Articles Posted in Clinical guidelines

HouseGregoryHouse-276x300Doctors, nurses, and hospitals should stop ignoring colleagues who act like jerks because obnoxious physicians—think of  Dr. Gregory House, the TV internist—may hurt patients, especially in surgery.

Researchers, who published a study in the JAMA Surgery, looked at two years of quality care data from seven medical centers, involving 800 surgeons and 32,000 adult patients. They also had information on physicians with “unsolicited patient observations,” meaning complaints from those undergoing care and their friends and families.

Stat, the online health information site, summarizes what the researchers found:

http://www.protectpatientsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/69/2016/09/Food_and_Drug_Administration_logo.svg_-300x129.pngTo hear some powerful proponents tell it, Uncle Sam needs to really hurry up the government’s approval of drugs and medical devices. He’s got to make oversight over them easier, lighter, and less complex.

But consider just some of the health news in recent days:

nhlDo the leaders of professional hockey need to spend some time in the penalty box? It might seem so based on a report in the New York Times that the National Hockey League, as it battles its own players in court over the harms caused by repetitive head injuries, is adopting the dubious legal playbook used by pro football, Big Tobacco and Big Sugar.

The $4-billion-a-year NHL, it seems, has taken off its mitts, thrown them on the ice, and is throwing blows to challenge the ever-mounting, evidence-based research that finds that concussions are detrimental to brain health and can lead to the disease known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy or CTE.

The National Football League, after years of CTE denial, including efforts to undercut its medical science and to attack its researchers, conceded that repeated head trauma harmed its players, and pro football settled with them for more than $1 billion.

harlanYes, there can be progressive steps in health care—and with all the controversy and change going on in the sector it’s worth spotlighting some of these:

Patients should get access to own health records, researchers say

  • Three researchers—Dr. Harlan Krumholz of Yale Medical School (photo right), Connecticut lawyer Jennifer L. Cox, and Yale student Austin W. Jaspers—deserve credit for publishing a pointed opinion piece in the JAMA Internal Medicine detailing the costs and needless obstacles patients confront when they want copies of their own health records. As Krumholz told Reuters of the study’s message about excessive records fees charged by doctors and hospitals:  “Higher costs are a higher barrier for people to get their own information. Without that information it is not possible to correct errors in the record, get informed second opinions, donate your data to research – or share with others what is happening with your care.”  That’s spot on, doctor, as I have written recently and in my book,  The Life You Save: Nine Steps to Getting the Best Medical Care, and Avoiding the Worst. Uncle Sam has stepped in and tried to make it easier and more affordable for patients to get their own records, which Krumholz and company point out should be even more available now that they are digitized (he’s working on software to help, too). But states aren’t doing enough to help, except for Kentucky, which requires a free first copy on request, he and his colleagues say. My firm’s site contains information that may be helpful to those struggling to get their records. Here’s hoping that doctors, hospitals, and other caregiving facilities read the Jaspers, Cox, and Krumholz viewpoint, and, because it appears in one of their publications and Krumholz is a physician-researcher of growing influence, they heed it more.

skepticism-image-197x300At one point, medical experts recommended that physicians aggressively treat patients 60 and older so the top number of their blood pressure readings ran as close as possible to 140. Maybe not so, anymore. For a while, physicians were told to treat patients so their “good cholesterol” increased significantly. But maybe this approach doesn’t protect against heart disease after all. Pediatricians once warned parents to protect newborns by not exposing them to certain allergens, especially peanuts. If you haven’t had your head buried in the sand, that counsel, of course, has just changed 180 degrees.

Thanks are due to Aaron E. Carroll, a pediatrician, health research and policy expert, and columnist with the New York Times “Upshot” feature, for reminding — yet again, as repetition is the Mother of Learning — that medical news must be taken in by patient-consumers with a “dose of healthy skepticism.” This he says is especially true about reports on nutrition.

I’ve written about the harms that result from hype and the many, sometimes dramatic reverses in health and medical news. I’ve pointed out that there are accessible resources, such as the excellent healthnewsreview.org, to watchdog coverage of medical science and so-called advances. I’ve suggested that patient-consumers look closely at key elements in research stories, including how the work was done, how long the study ran, whether its data is visible and if it was published in a reputable medical journal. This will help savvy readers look askance, even at pieces in quality news sites — such as recent articles touting turmeric or eating lots of hot peppers.

pthiel-200x300Although attention has focused on the GOP-promised repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act, other big changes also are afoot in the federal government that will have significant effects on health care in this country.

