Keep Moving for Cardiovascular Benefits

We keep extolling the benefits and virtues of regular exercise and fitness. Some research studies have documented the intensity and duration of exercise programs with cardiovascular events and mortality. Those who do more and are fitter apparently do much better which surprises few of us.

It comes down to the “which came first the chicken or egg “question?  Are people genetically able to exercise at a high level living longer and healthier because they exercise at a high intensity and duration or vice versa?

It is quite comforting to read the recent study in JAMA by Andrea LaCroix, PhD, MPH and colleagues from the University of California, San Diego that shows the benefits of even modest movement and exercise.  The study was conducted under the umbrella of the Women’s Health Initiative and put pedometers and accelerometers on women to measure activity during waking hours.  Light physical activity was defined as less than 3 metabolic equivalents (Walking one mile in about 22 minutes expends about 3 Metabolic Equivalents of Activity).  They noted that for each hour per day increment in light activity there was a 14% lower risk of Coronary Heart Disease and 8% lower risk of cardiovascular disease.

The researchers evaluated 5,861 women with a mean age of 78.5 years. Average follow-up spanned 3.5 years with study members having 570 cardiovascular disease events and 143 coronary heart disease events. The study group was diverse with there being 48.8% Caucasian women, 33.5 % Black women and 17.6% Hispanic women.

The study’s results and message was clear. Keep moving. Even modest exercise is beneficial in reducing heart attack and stroke risk.

Advertisements

Free Choice of Physicians & Fee for Service Medicine Ending?

The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission is a panel of financial, economic and health policy advisors created by Congress to advise CMS (Center for Medicare Services) and Congress how to pay physicians, health care providers and facilities for services rendered. According to an online article on MedPage they are close to eliminating fee for service payments for health care. CMS has encouraged alternative delivery methods for years. For the most part this has resulted in hospital and health care systems buying up and employing doctors, mid-level providers being substituted for more highly trained doctors and these alternative systems covering care only with their panel of providers and diagnostic and treatment centers.

However, publicized figures have shown these Medicare alternative products actually cost more per patient per year than traditional Medicare. This particular article claimed a 1-2% savings.

We all see the ads for Medicare Advantage plans which, in addition to no co-pay and no deductible, provide for dental care, vision care, eye care and exercise and gym memberships. Apparently 50% of the Medicare population is now enrolled in such a program.

As a 69 year old individual paying into the Medicare system for the last 55 years I see the benefits and cost savings for seniors when they are healthy. What happens however, when you become ill? Clearly the Centers of Excellence for many of the ailments seniors contract are geographically and contractually outside the narrow networks and panels these private insurance companies run and the Accountable Care Organization run plans provide.

If I do not have coverage for the Mayo Clinic or MD Anderson Cancer Center or the Cleveland Clinic or Dana Farber Cancer Center or Johns Hopkins Medical Center then have I wasted 55 years of payments? Do I really want a nurse practitioner in south Florida directing my care off a protocol list of contracted providers or do I want a clinician who sees a dozen cases of this disease per week calling the shots?

I prefer the latter but may not have a choice but to pay out of pocket if MEDPACs recommendations are accepted by CMS and Congress and become law.

Scientific Reports, Media Reports and Ambiguity

Last week I read an article in a peer reviewed journal citing the benefits of a few eggs per week as part of a low carbohydrate dietary intervention for Type II Diabetes.  The information was so meaningful about a controversial food source of protein that I decided to write about it in my blog and pass it along to my patients.  Three days later the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology discussed the increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in individuals consuming three or more eggs regularly. They talked about the detrimental cholesterol being concentrated in the yolk making egg white omelets look healthier than traditional omelets.

In the early 1970’s a VA study was published showing that veterans over 45 years of age who took an aspirin a day had fewer heart attacks and strokes and survived them better than those who don’t.  Fast forward almost 50 years and we have different recommendations for people who have never had an MI or CVA or evidence of cardiovascular disease compared to secondary prevention in individuals who have known coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease or diabetes. Throw in the controversial discussions of aspirin preventing colorectal adenomas from developing, aspirin preventing certain types of skin cancers and today’s report that suggests it may prevent liver cancer. Now three studies suggest that in older individuals (70 or greater) the risk of bleeding negates the benefits of cardio and cerebrovascular protection and aspirin may not actually prevent heart attacks and strokes in that age group.

