abstract presentations (OAP) at national meetings are high visibility opportunities. However, there has not been a formal process for coaching presenters and providing feedback at IDWeek. We led a pilot project pairing ID-trained medical educators with OA presenters for feedback prior to and at IDWeek. Methods A link in IDWeek 2022 OAP acceptances invited presenters to participate in the OAP coaching pilot program (CPP). The link requested demographics, availability of local mentors to provide feedback, and areas of desired feedback for the OAP. Coaches were primarily solicited from the IDSA Med Ed Community of Practice Workgroups to give feedback pre-IDWeek, attend the IDWeek OAP, and provide feedback after. An anonymous survey was sent to presenters and coaches 8 days post-IDWeek. Results 38 presenters (median of 1 (IQR 0, 4) prior national OAP) requested to participate, despite 71% already having feedback available (table 1). Due to coaching pool limitations, presenters with no prior national OAPs and/or without local feedback were prioritized for the CPP. 22 (85%) and 18 (69%) of the 26 coaches and presenters responded to the post-IDWeek survey, respectively (table 2). Presenters and coaches largely overlapped regarding the types of feedback requested and delivered before and at IDWeek (table 3). Presenter qualitative comments highlighted the value provided in improving OAP visual display, delivery, clarity for those unfamiliar with the work, and the presenter’s confidence. Coaches described appreciation for the opportunity to practice providing feedback and feelings of pride and fulfillment in the improvements noted following the feedback. Both presenters and coaches commented on the benefit of meeting new colleagues and building networks. 94% of presenters and 91% of coaches reported professional/personal benefit from the CPP.Table 1:Characteristics of presenters requesting and selected to participate in the IDWeek Oral Abstract Coaching Pilot ProgramTable 2:Demographics of presenters and coaches in the IDWeek Oral Abstract Coaching Pilot ProgramTable 3:Results of IDWeek Oral Abstract Coaching Pilot Program evaluation survey Conclusion This OAP CPP was highly successful, with > 90% of presenters and coaches reporting professional/personal benefit and interest in participating again. In the future, a coach’s guide will be incorporated to increase feedback effectiveness across the desired OAP topics and to augment expansion of the pool of potential coaches. We hope coaching targeting these early career presenters can enhance engagement and recruitment into ID. Disclosures James B. Cutrell, MD, IDSA: stipend as Deputy Editor for Open Forum Infectious Diseases

The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has set clear priorities in recent years to promote inclusion, diversity, access, and equity (IDA&E) in infectious disease (ID) clinical practice, medical education, and research. The IDSA IDA&E Task Force was launched in 2018 to ensure implementation of these principles. The IDSA Training Program Directors Committee met in 2021 and discussed IDA&E best practices as they pertain to the education of ID fellows. Committee members sought to develop specific goals and strategies related to recruitment, clinical training, didactics, and faculty development. This article represents a presentation of ideas brought forth at the meeting in those spheres and is meant to serve as a reference document for ID training program directors seeking guidance in this area.

