Feeds:
Posts
Comments

First Friday in First Person. Asthma, which affects about 20 million

asthmatics must beware of drug's potenially dangerous side effects

asthmatics must beware of drug's potenially dangerous side effects

people throughout the world is defined by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute as a common chronic disorder of the airways that is complex and characterized by variable and recurring symptoms, airflow obstruction, bronchial hyperresponsiveness (or bronchospasm), and an underlying inflammation. There have been a number of success stories in the management of asthma, such as Olympic champions Jackie Joyner-Kersee and Dara Torres whose are highlighted as a part of the Asthma All-Stars, an innovative campaign by the Breathe Easy Play Hard Foundation.  Yet, the fact remains that asthma is becoming more and more common.  According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,  its prevalence in US children has increased from 3.6% in 1980 to 9% in 2001, driving families on repeated trips to the emergency room while patients in the crisis of an asthma attack, struggle to breathe.  Recently, I had the opportunity to become acquainted with Melissa, a blogging mother who has two special needs children.  For this month’s personal look inside disease, I’d like to share an experience she and her daughter, Ava had with a drug to treat her asthma.  It not only demonstrates some of the challenges of managing the disease but the type of proactive, informed advocacy that ensures the best care for patients.

Ava has asthma and in October of 2007, after a hospital stay, she began taking Singulair.  Singulair is a daily asthma controller medication and for Ava, it has been a wonder drug. She went from visiting the ER one to two times per month for her asthma to going a few times a year.  Over the past six weeks or so, Ava has been incredibly weepy. She will cry every evening saying that she has no friends, etc…[T]he past week she’s been saying some pretty disturbing things, especially for a five-year-old.

Ava was subsequently taken off of the drug because she was experience side effect symptoms of depression.  In her update after ending the Singulair, Melissa writes:

[W]e don’t have an increase in asthma symptoms (yet). I can’t help myself by saying yet because in October or November she was without Singulair for about a week and picked up a respiratory bug at school – her asthma symptoms were through the roof. Hopefully with her Flovent 3x/day we’ll be able to avoid it this time.

Asthma is a complex disease that is both costly to the health care system and a challenge for many patients to manage.  Throughout the month we will continue to examine the research and other aspects related to this chronic disease.

Read:

Melissa and Ava’s experience in full in Asthma, Singulair and Depression at mindlessmommy.com

About the Breathe Easy Play Hard Foundation

by Mike Thompson, originally uploaded by the Health Advocate.

I choose Thompson’s cartoon this week because it is such a stark contrast to the recent behavior of the most powerful health industry organizations. They once did seem to be a fortress unable to be penetrated. What about now? Leave a comment and tell me what you think.

by White House Photographer Pete Souza

by White House Photographer Pete Souza

As summer (and Congress’ August recess) approaches, events continue to emerge suggesting in this iteration of health care reform, all stakeholders want to make sure that they are included in the discussion, rather than refusing to negotiate as they did during the early nineties.  So when the White House announced it’s receipt of a letter from the chairmen of Americas’ Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), American Hospital Association (AHA), American Medical Association (AMA), Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed), Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) proposing approximately $2 trillion savings over the next decade, I saw it as Health_Expenditures_Final2_Blogthe latest maneuver to ensure a seat at the roundtable on health care reform.  These six organizations pledge to adhere to evidence-based best practices and right-sizing the use of health system resources in accordance with several strategies already proposed by the administration.  I was surprised to see SEIU join with the providers and payers of the health care industry.  Yet, this is not the first union of seemingly unlikely organizations.  Just last month PhRMA united with the consumer health group Families USA (an ideological adversary) to promote the expansion of Medicaid.  With a newly planned lobbying and media campaign, the strategic partnership seeks new policy to cover more low-income families, provide income-adjusted subsidies for middle-class families and cap out-of-pocket expenditures for people with insurance.  President of PhRMA, William Tauzin explained the strategy in this way, “We got a new team in town who could, I guess, pass what they wanted to…our job is to make sure that what they pass has as many elements of our principles in them as possible, and that means being at the table.”  This, I believe explains it all.

Sources:
Frates, C. Adversaries Team Up on Health Care: Families USA, PhRmA Focus on Medicaid.  (2009, April 20).  Politico, p. 4.

