User login
For MD-IQ use only
August 2019 – ICYMI
Gastroenterology
Promoting leadership by women in gastroenterology: Lessons learned and future directions. Pascua M et al. 2019 May;156(6):1548-52. doi. org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.03.012.
How to incorporate esophageal manometry teaching in your fellowship program. Kraft C et al. 2019 June;156(8):2120-3. doi. org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.04.024.
How to incorporate bariatric training into your fellowship program. Jirapinyo P et al. 2019 July;157(1):9-13. doi. org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.05.034.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol.
Preparing for large-scale disruptions in health care delivery: Nursing strikes and beyond. Allen JI et al. 2019 July;17(8):1424-7. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2019.02.001.
Optimal management of malignant polyps, from endoscopic assessment and resection to decisions about surgery. Rex DK et al. 2019 July;17(8):1428-37. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.09.040.
Bowel cleansing strategies after suboptimal bowel preparation. Sharara AI et al. 2019 June;17(7):1239-41. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.042.
Holding gastroenterologists accountable for colonoscopy through MACRA episode–based cost measure. Siddique SM et al. 2019 May;17(6):1015-8. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2019.01.009.
Endoscopic mucosal resection vs endoscopic submucosal dissection for Barrett’s esophagus and colorectal neoplasia. Yang D et al. May;17(6):1019-28. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.09.030.
Metal biliary stents in benign disease. Haseeb A et al. 2019 May;17(6):1029-32. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.010.
Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol.
Rigor, reproducibility, and responsibility: A quantum of solace. Turner JR. 2019;7(4):869-71. doi. org/10.1016/j.jcmgh.2019.03.006.
Gastroenterology
Promoting leadership by women in gastroenterology: Lessons learned and future directions. Pascua M et al. 2019 May;156(6):1548-52. doi. org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.03.012.
How to incorporate esophageal manometry teaching in your fellowship program. Kraft C et al. 2019 June;156(8):2120-3. doi. org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.04.024.
How to incorporate bariatric training into your fellowship program. Jirapinyo P et al. 2019 July;157(1):9-13. doi. org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.05.034.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol.
Preparing for large-scale disruptions in health care delivery: Nursing strikes and beyond. Allen JI et al. 2019 July;17(8):1424-7. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2019.02.001.
Optimal management of malignant polyps, from endoscopic assessment and resection to decisions about surgery. Rex DK et al. 2019 July;17(8):1428-37. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.09.040.
Bowel cleansing strategies after suboptimal bowel preparation. Sharara AI et al. 2019 June;17(7):1239-41. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.042.
Holding gastroenterologists accountable for colonoscopy through MACRA episode–based cost measure. Siddique SM et al. 2019 May;17(6):1015-8. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2019.01.009.
Endoscopic mucosal resection vs endoscopic submucosal dissection for Barrett’s esophagus and colorectal neoplasia. Yang D et al. May;17(6):1019-28. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.09.030.
Metal biliary stents in benign disease. Haseeb A et al. 2019 May;17(6):1029-32. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.010.
Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol.
Rigor, reproducibility, and responsibility: A quantum of solace. Turner JR. 2019;7(4):869-71. doi. org/10.1016/j.jcmgh.2019.03.006.
Gastroenterology
Promoting leadership by women in gastroenterology: Lessons learned and future directions. Pascua M et al. 2019 May;156(6):1548-52. doi. org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.03.012.
How to incorporate esophageal manometry teaching in your fellowship program. Kraft C et al. 2019 June;156(8):2120-3. doi. org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.04.024.
How to incorporate bariatric training into your fellowship program. Jirapinyo P et al. 2019 July;157(1):9-13. doi. org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.05.034.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol.
Preparing for large-scale disruptions in health care delivery: Nursing strikes and beyond. Allen JI et al. 2019 July;17(8):1424-7. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2019.02.001.
Optimal management of malignant polyps, from endoscopic assessment and resection to decisions about surgery. Rex DK et al. 2019 July;17(8):1428-37. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.09.040.
Bowel cleansing strategies after suboptimal bowel preparation. Sharara AI et al. 2019 June;17(7):1239-41. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.042.
Holding gastroenterologists accountable for colonoscopy through MACRA episode–based cost measure. Siddique SM et al. 2019 May;17(6):1015-8. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2019.01.009.
Endoscopic mucosal resection vs endoscopic submucosal dissection for Barrett’s esophagus and colorectal neoplasia. Yang D et al. May;17(6):1019-28. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.09.030.
Metal biliary stents in benign disease. Haseeb A et al. 2019 May;17(6):1029-32. doi. org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.010.
Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol.
Rigor, reproducibility, and responsibility: A quantum of solace. Turner JR. 2019;7(4):869-71. doi. org/10.1016/j.jcmgh.2019.03.006.
June 2019 - Question 2
Q2. Correct Answer: C
Rationale
This patient has a main duct IPMN, which has a high potential for malignant transformation and should be resected if possible. Resection is also indicated for branch-duct IPMN's, which are symptomatic (e.g. pancreatitis), associated with obstructive jaundice or main duct involvement, have a solid component within the cyst, or have concerning features on EUS-FNA.
Reference
1. Elta GH, et al, ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Pancreatic Cysts. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018;113:464-79.
[email protected]
Q2. Correct Answer: C
Rationale
This patient has a main duct IPMN, which has a high potential for malignant transformation and should be resected if possible. Resection is also indicated for branch-duct IPMN's, which are symptomatic (e.g. pancreatitis), associated with obstructive jaundice or main duct involvement, have a solid component within the cyst, or have concerning features on EUS-FNA.
Reference
1. Elta GH, et al, ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Pancreatic Cysts. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018;113:464-79.
[email protected]
Q2. Correct Answer: C
Rationale
This patient has a main duct IPMN, which has a high potential for malignant transformation and should be resected if possible. Resection is also indicated for branch-duct IPMN's, which are symptomatic (e.g. pancreatitis), associated with obstructive jaundice or main duct involvement, have a solid component within the cyst, or have concerning features on EUS-FNA.
Reference
1. Elta GH, et al, ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Pancreatic Cysts. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018;113:464-79.
[email protected]
Q2. A 64-year-old male with a recent history of acute pancreatitis has a dilated main pancreatic duct with prominent side branch lesions seen on CT scan. Endoscopic evaluation reveals mucus extruding from a dilated ampulla.
June 2019 - Question 1
Q1. Correct Answer: D
Rationale
The severe reflux may be due to the hiatal hernia and worsened by the obesity. This patient has medically complicated obesity and thus bariatric surgery is an option. A gastric bypass in this situation offers the best anti-reflux procedure for this patient. A fundoplication in the setting of obesity has a higher rate of recurrence of symptoms (Answers A, B). While a gastric sleeve is an option for the obesity, a gastric sleeve (Answer E) may cause de novo reflux or worsen pre-existing symptoms. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (Answer C) has demonstrated promising results in patients with a BMI less than 35 and hiatal hernia less than 3 cm. Data are not available for patients with higher BMIs.
References
1. Abdelrahman T, Latif A, Chan DS, et al. Outcomes after laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery related to obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2018 Mar;51:76-82.
2. Stenard F, Iannelli A. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and gastroesophageal reflux. World J Gastroenterol. 2015 Sep 28;21(36):10348-57.
Q1. Correct Answer: D
Rationale
The severe reflux may be due to the hiatal hernia and worsened by the obesity. This patient has medically complicated obesity and thus bariatric surgery is an option. A gastric bypass in this situation offers the best anti-reflux procedure for this patient. A fundoplication in the setting of obesity has a higher rate of recurrence of symptoms (Answers A, B). While a gastric sleeve is an option for the obesity, a gastric sleeve (Answer E) may cause de novo reflux or worsen pre-existing symptoms. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (Answer C) has demonstrated promising results in patients with a BMI less than 35 and hiatal hernia less than 3 cm. Data are not available for patients with higher BMIs.
References
1. Abdelrahman T, Latif A, Chan DS, et al. Outcomes after laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery related to obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2018 Mar;51:76-82.
2. Stenard F, Iannelli A. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and gastroesophageal reflux. World J Gastroenterol. 2015 Sep 28;21(36):10348-57.
Q1. Correct Answer: D
Rationale
The severe reflux may be due to the hiatal hernia and worsened by the obesity. This patient has medically complicated obesity and thus bariatric surgery is an option. A gastric bypass in this situation offers the best anti-reflux procedure for this patient. A fundoplication in the setting of obesity has a higher rate of recurrence of symptoms (Answers A, B). While a gastric sleeve is an option for the obesity, a gastric sleeve (Answer E) may cause de novo reflux or worsen pre-existing symptoms. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (Answer C) has demonstrated promising results in patients with a BMI less than 35 and hiatal hernia less than 3 cm. Data are not available for patients with higher BMIs.
References
1. Abdelrahman T, Latif A, Chan DS, et al. Outcomes after laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery related to obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2018 Mar;51:76-82.
2. Stenard F, Iannelli A. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and gastroesophageal reflux. World J Gastroenterol. 2015 Sep 28;21(36):10348-57.
Q1. A 56-year-old female with a BMI of 42 (kg/m2), diabetes, and hyperlipidemia presents with a 5-cm hiatal hernia. She has symptoms of heartburn during the day and significant nocturnal regurgitation such that she is sleeping in a recliner at night.
Evolving Sex and Gender in Electronic Health Records
Providing consistent and high-quality services to gender diverse patients is a top priority for health care systems, including the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).1 Over the past decade, awareness of transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) people in the US has increased. Gender identity refers to a person’s inner sense of where that person belongs on a continuum of masculine to androgynous to feminine traits. This identity range can additionally include nonbinary identifications, such as “gender fluid” or “genderqueer.” A goal of patient-centered care is for health care providers (HCPs) to refer to TGNC individuals, like their cisgender counterparts, according to their gender identity. Gender identity for TGNC individuals may be different from their birth sex. Birth sex, commonly referred to as “sex assigned at birth,” is the biologic and physiologic characteristics that are reflected on a person’s original birth certificate and described as male or female.
Background
In the electronic health record (EHR), birth sex is an important, structured variable that is used to facilitate effective patient care that is efficient, equitable, and patient-centered. Birth sex in an EHR often is used to cue automatic timely generation of health screens (eg, pap smears, prostate exams) and calculation of medication dosages and laboratory test ranges by adjusting for a person’s typical hormonal history and anatomy.
