Categories

Above the Fold

Maternal Mortality – Separating Signal from Noise

By AMEYA KULKARNI, MD

When Samuel Morse left his New Haven home to paint a portrait of the Maquis du Lafayette in Washington DC, it was the last time he would see his pregnant wife. Shortly after his arrival in Washington, his wife developed complications during childbirth. A messenger took several days on horseback to relay the message to Mr Morse. Because the trip back to New Haven took several more, his wife had died by the time he arrived at their home.  So moved was he by the tragedy of lost time that he dedicated the majority of the rest of his life to make sure that this would never happen to anyone again. His subsequent work on the telegraph and in particular the mechanism of communication for the telegraph resulted in Morse code – the first instantaneous messaging system in the world.

Mr Morse’s pain is not foreign to us in the 21st century. We feel the loss of new mothers so deeply that, when earlier this year new statistics on the rate of maternal death were released and suggested that American women died at three times the rate of other developed countries during child birth, doctors, patient advocates, and even Congress seemed willing to move heaven and earth to fix the problem. As someone who cares for expectant mothers at high risk for cardiovascular complications, I too was moved. But beyond the certainty of the headlines lay the nuance of the data, which seemed to tell a murkier story.

First at issue was the presentation of the data. Certainly, as a rate per live births, it would seem that the United States lagged behind other OECD countries – our maternal mortality rate was between 17.2 and 26.4 deaths per 100,000 live births, compared to 6.6 in the UK or 3.7 in Spain. But this translated to approximately 700 maternal deaths per year across the United States (among approximately 2.7 million annual births). While we would all agree that one avoidable maternal death is one too many, the low incidence means that small rates of error could have weighty implications on the reported results. For instance, an error rate of 0.01% would put the United States in line with other developed countries.

Surely, the error rate could not account for half the reported deaths, right? Unfortunately, it is difficult to estimate how close to reality the CDC reported data is, primarily because the main source data for maternal mortality is a single question asked on the application for death certificates. The question asks whether the deceased was pregnant at the time of death, within 42 days of death, or in the 43 to 365 days prior to death. While pregnancy at the time of death may be easy to assess, the latter two categories are subject to significantly more error.

Continue reading…

THCB Spotlights: Mike McSherry, CEO of Xealth

Today on THCB Spotlights, Matthew talks to Mike McSherry about Xealth—which is an “X” not a “Z” as in, the missing variable in health. How did Mike end up in health care from Swype, the touch screen keyboard that is now ubiquitous on all touch screen phones? Find out how Xealth facilitates adoption of a vast range of digital health services by making it easy for providers to prescribe them as well as track engagement levels. Within the complexity of Epic and other EMR systems, how does Xealth fit in?

Will Omada Health be Digital Health’s Next Big IPO? | Sean Duffy, Omada Health

By JESSICA DAMASSA, WTF HEALTH

Sean Duffy, CEO of Omada Health, proves why his company is one of those digital health startups everyone’s watching in the chronic condition management space. Never mind the buzz around their latest massive funding round or Livongo’s IPO, the real story here is Sean’s idea about building a “completely digital” care provider for folks with pre-diabetes, type II diabetes, hypertension, and mental health issues — or, at least that’s the goal for the next decade. What does a “full-stack view of supporting someone’s care look like? How do you get there? Tune in to find out about Omada’s proprietary tech-testing litmus test, “The Sean Duffy’s Mom Test,” and some good advice for other health tech startups about what it takes to win over clinicians with your tech.

Filmed at Health 2.0 in Santa Clara, California in September 2019.

Jessica DaMassa is the host of the WTF Health show & stars in Health in 2 Point 00 with Matthew HoltGet a glimpse of the future of healthcare by meeting the people who are going to change it. Find more WTF Health interviews here or check out www.wtf.health.

Applications for GuideWell’s Scale Up Accelerator Closing Soon!

SPONSORED POST

By CATALYST @ HEALTH 2.0

There are only a few days remaining to apply for GuideWell’s 2020 Accelerator: Aging in Place! The program is seeking innovative, easy-to-use solutions that enable seniors to improve overall physical and emotional wellness, connect seniors to their communities, and increase the affordability and accessibility of health care for seniors that are economically challenged or cared for by a working family member.

10 health technology companies or innovators will have the incredible opportunity to participate in an eight week accelerator program that consists of a two-day kickoff boot camp, followed by weekly mentoring sessions and a series of virtual workshops that focus on challenges in the health care industry (e.g. customer acquisition, regulatory compliance, etc.).The program begins January 23rd, 2020 and will culminate in a curated Investor Matchmaking Showcase at GuideWell’s Innovation Center in Orlando, FL., on March 9th, 2020.