We then turn to statins and prevention of heart attacks and numerous articles about not prescribing them to older Americans.  I saw articles on this topic covered by CNN, the Wall Street Journal, ARP Journal, AAA magazine and in several newsletters published by major national medical centers.  In each piece they caution you to talk to your doctor before stopping that medicine.

I am that seventy year old patient they all talk about.  I have never smoked. I exercise modestly on a regular basis, getting my 10,000 or more steps five or more days a week.  I battle to keep my weight down and find it difficult to give up sweets and bread when so many other of life’s pleasures are no longer available due to age and health related suggestions.

There are clearly no studies that look at patients who took a statin for 15 years and aspirins for over 20 years, stopped them and then were followed for the remainder of their lives.   How will they fare compared to patients who never took them?

I have this discussion every day with my patient’s pointing out the current guidelines and trying to individualize the suggestions to their unique lifestyle and issues. On a personal level, I still have no idea what the correct thing is to do even after discussing it with my doctors.  How can I expect my patients to feel any differently?

Sleep Apnea and Cognitive Impairment

Convincing a patient to undergo a sleep analysis for obstructive sleep apnea is a difficult task. During our history taking session, we ask about excessive snoring, periods of not breathing while asleep, daytime sleepiness and we look at the patient’s body habitus, weight and height. Often, the patient’s spouse or partner has complained about their snoring keeping them up. Most of the time, when I ask about this the response is, “Why go for an evaluation if I am not going to wear that mask anyway?  I have a friend who has a CPAP mask and I am just not going to do that.”

Obstructive sleep apnea and periods of apnea (not breathing) results in the lung blood vessel blood pressure rising.  We call it pulmonary hypertension.  It is different from systemic arterial essential hypertension in that traditional blood pressure medicines do not lower the pulmonary pressures.

If you examine our heart and lung anatomy you realize that the very non-muscular right side of the heart, primarily the right ventricle, pumps blood a short distance to the lungs to exchange gases and removing wasteful gases in exchange for oxygen. That oxygen rich blood returns to the left side of the heart where the very muscular left ventricle pumps it out to the body.

When the body’s systemic blood pressure rises the left side of the heart has to work harder. The muscular left ventricle is much more suited for that task than the right ventricle is suited to pump against pulmonary vessel hypertension.  The result is the right heart fails much sooner than the left side and the treatment options and medications are far less successful.  This explanation to patients is often received, digested and dismissed as hypothetical and down the road.

This week the American Academy of Neurology received a presentation by a group at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester that showed that patients with untreated sleep apnea produced an increased amount of tau protein deposition in the brain. Tau protein deposition is associated with Alzheimer’s disease.  The researchers, led by Diego Z. Carvalho, MD, are not sure if more Tau protein accumulates in brains of people with untreated sleep apnea or if Tau protein accumulation actually leads to sleep apnea?  That research is ongoing.

The lesson is that sleep apnea is something that needs to be diagnosed and treated. I am a fan of referring patients’ to sleep evaluation centers where that is the primary disease state reviewed.

While sleep apnea is one of the abnormalities evaluated, there are many other disorders of sleep that can be recognized and treated to improve patient sleep. At home sleep monitors are available as well but may be limited in diagnosing sleep apnea alone.

If you are determined to have obstructive sleep apnea then treatment choices include weight loss, laser treatment of the uvula, dental appliances to open up your airways, adjustments to your sleep position and many types of facial and nasal CPAP devices.

Most of my patients who try a CPAP mask require 8-12 weeks to adjust to it. Once adjusted to it, their quality of sleep is so good that I rarely have to convince them to keep using it.

Physician Online Reviews

My friend and practice advisor showed me two very negative anonymous reviews of my practice this week. Both were posted within a one-month winter period and were written about family members. They were not written by patients.