Krugman, P. (2009, May 10).  Harry, Louise and Barack. The NewYork Times. Retrieved May 11, 2009 from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/11/opinion/11krugman.html

TheSoloistA few new movies have appeared in theaters recently that can be added to what is becoming a growing cannon of films that tackle the many facets and complexities surrounding issues in bioethics. Tonight, I saw one of them. This inspired me to compose a list of recent films (plus a classic or two) that help us better understand the medical humanities and perhaps, ourselves.  These movies depict individuals answering the very personal questions of patient autonomy, “What do I want to happen to me, to my body for the sake of my health or medical care?”

  1. Seven Pounds (2008). After a profound life experience, develops an extremely altruistic view towards organ donation, and actively sets out to assist individuals in need of organ donation. On one level, this film allows us to follow the lead character as he deals with his untreated situational depression, while it also chronicles his experience with living donation.
  2. John Q (2002). The lead character of this film, devises an unconventional solution (similar to that of the lead in Seven Pounds) to obtain the organ needed for his ailing young son. In addition, to patient autonomy, this film deals with issues of distributive justice and access to care.
  3. The Soloist (2009, now playing). Based on true-life events, this film is a thoughtful and realistic examination of how Ayers who is chronically ill defines quality of life for himself. It goes further to show the development of a friendship between the lead characters
    opens in June

    opens in June

    and how that friendship forces Lopez to accept Ayers on Ayers’ own terms. This was a very moving story of patient autonomy and mental illness.

  4. My Sister’s Keeper (2009, opens June 26). An adolescent girl undermines her parents when she decides she’s old enough to determine exactly what she wants to happen to her own body. In addition to patient autonomy, this movie also deals with pre-implantation genetic diagnosis.
  5. Steel Magnolias (1989). This classic ‘chick flick’ examines the relationship between a mother and her adult diabetic daughter. The candid depiction covers issues of patient autonomy, organ donation, withdrawal of treatment, and grief.

Definitely check out these movies, in addition to being entertained, you just might become a more sophisticated and informed patient in the future. At the very least, it will inspire you to give pause and consider how you define quality of life, what treatments you might want or what treatments you might refuse in preservation of that quality of life.

by RJ Matsen

by RJ Matson

Tuesday with the Council on Foundations, Sebelius made her first public address since she was confirmed and quickly installed as the administration’s Secretary for Health and Human services last week.  To highlight the urgency of the crisis, she states, “Approximately 30 cents of every health care dollar [is] spent on billing, overhead and administration. Spending on the uninsured and the health care bureaucracy takes up nearly one half of every health care dollar and results in a system where we all pay more and get worse results.”  The new Secretary went even further to say,  [T]he old opponents of reform have joined our effort to change the status quo. Groups and organizations that were once fierce enemies have come to the table and embraced the call for real health care reform.”

Indeed, there is great momentum (as so deftly illustrated by Matson above) for this issue right now and many conservative stakeholders are attempting to be proactive in their approach to stay ahead of that momentum.  Yet, to say old opponents have joined the effort could be an overstatement.  It leads me to say skeptically, “We shall see…”  Tell me what you think?  Will there be work and consensus building to get health reform out of committees by June?  Will the democrats simply be forced to rely on their numbers as they did in passing the Recovery Act?

Source:

Healthcare Reform Is Top US Priority – Sebelius.  Reuters Health Information via Medscape Today. Cited on May 6, 2009.  Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/702385.

March 2009 issue

March 2009 issue

Patients with chronic illness must learn to recognize signs, symptoms, and triggers that exacerbate their condition. Then, they must proactively implement self-care techniques to best manage those symptoms and crises.  While physicians prescribe medicines, draw up plans of care and provide instructions for these plans, low health literacy among many patients combined with time compressed office visits often leave patients bewildered when it comes to effectively managing their disease.   In a randomized controlled study, Dr. Fisher and his colleagues at UNC at Chapel Hill used asthma coaches in a population of African American children with asthma to bolster health literacy and improve clinical outcomes.  Community health workers familiar with the medical terms of an action plan, with good communication skills and the ability to work effectively with parents, served as asthma coaches.  Using a coaching style that was both cooperative and supportive, home visit and phone call interventions were tailored to parents’ readiness to adopt the management practices.  A coach’s job was to reinforce basic asthma education and encourage key behaviors for managing the disease.  Through randomization, the patients received usual care or usual care with the addition of an asthma coach.  Over the 24 months of the study, coaches averaged 21.1 contacts with the families.  Among the asthmatics receiving this care, 36.5% were hospitalized subsequent to an emergency department visit compared to the 59.1% hospitalized subsequent to an emergency department visit for the asthmatics receiving usual care, a statistically significant difference between the two groups. In the March edition of the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Fisher and his colleagues published their findings,

“An asthma coach can reach low-income parents of African American children hospitalized for asthma and reduce rehospitalization among the children.”