Gender identity fields are independently helpful to include in the EHR, because clinicians can use this information to ensure proper pronoun use and avoid misgendering a patient. Additionally, the gender identity field informs HCPs who may conduct more frequent or different health screenings to evaluate specific health risks that are more prevalent in gender minority (ie, lesbian, gay, bisexual) patients.2,3
EHRs rely on structured data elements to standardize data about patients for clinical care, quality improvement, data sharing, and patient safety.4,5 However, health care organizations are grappling with how to incorporate gender identity and birth sex information into EHRs.3 A 2011 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) directive required staff and providers to address and provide care to veterans based on their gender identity. Like other health systems, VHA had 1 demographic data field in the EHR to indicate birth sex, with no field for gender identity. A HCP could enter gender identity information into a progress note, but this addition might not be noticed by other HCPs. Consequently, staff and providers had no effective way of knowing a veteran’s gender identity from the EHR, which contributed to misgendering TGNC veterans.
With the singular demographic field of sex representing both birth sex and gender identity, some TGNC veterans chose to change their birth sex information to align with their gender identity. This change assured TGNC veterans that staff and providers would not misgender them because the birth sex field is easily observed and would allow providers to use respectful, gender-consistent pronouns when speaking with them. However, changing the birth sex field can misalign natal sex–based clinical reminders, medication dosages, and laboratory test values, which created potential patient safety risks. Thus, birth sex created potential hazards to quality and safety when used as a marker even with other variables—such as current anatomy, height, and weight—for health screenings, medication dosing, and other medical decisions.
In this article, we: (1) outline several patient safety issues that can arise with the birth sex field serving as an indicator for both birth sex and gender identity; (2) present case examples that illustrate the benefits of self-identified gender identity (SIGI) in an EHR; (3) describe the process of work-group development of patient-provider communication tools to improve patient safety; and (4) provide a brief overview of resources rolled out as a part of SIGI. This report serves as a guide for other federal organizations that wish to increase affirmative care and safe practices for transgender consumers. We will provide an overview of the tasks leading up to SIGI implementation, deliverables from the project, and lessons learned.
Veterans Affairs SIGI EHR Field
In 2016, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) began implementing a SIGI demographic field across all EHRs, requiring administrative staff to ask enrolled and new veterans their gender identity (full implementation of SIGI has not yet occurred and will occur when a later EHR upgrade displays SIGI in the EHR). The initiation of SIGI did not change any information in the birth sex field, meaning that some veterans continue to have birth sex field information that results in problematic automatic medical reminders and dosing values. Consequently, the National Center for Patient Safety (NCPS) noted that this discrepancy may be a pertinent patient safety issue. The NCPS and Lesbian, Gay Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Health national program offices worked to provide documentation to TGNC veterans to inform them of the clinical health care implications of having their birth sex demographic field reflect gender identity that is inconsistent with their natal sex (ie, original birth certificate record of sex).
Patient Safety Issues
Conversations between transgender patients and their HCPs about transition goals, necessary medical tests, and laboratory ranges based on their current anatomy and physiology can improve patient safety and satisfaction with medical care. Prior to the availability of the SIGI field, VA facilities varied in their documentation of gender identity in the patient chart. LGBT veteran care coordinators discussed diverse suggestions that ranged from informally documenting SIGI in each progress note to using flags to draw attention to use certain sections of local EHRs. These suggestions, though well intentioned, were not adequate for documenting gender identity at the national level because of regional variations in EHR customization options. Furthermore, the use of flags for drawing clinical attention to gender identity posed a potential for stigma toward patients, given that flags are typically reserved for behavioral or other risk concerns.
Several problems can emerge when HCPs are not equipped with accurate information about patient birth sex and SIGI. For instance, TGNC patients lack a way of being known from clinic to clinic by proper pronouns or self-labels. Providers may misgender veterans, which is a negative experience for TGNC veterans linked with increased barriers to care and decreased frequency of health care visits.4 Moreover, the quality and personalization of care across clinic locations in the facility’s system is variable without a consistent method of documenting birth sex and SIGI. For example, in clinics where the veteran is well known (eg, primary care), staff may be more affirming of the veteran’s gender identity than those in specialty care clinics that lack prior patient contact.
Furthermore, depending on hormone and surgical interventions, some health screenings may be irrelevant for TGNC patients. To determine appropriate health screens and assess potential risks associated with hormone therapy, providers must have access to current information regarding a patient’s physiologic anatomy.6 Health screenings and laboratory results in sophisticated EHRs (ie, EHRs that might autodetermine normative values) may populate incorrect treatment recommendations, such as sex-based medication dosages. Furthermore, laboratory test results could be incorrectly paired with a different assumed hormonal history, potentially putting the patient at risk.
Case Examples
An important element of EHRs facilitating the goal of patient-centered care is that patients have their EHR validate their sense of self, and their providers can use names and pronouns that correspond to the patient’s SIGI. Some patients have spent a great amount of effort altering their name and sex in legal records and may want their birth sex field to conform to their gender identity. To that end, patients may seek to alter their birth sex information so that it is congruent with how they see themselves to affirm their identity, despite patient safety risks. Several scenarios below demonstrate the potential costs and benefits to patients altering birth sex and SIGI in the EHR.
Case 1 Presentation
A young transman is working with his therapist on engaging in self-validating behaviors. This veteran has met with his PCP and informed the provider of his decision to alter the birth sex field in his EHR from female to male.
Ideally, the patient would begin to have regular conversations with his HCPs about his birth sex and gender identity, so that medical professionals can provide relevant screenings and affirm the patient’s gender identity while acknowledging his right to list his birth sex as he chooses. However, particular attention will need to be paid to assuring that natal sex–based health screenings (eg, pap smears, mammograms) are conducted on an appropriate schedule and that the veteran continues to discuss his current anatomy with providers.
Case 2 Presentation
A veteran has a male birth sex, identifies as a transwoman, and uses nongendered plural pronouns “they/them/theirs.” The word “they,” used as a singular pronoun may feel uncomfortable to some providers, but it validates the veteran’s sense of self and helps them feel welcome in the treatment environment. This patient communicated proactively with their HCPs about their transition goals and current hormone use.
They opted to have their birth sex field continue to indicate “male” because they, after a discussion with their PCP, are aware of the health implications of receiving an incorrect dose for their diabetes medication. They understand that having open communication and receiving input from their HCPs is part of good health care.
Case 3 Presentation
A patient with a sexual development disorder (intersex condition) identifies as a man (indicated as “male” in the SIGI field) and had his birth sex field changed to match his gender identity. He now seeks to change his birth sex field back to female, as he has complicated health considerations due to breast cancer.
The veteran thinks it is important that providers know about his intersex condition so that his breast cancer care is as seamless as possible. In particular, although this veteran is comfortable talking about his intersex condition and his identity with his PCP and oncologist, he wants to ensure that all people involved in his care (eg, pharmacists, radiologists) use the correct values in interpreting his medical data. Providers will need to use the female birth sex field for interpreting his medical data but use male pronouns when interacting with the veteran and documenting his care.
These case examples illustrate the need for HCPs to have patient-affirming education and appropriate clinical tools available when speaking to patients about birth sex, SIGI, and the implications of changing birth sex in the EHR. Moreover, these cases highlight that patient health needs may vary over time, due to factors such as perceived costs/benefits of a change in the sex field of the EHR as well as patient comfort with providers.
Current Status of SIGI and EHR
Although having separate fields for birth sex and SIGI in the EHR is ideal, the VHA does not yet have a fully functional SIGI field, and several TGNC veterans have changed their birth sex field to align with their gender identity. Roughly 9,700 patients have diagnostic codes related to transgender care in the VHA, meaning thousands of current patients would potentially benefit from SIGI implementation (John Blosnich, written communication, March 2018). A possible action that the VHA could take with the goal of enhancing patient safety would be to revert the birth sex field of patients who had previously changed the field back to the patient’s original birth sex. However, if this alteration to the EHR were done without the patient’s consent, numerous additional problems would result—including invalidating a veteran’s wishes—potentially driving patients away from receiving health care.
Moreover, in the absence of updated SIGI information (which only the veteran can provide), making a change in the EHR would perpetuate the misgendering of TGNC veterans who have already sought an administrative fix for this problem. Thus, the agency decided to engage patients in a discussion about their decision to keep the birth sex field consistent with their original birth certificate. In cases in which the field had been changed previously, the recommendation is for HCPs to gain patient consent to change the birth sex field back to what was on their original birth certificate. Thus, decisions about what should be listed in the EHR are made by the veteran using an informed decision-making model.
Patient Safety Education Workgroup
To begin the process of disentangling birth sex and SIGI fields in the EHR, 2 work groups were created: a technical work group (coding the patches for SIGI implementation) and a SIGI patient safety education work group. The patient safety education work group was committed to promoting affirmative VA policies that require validation of the gender identity of all veterans and pursuing best practices through clinical guidelines to promote effective, efficient, equitable, and safe veteran care. The patient safety education work group included representatives from all 3 branches of the VA (VHA, Veterans Benefits Administration, and National Cemetery Administration), including clinical media, patient safety, information technology, and education specialists. The group developed trainings for administrative staff about the appropriate ways to ask birth sex and SIGI questions, and how to record veteran-driven responses.
SIGI Fact Sheet
The patient safety education work group examined clinical literature and developed tools for staff and veterans to facilitate effective discussions about the importance and utility of documenting both birth sex and SIGI in the EHR. The patient safety education work group along with media and educational experts created basic key term definition documents to address the importance, purpose, and use of the SIGI field. The patient safety education work group developed 2 documents to facilitate communication between patients and providers.
A 1-page veteran-facing fact sheet was developed that described the differences between birth sex and SIGI fields and how these fields are used in the VA EHR system (Figure 1). In addition, a 1-page HCP-facing fact sheet was designed to inform HCPs that patients may have changed their birth sex in their EHR or might still wish to change their birth sex field, and to inform HCPs of the importance of patient-centered, gender-affirmative care (Figure 2). An additional goal of both documents was to educate veterans and HCPs on how the EHR automatically calculates laboratory results and screening notifications based on birth sex.
Review Process
As part of reviewing and finalizing the SIGI patient fact sheet, the patient safety education work group previewed the document’s content with veterans who provided feedback on drafts to improve comprehension, patient-centered care, and clinical accuracy. For instance, several patients commented that the document should address many gender identities, including intersex identities. As noted in one of the case presentations earlier, individuals who identify as intersex may have changed their birth sex to be consistent with their gender and might benefit from being informed about the EHR’s autocalculation feature. The patient safety education work group adjusted the SIGI patient fact sheet to include individuals who identify as intersex and instructed them to have a conversation with their HCP regarding potential birth sex changes in the EHR.
Much of the veteran feedback to the patient safety education work group reflected veteran concerns, more broadly, about implementation of SIGI. Many veterans were interested in how federal policy changes might affect their benefits package or clinical care within the VA. The SIGI patient fact sheet was a tool for communicating that Department of Defense (DoD) policies, specifically, do not have a bearing on VA care for LGBT veterans. Therefore, SIGI information does not affect service connection or benefits eligibility and is not shared with the DoD. Veterans found this information helpful to see reflected in the SIGI patient fact sheet.