My staff and I tried diligently to identify the stated situations as they did not resonate with any of us.  Unfortunately, we were unsuccessful.  That frustrates each of us.

Combined, these reviews were aggressive and unflattering.  They mentioned my age, ego and seemingly lack of compassion.  I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t bothered by them.  I truly wish I could talk to those anonymous authors to learn their point of view and find out why they are so angry. I’d sincerely apologize to them if I did anything to cross a line.

At the end of the day, I like to look myself in the mirror and know that I have done the best I can for each of my patients. I am very passionate about my profession, care immensely about the well-being of each patient and believe in evidence-based medicine – not fads and or snake oil. I also hold true to my practice’s slogan – Access, Advocacy, Compassion and Prevention.

I spend a great deal of time in face to face meetings with my patients. I return all phone calls, call regarding all test and lab results and; usually I am aware when a patient is unhappy or dissatisfied.  If I am not aware, my office supervisor or staff know it and bring it to my attention so I can discuss the reason and clear the air or rectify the problem.

If quoting the medical literature to patients to explain a point of view, plus relying on years of experience, is being full of myself; I guess I am guilty.  If I do not respect the wishes of the family when the patient is fully competent to make decisions and is still the legal health care decision maker, than I am guilty as well.

When a patient chooses to leave my practice, I make it a point to send them an individual hand -written note.  I apologize for not meeting their needs and expectations and ask them to please let me know their grievances for the sake of improving the care and service and not repeating actions which a patient found to be negative. I ask “why” they left and if I did something that I should not have done, or did not do something that I should have done. After writing these notes, I have my office staff review them to make sure the tone and content are caring, inquisitive and appropriate.  Unfortunately, no one ever responds.

My friend, the practice advisor, felt it was important to identify these situations and try to further identify the author of each review.  He recommended, and I wholeheartedly agreed, it would be important to have a conversation with each of them to gain a better understanding of the situation, apologize and make any appropriate practice changes.

Since my staff and I are not able to put the pieces of these puzzles together, I am at a loss for identifying the authors.  Furthermore, these online sites do not typically allow a physician to confirm the author was, in fact, a patient and then respond to their review.

That’s a problem since 80% of patients who are seeking a new physician search online.  My advisor has shared with me countless examples of negative physician reviews where there was nothing to indicate the author had ever even been a patient of the practice.

A few years ago I experienced that myself on Angie’s List.  Fortunately, I was able to track down and contact the author and they admitted they and their spouse had never been my patients.  It was an error on their part which reflected poorly on me.  It took time and effort but we were eventually able to have the review removed.  That rarely happens.

If you are a patient who feels you have a gripe with your doctor, I urge you to call that physician or write that doctor and express your concerns and give them a chance to respond. Do that even if you wish to move on. It’s the only way a practice and doctor can improve.  We really do care.

And, if you are seeking a new physician, do not take online reviews at face value.  Gather as much information about the physician as possible and ask if you can have a short meeting with the doctor before making your choice.  That’s something that’s something I make available at my practice for anyone interested in concierge medicine.

Joint Commission Inspection and Data Entry Duty for the Doctors

I received an email from our hospital Accreditation Coordinator/Quality Coordinator in a manner that wasn’t clear if it was directed to me personally or if it was sent to the entire medical staff.  It said that she was reviewing the Joint Commission Accreditation of Hospitals recent survey which found that the charts did a poor job of reflecting the patient’s “Code Status”.  The institution only received a 40% rating.

Some patients were listed as “Do Not Resuscitate” (DNR) but did not have the yellow State of Florida DNR Form on the chart.  Some charts had the DNR form but the physician, in a progress note, had incorrectly indicated that if the patient’s heart stopped beating, or they stopped breathing, that the patient was in fact a “Full Code.”   Of the 25 charts reviewed only ten were in full compliance.