Abstract Background Rashes are common among patients with infections. A prior survey of United States adult infectious disease (ID) fellowship program directors showed that most respondents (55/90; 61%) do not have a formal dermatology curriculum for their fellows and 76% (41/54) were interested in incorporating an externally produced dermatology curriculum if made available to them. To address this education gap, a “Dermatology for the ID Fellow” curriculum was created. Methods During the 2022-2023 academic year, a “Dermatology for the ID Fellow” curriculum was piloted with the 11 fellows in the Johns Hopkins adult ID fellowship program. The curriculum included two lectures, multiple asynchronous board-style questions, and three knowledge assessments (Figure 1). Curricular objectives were evaluated by pre-, mid-, and post-curriculum knowledge assessments. Descriptive data analysis was performed. This study was IRB exempt. Results The response rates for the pre-, mid-, and post-curriculum knowledge assessments were 91%, 64%, and 55% respectively. The response rate of asynchronous questions averaged 63% across all participating fellows (range 13%-100%). Most fellows correctly identified primary rash morphologies by verbal description (88% correct) and photographs (96% correct). At the end of the curriculum, 50% (4/8) of the fellows ranked their comfort level in approaching cutaneous manifestations of infections as higher than before the curriculum, with 38% (3/8) staying the same. More fellows used a systematic approach to unknown rashes after the curriculum (83%; 5/6) as compared to before the curriculum (30%, 3/10) (Figure 2). There was no improvement in fellows' ability to determine a differential diagnosis based on rash appearance. Overall, 100% of the fellows felt like the lectures presented new and important knowledge. Conclusion Incorporation of a “Dermatology for ID Fellows” curriculum was viewed favorably. The curriculum increased the use of a systematic approach to a rash and helped some fellows improve comfort level in approaching a rash. Data from this pilot curriculum will inform subsequent iterations that may help increase the ability to develop infectious differentials based on rash appearance, addressing an important knowledge gap in ID fellowship training. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Abstract Background Many infectious diseases present with rashes. Despite this, limited data have been published regarding dermatology training in infectious disease (ID) fellowships. We aimed to understand the perceived importance, current effectiveness, and existence of dermatology curricula for ID fellows in the United States (US). Methods Over four weeks in March-April 2022, we emailed US ID fellowship program directors (PDs) individualized links to a Qualtrics survey. Up to two reminder emails were sent. Using NRMP Match Results and Data, we identified 151 PDs. Email addresses were found for 147 PDs. Descriptive data analysis was performed. This study was IRB exempt. Results Response rate was 91/147 (62%). Most PDs (79/91, 87%) felt like it was very-to-extremely important for ID fellows to know basic dermatologic manifestations of infections (Image 1), though 91% (82/90) felt that they were only slightly-to-moderately effective at preparing fellows for this (Image 2). Most (55/90; 61%) programs do not have a formal dermatology curriculum for their fellows. Lack of faculty capacity, lack of reliable resources, and other topics taking priority were most commonly selected as significant barriers to implementing a dermatology curriculum (Image 3). Of the programs that do not have a dermatology curriculum, 76% (41/54) of PDs were interested in incorporating an externally produced dermatology curriculum with synchronous lectures (81%), asynchronous content (78%), and flipped classroom guides (72%) being the most favored educational strategies. For programs that currently have a dermatology curriculum (35/90, 39%), 67% (22/33) of PDs felt their fellows found their current dermatology curriculum very-to-extremely valuable. Conclusion These data indicate that current ID training often does not include formal dermatology-ID training. This data, along with a planned focus group of fellows, will help inform the development of a dermatology-ID curriculum to help address this content gap and improve ID fellowship education. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

To the Editor—The evidence base for antimicrobial stewardship interventions focused only on healthcare worker education is weaker than recommended interventions such as preprescription authorization or postprescription review with feedback. Experts traditionally rank educational training as lower-priority quality improvement or patient safety interventions because these require remembering skills and knowledge rather than changing the system or culture. The 2015 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)/Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) Antibiotic Stewardship Guidelines specifically recommend that passive education interventions be complementary to other antimicrobial stewardship activities.1 However, antimicrobial stewardship education is important and can be effective. Although not recommended as a primary modality, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has said that “education for physicians and other healthcare personnel who prescribe antimicrobials is an essential component of an antimicrobial stewardship program.”2 Educational approaches should not only improve knowledge but also enhance skills and behaviors, encouraging putting antimicrobial stewardship into practice.3 A review showed that interactive practice-based seminars, online modules, motivational interviewing, academic detailing, social media engagement, and engagement of learners from different and training levels have been helpful in reducing antibiotic use.4 Education strategies focused on a specific antimicrobial stewardship goal (for example, multifaceted or syndromespecific interventions) can be successful.5 Facility-specific practice guidelines with a strong implementation and dissemination plan are also recommended as an education-based approach to antimicrobial stewardship.1 Innovative curricula have been particularly effective. An interactive educational seminar for family practitioners focused on communication strategies reduced antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections for 3.5 years.6 An initiative focused on clinicians at multiple training levels led to a sustained improvement in antibiotic prescribing 20months after the intervention.7 The initiative included second year medical students (a tool kit, simulated patient cases, antibiograms, and an app), internal medicine residents (case-based lectures and antibiograms), infectious diseases fellows (interactive antimicrobial stewardship cases in a workshop), and internal medicine attending physicians (a tool allowing internal medicine attending physicians to be antimicrobial stewardship extenders).7 These innovative curricula demonstrate that educational interventions can be important antimicrobial stewardship interventions. However, many antimicrobial stewards are not formally trained in curriculum development, and studies using antimicrobial stewardship educational interventions rarely detail the curriculum development approaches taken. We posit that the absence of grounding in curriculum development principles may limit antimicrobial stewardship educational interventions and that such interventions would be well served by formal curriculum development approaches. Using a formal curriculum development approach in antimicrobial stewardship educational interventions that addresses different levels of learners could increase the impact of interventions. One such approach is the Kern model of curriculum development, which has had extensive application to medical education generally and clinical training specifically.8 The Kern model emphasizes 6 interdependent steps: (1) problem identification and general needs assessment, (2) targeted needs assessment, (3) goals and objectives, (4) educational strategies, (5) implementation, and (6) evaluation and feedback.We present the example of an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) disseminating guideline-basedmanagement of urinary tract infections (UTIs) in acute care. To use the Kern model to implement education on guidelinebased management of UTIs, the ASP should start with the identification of a specific problem, such as ‘Facility-specific UTI treatment guidelines are not incorporated into routine medical practice.’ This identification can be followed by a general needs assessment: What is the ideal way to teach UTI treatment guidelines? How are we currently teaching UTI treatment guidelines? Step 2 involves a local needs assessment, focused on the target audience and their needs and learning environment: Who should our specific learners be? What is their prior training and proficiency in antimicrobial stewardship? What related curricula are planned for them, and how can we collaborate? What hidden curricula or cultural barriers exist? What strategies have worked or not worked in the past? The ASP team could disseminate UTI treatment guidelines dissemination to multiple levels of medical training (eg, students, residents, fellows, attendings, advanced practice providers). Author for correspondence: Sara C. Keller, E-mail: Skeller9@jhmi.edu Cite this article: Keller SC, Nassery N, and Melia MT. (2022). The case for curriculum development in antimicrobial stewardship interventions. Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology, https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2021.251