Continue reading…

The F Word …

Fragmentation, Fee-for-service and Futile care are the trifecta of what is supposedly ailing our health care system, or non-system, as it is fashionably described nowadays. Modern health care has reached its crisis point not due to hordes of people keeling over and dying in the streets, as they did during historical health care crises brought on by plagues and famine, but due to exploding costs of delivering decent care to all people. Since the issue now is mostly financial, health care as a discipline is attracting the interests of those who practice the dismal science of Economics. Over the last two centuries, economists have successfully addressed the F words in other industries with spectacular results in developed countries, so why not apply lessons learned to health care?

The obvious reason to treat economists with suspicion in health care is the quintessential argument that people are not widgets, but there is another problem. Most tried-and-true solutions for increasing availability and quality while lowering costs of products are not accounting for the other explosion occurring as we speak – the Internet.  How can this assertion be true when we are in the midst of a government sponsored spending spree to computerize medical records and adopt Health Information Technology (HIT)? Apparently, even those who lead and define the HIT revolution are reluctant (or unable) to grasp its full implication, thus they are consistently underestimating the power of the Internet to serve the individual, and as a result are hedging their bets on technology with classic industrial models from days gone by.

Continue reading…

Pressed to Demonstrate Utility, Digital Health Struggles — Just Like Traditional Medicine

After absorbing several years of increasingly extravagant promises about the remarkable potential of digital health, investors, physicians, and other stakeholders are now unabashedly demanding: “Show me the data.”

By now, most everyone appreciates the promise of digital health, and understands how, in principle, emerging, patient-focused technologies could help improve care and reduce costs.

The question is whether digital health can actually deliver.

A recent NIH workshop, convened to systematically review the data on digital health, acknowledged, “evidence is sparse for the efficacy of mHealth.”

As Scripps cardiologist Eric Topol and colleagues summarized in JAMA late last year,

“Most critically needed is real-world clinical trial evidence to provide a roadmap for implementation that confirms its benefits to consumers, clinicians, and payers alike.”

What everyone’s asking for now is evidence – robust data, not like the vast majority of wellness studies that experts like Al Lewis and others have definitively shredded.

The goal is to find solid evidence that a proposed innovation actually leads to measurably improved outcomes, or to a material reduction in cost.  Not that it could or should, but that it does.
Continue reading…

Do Dogs Watch Oprah?

As an incurable compulsive introspect, I tend to brood, ponder, contemplate, and (of course) muse on “big ideas,” such as:
• What makes people choose things which cause themselves harm?
• Are some people better people than others, or are they just more skilled at hiding their problems?
• Is pain really a bad thing, or is our aversion to it a sign of human weakness?
• Does God ever wear a hat?
• Do dogs watch Oprah?
• Why did I put “big ideas” in quotes?

Tough questions.

Lately I’ve been contemplating the nature of human awareness:
• Is self-awareness (the ability to think of ourselves in the third person) a uniquely human trait, and is lack of self-awareness the essence of mental illness?
• Is empathy, or other-awareness the highest of human traits?  Is this what the biblical idea of being “made in the image of God” really means?

Yeah, that’s a lot deeper than about dogs watching Oprah.  The second of these questions seems to be a very important dividing point in people’s ability to have good relationships with others.  Our ability to put ourselves into the place of others, pondering their motives, thoughts, and emotions, goes a very long way in helping us develop deep relationships and avoiding causing inadvertent pain.

It also seems to be a trait that is in short supply in our health care system.  I am amazed and deeply disturbed by how callously many of my patients have been treated by some of my colleagues.  Patients are seemingly treated as a commodity, a necessary evil required for billing of services.

I do understand that doctors and nurses are drained of their ability to show compassion by a system that puts them in an adversarial relationship with patients, hospital administrators, insurance companies, lawyers, and their fellow doctors and nurses.  That feeling of burn-out in me was one of the big reasons I left my old practice.  Either I had to change my compassion, or my situation.

Continue reading…

Should Death Row Inmates Be Able to Donate Their Organs Before They Die?

Several people have asked me lately whether I think that death row inmates should be able to donate their organs before they die. In effect, to commit suicide through organ donation. Culminating in donation of the heart, of course. They are going to be executed anyway, why not bring benefits to others en route?