The patient safety education work group also shared the SIGI provider fact sheet with VHA providers before finalizing the content. PCPs gave feedback to improve the specification of patient safety concerns and appropriate readership language. The patient safety education work group adjusted the SIGI provider fact sheet to be inclusive of relevant literature and an e-consultation link for assisting HCPs who are unsure how to proceed with a patient.
Implementation
The patient safety education work group also developed several materials to provide information about the birth sex and SIGI fields in the EHR. Because the SIGI demographic field is new and collected by clerical staff, training was necessary to explain the difference between birth sex and SIGI before implementation in the EHR. The training sessions educated staff about the difference between birth sex and SIGI, how to ask and respond to questions respectfully, and how to update these fields in the EHR. These trainings included a 20-minute video demonstrating best practices for asking about SIGI, a frequently asked questions document responding to 7 common questions about the new fields, and a quick reference guide for administrative staff to have handy at their desks.
Dissemination of the SIGI patient and provider fact sheets is planned to occur, ideally, several weeks before implementation of the new patches updating the EHR fields in spring 2020. Building on existing resources, the patient safety education work group plans to disseminate the patient fact sheets via e-mail lists for the national mental health facility leaders as well as through e-mail lists for VA PCPs, nursing and clerical staff, privacy officers, facility LGBT veteran care coordinators, VISN leads, transgender e-consultation, the Office of Connected Care, the LGBT external homepage for the VA, and the training website for VA employees. The goal is to target potential points of contact for veterans who may have already changed their birth sex and might benefit medically from altering birth sex to be consistent with their original birth certificate.
The SIGI provider fact sheet will be disseminated using internal e-mails, announcements on routine LGBT veteran care coordinator calls, weekly Ask LGBT Health teleconferences, and announcements at LGBT health training events both internally and externally. Several dissemination tools have already ensured that VA employees are aware of the SIGI field in the EHR. Leadership throughout the VA will be encouraged to share SIGI trainings with clerical staff. Additionally, broad-based e-mails summarizing changes to the EHR will be provided concurrent to the SIGI patch implementation to VA staff as well as links to the resources and training materials.
Challenges
One difficulty in the development process for both SIGI fact sheets was addressing the issue of patient safety for veterans who may be at different points in their gender transition process. It was challenging for the patient safety education work group to not sound alarmist in discussing the safety implications of birth sex changes in the EHR, as this is just one factor in clinical decision making. The goal was to educate veterans from a patient safety perspective about the implications of having a state-of-the-art, automated EHR. However, text can be perceived differently by different people, which is why the patient safety education work group asked veterans to preview the patient document and clinical providers to preview the provider document.
Both work groups encountered technologic challenges, including a delay in the implementation of the SIGI field due to a systemwide delay of EHR updates. Although it released training and educational materials to the VHA, the patient safety education work group understood that at some point in the future, VA programmers will update the EHR to change the information clerks and HCPs can see in the EHR. Coordination of the fact sheet release alongside information technology has been an important part of the SIGI rollout process.
Conclusion
HCPs have a complex role in providing treatment to TGNC patients in the VHA: They must affirm a patient’s gender identity through how they address them, while openly communicating the health risks inherent in having their birth sex field be incongruent with the sex recorded on their original birth certificate. Accomplishing these tasks simultaneously is difficult without invalidating the veteran’s identity or right to choose their EHR demographic birth sex label. Furthermore, patients may ask HCPs to write letters of support for either medical or surgical intervention or other documentation changes (eg, changes to a patient’s legal name, passport changes, or a safe passage letter for TGNC patients). Navigating the dialectic of safety and validation requires strong rapport, trust, and effective communication in the patient-provider relationship and great empathy by the provider.
A future task for the SIGI patient safety education work group is to continue to communicate with the technical work group and providers in the field about how demographic fields in the EHR are utilized to enable future EHR changes. This hurdle is not easy because EHR updates change the infrastructure through which demographic content is delivered and incorporated into a patient’s treatment. The VA HCPs are tasked with thoroughly examining the results that automated systems produce to ensure safe and accurate medical services are always provided to all patients. An integral part of patient-centered care is balancing any computer-guided recommendations with an understanding that actual patient needs may differ due to presence/absence of anatomy and other factors (eg, weight, current medications).
From a systems perspective, a benefit of adding the SIGI demographic field is systemic improvement in calculating the number of transgender veterans under VA care and evaluating health outcomes for this population. SIGI is particularly important for signaling gender pronouns for veterans, regardless of whether they are receiving care for a gender-related diagnosis. In terms of scope, the SIGI project potentially will apply to > 9 million enrolled veterans and nearly 400,000 VA employees.
Improvements could be made in the SIGI field of the new EHR, such as expanding the options for self-labels. Additionally, a text field could be used to enhance the quality of personalization provided to veterans self-identifying in the EHR, including pronoun specification. Moreover, adding new fields such as “preferred name” could improve the health care experience of not only TGNC veterans but all veterans who use something other than their full legal name (eg, a nickname). It will be good practice to notify providers and staff of a veteran’s requested name and pronouns when the patient checks in at an electronic kiosk so that all staff immediately know how to address the patient. The VHA can continue to adjust the options for the SIGI field once the new EHR system is operational. Ideally, this new EHR will display birth sex and SIGI to clinicians or clerks engaged in patient interactions.
Technology will continue to automate medical care, meaning that HCPs must be vigilant about how computer programming and the accuracy of prepopulated information affect patient care. The concerns discussed in this report relating to patient safety are relatively absent in the medical literature, even though substantial health risks exist to patients who have birth sex listed incorrectly for any reason.6,7 Additionally, administrative burden can be reduced if patients who do not need certain screenings based on their current anatomy are not contacted for unnecessary screenings. Future EHR systems might incorporate anatomical considerations from an inventory to assist in automating patient care in safe and accessible ways.
1. Institute of Medicine Committee on Quality of Health Care. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2001. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222274. Accessed April 10, 2019.
2. Cahill SR, Baker K, Deutsch MB, Keatley J, Makadon HJ. Inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity in stage 3 meaningful use guidelines: a huge step forward for LGBT health. LGBT Health. 2016;3(2):100-102.
3. Cahill SR, Makadon HJ. Sexual orientation and gender identity data collection update: U.S. government takes steps to promote sexual orientation and gender identity data collection through meaningful use guidelines. LGBT Health. 2014;1(3):157-160.
4. Fridsma D. EHR interoperability: the structured data capture initiative. https://www.healthit.gov/buzz-blog/electronic-health-and-medical-records/ehr-interoperabiity-structured-data-capture-initiative. Published January 31, 2013. Accessed April 10, 2019.
5. Muray T, Berberian L. The importance of structured data elements in EHRs. Computerworld website. https://www.computerworld.com/article/2470987/healthcare-it/the-importance-of-structured-data-elements-in-ehrs.html. Published March 31, 2011. Accessed April 10, 2019.
6. Deutsch MB, Green J, Keatley J, Mayer G, Hastings J, Hall AM; World Professional Association for Transgender Health EMR Working Group. Electronic medical records and the transgender patient: recommendations from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health EMR Working Group.
7. Deutsch MB, Keatley J, Sevelius J, Shade SB. Collection of gender identity data using electronic medical records: survey of current end-user practices. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care. 2014;25(6):657-663.
Providing consistent and high-quality services to gender diverse patients is a top priority for health care systems, including the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).1 Over the past decade, awareness of transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) people in the US has increased. Gender identity refers to a person’s inner sense of where that person belongs on a continuum of masculine to androgynous to feminine traits. This identity range can additionally include nonbinary identifications, such as “gender fluid” or “genderqueer.” A goal of patient-centered care is for health care providers (HCPs) to refer to TGNC individuals, like their cisgender counterparts, according to their gender identity. Gender identity for TGNC individuals may be different from their birth sex. Birth sex, commonly referred to as “sex assigned at birth,” is the biologic and physiologic characteristics that are reflected on a person’s original birth certificate and described as male or female.
Background
In the electronic health record (EHR), birth sex is an important, structured variable that is used to facilitate effective patient care that is efficient, equitable, and patient-centered. Birth sex in an EHR often is used to cue automatic timely generation of health screens (eg, pap smears, prostate exams) and calculation of medication dosages and laboratory test ranges by adjusting for a person’s typical hormonal history and anatomy.
Gender identity fields are independently helpful to include in the EHR, because clinicians can use this information to ensure proper pronoun use and avoid misgendering a patient. Additionally, the gender identity field informs HCPs who may conduct more frequent or different health screenings to evaluate specific health risks that are more prevalent in gender minority (ie, lesbian, gay, bisexual) patients.2,3
EHRs rely on structured data elements to standardize data about patients for clinical care, quality improvement, data sharing, and patient safety.4,5 However, health care organizations are grappling with how to incorporate gender identity and birth sex information into EHRs.3 A 2011 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) directive required staff and providers to address and provide care to veterans based on their gender identity. Like other health systems, VHA had 1 demographic data field in the EHR to indicate birth sex, with no field for gender identity. A HCP could enter gender identity information into a progress note, but this addition might not be noticed by other HCPs. Consequently, staff and providers had no effective way of knowing a veteran’s gender identity from the EHR, which contributed to misgendering TGNC veterans.
With the singular demographic field of sex representing both birth sex and gender identity, some TGNC veterans chose to change their birth sex information to align with their gender identity. This change assured TGNC veterans that staff and providers would not misgender them because the birth sex field is easily observed and would allow providers to use respectful, gender-consistent pronouns when speaking with them. However, changing the birth sex field can misalign natal sex–based clinical reminders, medication dosages, and laboratory test values, which created potential patient safety risks. Thus, birth sex created potential hazards to quality and safety when used as a marker even with other variables—such as current anatomy, height, and weight—for health screenings, medication dosing, and other medical decisions.
In this article, we: (1) outline several patient safety issues that can arise with the birth sex field serving as an indicator for both birth sex and gender identity; (2) present case examples that illustrate the benefits of self-identified gender identity (SIGI) in an EHR; (3) describe the process of work-group development of patient-provider communication tools to improve patient safety; and (4) provide a brief overview of resources rolled out as a part of SIGI. This report serves as a guide for other federal organizations that wish to increase affirmative care and safe practices for transgender consumers. We will provide an overview of the tasks leading up to SIGI implementation, deliverables from the project, and lessons learned.
