Categories

Tag: Quality

QUALITY/PHYSICIANS: Just what we need now, another grandstanding politician on end of life issues

I’ve been having a backchat email with the people from the Tenet Shareholders Committee. They are enjoying the legal  attack on the Louisiana physician who is supposed to have performed a mercy killing or provided ample pain medication at Tenet’s Memorial Hospital a little too much for my taste. Admittedly they are so opposed to Tenet that this one is too easy for them. But I doubt this one has anything to do with Tenet, which frankly didn’t do much to help its patients (HCA was a little more honorable).

But where the hell was the Louisiana or New Orleans AG (or for that matter any other level of government) when desperate physicians, nurses and patients needed help? Absolutely effing nowhere. A humane person wouldn’t leave a dog to slowly die or drown in the 105 degree heat, let alone another human. And it seems to me that in absolutely desperate circumstances, Dr Anna Pou did what she felt was best for those patients.Yet six months later a grandstanding DA gets his jollies off by sending physicians and nurses on trial for homicide.

This is total bullshit. A series of studies in the 1990s showed that physicians routinely ignored DNR orders. I don’t recall any of them being prosecuted, but they probably caused more harm and inflicted way more distress on patients than Dr. Pou would have done under any normal circumstances…..and let us not forget—those were anything but normal circumstances. If I was a patient there suffering with no water, no power,and no hope other than suffering a long agonizing death—I’d have been very grateful for the relief Dr. Pou’s care would have given me in my final hours.

And now we’re going to send her to jail?!

 

QUALITY/PHYSICIANS: Klein on malpractice

Ezra Klein has written a pretty good state of play about Medical Malpractice over at Slate. As you know I’m all for putting the solution for malpractice within the context of an overall medical error/practice guideline/EBM policy. Of course, politically the AMA and the docs are being used by the “tort reform” lobby who don’t give a rat’s arse about doctors or patients but are using them as sympathetic front men in their campaign to make corporate malfeasance unpunishable by any branch of government. So politically I wish the Democrats would sell out the trial lawyers on this one and work towards a wider solution (as Ezra suggests they might do). Not very likely of course, but slightly more plausible than the AMA cutting a deal, or the Republicans doing the right thing.

QUALITY/PHARMA: Someone’s going to get fired at the DEA for sure

The WSJ writes about a serious scientific study of the hallucinogen in magic mushrooms.  As you might expect virtually all of the participants thought that the sessions had a very powerful effect and 60% of the clinical trial participants said that effect was very positive indeed. But 30% of the cases felt incredibly bad effects, largely increasing paranoia. That’s not much of a surprise—people react differently to different drugs. The researchers are interested in seeing if these drugs (and presumably others like MDMA/Ecstasy) have value in treating psychiatric cases.

What’s amazing is that someone in the DEA signed off and allowed this research. After all, this is a substances banned for hysterical political reasons and, like LSD its synthetic equivalent, no one is pretending that they’re not very powerful. Of course the government does allow equally powerful psychotropic drugs to be widely used and dispensed with a false pretense that somehow their use is morally different.

The main differentiator is of course what the government will allow to go through clinical trials. Now that an approved trial of one class of banned drugs that may have a positive effect has been allowed, how can the DEA justify the continued delays in granting permissions for real trials of another banned drug that we all know has significant medicinal qualities? They can’t justify it morally or rationally or even legally, but they certainly continue to raid medical marijuana dispensaries to justify their existence, their power and their budgets. So when word gets out that someone inside the DEA made a rational decision on allowing a study that counters the drug warriors’ propaganda—well, I’m sure their career is on the outs.

POLICY/QUALITY: Reclaiming the right to die; book review by Mitchell Berger

Mitchell Berger volunteered to write a review of  William Colby’s, Unplugged: Reclaiming Our Right To Die in America (2006, American Management Association, 272 pp., $24.95 hardcover), and an excellent review it is too:

High-profile legal cases such as those involving Karen Ann Quinlan, Nancy Cruzan and Terri Schiavo and their families coupled with improvements in medical technology have forced growing numbers of patients and their family members, health care providers, judges, lawyers and legislators to confront difficult end-of-life dilemmas. Because of his own background as an attorney for the Cruzan family for four years, supporter of the hospice movement and contributor to the 1990 Patient Self-Determination Act, which requires hospitals to inform patients in writing about health care advance directives such as living wills, attorney William Colby, author of Unplugged: Reclaiming Our Right to Die in America, brings unique insights to his discussion of these cases, evolving medical technology and the overarching issue of end-of-life care in America.