Abstract Background Many abstracts are submitted to scientific meetings each year. Scholarly work benefits from peer review, yet specific feedback from abstract reviewers is rarely given to authors. Here reviewers provided feedback to all authors who submitted Medical Education abstracts to IDWeek 2021. Methods All IDWeek 2021 abstract reviewers for the Medical Education category were invited to an abstract review instructional webinar and were asked to provide feedback on each assigned abstract in a free text box on the review website. Each submitting author was sent this feedback when informed of their abstract disposition. In October 2021, these authors were sent an email containing a link to a survey soliciting their perspectives on the feedback; the survey included demographic questions and Likert scale questions. Descriptive data analysis was performed. All 10 reviewers participated in one of two virtual, semi-structured focus groups about their experience. Two authors conducted thematic analysis on transcripts. Results Among abstract authors, 18/26 (69%) responded to the survey. All respondents found the feedback helpful. Twelve (67%) incorporated the feedback into their IDWeek presentations. All 14 submitters who plan to write a manuscript intend to incorporate the feedback into that work. Most (94%) would want to receive feedback on future abstract submissions (Figure); all wish other scientific meetings would provide feedback on abstracts. Among reviewers, common themes included that they (1) provided more attentive reviews due to a sense of responsibility to provide thoughtful feedback, (2) found the work rewarding, (3) improved their abstract-reviewing skills, (4) planned to use this experience to help trainees write better abstracts, and (5) felt this activity built community within IDSA. While providing feedback required more time than past reviews, all would volunteer to provide feedback in the future. Conclusion Authors who submitted Medical Education abstracts to IDWeek valued abstract feedback and used it to strengthen their presentations; reviewers found it to be a positive experience and would do it again. IDSA and other societies should consider providing feedback for all abstract categories. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated that Lyme disease is frequently over-diagnosed. However, few studies describe which conditions are misdiagnosed as Lyme disease. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study evaluated patients who lacked evidence for Borrelia burgdorferi infection referred for Lyme disease to a Mid-Atlantic academic center from 2000-2013. The primary outcome is clinically described diagnoses contributing to symptoms. Secondary outcomes included symptom duration and determination whether diagnoses were new or attributed to existing medical conditions. RESULTS: Of 1261 referred patients, 1061 (84%) had no findings of active Lyme disease, with 690 (65%) receiving other diagnoses; resulting in 405 (59%) having newly diagnosed medical conditions, 134 (19%) attributed to pre-existing medical issues, and 151 (22%) with both new and pre-existing conditions. Among the 690 patients, the median symptom duration was 796 days, and a total of 139 discrete diagnoses were made. Infectious disease diagnoses comprised only 3.2%. Leading diagnoses were anxiety/depression 222 (21%), fibromyalgia 120 (11%), chronic fatigue syndrome 77 (7%), migraine disorder 74 (7%), osteoarthritis 62 (6%), and sleep disorder/apnea 48 (5%). Examples of less frequent but non-syndromic diseases newly diagnosed included multiple sclerosis (n = 11), malignancy (n = 8), Parkinson's disease (n = 8), sarcoidosis (n = 4), or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (n = 4). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with long-term symptoms have either new or pre-existing disorders accounting for their symptoms other than Lyme disease, suggesting overdiagnosis in this population. Patients referred for consideration of Lyme disease for chronic symptoms deserve careful assessment for diagnoses other than Borrelia burgdorferi infection. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Abstract Background Many trainees plan pregnancy during fellowship training. A study of internal medicine program directors (PDs) demonstrated frequent misinterpretation of American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) leave policies when applied to parental leave. The ABIM has since attempted to clarify its leave and deficits in training policies. The primary aim of this study was to investigate how infectious disease (ID) program directors interpret the current ABIM leave policies in crafting parental leave for trainees. Methods We surveyed 155 ID program directors in an online, anonymous questionnaire regarding their knowledge of ABIM leave policies and application toward trainees’ leaves of absence. Results 75/155 (48%) of program directors responded to the survey. Most respondents incorrectly identified the leave limits permitted by ABIM policies, and a majority mistakenly chose to extend training when a clinically competent fellow was within their allowed duration of leave.(Figure 1) Most respondents correctly identified that equal time is permitted for both birth and non-birth parent parental leave, however, reported leave durations did not reflect this equity. PDs reported the majority (60.4%) of ID trainee maternity/birth parent leaves at their programs were ≤7weeks and 4.6% were≤3 weeks, while only 7% were≥12 weeks. In contrast, 50% of paternity/non birth parent leaves were ≤3weeks and none were ≥12 weeks. (Figure 2) PDs utilize various strategies to prevent extending training for fellows taking parental leaves that exceed the limits allowed by ABIM policies, including creating “home electives,” though 34% counsel trainees to take “a shorter maternity leave.” Conclusion Fellowship program directors often misinterpret ABIM leave policies, and misapply them when given example scenarios. These findings have clear implications for trainees’ family planning and may lead to shortened parental leaves and inappropriate fellowship training extensions. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