As health care professional continue to excel in working effectively as a team in the delivery of care, the use of asthma coaches may be one option for improving health literacy and self-care while reducing the morbidity caused by asthma.

Read the Abstract:

Fisher EB, Strunk RC, Highstein GR, Kelley-Sykes R, Tarr KL, Trinkaus K, Musick J.  A randomized controlled evaluation of the effect of community health workers on hospitalization for asthma: the asthma coach. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009 Mar;163(3):225-32.   Available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez

aafa_naaam_2009-webToday is the first day of May and all is enBloom here in Washington, DC.  While many of us are continuing to enjoy the beauty of spring and get excited about the arrival of summer, there are many others out there who suffer from allergies and asthma.  May is National Asthma and Allergy Awareness Month.  All month, we will focus our attention on asthma, air quality and air pollutants, including tobacco, in addition to the normal banter around health policy, politics, health reform and ARRA.  Look out for ways to educate yourselves and participate in this month’s featured health observances.

After spending last week focusing on cancer awareness among minorities, I

read the archives at http://cancer-carnival.blogspot.com

read the archives at http://cancer-carnival.blogspot.com

decided to submit one of those articles to the Cancer Research Blog Carnival. It was accepted. (Yeeesssss!)  It’s been five quiet months of blogging and now I just might be starting to make a friend or two out there. Each month Cancer Research presents what’s new and now from cancer biology, cancer genetics, cancer therapeutics to cancer diagnostics and patient care. Head on over to Highlight HEALTH and check out the 21st edition of this blog carnival which is the standard for all things cancer. Be sure to read all the articles, the Health Advocate is in such excellent company.

Think Tank Thursdays. New York has publishing and fashion, LA has television and movies and DC…well, DC has influence and policy. On any given day in this town, you have seasoned professionals going about the business of influencing thought. Influencing whom you ask, influencing the legislative staffers and ultimately policy makers regarding any myriad of issues for which legislation is being crafted. Many are familiar with the lobbyist who work for law firms and associations and use their tremendous budgets to influence lawmakers and by extension policy.  There is yet another class of influencers that exist in Washington who exert their power of influence in a far more nuanced fashion. They are the Think Tanks, repositories for scholarly inquiry and research on any number of policy issues.  Think Tanks use their brain trust of scholars and research to contribute to and advance the debate on policy issues. And yes, ultimately influence the policy crafted.  With this periodic series, Think Tank Thursdays, I will give you a look inside selected institutions and the research they set forth.

As I continue my examination of health reform in the Obama Era, my agenda for Monday led me to consider Academic Medical Centers (AMC) by attending The Path Forward for Academic Medical Centers: Innovation, Economics, and Better Health, a panel discussion at the Brookings Institute.

The Importance of the Academic Medical Center

AMCs are vital to our health care system because they educate the next generation of health care and biomedical research professionals, they receive the majority of extramural funds allocated for basic science and applied research, and ultimately, they nurture the expertise to successfully treat and sometimes cure the medical maladies that plague us.  These nonprofit organizations serve a disproportionate share of lower-income and uninsured patients in addition to individuals whose illnesses have the greatest degree of medical complexity.  In his introduction, Dr. Mark McClellan of the Brookings Institution observed that members of the Council of Teaching Hospitals and Health Systems

  • provide 41% of all charity care
  • receive 56% of all NIH extramural awards (along with AAMC medical schools)
  • and train 76% of all residents physicians.

Reforms in the health care system leading to the failure of AMCs would result in a subsequent loss of the essential services previously discussed.  Because they play a vital role in the system, their voice at the table of stakeholders in health reform is significant.

What Should Be the Vision for the Future of AMCs

Economic pressures of the last two decades in particular, have challenged AMCs to implement sustainable business models.  Presidents from three organizations attempted to answer the question, “What should be the vision for the future of AMCs?”  Using Duke University Health System as a model, the CEO, Victor Dzau discussed an overall vision.  Elaine Ullian, CEO of Boston Medical Center discussed the future of AMCs from the perspective of the hospital and health system.  Baylor Health Care System CEO, Joel Allison discussed the future of  AMCs from the provider prospective.  There were recurring themes among the presentations (available below).  There is a strong focus on improving health care delivery.  Organizational changes like the shift from tertiary care hospitals to integrated health care delivery systems are a common theme as AMCs look for ways to add value to their community in ways they previously had not.  Additional strategies include changing medical education and implementing professional training to help health care providers and allied health professionals perform more efficiently as health care delivery teams.  Specific examples that panelists referenced were the use of the medical home model, as well as the use of  hospitalist physicians and physician champions. All of these are implemented with the intention of placing the patient at the center of care.  There is also a focus on improving health care value through comparative effectiveness research, widespread use of evidence-based medical interventions, and the use of personalized medicine.