Colby’s book includes an extensive discussion of the Quinlan, Cruzan and Schiavo cases. He describes how relatively recent advances in scientific knowledge, such as an improved understanding of brain function, brain death and vegetative states and advances such as cardiac defibrillators, artificial respirators, feeding tubes, percutaneous endocscopic gastronomy (PEG) tubes (a method of providing nourishment to patients using a tube inserted through an endoscopic procedure which is simpler than standard feeding tube insertion), have led to new challenges as society struggles to reconcile the benefits of these technologies with respect for the individual’s quality of life and right to live and die in a manner reflecting their beliefs. Colby devotes an entire chapter of his book to explaining the ethical and medical issues associated with feeding tubes and PEG; he explains how PEG tubes, originally intended for pediatric patients, are now used routinely in cognitively impaired elderly persons who can no longer eat on their own.

While many people would want every reasonable measure taken to prolong and maintain their life regardless of their condition, many others would not want to live in a state where they are no longer able to respond to their loved ones and the world around them. When Nancy Cruzan, then a 25-year old Missouri woman, was left in a persistent vegetative state following a car wreck in 1983, her father authorized insertion of a feeding tube. Colby explains that in a persistent vegetative state a patient may be awake and even smile or move their eyes, however these movements are completely involuntary and in fact the patient has “no thinking, no feeling, no consciousness” (p. 10). When it became clear as first months and then years went by that Nancy Cruzan would never recover from her condition, Cruzan’s family tried to act on their shared “belief that  [she] would want the feeding tube removed” (p. 89). After many years of legal proceedings both in Missouri and at the federal level, including a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1990, the family eventually was granted the right to remove the feeding tube based on evidence of what Nancy Cruzan herself would have wanted. Extensive publicity surrounded this case – indeed the Cruzan family allowed PBS’ Frontline to document their experiences — and Colby describes how the Cruzan family’s experience altered public opinion about end-of-life care both in Missouri and elsewhere and encouraged Missouri Senator John Danforth and others to sponsor the Patient Self-Determination Act.

In perhaps the most interesting portion of his book (Chapters 1-3), Colby provides an informative and balanced discussion of the most recent and perhaps controversial end-of-life care case involving Terri Schiavo. Unlike Nancy Cruzan’s family, Schiavo’s relatives were bitterly divided about what she would have wanted and what was best for her. Colby discusses his own approach to death and dying issues and even includes his own health care power of attorney as an example for others (Chapter 10; Appendix). However, he also notes the limitations of laws and legal documents. For instance, Colby describes the “institutional glide path” which dictates that many hospital patients will receive “aggressive,” often unwanted end-of-life medical care; the “glide path” reflects the tendency of health care providers and institutions to treat patients in customary, technology-intensive ways due to such factors as medical education, institutional culture and fear of litigation.

To help ensure that the end-of-life care we receive reflects our values and desires, Colby emphasizes the importance of talking at length with family members, friends and health care providers about how we would want to be cared for if our capacity to make our own decisions should ever be impaired by illness or injury. This dialogue will help ensure that our family members and health providers are not forced to confront complex dilemmas in tense and emotional circumstances with their loved one’s wishes unclear.

Colby is a strong supporter of hospice as one option for end-of-life care. Indeed, he serves as a Senior Fellow of the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization in Washington, D.C., and the foreword to his book is contributed by that organization’s chief executive officer. He explains the rise of hospice care, which he characterizes as a “hidden jewel,” and notes that growing numbers of patients are opting for hospice (750000 of 2.5 million Americans who died in 2005). Hospice emphasizes communication between patients, families and health care providers, symptom relief and palliative care (Chapter 15).

Though he clearly has strong opinions, Colby’s book is fair and even-handed in his treatment of the major legal and ethical issues and he includes chapters devoted to concerns about expanded recognition of the “right to die” expressed by religious organizations and persons with disabilities. The book is well-researched and well-documented, with numerous end notes, citations to outside sources, suggestions for further reading and contact information for such relevant organizations as the National Family Caregivers Association and National Institute on Aging. Overall, Colby’s book provides readers with excellent background about the key legal and scientific issues, good ideas for how to approach end-of-life care and strong motivation for initiating these sometimes awkward but critically important conversations with family members and health care providers.

POLICY/PHYSICIANS: Too many doctors

Dartmouth worthy David Goodman has an op-ed in the NY Times called Too Many Doctors in the House. It makes the arguments that you all know well, but it does contain this lovely zinger.

