The cultural effects of the COVID pandemic can still be felt reverberating through society. One of the positive effects, in my opinion, was the sudden boost to remote technology – connecting remotely for meetings and other uses through Zoom or a similar application. This development has been a little controversial, but I think on the whole has been a net positive, especially as we move into the era of voluntary remote connections and hybrid meetings.

Prior to the pandemic having a hybrid or remote meeting was still the exception rather than the rule. We were slowly progressing in this direction, but it was still uncommon and looked upon with suspicion. For example, my wife obtained her PhD through a hybrid online program (partly online, partly in person). This worked well and was very convenient, considering we live in CT and the program is based in Oregon. But she definitely faced some professional headwinds in terms of acceptance of the concept of online learning. At K-12 schools remote learning was essentially not a thing.

While virtual meetings were already a thing, they too were not routine. For me personally, for example, all of my meetings, lectures, rounds, and workshops were in person. There wasn’t even an option to attend remotely. This is despite the fact that we have the technology. Grand rounds, for example, was streamed to an outside location where some of our physicians work so that they could attend.

Clinically there was a lot of discussion about virtual office visits, and again we saw the beginnings of this technology and very tentative explorations. Mostly this was used to provide expert-level consultations to remote areas or local hospitals lacking such experts. For routine use, however, it was non-existent, and there were many bureaucratic obstacles, such as state licensing rules and insurance reimbursement.

Then, of course, COVID hit and the world was forced to do as much as possible remotely. This partly worked and partly failed, based at least partly on infrastructure and execution. Looking back now it seems the K-12 remote learning experience was a bad one. Keep in mind, this was still a complex situation. Many teachers had to say out of work because they tested positive for COVID, so school was going to be negatively impacted no matter what we did. And we don’t know what would have happened if all schools remained open in terms of the pandemic itself. But we definitely did underestimate the negative impact of forced online schooling. But a lot of this was due to the fact that many schools and homes were simply not prepared, and you can’t simply run a class online. The experience has to be designed and optimized for being online.

Now that we are post pandemic, we appear to be settling into the best of both worlds – a hybrid situation where voluntary use of remote presence when appropriate. My hope is, this will continue and we will gain more experience and comfort with remote meetings to gain the advantages while minimizing the disadvantages.

For learning some types of content are actually better online. I attend many lectures remotely, and they are great. You have the slides right on your computer, with a inset picture of the lecturer. You can type questions, or ask them live. I have also given such lectures online, and this too can work very well. However, there are types of classes that don’t work online, those that function more like workshops. If you need a lot of interaction with the audience, Zoom can be a problem. It’s hard to know if someone is paying attention, and it can be challenging to direct questions to individual attendees. Physical presence does have it’s advantages.

For small meetings virtual setups, I think, are optimal. Everyone can see and hear everyone and it’s easy to share desktops and content. Clinically, telehealth is also idea for some types of encounters, but not for others. If all I need to do is talk to my patient, give them orders or prescriptions, and document everything in the chart, telehealth is ideal. If I need to examine them, then they need to come in.

This is why the hybrid situation we are evolving towards is ideal. Even for individual meetings, some people can be present while others attend remotely. I think one thing we learned is that having the option for remote attendance is great to have and is an important way to level the field for everyone. Some patients, for example, have a really hard time physically getting into the office for a visit – they need to arrange transportation, take time off from work or home responsibilities, and navigate with sometimes severe physical limitations. Contrast this to sitting on your couch, or going into a break room at work, and just connecting on your phone for 10 minutes. The convenience and efficiency gain is massive, and leads to better medical care. These same patients have a high risk of no-showing to appointments because they could just not make it in.

For business meetings, conferences, and learning experiences, having the option to attend remotely helps individuals who have child care responsibilities, who would otherwise be at a disadvantage in terms of professional progress.

Not to mention, there is a large environmental benefit to hybrid conferences. If the longest-distance speakers or attendees can attend remotely, that reduces long-distance travel.

What all this means is that we now have an opportunity to move forward from COVID rather than go back. I hope that those parts of the experience that were negative will not dissuade people from continuing to support remote meetings. It should now become routine and normalized to allow for hybrid and remote access to all types of conferences and meetings. Content should be designed to work remotely, as well as in person. The advantages are just too great to ignore and let slip away. This begins with realizing that we are not talking about the forced experience of the pandemic, but a hybrid voluntary experience that is optimized for everyone.