I see the logic of this position. Why inject someone with lethal medications and then dispose of their remains when so much good could come of their death?

But that’s where I have a problem with this policy: of making people feel that so much “good” can come out of executing people. I oppose organ donation from prisoners on death row because I oppose capital punishment. I think people should always have a chance at redemption, no matter what crimes they have committed. I do not think that capital punishment is, or can, be administered fairly in the United States. I do not think the criminal justice system is accurate enough to make me confident that people who are executed necessarily committed the crimes they had been accused of.

I oppose death-by-organ-donation because I don’t think we need any more reasons to look favorably upon the death penalty. We are practically alone amongst Western democracies in still using this form of punishment. I’d like to see that change.

 

Med School For Lawyers

 

4. If you need to learn about a disease, procedure, or drug that you know nothing about, your best starting point is probably Wikipedia. Google will lead you to some incorrect answers, and diagnose-yourself websites will give you answers that are much too broad to use practically in legal practice. Once you have familiarized yourself with the general topic on Wikipedia, you can then go back to your search engine of choice for more specific terms and weed out the wrong information. Starting on PubMed or GoogleScholar probably isn’t the best idea either because most of what you’re reading will be highly technical and the articles you find will likely be about novel uses or instances of whatever you’re searching. Another fantastic source is UpToDate, an evidence-based Wikipedia-like source for healthcare providers, but many people may not have access to all the information on this site.

5. Physicians don’t know as much as you’d expect them to about the health insurance system. (Note: I have only the utmost respect for healthcare providers and understand that the quantity of information they are expected to retain is nothing short of ridiculous. See Atul Gawande’s Complications for an interesting perspective on society’s unrealistic and unattainable expectations of modern medicine.) They receive almost no formal training on health insurance and, realistically, don’t need to know much about it on a day-to-day basis. Little to none of their day is spent looking through the details of coverage or payments. I write this only to emphasize that talking to a physician about your client’s insurance is likely not the best use of anyone’s time. Unless your client has particular conditions that would make the provider aware of his insurance, such as an inability to pay for necessary medications, the client’s health insurance probably has never crossed the provider’s mind. This is most applicable to providers in academic and public institutions. Providers in private practice may handle more of their billing and insurance work.

6. This is an extremely broad generalization, but, as a whole, lawyers make physicians nervous. I’ve started to notice that lawyers and physicians may not understand the type of relationship that they have with one another. When providing an example of an authority figure in her life, my HLS professor who formerly worked at the White House named her physician. Not the President of the United States, but her personal physician.

What lawyers need to understand is that physicians have a similar (but not same!) attitude toward lawyers. When I was volunteering in a large hospital in an affluent area of Southern California known for its zip code, the surgeon I was working with gave me a memorable talk on what is flawed with our healthcare system. He explained that costs are high not because people are sick, but because there is too much waste and inefficiency, particularly in wealthy neighborhoods. Immediately after this, we went out to see his next patient. She simply said, “My neck hurts. I think I need an MRI.” The surgeon then agreed and pointed her to the front desk where she could schedule her MRI. After she left the room, he turned to me and whispered, “She doesn’t need an MRI, but she’s a lawyer so we’re not going to disagree with her.”

I heard more about being sued when I was in medical school than I have during my time in law school. Unfortunately, the training I received regarding malpractice amounted to (1) Don’t mess up, and (2) Be nice to patients and say sorry, but, actually, don’t say sorry too much.
To give a more concrete example of medical education on medical malpractice, an exam question on the topic would look something like this:

Question
A scenario of possible medical malpractice is described. What is the patient’s burden of proof?
Answer Choices
(A) Preponderance of the evidence
(B) Beyond reasonable doubt
(C) XYZ
(D) None of the above

What medical student has any idea what the above actually means in practice? (What law student does?) The student will memorize the phrase preponderance of the evidence and possibly understand, incorrectly, that patients have a very low burden to bear based on the explanation “more likely than not,” and then move on. What all this does is leave physicians with the idea that suing doctors is an easy, get-rich-quick pastime of lawyers. In fact, when I told my physician husband that I was writing a blog post on lawyers and medicine, his response was, “Are you writing about how you’re all out to get us?”