The association of medical colleges has argued that increasing the doctor supply overall can remedy regional shortages. But in the past 20 years, as the number of doctors per capita grew by more than 50 percent, according to our measurements, most of the new ones settled in areas where the supply was already above average — places like Florida or New York — rather than in regions that lack doctors, like the rural South. Medical training is an expensive business, and it makes little sense to waste additional public dollars to perpetuate doctors’ preference to live in affluent places. (my emph added)

QUALITY: Performance measures only have a little of the answer

(Hat-tip to Modern Healthcare for spotting this one). While there was lots of fuss about the IHI 1OOK lives campaign recently and whether it did or didn’t meet its target—and the NY Times gave it a pat on the back this morning in the Editorial section—there’s perhaps even more important news from a study published in JAMA today. A large multi-center team looked at the Medicare data for performance measures on post-heart attack patients with regard to how improved processes related to outcomes. These measures are the bedrock of the “we know what to do, but we don’t know how to do it” meme of IHI and the quality movement. In other words, the theory is that if we just did it all as well as the literature says we should, then there is potential for vast improvement. Unfortunately the outcomes are sobering for those of us who believe that if you apply relatively simple industrial processes to medicine it can markedly improve outcomes (and lower costs too).

We found moderately strong correlations (correlation coefficients ≥0.40; P values <.001) for all pairwise comparisons between beta-blocker use at admission and discharge, aspirin use at admission and discharge, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use, and weaker, but statistically significant, correlations between these medication measures and smoking cessation counseling and time to reperfusion therapy measures (correlation coefficients <0.40; P values <.001). Some process measures were significantly correlated with risk-standardized, 30-day mortality rates (P values <.001) but together explained only 6.0% of hospital-level variation in risk-standardized, 30-day mortality rates for patients with AMI.

In other words, even when the hospitals did well on the performance measures, it only explained a small fraction of the overall variation in outcomes. So there are to my mind only two possible conclusions. Either performance measurements and controlling process variation don’t matter too much, or we actually—in this case at least—don’t know what works. Neither one is a particularly satisfying explanation.

QUALITY: Quiet welcome to new sponsor

It’s a quiet return around here from the prolonged July 4th weekend. Meanwhile, there’s a new sponsor at THCB. This time it’s a  book called On Track To Quality by James Todd, a pediatrician at Children’s Hospital in Denver. The book is a philosophical investigation into quality, involving not a motorcycle trip, but a train journey.  Interesting stuff, and a longer review will be forthcoming shortly.

BLOGS/QUALITY: Big themes and signing off from FierceHealthcare

Here’s my last ever FierceHealthcare editorial. The FierceMarkets team is taking the editorializing of FierceHealthcare back in-house and I wish them luck. It’s been fun for me (and John Irvine who’s supported me all the way) to work on this over the past couple of years, but I’m happy to get away from the deadline grind and concentrate on THCB and my consulting work. And hopefully I’ll find the time to start working on that book I’ve been threatening you all with. Anyway my last editorial is about the two biggest themes in health care—fixing process and fixing insurance.

Perhaps the dominant theme of the decade in healthcare has been patient safety. Since the 1999 IOM report, hospitals and doctors have focused on improving the medical error situation. Last week, Don Berwick’s IHI announced that a precise number of lives (123,000 and change) had been saved since the voluntary 100,000 Lives Campaign started. This week, the carping started with The Wall Street Journal suggesting that the IHI numbers were inaccurate. Commenters also started down the path of whether saving the "life" of a severely ill patient who was going to likely die soon anyway was all that important–or at least as important of saving the life of an otherwise young healthy patient.

But beyond questions about the data, there are two crucial related points we must hold onto. First, medical errors are symptoms of poorly designed medical processes, and we know that reducing "muda"–waste in medical care–is an achievable goal. Second, patients are not just vulnerable to physical harm from interacting with the healthcare system, they’re also extremely vulnerable to financial harm caused by that "muda" and facilitated by our dog’s breakfast of an insurance and financing system. These are two sides of the same coin, and efforts like the 100,000 Lives Campaign should be applauded for focusing on at least part of the problem. It would be nice if there was a similar system-wide commitment to concentrate on the whole of the cost and care crisis rather than just one part.

DISEASE MANAGEMENT BOSTON JULY 30 – AUG 2At a three day conference in Boston MA, scheduled between July 31 and Aug 2, industry leaders from managed care companies, employer groups purchasing healthcare services, providers, third party administrators, physicians, healthcare technology players, nursing and pharmacy practitioners, disease management experts will meet at the 4th Annual Disease Management Conference. The event is posted online at www.srinstitute.com/ch142