Veterans Affairs SIGI EHR Field
In 2016, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) began implementing a SIGI demographic field across all EHRs, requiring administrative staff to ask enrolled and new veterans their gender identity (full implementation of SIGI has not yet occurred and will occur when a later EHR upgrade displays SIGI in the EHR). The initiation of SIGI did not change any information in the birth sex field, meaning that some veterans continue to have birth sex field information that results in problematic automatic medical reminders and dosing values. Consequently, the National Center for Patient Safety (NCPS) noted that this discrepancy may be a pertinent patient safety issue. The NCPS and Lesbian, Gay Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Health national program offices worked to provide documentation to TGNC veterans to inform them of the clinical health care implications of having their birth sex demographic field reflect gender identity that is inconsistent with their natal sex (ie, original birth certificate record of sex).
Patient Safety Issues
Conversations between transgender patients and their HCPs about transition goals, necessary medical tests, and laboratory ranges based on their current anatomy and physiology can improve patient safety and satisfaction with medical care. Prior to the availability of the SIGI field, VA facilities varied in their documentation of gender identity in the patient chart. LGBT veteran care coordinators discussed diverse suggestions that ranged from informally documenting SIGI in each progress note to using flags to draw attention to use certain sections of local EHRs. These suggestions, though well intentioned, were not adequate for documenting gender identity at the national level because of regional variations in EHR customization options. Furthermore, the use of flags for drawing clinical attention to gender identity posed a potential for stigma toward patients, given that flags are typically reserved for behavioral or other risk concerns.
Several problems can emerge when HCPs are not equipped with accurate information about patient birth sex and SIGI. For instance, TGNC patients lack a way of being known from clinic to clinic by proper pronouns or self-labels. Providers may misgender veterans, which is a negative experience for TGNC veterans linked with increased barriers to care and decreased frequency of health care visits.4 Moreover, the quality and personalization of care across clinic locations in the facility’s system is variable without a consistent method of documenting birth sex and SIGI. For example, in clinics where the veteran is well known (eg, primary care), staff may be more affirming of the veteran’s gender identity than those in specialty care clinics that lack prior patient contact.
Furthermore, depending on hormone and surgical interventions, some health screenings may be irrelevant for TGNC patients. To determine appropriate health screens and assess potential risks associated with hormone therapy, providers must have access to current information regarding a patient’s physiologic anatomy.6 Health screenings and laboratory results in sophisticated EHRs (ie, EHRs that might autodetermine normative values) may populate incorrect treatment recommendations, such as sex-based medication dosages. Furthermore, laboratory test results could be incorrectly paired with a different assumed hormonal history, potentially putting the patient at risk.
Case Examples
An important element of EHRs facilitating the goal of patient-centered care is that patients have their EHR validate their sense of self, and their providers can use names and pronouns that correspond to the patient’s SIGI. Some patients have spent a great amount of effort altering their name and sex in legal records and may want their birth sex field to conform to their gender identity. To that end, patients may seek to alter their birth sex information so that it is congruent with how they see themselves to affirm their identity, despite patient safety risks. Several scenarios below demonstrate the potential costs and benefits to patients altering birth sex and SIGI in the EHR.
Case 1 Presentation
A young transman is working with his therapist on engaging in self-validating behaviors. This veteran has met with his PCP and informed the provider of his decision to alter the birth sex field in his EHR from female to male.
Ideally, the patient would begin to have regular conversations with his HCPs about his birth sex and gender identity, so that medical professionals can provide relevant screenings and affirm the patient’s gender identity while acknowledging his right to list his birth sex as he chooses. However, particular attention will need to be paid to assuring that natal sex–based health screenings (eg, pap smears, mammograms) are conducted on an appropriate schedule and that the veteran continues to discuss his current anatomy with providers.
Case 2 Presentation
A veteran has a male birth sex, identifies as a transwoman, and uses nongendered plural pronouns “they/them/theirs.” The word “they,” used as a singular pronoun may feel uncomfortable to some providers, but it validates the veteran’s sense of self and helps them feel welcome in the treatment environment. This patient communicated proactively with their HCPs about their transition goals and current hormone use.
They opted to have their birth sex field continue to indicate “male” because they, after a discussion with their PCP, are aware of the health implications of receiving an incorrect dose for their diabetes medication. They understand that having open communication and receiving input from their HCPs is part of good health care.
Case 3 Presentation
A patient with a sexual development disorder (intersex condition) identifies as a man (indicated as “male” in the SIGI field) and had his birth sex field changed to match his gender identity. He now seeks to change his birth sex field back to female, as he has complicated health considerations due to breast cancer.
The veteran thinks it is important that providers know about his intersex condition so that his breast cancer care is as seamless as possible. In particular, although this veteran is comfortable talking about his intersex condition and his identity with his PCP and oncologist, he wants to ensure that all people involved in his care (eg, pharmacists, radiologists) use the correct values in interpreting his medical data. Providers will need to use the female birth sex field for interpreting his medical data but use male pronouns when interacting with the veteran and documenting his care.
These case examples illustrate the need for HCPs to have patient-affirming education and appropriate clinical tools available when speaking to patients about birth sex, SIGI, and the implications of changing birth sex in the EHR. Moreover, these cases highlight that patient health needs may vary over time, due to factors such as perceived costs/benefits of a change in the sex field of the EHR as well as patient comfort with providers.
Current Status of SIGI and EHR
Although having separate fields for birth sex and SIGI in the EHR is ideal, the VHA does not yet have a fully functional SIGI field, and several TGNC veterans have changed their birth sex field to align with their gender identity. Roughly 9,700 patients have diagnostic codes related to transgender care in the VHA, meaning thousands of current patients would potentially benefit from SIGI implementation (John Blosnich, written communication, March 2018). A possible action that the VHA could take with the goal of enhancing patient safety would be to revert the birth sex field of patients who had previously changed the field back to the patient’s original birth sex. However, if this alteration to the EHR were done without the patient’s consent, numerous additional problems would result—including invalidating a veteran’s wishes—potentially driving patients away from receiving health care.
Moreover, in the absence of updated SIGI information (which only the veteran can provide), making a change in the EHR would perpetuate the misgendering of TGNC veterans who have already sought an administrative fix for this problem. Thus, the agency decided to engage patients in a discussion about their decision to keep the birth sex field consistent with their original birth certificate. In cases in which the field had been changed previously, the recommendation is for HCPs to gain patient consent to change the birth sex field back to what was on their original birth certificate. Thus, decisions about what should be listed in the EHR are made by the veteran using an informed decision-making model.
Patient Safety Education Workgroup
To begin the process of disentangling birth sex and SIGI fields in the EHR, 2 work groups were created: a technical work group (coding the patches for SIGI implementation) and a SIGI patient safety education work group. The patient safety education work group was committed to promoting affirmative VA policies that require validation of the gender identity of all veterans and pursuing best practices through clinical guidelines to promote effective, efficient, equitable, and safe veteran care. The patient safety education work group included representatives from all 3 branches of the VA (VHA, Veterans Benefits Administration, and National Cemetery Administration), including clinical media, patient safety, information technology, and education specialists. The group developed trainings for administrative staff about the appropriate ways to ask birth sex and SIGI questions, and how to record veteran-driven responses.
SIGI Fact Sheet
The patient safety education work group examined clinical literature and developed tools for staff and veterans to facilitate effective discussions about the importance and utility of documenting both birth sex and SIGI in the EHR. The patient safety education work group along with media and educational experts created basic key term definition documents to address the importance, purpose, and use of the SIGI field. The patient safety education work group developed 2 documents to facilitate communication between patients and providers.
A 1-page veteran-facing fact sheet was developed that described the differences between birth sex and SIGI fields and how these fields are used in the VA EHR system (Figure 1). In addition, a 1-page HCP-facing fact sheet was designed to inform HCPs that patients may have changed their birth sex in their EHR or might still wish to change their birth sex field, and to inform HCPs of the importance of patient-centered, gender-affirmative care (Figure 2). An additional goal of both documents was to educate veterans and HCPs on how the EHR automatically calculates laboratory results and screening notifications based on birth sex.
Review Process
As part of reviewing and finalizing the SIGI patient fact sheet, the patient safety education work group previewed the document’s content with veterans who provided feedback on drafts to improve comprehension, patient-centered care, and clinical accuracy. For instance, several patients commented that the document should address many gender identities, including intersex identities. As noted in one of the case presentations earlier, individuals who identify as intersex may have changed their birth sex to be consistent with their gender and might benefit from being informed about the EHR’s autocalculation feature. The patient safety education work group adjusted the SIGI patient fact sheet to include individuals who identify as intersex and instructed them to have a conversation with their HCP regarding potential birth sex changes in the EHR.
Much of the veteran feedback to the patient safety education work group reflected veteran concerns, more broadly, about implementation of SIGI. Many veterans were interested in how federal policy changes might affect their benefits package or clinical care within the VA. The SIGI patient fact sheet was a tool for communicating that Department of Defense (DoD) policies, specifically, do not have a bearing on VA care for LGBT veterans. Therefore, SIGI information does not affect service connection or benefits eligibility and is not shared with the DoD. Veterans found this information helpful to see reflected in the SIGI patient fact sheet.
The patient safety education work group also shared the SIGI provider fact sheet with VHA providers before finalizing the content. PCPs gave feedback to improve the specification of patient safety concerns and appropriate readership language. The patient safety education work group adjusted the SIGI provider fact sheet to be inclusive of relevant literature and an e-consultation link for assisting HCPs who are unsure how to proceed with a patient.
Implementation
The patient safety education work group also developed several materials to provide information about the birth sex and SIGI fields in the EHR. Because the SIGI demographic field is new and collected by clerical staff, training was necessary to explain the difference between birth sex and SIGI before implementation in the EHR. The training sessions educated staff about the difference between birth sex and SIGI, how to ask and respond to questions respectfully, and how to update these fields in the EHR. These trainings included a 20-minute video demonstrating best practices for asking about SIGI, a frequently asked questions document responding to 7 common questions about the new fields, and a quick reference guide for administrative staff to have handy at their desks.
Dissemination of the SIGI patient and provider fact sheets is planned to occur, ideally, several weeks before implementation of the new patches updating the EHR fields in spring 2020. Building on existing resources, the patient safety education work group plans to disseminate the patient fact sheets via e-mail lists for the national mental health facility leaders as well as through e-mail lists for VA PCPs, nursing and clerical staff, privacy officers, facility LGBT veteran care coordinators, VISN leads, transgender e-consultation, the Office of Connected Care, the LGBT external homepage for the VA, and the training website for VA employees. The goal is to target potential points of contact for veterans who may have already changed their birth sex and might benefit medically from altering birth sex to be consistent with their original birth certificate.
The SIGI provider fact sheet will be disseminated using internal e-mails, announcements on routine LGBT veteran care coordinator calls, weekly Ask LGBT Health teleconferences, and announcements at LGBT health training events both internally and externally. Several dissemination tools have already ensured that VA employees are aware of the SIGI field in the EHR. Leadership throughout the VA will be encouraged to share SIGI trainings with clerical staff. Additionally, broad-based e-mails summarizing changes to the EHR will be provided concurrent to the SIGI patch implementation to VA staff as well as links to the resources and training materials.