There are appointments pending from President Trump at the federal Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sonny Perdue, the administration’s pick for Agriculture secretary, also will play a big public health role, as will the personnel decisions that may be made at the troubled National Institutes of Health, where, for now, Francis Collins will continue to lead.

Will the FDA be run by a venture capitalist?

Female_black_symbol-200x300Modern medicine isn’t addressing women’s distinctive health care needs as optimally as needed, with research further showing it may be time to dial down expectations about breast cancer screening, while heightening physicians’ awareness and best practices in eliminating gender biases.

Women also may want to keep close tabs on how changes with the Affordable Care Act affect them, and they may be well-served to remind themselves about Texas’ sudden surge in maternal deaths and one of health care’s major, gender-based debacles in hormone treatments for females.

Over-treatment tied to mammograms

Cattle-300x219What happens on farms in Georgia and Oregon or ranches in Texas and Wyoming has a direct and significant effect on how healthy hospitalized patients stay in Buffalo, Baltimore, or Los Angeles. And now federal regulators have put in full effect a big change to help protect humans’ well-being by ensuring medically important antibiotics don’t get squandered in agriculture, where they’re used mainly to make livestock bigger and more profitable for farmers and ranchers.

Under new federal Food and Drug Administration regulations, antibiotics that are used to treat people and their diseases cannot be fed to animals principally to promote their growth. Before such drugs can be added to feed, a veterinarian now must approve and supervise their use—a new step that will make them more expensive and inconvenient.

Animal consumption of antibiotics has soared in recent years. Even with growing pressure from public health officials concerned that the medications’ germ-fighting capacities are diminishing due to over-use, American farmers and ranchers increased their antibiotic purchases by 2 percent in 2015 versus the year previous, federal data show. Growers pumped 9.7 million kilograms of the valuable bug-fighting drugs into cattle, pigs, and chickens destined for American kitchens and dining tables.

med-records-300x200In the best of all worlds, none of us will need any time soon to race to a nearby urgent care center or to pop by the retail, walk-in clinics that have sprouted in neighborhood drug stores across the country. But if you do find yourself at one of these “doc-in-a-box” clinics, here is some good advice. A lot of this applies to regular doctor visits, too.

A tip of the hat to Dr. Peter Ubel, who posted recently at Forbes and KevinMD.com, the physician information-sharing site, his suggestions of a half dozen “essentials” that patient-consumers might need to know before a retail clinic visit. He based these on positions taken by the American College of Physicians and published in the peer reviewed  Annals of Internal Medicine.

Ubel says “doc in a box” operations (retail clinics, often staffed with physician assistants or nurses) are suitable for low-level, ordinary treatment for things like poison ivy or sore throat. When patients go to these clinics, they need later to fully inform their doctors about the care they got (see the next paragraph). They shouldn’t take referrals to specialists from staff at walk-in clinics. The facilities are OK for patients who are “relatively healthy,” and who don’t have a “complex medical history,” meaning they lack chronic or difficult conditions. Patients with greater challenges need to see their own doctors, regularly if need be. Ubel calls out his colleagues, noting that if they were more responsive to their patients, or figured out alternatives when they can’t, docs in boxes wouldn’t be flourishing as they are.

peanutsAlthough many of us would like nothing better than to dote on a favorite baby all day long, medical experts have offered some surprising turnarounds and concessions for the new year about what they do and don’t know about infant care-giving.

They have made a 180-degree reversal on their advice to parents on dealing with the rising problem of peanut allergies, while also suggesting that a familiar product may be more useful than thought to combat a common skin woe. And they have said that 90 percent of the medications given to newborns aren’t approved for such uses by the federal Food and Drug Administration.

Feed the baby peanuts, docs now say

Patrick Malone & Associates, P.C. listed in Best Lawyers Rated by Super Lawyers Patrick A. Malone
Washingtonian Top Lawyer 2011
Avvo Rating 10.0 Superb Top Attorney Best Lawyers Firm
Contact Information