My take-home message on the point is this: As a lawyer, when speaking with physicians, be upfront about what information you need and why you need it. After introducing yourself as a law student, lawyer, or as part of a law firm, be quick to note why you are calling. If you need information about your client, make sure to send your HIPAA release form first and note that you are representing the client. The physician may worry you are trying to sneak one past her and get information about an opposing party. If you forget to send your release form and the physician accidentally gives you information, send the release immediately afterward and be by your phone for when she calls to confirm that you have clearance. If you think you and the physician are on the same advocate-wavelength and that a release form is not necessary, you are mistaken. The physician will spend the rest of her afternoon imagining you smugly sitting in your office, pleased with yourself that you tricked a doctor into divulging confidential information and surrounded by the briefs that will eventually be used in suing her. I have seen this happen.

Last week, I wrote the first of a two-part series on tips that may be helpful for law students and lawyers interested in or working in health/medical law.  I continue with Tip #4 here.

4. If you need to learn about a disease, procedure, or drug that you know nothing about, your best starting point is probably Wikipedia.  Google will lead you to some incorrect answers, and diagnose-yourself websites will give you answers that are much too broad to use practically in legal practice.  Once you have familiarized yourself with the general topic on Wikipedia, you can then go back to your search engine of choice for more specific terms and weed out the wrong information.  Starting on PubMed or GoogleScholar probably isn’t the best idea either because most of what you’re reading will be highly technical and the articles you find will likely be about novel uses or instances of whatever you’re searching.  Another fantastic source is UpToDate, an evidence-based Wikipedia-like source for healthcare providers, but many people may not have access to all the information on this site.

5. Physicians don’t know as much as you’d expect them to about the health insurance system.  (Note: I have only the utmost respect for healthcare providers and understand that the quantity of information they are expected to retain is nothing short of ridiculous.  See Atul Gawande’s Complications for an interesting perspective on society’s unrealistic and unattainable expectations of modern medicine.) They receive almost no formal training on health insurance and, realistically, don’t need to know much about it on a day-to-day basis.  Little to none of their day is spent looking through the details of coverage or payments.  I write this only to emphasize that talking to a physician about your client’s insurance is likely not the best use of anyone’s time.  Unless your client has particular conditions that would make the provider aware of his insurance, such as an inability to pay for necessary medications, the client’s health insurance probably has never crossed the provider’s mind.  This is most applicable to providers in academic and public institutions.  Providers in private practice may handle more of their billing and insurance work.

6.  This is an extremely broad generalization, but, as a whole, lawyers make physicians nervous.  I’ve started to notice that lawyers and physicians may not understand the type of relationship that they have with one another.  When providing an example of an authority figure in her life, my HLS professor who formerly worked at the White House named her physician.  Not the President of the United States, but her personal physician.
What lawyers need to understand is that physicians have a similar (but not same!) attitude toward lawyers.  When I was volunteering in a large hospital in an affluent area of Southern California known for its zip code, the surgeon I was working with gave me a memorable talk on what is flawed with our healthcare system.  He explained that costs are high not because people are sick, but because there is too much waste and inefficiency, particularly in wealthy neighborhoods.  Immediately after this, we went out to see his next patient.  She simply said, “My neck hurts. I think I need an MRI.”  The surgeon then agreed and pointed her to the front desk where she could schedule her MRI.  After she left the room, he turned to me and whispered, “She doesn’t need an MRI, but she’s a lawyer so we’re not going to disagree with her.”
I heard more about being sued when I was in medical school than I have during my time in law school.  Unfortunately, the training I received regarding malpractice amounted to (1) Don’t mess up, and (2) Be nice to patients and say sorry, but, actually, don’t say sorry too much.

To give a more concrete example of medical education on medical malpractice, an exam question on the topic would look something like this:

Question
A scenario of possible medical malpractice is described. What is the patient’s burden of proof?
Answer Choices
(A) Preponderance of the evidence
(B) Beyond reasonable doubt
(C) XYZ
(D) None of the above

What medical student has any idea what the above actually means in practice?  (What law student does?)  The student will memorize the phrase preponderance of the evidence and possibly understand, incorrectly, that patients have a very low burden to bear based on the explanation “more likely than not,” and then move on.  What all this does is leave physicians with the idea that suing doctors is an easy, get-rich-quick pastime of lawyers.  In fact, when I told my physician husband that I was writing a blog post on lawyers and medicine, his response was, “Are you writing about how you’re all out to get us?”