Challenges
One difficulty in the development process for both SIGI fact sheets was addressing the issue of patient safety for veterans who may be at different points in their gender transition process. It was challenging for the patient safety education work group to not sound alarmist in discussing the safety implications of birth sex changes in the EHR, as this is just one factor in clinical decision making. The goal was to educate veterans from a patient safety perspective about the implications of having a state-of-the-art, automated EHR. However, text can be perceived differently by different people, which is why the patient safety education work group asked veterans to preview the patient document and clinical providers to preview the provider document.
Both work groups encountered technologic challenges, including a delay in the implementation of the SIGI field due to a systemwide delay of EHR updates. Although it released training and educational materials to the VHA, the patient safety education work group understood that at some point in the future, VA programmers will update the EHR to change the information clerks and HCPs can see in the EHR. Coordination of the fact sheet release alongside information technology has been an important part of the SIGI rollout process.
Conclusion
HCPs have a complex role in providing treatment to TGNC patients in the VHA: They must affirm a patient’s gender identity through how they address them, while openly communicating the health risks inherent in having their birth sex field be incongruent with the sex recorded on their original birth certificate. Accomplishing these tasks simultaneously is difficult without invalidating the veteran’s identity or right to choose their EHR demographic birth sex label. Furthermore, patients may ask HCPs to write letters of support for either medical or surgical intervention or other documentation changes (eg, changes to a patient’s legal name, passport changes, or a safe passage letter for TGNC patients). Navigating the dialectic of safety and validation requires strong rapport, trust, and effective communication in the patient-provider relationship and great empathy by the provider.
A future task for the SIGI patient safety education work group is to continue to communicate with the technical work group and providers in the field about how demographic fields in the EHR are utilized to enable future EHR changes. This hurdle is not easy because EHR updates change the infrastructure through which demographic content is delivered and incorporated into a patient’s treatment. The VA HCPs are tasked with thoroughly examining the results that automated systems produce to ensure safe and accurate medical services are always provided to all patients. An integral part of patient-centered care is balancing any computer-guided recommendations with an understanding that actual patient needs may differ due to presence/absence of anatomy and other factors (eg, weight, current medications).
From a systems perspective, a benefit of adding the SIGI demographic field is systemic improvement in calculating the number of transgender veterans under VA care and evaluating health outcomes for this population. SIGI is particularly important for signaling gender pronouns for veterans, regardless of whether they are receiving care for a gender-related diagnosis. In terms of scope, the SIGI project potentially will apply to > 9 million enrolled veterans and nearly 400,000 VA employees.
Improvements could be made in the SIGI field of the new EHR, such as expanding the options for self-labels. Additionally, a text field could be used to enhance the quality of personalization provided to veterans self-identifying in the EHR, including pronoun specification. Moreover, adding new fields such as “preferred name” could improve the health care experience of not only TGNC veterans but all veterans who use something other than their full legal name (eg, a nickname). It will be good practice to notify providers and staff of a veteran’s requested name and pronouns when the patient checks in at an electronic kiosk so that all staff immediately know how to address the patient. The VHA can continue to adjust the options for the SIGI field once the new EHR system is operational. Ideally, this new EHR will display birth sex and SIGI to clinicians or clerks engaged in patient interactions.
Technology will continue to automate medical care, meaning that HCPs must be vigilant about how computer programming and the accuracy of prepopulated information affect patient care. The concerns discussed in this report relating to patient safety are relatively absent in the medical literature, even though substantial health risks exist to patients who have birth sex listed incorrectly for any reason.6,7 Additionally, administrative burden can be reduced if patients who do not need certain screenings based on their current anatomy are not contacted for unnecessary screenings. Future EHR systems might incorporate anatomical considerations from an inventory to assist in automating patient care in safe and accessible ways.
Providing consistent and high-quality services to gender diverse patients is a top priority for health care systems, including the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).1 Over the past decade, awareness of transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) people in the US has increased. Gender identity refers to a person’s inner sense of where that person belongs on a continuum of masculine to androgynous to feminine traits. This identity range can additionally include nonbinary identifications, such as “gender fluid” or “genderqueer.” A goal of patient-centered care is for health care providers (HCPs) to refer to TGNC individuals, like their cisgender counterparts, according to their gender identity. Gender identity for TGNC individuals may be different from their birth sex. Birth sex, commonly referred to as “sex assigned at birth,” is the biologic and physiologic characteristics that are reflected on a person’s original birth certificate and described as male or female.
Background
In the electronic health record (EHR), birth sex is an important, structured variable that is used to facilitate effective patient care that is efficient, equitable, and patient-centered. Birth sex in an EHR often is used to cue automatic timely generation of health screens (eg, pap smears, prostate exams) and calculation of medication dosages and laboratory test ranges by adjusting for a person’s typical hormonal history and anatomy.
Gender identity fields are independently helpful to include in the EHR, because clinicians can use this information to ensure proper pronoun use and avoid misgendering a patient. Additionally, the gender identity field informs HCPs who may conduct more frequent or different health screenings to evaluate specific health risks that are more prevalent in gender minority (ie, lesbian, gay, bisexual) patients.2,3
EHRs rely on structured data elements to standardize data about patients for clinical care, quality improvement, data sharing, and patient safety.4,5 However, health care organizations are grappling with how to incorporate gender identity and birth sex information into EHRs.3 A 2011 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) directive required staff and providers to address and provide care to veterans based on their gender identity. Like other health systems, VHA had 1 demographic data field in the EHR to indicate birth sex, with no field for gender identity. A HCP could enter gender identity information into a progress note, but this addition might not be noticed by other HCPs. Consequently, staff and providers had no effective way of knowing a veteran’s gender identity from the EHR, which contributed to misgendering TGNC veterans.
With the singular demographic field of sex representing both birth sex and gender identity, some TGNC veterans chose to change their birth sex information to align with their gender identity. This change assured TGNC veterans that staff and providers would not misgender them because the birth sex field is easily observed and would allow providers to use respectful, gender-consistent pronouns when speaking with them. However, changing the birth sex field can misalign natal sex–based clinical reminders, medication dosages, and laboratory test values, which created potential patient safety risks. Thus, birth sex created potential hazards to quality and safety when used as a marker even with other variables—such as current anatomy, height, and weight—for health screenings, medication dosing, and other medical decisions.
In this article, we: (1) outline several patient safety issues that can arise with the birth sex field serving as an indicator for both birth sex and gender identity; (2) present case examples that illustrate the benefits of self-identified gender identity (SIGI) in an EHR; (3) describe the process of work-group development of patient-provider communication tools to improve patient safety; and (4) provide a brief overview of resources rolled out as a part of SIGI. This report serves as a guide for other federal organizations that wish to increase affirmative care and safe practices for transgender consumers. We will provide an overview of the tasks leading up to SIGI implementation, deliverables from the project, and lessons learned.
Veterans Affairs SIGI EHR Field
In 2016, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) began implementing a SIGI demographic field across all EHRs, requiring administrative staff to ask enrolled and new veterans their gender identity (full implementation of SIGI has not yet occurred and will occur when a later EHR upgrade displays SIGI in the EHR). The initiation of SIGI did not change any information in the birth sex field, meaning that some veterans continue to have birth sex field information that results in problematic automatic medical reminders and dosing values. Consequently, the National Center for Patient Safety (NCPS) noted that this discrepancy may be a pertinent patient safety issue. The NCPS and Lesbian, Gay Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Health national program offices worked to provide documentation to TGNC veterans to inform them of the clinical health care implications of having their birth sex demographic field reflect gender identity that is inconsistent with their natal sex (ie, original birth certificate record of sex).
Patient Safety Issues
Conversations between transgender patients and their HCPs about transition goals, necessary medical tests, and laboratory ranges based on their current anatomy and physiology can improve patient safety and satisfaction with medical care. Prior to the availability of the SIGI field, VA facilities varied in their documentation of gender identity in the patient chart. LGBT veteran care coordinators discussed diverse suggestions that ranged from informally documenting SIGI in each progress note to using flags to draw attention to use certain sections of local EHRs. These suggestions, though well intentioned, were not adequate for documenting gender identity at the national level because of regional variations in EHR customization options. Furthermore, the use of flags for drawing clinical attention to gender identity posed a potential for stigma toward patients, given that flags are typically reserved for behavioral or other risk concerns.
Several problems can emerge when HCPs are not equipped with accurate information about patient birth sex and SIGI. For instance, TGNC patients lack a way of being known from clinic to clinic by proper pronouns or self-labels. Providers may misgender veterans, which is a negative experience for TGNC veterans linked with increased barriers to care and decreased frequency of health care visits.4 Moreover, the quality and personalization of care across clinic locations in the facility’s system is variable without a consistent method of documenting birth sex and SIGI. For example, in clinics where the veteran is well known (eg, primary care), staff may be more affirming of the veteran’s gender identity than those in specialty care clinics that lack prior patient contact.
Furthermore, depending on hormone and surgical interventions, some health screenings may be irrelevant for TGNC patients. To determine appropriate health screens and assess potential risks associated with hormone therapy, providers must have access to current information regarding a patient’s physiologic anatomy.6 Health screenings and laboratory results in sophisticated EHRs (ie, EHRs that might autodetermine normative values) may populate incorrect treatment recommendations, such as sex-based medication dosages. Furthermore, laboratory test results could be incorrectly paired with a different assumed hormonal history, potentially putting the patient at risk.
Case Examples
An important element of EHRs facilitating the goal of patient-centered care is that patients have their EHR validate their sense of self, and their providers can use names and pronouns that correspond to the patient’s SIGI. Some patients have spent a great amount of effort altering their name and sex in legal records and may want their birth sex field to conform to their gender identity. To that end, patients may seek to alter their birth sex information so that it is congruent with how they see themselves to affirm their identity, despite patient safety risks. Several scenarios below demonstrate the potential costs and benefits to patients altering birth sex and SIGI in the EHR.
Case 1 Presentation
A young transman is working with his therapist on engaging in self-validating behaviors. This veteran has met with his PCP and informed the provider of his decision to alter the birth sex field in his EHR from female to male.
Ideally, the patient would begin to have regular conversations with his HCPs about his birth sex and gender identity, so that medical professionals can provide relevant screenings and affirm the patient’s gender identity while acknowledging his right to list his birth sex as he chooses. However, particular attention will need to be paid to assuring that natal sex–based health screenings (eg, pap smears, mammograms) are conducted on an appropriate schedule and that the veteran continues to discuss his current anatomy with providers.