What Is a Sustainable Business Model for the Future AMC

There was a consensus from the panel that a payment structure providing incentives for prevention, disease or care management, and population health rather than a collection of interventions for unrelated each episode of care is preferred. Yet, redesigning the payment system can be a nuanced endeavor.  Dr. Gary Gottlieb, President of Bringham & Women’s and Faulkner Hospitals and panelist when he observed,

“It’s important to realize that these are very, very complex organizations, and that unwinding them just for the focus specifically to get best value of purchase of unit service in one area may, in fact, unwind and have other unintended consequences that will have severe outcomes. These places are academies, they are research institutes, as well as the providers of a lot of care, some of which needs to be in our venues and some of which needs to be elsewhere, so that payment reform needs to consider each of those issues very, very carefully.”

Indeed, the very design of integrated health care delivery systems emphasized in the Duke and Baylor health system presentations are intended to improve the ability of the AMC to deliver what Mr. Allison phrased as “the right care, at the right time in the right place and the right amount”.  The appropriate use of health promotion, disease prevention and screening interventions yields a higher quality of life and better health care value.  Dr. Reed Tuckson, Chief of Medical Affairs for UnitedHealth Group and panelist  uderscored this point when he asked of his fellow panelist,

“I was very encouraged by your reorganization models, and I wonder…Given that the things that are coming into your door is  obesity, diabetes, preventive cardiovascular-related, do you have another box in your new vision that incorporates…real community intervention, that creates a new science, a new model, a new paradigm, new providers, assets that really get at that stuff in a way that is transformative and that gets a higher proportion of your revenue than it gets today?”

But even as AMCs are reorganizing to better deliver care to a community and manage the health of defined populations, I stil wonder if this is a sustainable business model.  While executives from Duke and Baylor cited examples of community initiatives, this does not change the fact that private health insurers continue to selectively market in an attempt to maximize a covered population that is younger with the least amount of catostrophic, complex and/or chronic illness possible.  Ullian, Boston Medical Center CEO and panelist put it this way,  “I have been told…when the economy was strong or weak…what you do is somebody else’s problem, and we’re really glad you do it, but we’re not going to give you a dollar for a dollar worth of care.”  Since Massachusetts reformed its health insurance, Boston Medical Center has seen a drop in reimbursement such that it receives $0.64 for every $1.00 it spends on caring for its patients.  After so much shopping for the optimal patient mix, the sickest and most complex cases are covered by Medicaid and Medicare which still operate under a fee-for-service payment structure that contains perverse incentives.

Here’s the take home message.  Because of their unique mission and the services they provide, AMCs must remain viable.  They must continue to reorganize such that they provide maximum value through delivery of appropriate health promotion and disease prevention in the community setting, better coordination of care, and faster translation of innovations from the research setting to the community setting.  Payers must immediately restructure reimbursement systems so that they align with high value, integrated health care delivery.  Leaving public payers responsible for the most medically complex individuals is destructive to the health care system as a whole.

Sources:

Medical Center Presentations

McClellan, M.  The Path Forward for Academic Medical Centers: Innovation, Economics, and Better Health.  Power Point Presentiation on April 27, 2009 at The Brookings Institution.  Washington, DC.

The Path Forward for Academic Medical Centers:  Innovation, Economics, and Better Health. Transcript. April 27, 2009.  The Brookings Institution. Washington, DC.

“[T]here are those who say we cannot afford to invest in science, that support for research is somehow a luxury at moments defined by necessities.  I fundamentally disagree.  Science is more essential for our prosperity, our security, our health, our environment, and our quality of life than it has ever been before.”  These were the words of the President in a speech delivered at the National Academy of Sciences earlier this week.  He went on to set a goal for the US to increase investment in scientific research and development to 3% of the gross domestic product.  Previously, I have discussed this administration’s commitment to science and science education.  I’d like to include a presentation I made a few years ago on the crisis in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education and the importance of a robust science sector to a strong economy.

Older Posts »