For some reason I took this email very personally.  In my practice I take the time to discuss end of life issues with all my patients who are at an age, or have issues, that make one believe they may face a catastrophic cardio- respiratory arrest in the future.  When I have the discussion with the patient and family, I present them with a large yellow State of Florida DNR form. The large top half and small detachable bottom half are identical. The patient is supposed to fill both out, with the physician signing both.  We photo copy the form and scan it into the patient chart while listing DNR Status on the electronic health record face sheet for all to see.  The patient is supposed to place the large yellow upper half on their refrigerator while carrying the smaller wallet sized version in their wallet or purse.

Most of my patients get to the hospital through the emergency department by self-referral. Sometimes they call us first but most times they call 911 or go themselves.  Most situations involve unexpected falls and trauma or pain from a chronic source.

When I am called by the ER staff the patient has been registered in, insurance has been checked, medications have been reviewed, as have allergies to medication, and the patient has been evaluated by nurses and physicians.  The patient’s record is a mix of paper documents and electronic health records.  The hospital recently instituted a new electronic health record system with inadequate staff training and support (in my opinion) with decisions for financial reasons.  The result is that most clinicians are constantly searching for information and not quite sure where all of it is.  There is still a loose leaf binder type shell for some daily paper information such as the EKG rhythm strips created on the telemetry monitors.  Where a State of Florida DNR form is kept is anyone’s guess.  I took the electronic health record training course on line and the two in person events. At no time did they discuss entering a code status or show us how to enter this data.

It seems to me that the question of a patients “Code status” is something that should be asked at registration in the ER and at elective pre admission. All patients should be considered a full and complete code unless they say otherwise and can produce the documentation needed. If they are not carrying the documents with them then the document should be re-executed and signed at the registration desk by the patient or their legal health care surrogate. When their physician shows up to admit them the document should be on the chart, filled out for us to see.  I can access my office patient files at the emergency department from my iPad but, due to lack of interoperability between electronic health records in the office and in the hospital, I have no way to print out the document from my office electronic health record while I am at the hospital.

If end of life issues have not been discussed with the patient prior to hospitalization, I have no problem beginning the conversation when the medical condition they are there with has been addressed and stabilized.

It turns out that the email was addressed to the entire medical staff and not directed at me alone.  None of the 25 charts reviewed by JCAHO were mine.  If administration wishes to fix the problem it needs to make sure its employed clerical staff are trained to ask the right questions and list the answers where the doctors and nurses can easily see them and interpret them and act on them if necessary. Don’t ask caregivers to be data entry clerks for JCAHO or anyone else.

Leave us free to provide health care.

Tdap Booster Vaccinations

Several years ago an epidemic of whooping cough (pertussis) was ongoing in affluent areas of California and Arizona. Epidemiologists from the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and National Institute of Health (NIH) descended on those areas to determine the cause of the life threatening illness to very young children.

Much to their surprise, grandparents were inadvertently transmitting it to their new and not completely vaccinated grandchildren. As youngsters, these grandparents took the suggested DPT series of shots believing they were resistant to diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus for life.

Like most things, as we get older, the immune system just doesn’t work as well. The immunity to pertussis waned and adults were catching the adult version of whooping cough in the form of an upper respiratory tract infection with bronchitis. The adult version resembled a run of the mill viral upper respiratory tract infection with a prolonged barking cough. This was just the type of infection which infectious disease experts were suggesting we do not treat with antibiotics and instead let our immune systems fight off independently. Unknown to us was the fact that even after we stopped coughing, if this was in fact adult whooping cough, we could transmit the pertussis bacteria for well over a year after we stopped coughing.

The solution to the problem was to give these adults a booster shot against pertussis when they received their tetanus shot booster. It is recommended that we get a tetanus booster every seven to ten years.

Tdap, produced by Sanofli Pasteur, was the solution and an international campaign of vaccination was begun. The campaign was successful but what do you do seven to ten years later when the next tetanus shot is due? In a study sponsored by the manufacturer, adults 18- 64, were given a second dosage 8-10 years after the first Tdap shot and tolerated it very well. Blood levels for immunogenicity taken 28 days later showed the benefit of the second shot.

The data has been submitted to the CDC and its vaccination Prevention Advisory Panel for consideration for a change in the recommendations on vaccinating adults.