Case 2 Presentation
A veteran has a male birth sex, identifies as a transwoman, and uses nongendered plural pronouns “they/them/theirs.” The word “they,” used as a singular pronoun may feel uncomfortable to some providers, but it validates the veteran’s sense of self and helps them feel welcome in the treatment environment. This patient communicated proactively with their HCPs about their transition goals and current hormone use.
They opted to have their birth sex field continue to indicate “male” because they, after a discussion with their PCP, are aware of the health implications of receiving an incorrect dose for their diabetes medication. They understand that having open communication and receiving input from their HCPs is part of good health care.
Case 3 Presentation
A patient with a sexual development disorder (intersex condition) identifies as a man (indicated as “male” in the SIGI field) and had his birth sex field changed to match his gender identity. He now seeks to change his birth sex field back to female, as he has complicated health considerations due to breast cancer.
The veteran thinks it is important that providers know about his intersex condition so that his breast cancer care is as seamless as possible. In particular, although this veteran is comfortable talking about his intersex condition and his identity with his PCP and oncologist, he wants to ensure that all people involved in his care (eg, pharmacists, radiologists) use the correct values in interpreting his medical data. Providers will need to use the female birth sex field for interpreting his medical data but use male pronouns when interacting with the veteran and documenting his care.
These case examples illustrate the need for HCPs to have patient-affirming education and appropriate clinical tools available when speaking to patients about birth sex, SIGI, and the implications of changing birth sex in the EHR. Moreover, these cases highlight that patient health needs may vary over time, due to factors such as perceived costs/benefits of a change in the sex field of the EHR as well as patient comfort with providers.
Current Status of SIGI and EHR
Although having separate fields for birth sex and SIGI in the EHR is ideal, the VHA does not yet have a fully functional SIGI field, and several TGNC veterans have changed their birth sex field to align with their gender identity. Roughly 9,700 patients have diagnostic codes related to transgender care in the VHA, meaning thousands of current patients would potentially benefit from SIGI implementation (John Blosnich, written communication, March 2018). A possible action that the VHA could take with the goal of enhancing patient safety would be to revert the birth sex field of patients who had previously changed the field back to the patient’s original birth sex. However, if this alteration to the EHR were done without the patient’s consent, numerous additional problems would result—including invalidating a veteran’s wishes—potentially driving patients away from receiving health care.
Moreover, in the absence of updated SIGI information (which only the veteran can provide), making a change in the EHR would perpetuate the misgendering of TGNC veterans who have already sought an administrative fix for this problem. Thus, the agency decided to engage patients in a discussion about their decision to keep the birth sex field consistent with their original birth certificate. In cases in which the field had been changed previously, the recommendation is for HCPs to gain patient consent to change the birth sex field back to what was on their original birth certificate. Thus, decisions about what should be listed in the EHR are made by the veteran using an informed decision-making model.
Patient Safety Education Workgroup
To begin the process of disentangling birth sex and SIGI fields in the EHR, 2 work groups were created: a technical work group (coding the patches for SIGI implementation) and a SIGI patient safety education work group. The patient safety education work group was committed to promoting affirmative VA policies that require validation of the gender identity of all veterans and pursuing best practices through clinical guidelines to promote effective, efficient, equitable, and safe veteran care. The patient safety education work group included representatives from all 3 branches of the VA (VHA, Veterans Benefits Administration, and National Cemetery Administration), including clinical media, patient safety, information technology, and education specialists. The group developed trainings for administrative staff about the appropriate ways to ask birth sex and SIGI questions, and how to record veteran-driven responses.
SIGI Fact Sheet
The patient safety education work group examined clinical literature and developed tools for staff and veterans to facilitate effective discussions about the importance and utility of documenting both birth sex and SIGI in the EHR. The patient safety education work group along with media and educational experts created basic key term definition documents to address the importance, purpose, and use of the SIGI field. The patient safety education work group developed 2 documents to facilitate communication between patients and providers.
A 1-page veteran-facing fact sheet was developed that described the differences between birth sex and SIGI fields and how these fields are used in the VA EHR system (Figure 1). In addition, a 1-page HCP-facing fact sheet was designed to inform HCPs that patients may have changed their birth sex in their EHR or might still wish to change their birth sex field, and to inform HCPs of the importance of patient-centered, gender-affirmative care (Figure 2). An additional goal of both documents was to educate veterans and HCPs on how the EHR automatically calculates laboratory results and screening notifications based on birth sex.
Review Process
As part of reviewing and finalizing the SIGI patient fact sheet, the patient safety education work group previewed the document’s content with veterans who provided feedback on drafts to improve comprehension, patient-centered care, and clinical accuracy. For instance, several patients commented that the document should address many gender identities, including intersex identities. As noted in one of the case presentations earlier, individuals who identify as intersex may have changed their birth sex to be consistent with their gender and might benefit from being informed about the EHR’s autocalculation feature. The patient safety education work group adjusted the SIGI patient fact sheet to include individuals who identify as intersex and instructed them to have a conversation with their HCP regarding potential birth sex changes in the EHR.
Much of the veteran feedback to the patient safety education work group reflected veteran concerns, more broadly, about implementation of SIGI. Many veterans were interested in how federal policy changes might affect their benefits package or clinical care within the VA. The SIGI patient fact sheet was a tool for communicating that Department of Defense (DoD) policies, specifically, do not have a bearing on VA care for LGBT veterans. Therefore, SIGI information does not affect service connection or benefits eligibility and is not shared with the DoD. Veterans found this information helpful to see reflected in the SIGI patient fact sheet.
The patient safety education work group also shared the SIGI provider fact sheet with VHA providers before finalizing the content. PCPs gave feedback to improve the specification of patient safety concerns and appropriate readership language. The patient safety education work group adjusted the SIGI provider fact sheet to be inclusive of relevant literature and an e-consultation link for assisting HCPs who are unsure how to proceed with a patient.
Implementation
The patient safety education work group also developed several materials to provide information about the birth sex and SIGI fields in the EHR. Because the SIGI demographic field is new and collected by clerical staff, training was necessary to explain the difference between birth sex and SIGI before implementation in the EHR. The training sessions educated staff about the difference between birth sex and SIGI, how to ask and respond to questions respectfully, and how to update these fields in the EHR. These trainings included a 20-minute video demonstrating best practices for asking about SIGI, a frequently asked questions document responding to 7 common questions about the new fields, and a quick reference guide for administrative staff to have handy at their desks.
Dissemination of the SIGI patient and provider fact sheets is planned to occur, ideally, several weeks before implementation of the new patches updating the EHR fields in spring 2020. Building on existing resources, the patient safety education work group plans to disseminate the patient fact sheets via e-mail lists for the national mental health facility leaders as well as through e-mail lists for VA PCPs, nursing and clerical staff, privacy officers, facility LGBT veteran care coordinators, VISN leads, transgender e-consultation, the Office of Connected Care, the LGBT external homepage for the VA, and the training website for VA employees. The goal is to target potential points of contact for veterans who may have already changed their birth sex and might benefit medically from altering birth sex to be consistent with their original birth certificate.
The SIGI provider fact sheet will be disseminated using internal e-mails, announcements on routine LGBT veteran care coordinator calls, weekly Ask LGBT Health teleconferences, and announcements at LGBT health training events both internally and externally. Several dissemination tools have already ensured that VA employees are aware of the SIGI field in the EHR. Leadership throughout the VA will be encouraged to share SIGI trainings with clerical staff. Additionally, broad-based e-mails summarizing changes to the EHR will be provided concurrent to the SIGI patch implementation to VA staff as well as links to the resources and training materials.
Challenges
One difficulty in the development process for both SIGI fact sheets was addressing the issue of patient safety for veterans who may be at different points in their gender transition process. It was challenging for the patient safety education work group to not sound alarmist in discussing the safety implications of birth sex changes in the EHR, as this is just one factor in clinical decision making. The goal was to educate veterans from a patient safety perspective about the implications of having a state-of-the-art, automated EHR. However, text can be perceived differently by different people, which is why the patient safety education work group asked veterans to preview the patient document and clinical providers to preview the provider document.
Both work groups encountered technologic challenges, including a delay in the implementation of the SIGI field due to a systemwide delay of EHR updates. Although it released training and educational materials to the VHA, the patient safety education work group understood that at some point in the future, VA programmers will update the EHR to change the information clerks and HCPs can see in the EHR. Coordination of the fact sheet release alongside information technology has been an important part of the SIGI rollout process.
Conclusion
HCPs have a complex role in providing treatment to TGNC patients in the VHA: They must affirm a patient’s gender identity through how they address them, while openly communicating the health risks inherent in having their birth sex field be incongruent with the sex recorded on their original birth certificate. Accomplishing these tasks simultaneously is difficult without invalidating the veteran’s identity or right to choose their EHR demographic birth sex label. Furthermore, patients may ask HCPs to write letters of support for either medical or surgical intervention or other documentation changes (eg, changes to a patient’s legal name, passport changes, or a safe passage letter for TGNC patients). Navigating the dialectic of safety and validation requires strong rapport, trust, and effective communication in the patient-provider relationship and great empathy by the provider.
A future task for the SIGI patient safety education work group is to continue to communicate with the technical work group and providers in the field about how demographic fields in the EHR are utilized to enable future EHR changes. This hurdle is not easy because EHR updates change the infrastructure through which demographic content is delivered and incorporated into a patient’s treatment. The VA HCPs are tasked with thoroughly examining the results that automated systems produce to ensure safe and accurate medical services are always provided to all patients. An integral part of patient-centered care is balancing any computer-guided recommendations with an understanding that actual patient needs may differ due to presence/absence of anatomy and other factors (eg, weight, current medications).
From a systems perspective, a benefit of adding the SIGI demographic field is systemic improvement in calculating the number of transgender veterans under VA care and evaluating health outcomes for this population. SIGI is particularly important for signaling gender pronouns for veterans, regardless of whether they are receiving care for a gender-related diagnosis. In terms of scope, the SIGI project potentially will apply to > 9 million enrolled veterans and nearly 400,000 VA employees.
Improvements could be made in the SIGI field of the new EHR, such as expanding the options for self-labels. Additionally, a text field could be used to enhance the quality of personalization provided to veterans self-identifying in the EHR, including pronoun specification. Moreover, adding new fields such as “preferred name” could improve the health care experience of not only TGNC veterans but all veterans who use something other than their full legal name (eg, a nickname). It will be good practice to notify providers and staff of a veteran’s requested name and pronouns when the patient checks in at an electronic kiosk so that all staff immediately know how to address the patient. The VHA can continue to adjust the options for the SIGI field once the new EHR system is operational. Ideally, this new EHR will display birth sex and SIGI to clinicians or clerks engaged in patient interactions.