BACKGROUND A safe and effective vaccine to prevent chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a critical component of efforts to eliminate the disease. METHODS In this phase 1-2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we evaluated a recombinant chimpanzee adenovirus 3 vector priming vaccination followed by a recombinant modified vaccinia Ankara boost; both vaccines encode HCV nonstructural proteins. Adults who were considered to be at risk for HCV infection on the basis of a history of recent injection drug use were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive vaccine or placebo on days 0 and 56. Vaccine-related serious adverse events, severe local or systemic adverse events, and laboratory adverse events were the primary safety end points. The primary efficacy end point was chronic HCV infection, defined as persistent viremia for 6 months. RESULTS A total of 548 participants underwent randomization, with 274 assigned to each group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of chronic HCV infection between the groups. In the per-protocol population, chronic HCV infection developed in 14 participants in each group (hazard ratio [vaccine vs. placebo], 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 3.55; vaccine efficacy, -53%; 95% CI, -255 to 34). In the modified intention-to-treat population, chronic HCV infection developed in 19 participants in the vaccine group and 17 in placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% CI, 0.79 to 3.50; vaccine efficacy, -66%; 95% CI, -250 to 21). The geometric mean peak HCV RNA level after infection differed between the vaccine group and the placebo group (152.51×103 IU per milliliter and 1804.93×103 IU per milliliter, respectively). T-cell responses to HCV were detected in 78% of the participants in the vaccine group. The percentages of participants with serious adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS In this trial, the HCV vaccine regimen did not cause serious adverse events, produced HCV-specific T-cell responses, and lowered the peak HCV RNA level, but it did not prevent chronic HCV infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01436357.).

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected many providers, but its impact on Infectious Diseases (ID) fellows in the United States is largely undescribed. In this study, we discuss key issues that emerged from the first national ID Fellows Call with respect to the ID fellow's role during the COVID-19 pandemic, teaching/learning, and research.

Infectious diseases fellows’ futures have been uniquely imperiled by the pandemic. In this article, we issue a call to action to sustain their careers as the future leaders of infectious diseases inquiry.