My take-home message on the point is this: As a lawyer, when speaking with physicians, be upfront about what information you need and why you need it.  After introducing yourself as a law student, lawyer, or as part of a law firm, be quick to note why you are calling.  If you need information about your client, make sure to send your HIPAA release form first and note that you are representing the client.  The physician may worry you are trying to sneak one past her and get information about an opposing party.  If you forget to send your release form and the physician accidentally gives you information, send the release immediately afterward and be by your phone for when she calls to confirm that you have clearance.  If you think you and the physician are on the same advocate-wavelength and that a release form is not necessary, you are mistaken.  The physician will spend the rest of her afternoon imagining you smugly sitting in your office, pleased with yourself that you tricked a doctor into divulging confidential information and surrounded by the briefs that will eventually be used in suing her.  I have seen this happen.

  1. Always refer to a physician as “Dr.”  This is a really obvious one, but it has to be said, especially if you plan on working with the physician on your case.  Think of an MD or DO as more like a Judge or Honorable than a JD in terms of the importance of the title.  In medical school, I once saw Dr. S return an e-mail addressed to “Ms. S” saying only, “Why does it say Ms. S?”  It was as if she thought the e-mail had reached her in error.  Ms. S was not her name.
  2. As a corollary, any other health care provider with a doctorate should also be referred to as a doctor.  This means those with a PhD, PsyD, DNP, DDS, OD, etc.  If you don’t know if a health care provider is a nurse (non-doctorate) or a doctor, you should probably just call them doctor until they correct you.
  3. In law, we give medical records significant weight as evidence because we believe that people generally tell the truth to their providers since that is in their best interest.  As such, you should know how to read and interpret common terms in the records as a starting point in understanding your clients and cases.
  • First, as the wife of a physician, I can personally attest to the fact that writing, typing, or dictating medical charts is not a physician’s favorite activity.   Because of this, you will find numerous abbreviations and acronyms littered throughout the records.  While you don’t need to know or memorize what each of these mean, you may need to know how to look them up.  Unfortunately, the same set of letters can often stand for many very different things, so you’re will need to do more than just search the abbreviation or acronym itself.  For example, search “PE medical acronym” may not get you the correct answer.  You should include the words around the term itself and what type of file it was in to get more accurate results.  Searching “PE emergency room” versus “PE annual check up” will help your quickly determine whether your client had a life-threatening embolism or a routine physical exam.   Sounds silly, but you might be surprised at how often one-word searches are done in this context and how unreliable they can be.
  • Here are some of the basic headings that you will find in a medical chart and what they mean:
    CC – chief complaint.  This is the patient’s main issue.
    HPI – history of present illness. This is essentially the patient’s answer to the question, “So what brings you in today?”
    PMH/PSH – past medical/surgical history.
    ROS – review of systems. This is when the provider asks the patient questions upon questions pertaining to how he feels generally, if he’s had any changes in weight, any coughing, any pain, etc.
    PE – physical exam.  This will probably be followed by several other acronyms or other half-words.  If it looks like there are only acronyms, such as “HEENT PERRLA CVP RRR CTA,” then the findings were probably all normal.  If there was something abnormal you should, in theory, be able to read about it in plain English.  WNL means “within normal limits,” but, and this is my bioethics side kicking in here, it is sometimes disparagingly also referred to as meaning “we never looked.”  Thus, it might be a good idea not to have your entire case turn on one WNL in the record.  This is doubly true if the provider simply circles the entire physical exam form and writes one large WNL.
    A – assessment.  This is where the provider writes what she thinks is going on, including a differential diagnosis (DDx).  The differential diagnosis is the list of possible causes of the patient’s symptoms (what the patient reported) and signs (what the provider noticed or measured).  The patient is not necessarily being diagnosed with everything, or anything, listed.
    P – plan.  Here, the provider notes what she and the patient are going to do to treat the patient’s condition.  The provider may note that she is recommending a certain prescription, but it does not guarantee that the patient filled or took that medication.
  • One term of art that is crucial to understand is the use of the word historian.  When a provider describes what type of historian a patient is, she is making a credibility assessment.  For example, if your client was noted to be a poor historian, then you should take everything he reported as suspect unless corroborated elsewhere. He may be a poor historian due to age, drugs (prescription or otherwise), mental impairment, or because his story to his provider was obviously inconsistent.  This term is used without any attempt to make a normative judgment on his character. It is simply a way to communicate to others reading the report the possibility that not everything the patient reported is true.

 

 

These are all my tips for now, but I will be sure to update this list if I come across anything else that I find may be helpful as the semester progresses.  As always, I would love to hear any feedback or thoughts in the comments section below.

 

 

These are all my tips for now, but I will be sure to update this list if I come across anything else that I find may be helpful as the semester progresses. As always, I would love to hear any feedback or thoughts in the comments section below.

 

assetto corsa mods