Technology will continue to automate medical care, meaning that HCPs must be vigilant about how computer programming and the accuracy of prepopulated information affect patient care. The concerns discussed in this report relating to patient safety are relatively absent in the medical literature, even though substantial health risks exist to patients who have birth sex listed incorrectly for any reason.6,7 Additionally, administrative burden can be reduced if patients who do not need certain screenings based on their current anatomy are not contacted for unnecessary screenings. Future EHR systems might incorporate anatomical considerations from an inventory to assist in automating patient care in safe and accessible ways.
1. Institute of Medicine Committee on Quality of Health Care. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2001. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222274. Accessed April 10, 2019.
2. Cahill SR, Baker K, Deutsch MB, Keatley J, Makadon HJ. Inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity in stage 3 meaningful use guidelines: a huge step forward for LGBT health. LGBT Health. 2016;3(2):100-102.
3. Cahill SR, Makadon HJ. Sexual orientation and gender identity data collection update: U.S. government takes steps to promote sexual orientation and gender identity data collection through meaningful use guidelines. LGBT Health. 2014;1(3):157-160.
4. Fridsma D. EHR interoperability: the structured data capture initiative. https://www.healthit.gov/buzz-blog/electronic-health-and-medical-records/ehr-interoperabiity-structured-data-capture-initiative. Published January 31, 2013. Accessed April 10, 2019.
5. Muray T, Berberian L. The importance of structured data elements in EHRs. Computerworld website. https://www.computerworld.com/article/2470987/healthcare-it/the-importance-of-structured-data-elements-in-ehrs.html. Published March 31, 2011. Accessed April 10, 2019.
6. Deutsch MB, Green J, Keatley J, Mayer G, Hastings J, Hall AM; World Professional Association for Transgender Health EMR Working Group. Electronic medical records and the transgender patient: recommendations from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health EMR Working Group.
7. Deutsch MB, Keatley J, Sevelius J, Shade SB. Collection of gender identity data using electronic medical records: survey of current end-user practices. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care. 2014;25(6):657-663.
1. Institute of Medicine Committee on Quality of Health Care. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2001. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222274. Accessed April 10, 2019.
2. Cahill SR, Baker K, Deutsch MB, Keatley J, Makadon HJ. Inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity in stage 3 meaningful use guidelines: a huge step forward for LGBT health. LGBT Health. 2016;3(2):100-102.
3. Cahill SR, Makadon HJ. Sexual orientation and gender identity data collection update: U.S. government takes steps to promote sexual orientation and gender identity data collection through meaningful use guidelines. LGBT Health. 2014;1(3):157-160.
4. Fridsma D. EHR interoperability: the structured data capture initiative. https://www.healthit.gov/buzz-blog/electronic-health-and-medical-records/ehr-interoperabiity-structured-data-capture-initiative. Published January 31, 2013. Accessed April 10, 2019.
5. Muray T, Berberian L. The importance of structured data elements in EHRs. Computerworld website. https://www.computerworld.com/article/2470987/healthcare-it/the-importance-of-structured-data-elements-in-ehrs.html. Published March 31, 2011. Accessed April 10, 2019.
6. Deutsch MB, Green J, Keatley J, Mayer G, Hastings J, Hall AM; World Professional Association for Transgender Health EMR Working Group. Electronic medical records and the transgender patient: recommendations from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health EMR Working Group.
7. Deutsch MB, Keatley J, Sevelius J, Shade SB. Collection of gender identity data using electronic medical records: survey of current end-user practices. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care. 2014;25(6):657-663.
Why you should re-credential with Medicare as a hospitalist
CMS needs a better database of hospitalist information
In April 2017, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services implemented the new physician specialty code C6, specifically for hospitalists. There has been a lot of confusion about what this means and some uncertainty about why clinicians should bother to use it.
Some folks thought initially that it was a new CPT code they could use to bill hospitalist services, which might recognize the increased intensity of services hospitalists often provide to their hospitalized patients compared to many traditional internal medicine and family medicine primary care physicians. Others thought it was a code that was added to the HCFA 1500 billing form somewhere to designate that the service was provided by a hospitalist.
Neither is true. The C6 physician specialty code is one of a large number of such codes used by physicians to designate their primary physician specialty when they enroll with Medicare via the PECOS online enrollment system. It describes the unique type of medicine practiced by the enrolling physician and is used by the CMS both for claims processing purposes and for “programmatic” purposes (whatever that means).
It doesn’t change how your claim is processed or how much you get paid. So why bother going through the laborious process of re-credentialing with CMS via PECOS just to change your specialty code? Well, I believe there are several ways in which the C6 specialty code provides value – both to you and to the specialty of hospital medicine.
Reduce concurrent care denials
First, it distinguishes you from a general internal medicine or general family medicine practitioner by recognizing “hospitalist” as a distinct specialty. This can be valuable from a financial perspective because it may reduce the risk that claims for your services might be denied due to “concurrent care” by another provider in the same specialty on the same calendar day.
And it’s not just a general internist or family medicine physician that you might run into concurrent care trouble with. I’ve seen situations where doctors completed critical care or cardiology fellowships but never got around to re-credentialing with Medicare in their new specialty, so their claims still showed up with an “internal medicine” physician specialty code, resulting in denied “concurrent care” claims for either the hospitalist or the specialist.
While Medicare may still see unnecessary overlap between services provided by you and an internal medicine or family physician to the same patient on the same calendar day, you can make a better argument that your services were unique and complementary to (not duplicative of) the services of others if you are credentialed as a hospitalist.
Ensure “apples to apples” comparisons
A second reason to re-credential as a hospitalist is to ensure that when the CMS looks at the services you are providing and the CPT codes you are selecting, it is comparing you to an appropriate peer group for compliance purposes.
The mix of CPT codes reported by hospitalists in the SHM State of Hospital Medicine Survey has historically tilted toward higher-level care than has the mix of CPT codes reported by the CMS for internal medicine or family medicine physicians. But last year when Medicare released the utilization of evaluation and management services by specialty for calendar year 2017, CPT utilization was shown separately for hospitalists for the first time!
The volume of services reported for physicians credentialed as hospitalists was very small relative to the volume of inpatient services provided by internal medicine and family medicine physicians, but the distribution of inpatient admission, subsequent visit, and discharge codes for hospitalists closely mirrored those reported by SHM in its 2018 State of Hospital Medicine Report (see graphic).
If you’re going to be targeted in a RAC audit for the high proportion of 99233s you bill, you want to be sure the CMS is looking at your performance compared to those who are truly your peers, caring for patients of the same type and complexity.
Improve CMS data used for research purposes
Finally, the ability of academic hospitalists and other health services researchers to utilize Medicare claims data to better understand the care provided by hospitalists and its impact on the overall health care system will be significantly enhanced by a more robust presence of physicians who have identified themselves as hospitalists in the PECOS credentialing system.
We care for the majority of patients in most hospitals these days, yet “hospitalists” billed only 2,009,869 inpatient subsequent visits (CPT codes 99231, 99232, and 99233) in 2017 compared to 25,903,829 billed by internal medicine physicians and 4,678,111 billed by family medicine physicians. And regardless of what you think about using claims data as a proxy for health care services and quality, it’s undeniably the best data set we currently have.
So, let’s work together to build a bigger, better database of hospitalist information at the CMS. I urge you to go to your credentialing folks today and find out how you can work with them to get yourself re-credentialed in PECOS using the C6 “hospitalist” physician specialty.
Ms. Flores is a partner at Nelson Flores Hospital Medicine Consultants, La Quinta, Calif. She serves on SHM’s Practice Analysis and Annual Meeting Committees, and helps to coordinate SHM’s bi-annual State of Hospital Medicine Survey. This article appeared originally in SHM's official blog The Hospital Leader. Read more recent posts here.
CMS needs a better database of hospitalist information
CMS needs a better database of hospitalist information
In April 2017, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services implemented the new physician specialty code C6, specifically for hospitalists. There has been a lot of confusion about what this means and some uncertainty about why clinicians should bother to use it.
Some folks thought initially that it was a new CPT code they could use to bill hospitalist services, which might recognize the increased intensity of services hospitalists often provide to their hospitalized patients compared to many traditional internal medicine and family medicine primary care physicians. Others thought it was a code that was added to the HCFA 1500 billing form somewhere to designate that the service was provided by a hospitalist.
Neither is true. The C6 physician specialty code is one of a large number of such codes used by physicians to designate their primary physician specialty when they enroll with Medicare via the PECOS online enrollment system. It describes the unique type of medicine practiced by the enrolling physician and is used by the CMS both for claims processing purposes and for “programmatic” purposes (whatever that means).
It doesn’t change how your claim is processed or how much you get paid. So why bother going through the laborious process of re-credentialing with CMS via PECOS just to change your specialty code? Well, I believe there are several ways in which the C6 specialty code provides value – both to you and to the specialty of hospital medicine.
Reduce concurrent care denials
First, it distinguishes you from a general internal medicine or general family medicine practitioner by recognizing “hospitalist” as a distinct specialty. This can be valuable from a financial perspective because it may reduce the risk that claims for your services might be denied due to “concurrent care” by another provider in the same specialty on the same calendar day.
And it’s not just a general internist or family medicine physician that you might run into concurrent care trouble with. I’ve seen situations where doctors completed critical care or cardiology fellowships but never got around to re-credentialing with Medicare in their new specialty, so their claims still showed up with an “internal medicine” physician specialty code, resulting in denied “concurrent care” claims for either the hospitalist or the specialist.
While Medicare may still see unnecessary overlap between services provided by you and an internal medicine or family physician to the same patient on the same calendar day, you can make a better argument that your services were unique and complementary to (not duplicative of) the services of others if you are credentialed as a hospitalist.
Ensure “apples to apples” comparisons
A second reason to re-credential as a hospitalist is to ensure that when the CMS looks at the services you are providing and the CPT codes you are selecting, it is comparing you to an appropriate peer group for compliance purposes.
The mix of CPT codes reported by hospitalists in the SHM State of Hospital Medicine Survey has historically tilted toward higher-level care than has the mix of CPT codes reported by the CMS for internal medicine or family medicine physicians. But last year when Medicare released the utilization of evaluation and management services by specialty for calendar year 2017, CPT utilization was shown separately for hospitalists for the first time!
The volume of services reported for physicians credentialed as hospitalists was very small relative to the volume of inpatient services provided by internal medicine and family medicine physicians, but the distribution of inpatient admission, subsequent visit, and discharge codes for hospitalists closely mirrored those reported by SHM in its 2018 State of Hospital Medicine Report (see graphic).
If you’re going to be targeted in a RAC audit for the high proportion of 99233s you bill, you want to be sure the CMS is looking at your performance compared to those who are truly your peers, caring for patients of the same type and complexity.