AbstractBackgroundGraduate Medical Education training programs transitioned to all-virtual recruitment in 2020. Limited data have been published regarding the consequences of this transition. We aimed to understand (1) infectious diseases (ID) fellowship programs’ recruitment efforts and the effect of virtual recruitment on application and interview numbers and (2) the number of programs to which matched applicants applied and interviewed and applicants’ perspectives on virtual recruitment.MethodsIn 2020–2021, we surveyed all US ID fellowship program directors (PDs) and matched applicants. Descriptive data analysis was performed on quantitative survey items. Free-text responses were analyzed through a quantitative content analysis approach.ResultsThe PD response rate was 68/158 (43%); the applicant response rate was at least 23% (85/365). PDs reported a 27% increase in mean number of applications received and a 45% increase in mean number of applicants interviewed compared with the previous year. Applicants especially valued the online program structure information, PD program overview videos, didactic and curriculum content, and fellow testimonials and profiles. Most applicants preferred interviews lasting no more than 40 minutes and interview days lasting no more than 5 hours. Nearly all (60/64, 94%) PDs adequately learned about candidates; most (48/64, 75%) felt unable to showcase their program as well as when in-person. Most PDs (54/64, 84%) and applicants (56/73, 77%) want an option for virtual recruitment.ConclusionsVirtual recruitment enabled programs to accommodate more applicants and highlighted applicants’ preferences for programs’ augmented online presences and time-limited interview days. Most programs and applicants want an option for virtual interviews.

Abstract Background Career mentorship for clinician educators (CE) may be difficult to obtain within one’s home institution. During IDWeek 2018 and 2019, a mentoring program pairing junior faculty pursuing careers as CEs with more experienced CEs from other institutions was found to be feasible and effective. During IDWeek 2020, the program was transitioned to a virtual format. We assessed the feasibility and efficacy of this virtual mentoring program. Methods Junior and established CEs were recruited through the IDSA listserv and Medical Education Community of Practice and paired. Mentees completed an individual development plan (IDP) and identified discussion topics for their meeting. Mentors received training on successful mentoring and their mentee’s IDP and CV prior to meeting. Mentor and mentees met via videoconference for one hour during IDWeek 2020, created an action plan, and scheduled a follow-up call. Post-participation surveys were sent to mentees and mentors. Results 30 mentor and mentee pairs were matched; 1 pair did not meet. Compared to IDWeek 2018 (17) and 2019 (20), the 2020 program had more mentees (30). 24 (80%) mentees completed the pre-session survey; 17 (59%) mentees and 20 (69%) mentors completed the post-session survey. When compared to survey results from mentees in 2018-19 who met in-person, mentees in the virtual format reported similarly high rates of satisfaction, planned to make changes at work, had an increase in confidence, and felt it was a valuable experience (Table 1). Mentors also reported high rates of satisfaction with the experience in 2020 and were likely to participate in the program next year (Table 2). Only 1 (6%) mentee reported that the virtual format negatively impacted their experience, although 6 (30%) mentors reported some negative impact of the virtual format (Table 3). Table 1. Post-session mentee survey responses across 2 in-person years (2018, 2019) compared to the virtual mentoring program (2020) Table 2. Post-session mentor survey responses across 2 in-person years (2018, 2019) compared to the virtual mentoring program (2020) Table 3. Experience of mentees and mentors with the 2020 virtual mentoring program Conclusion A virtual mentoring program for CEs was feasible and as effective for mentees as an in-person format. Some mentors felt that the virtual nature did negatively impact the experience although it had minimal negative impact on mentees. Disclosures David J. Riedel, MD, MPH , Gilead (Advisor or Review Panel member)ViiV (Advisor or Review Panel member) Vera Luther, MD, Nothing to disclose Wendy Armstrong, MD, Nothing to disclose Brian Schwartz, MD, Nothing to disclose

In 2014, trained healthcare provider capacity was insufficient to deliver care to an estimated 70 000 persons in Maryland with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The goal of Maryland Community Based Programs to Test and Cure Hepatitis C, a public health implementation project, was to improve HCV treatment access by expanding the workforce. Sharing the Cure (STC) was a package of services deployed 10/1/14‐9/30/18 that included enhanced information technology and public health infrastructure, primary care provider training and practice transformation. Nine primary care sites enrolled. HCV clinical outcomes were documented among individuals who presented for care at sites and met criteria for HCV testing including risk factor or birth cohort (born between 1945 and 1965) based testing. Fifty‐three providers completed the STC training. STC providers identified 3237 HCV antibody‐positive patients of which 2624 (81%) were RNA+. Of those HCV RNA+, 1739 (66%) were staged, 932 (36%) were prescribed treatment, 838 (32%) started treatment, 721 (27%) completed treatment and 543 (21%) achieved cure. Among 1739 patients staged, 693 (40%) patients had a liver fibrosis assessment score < F2, rendering them ineligible for treatment under Maryland Medicaid guidelines. HCV RNA testing among HCV antibody‐positive people increased from 40% (baseline) to 95% among STC providers. Of 554 patients with virologic data reported, 543 (98%) achieved cure. Primary care practices can effectively serve as HCV treatment centers to expand treatment access. However, criteria by insurance providers in Maryland were a major barrier to treatment.

Abstract Background Effective career mentorship enhances well-being, productivity, and advancement in academic medicine. The pathway to success for clinician educators (CE) is often ill-defined. Career development resources and support for this pathway vary across institutions. To address this need, we created a mentoring program pairing junior faculty pursuing careers as CEs with more experienced CEs from other institutions during IDWeek 2018 and 2019. Methods Prior to IDWeek 2018 and 2019, a survey was sent through the IDSA listserv to identify members pursuing CE careers interested in extra-institutional career mentorship. These faculty were paired with mentors who were established career CEs identified via the IDSA Medical Education Workgroup. Mentees completed a brief individual development plan (IDP) and identified 3 discussion topics. Mentors received the mentee’s IDP and CV prior to IDWeek and were given brief guidance on successful mentoring. One hour advising sessions were held during IDWeek and ended with the creation of a mentee action plan and a scheduled follow-up call. Post-participation surveys were sent to mentees and mentors. Results 31 different mentees and 15 mentors participated in the program over two years. 26 (84%) mentees completed the post-session survey. 25 (96%) mentees and 14 (93%) mentors reported being very satisfied with their meetings at IDWeek. All mentees created an action plan with their mentor. 16 (62%) strongly agreed and 10 (38%) somewhat agreed that they planned to make changes based on the meeting. 21 (81%) mentees strongly agreed they received advice they were unable to get at their own institution. After the session, 18 (69%) strongly agreed they felt connected to a supportive CE community at IDSA; none strongly agreed in the pre-survey. All mentors and mentees agreed that this program was a resource that IDSA should consider expanding. Qualitative response themes from mentees emphasized the usefulness of an external perspective. Conclusion A mentoring program for junior faculty during IDWeek was feasible and effective for CEs. Through these interactions, mentees planned changes to enhance their careers and felt newly supported by the IDSA community. This model could be used for other ID career paths at future meetings. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Background. There is currently no single treatment that mitigates all harms caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Tocilizumab, an interleukin-6 antagonist, may have a role as an adjunctive immune-modulating therapy. Methods. This was an observational retrospective study of hospitalized adult patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The intervention group comprised patients who received tocilizumab; the comparator arm was drawn from patients who did not receive tocilizumab. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality censored at 28 days; secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality at discharge, time to clinical improvement, and rates of secondary infections. Marginal structural Cox models via inverse probability treatment weights were applied to estimate the effect of tocilizumab. A time-dependent propensity score-matching method was used to generate a 1:1 match for tocilizumab recipients; infectious diseases experts then manually reviewed these matched charts to identify secondary infections. Results. This analysis included 90 tocilizumab recipients and 1669 controls. Under the marginal structural Cox model, tocilizumab was associated with a 62% reduced hazard of death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.70) and no change in time to clinical improvement (aHR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.87). The 1:1 matched data set also showed a lower mortality rate (27.8% vs 34.4%) and reduced hazards of death (aHR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.88). Elevated inflammatory markers were associated with reduced hazards of death among tocilizumab recipients compared with controls. Secondary infection rates were similar between the 2 groups. Conclusions. Tocilizumab may provide benefit in a subgroup of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who have elevated bio-markers of hyperinflammation, without increasing the risk of secondary infection.

One of the many challenges that has befallen the Infectious Diseases and Graduate Medical Education communities during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is the maintenance of continued effective education and training of the future leaders of our field. With the remarkable speed and innovation that has characterized the responses to this pandemic, educators everywhere have adapted existing robust and safe learning environments to meet the needs of our learners. This paper will review distinct aspects of education and training of the Infectious Diseases fellows we believe the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted most, including mentoring, didactics, and wellness. We anticipate that several strategies developed in this context and described herein will help to inform training and best practices during the pandemic and beyond.