Improve CMS data used for research purposes
Finally, the ability of academic hospitalists and other health services researchers to utilize Medicare claims data to better understand the care provided by hospitalists and its impact on the overall health care system will be significantly enhanced by a more robust presence of physicians who have identified themselves as hospitalists in the PECOS credentialing system.
We care for the majority of patients in most hospitals these days, yet “hospitalists” billed only 2,009,869 inpatient subsequent visits (CPT codes 99231, 99232, and 99233) in 2017 compared to 25,903,829 billed by internal medicine physicians and 4,678,111 billed by family medicine physicians. And regardless of what you think about using claims data as a proxy for health care services and quality, it’s undeniably the best data set we currently have.
So, let’s work together to build a bigger, better database of hospitalist information at the CMS. I urge you to go to your credentialing folks today and find out how you can work with them to get yourself re-credentialed in PECOS using the C6 “hospitalist” physician specialty.
Ms. Flores is a partner at Nelson Flores Hospital Medicine Consultants, La Quinta, Calif. She serves on SHM’s Practice Analysis and Annual Meeting Committees, and helps to coordinate SHM’s bi-annual State of Hospital Medicine Survey. This article appeared originally in SHM's official blog The Hospital Leader. Read more recent posts here.
In April 2017, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services implemented the new physician specialty code C6, specifically for hospitalists. There has been a lot of confusion about what this means and some uncertainty about why clinicians should bother to use it.
Some folks thought initially that it was a new CPT code they could use to bill hospitalist services, which might recognize the increased intensity of services hospitalists often provide to their hospitalized patients compared to many traditional internal medicine and family medicine primary care physicians. Others thought it was a code that was added to the HCFA 1500 billing form somewhere to designate that the service was provided by a hospitalist.
Neither is true. The C6 physician specialty code is one of a large number of such codes used by physicians to designate their primary physician specialty when they enroll with Medicare via the PECOS online enrollment system. It describes the unique type of medicine practiced by the enrolling physician and is used by the CMS both for claims processing purposes and for “programmatic” purposes (whatever that means).
It doesn’t change how your claim is processed or how much you get paid. So why bother going through the laborious process of re-credentialing with CMS via PECOS just to change your specialty code? Well, I believe there are several ways in which the C6 specialty code provides value – both to you and to the specialty of hospital medicine.
Reduce concurrent care denials
First, it distinguishes you from a general internal medicine or general family medicine practitioner by recognizing “hospitalist” as a distinct specialty. This can be valuable from a financial perspective because it may reduce the risk that claims for your services might be denied due to “concurrent care” by another provider in the same specialty on the same calendar day.
And it’s not just a general internist or family medicine physician that you might run into concurrent care trouble with. I’ve seen situations where doctors completed critical care or cardiology fellowships but never got around to re-credentialing with Medicare in their new specialty, so their claims still showed up with an “internal medicine” physician specialty code, resulting in denied “concurrent care” claims for either the hospitalist or the specialist.
While Medicare may still see unnecessary overlap between services provided by you and an internal medicine or family physician to the same patient on the same calendar day, you can make a better argument that your services were unique and complementary to (not duplicative of) the services of others if you are credentialed as a hospitalist.
Ensure “apples to apples” comparisons
A second reason to re-credential as a hospitalist is to ensure that when the CMS looks at the services you are providing and the CPT codes you are selecting, it is comparing you to an appropriate peer group for compliance purposes.
The mix of CPT codes reported by hospitalists in the SHM State of Hospital Medicine Survey has historically tilted toward higher-level care than has the mix of CPT codes reported by the CMS for internal medicine or family medicine physicians. But last year when Medicare released the utilization of evaluation and management services by specialty for calendar year 2017, CPT utilization was shown separately for hospitalists for the first time!
The volume of services reported for physicians credentialed as hospitalists was very small relative to the volume of inpatient services provided by internal medicine and family medicine physicians, but the distribution of inpatient admission, subsequent visit, and discharge codes for hospitalists closely mirrored those reported by SHM in its 2018 State of Hospital Medicine Report (see graphic).
If you’re going to be targeted in a RAC audit for the high proportion of 99233s you bill, you want to be sure the CMS is looking at your performance compared to those who are truly your peers, caring for patients of the same type and complexity.
Improve CMS data used for research purposes
Finally, the ability of academic hospitalists and other health services researchers to utilize Medicare claims data to better understand the care provided by hospitalists and its impact on the overall health care system will be significantly enhanced by a more robust presence of physicians who have identified themselves as hospitalists in the PECOS credentialing system.
We care for the majority of patients in most hospitals these days, yet “hospitalists” billed only 2,009,869 inpatient subsequent visits (CPT codes 99231, 99232, and 99233) in 2017 compared to 25,903,829 billed by internal medicine physicians and 4,678,111 billed by family medicine physicians. And regardless of what you think about using claims data as a proxy for health care services and quality, it’s undeniably the best data set we currently have.
So, let’s work together to build a bigger, better database of hospitalist information at the CMS. I urge you to go to your credentialing folks today and find out how you can work with them to get yourself re-credentialed in PECOS using the C6 “hospitalist” physician specialty.
Ms. Flores is a partner at Nelson Flores Hospital Medicine Consultants, La Quinta, Calif. She serves on SHM’s Practice Analysis and Annual Meeting Committees, and helps to coordinate SHM’s bi-annual State of Hospital Medicine Survey. This article appeared originally in SHM's official blog The Hospital Leader. Read more recent posts here.
Linear Vulvar Lesions
The Diagnosis: Vestibular Papillomatosis
Vestibular papillomatosis (VP), the female equivalent of pearly penile papules, is characterized by multiple papules in a linear array on the labia minora and is considered a normal anatomic variant. It typically presents as monomorphous, soft, flesh-colored, filiform papules that are distributed in a symmetric fashion. In women, the papules present as linear arrays on the inner aspects of the labia minora, whereas in men, they present in a circumferential array along the sulcus of the glans penis.1 Lesions often are asymptomatic but may cause itching, burning, and dyspareunia.2 Previously believed to be associated with human papillomavirus infection,3 VP is now considered a noninfectious condition. Biopsy reveals parakeratosis and perinuclear vacuolization in the absence of true koilocytes.4,5 Dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy have been used to differentiate VP from clinically similar lesions (eg, condyloma acuminatum).6,7 The prevalence of this condition is not well established; however, one study found VP in 1% of women attending genitourinary medicine clinics.3
Condyloma acuminatum, known colloquially as genital warts, is a human papillomavirus infection. Lesions tend to be painless and firm and are distributed asymmetrically with a cauliflowerlike appearance.1 Condyloma latum, found in secondary syphilis, is characterized by papules that are pale, smooth, flat topped, and moist.8 Molluscum contagiosum is an infection caused by a poxvirus presenting with flesh-colored, dome-shaped papules with central umbilication.9 The lesions of papulosquamous lichen planus are violaceous polygonal papules that affect the clitoral hood and labia minora and may cause pruritus. The cause of lichen planus is unknown; however, clinically similar lesions may occur in a lichenoid drug eruption due to certain medications.
Vestibular papillomatosis typically does not require treatment, except in symptomatic cases. To date, limited studies have reported variable treatment success utilizing destructive techniques such as CO2 laser or topical application of 5-fluorouracil or trichloroacetic acid.10
The lesions on our patient's left medial labia minora were successfully treated with low-voltage (3.0 V) electrodesiccation. Following local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine, each papule was gently electrodesiccated utilizing a standard hyfrecation electrode tip to a light gray discoloration. Postprocedural care involved only twice-daily cleansing with a gentle soap and application of petrolatum. The patient tolerated the procedure well and was satisfied with the cosmetic and functional results. She subsequently underwent treatment of the lesions on the right labia minora with equivalent treatment success.
- Moyal-Barracco M, Leibowitch M, Orth G. Vestibular papillae of the vulva. lack of evidence for human papillomavirus etiology. Arch Dermatol. 1990;126:1594-1598.
- Strand A, Wilander E, Zehbe I, et al. Vulvar papillomatosis, aceto-white lesions, and normal-looking vulvar mucosa evaluated by microscopy and human papillomavirus analysis. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 1995;40:265-270.
- Welch JM, Nayagam M, Parry G, et al. What is vestibular papillomatosis? a study of its prevalence, aetiology and natural history. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993;100:939-942.
- Wilkinson EJ, Guerrero E, Daniel R, et al. Vulvar vestibulitis is rarely associated with human papillomavirus infection types 6, 11, 16, or 18. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1993;12:344-349.
- Beznos G, Coates V, Focchi J, et al. Biomolecular study of the correlation between papillomatosis of the vulvar vestibule in adolescents and human papillomavirus. ScientificWorldJournal. 2006;6:628-636.
- Kim SH, Seo SH, Ko HC, et al. The use of dermatoscopy to differentiate vestibular papillae, a normal variant of the female external genitalia, from condyloma acuminata. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;60:353-355.
- Ozkur E, Falay T, Turgut Erdemir AV, et al. Vestibular papillomatosis: an important differential diagnosis of vulvar papillomas. Dermatol Online J. 2016;22. pii:13030/qt7933q377
- Chang GJ, Welton ML. Human papillomavirus, condylomata acuminata, and anal neoplasia. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2004;17:221-230.
- Lynch PJ, Moyal-Barracco M, Bogliatto F, et al. 2006 ISSVD classification of vulvar dermatoses: pathologic subsets and their clinical correlates. J Reprod Med. 2007;52:3-9.
- Bergeron C, Ferenczy A, Richart RM, et al. Micropapillomatosis labialis appears unrelated to human papillomavirus. Obstet Gynecol. 1990;76:281-286.
The Diagnosis: Vestibular Papillomatosis
Vestibular papillomatosis (VP), the female equivalent of pearly penile papules, is characterized by multiple papules in a linear array on the labia minora and is considered a normal anatomic variant. It typically presents as monomorphous, soft, flesh-colored, filiform papules that are distributed in a symmetric fashion. In women, the papules present as linear arrays on the inner aspects of the labia minora, whereas in men, they present in a circumferential array along the sulcus of the glans penis.1 Lesions often are asymptomatic but may cause itching, burning, and dyspareunia.2 Previously believed to be associated with human papillomavirus infection,3 VP is now considered a noninfectious condition. Biopsy reveals parakeratosis and perinuclear vacuolization in the absence of true koilocytes.4,5 Dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy have been used to differentiate VP from clinically similar lesions (eg, condyloma acuminatum).6,7 The prevalence of this condition is not well established; however, one study found VP in 1% of women attending genitourinary medicine clinics.3
Condyloma acuminatum, known colloquially as genital warts, is a human papillomavirus infection. Lesions tend to be painless and firm and are distributed asymmetrically with a cauliflowerlike appearance.1 Condyloma latum, found in secondary syphilis, is characterized by papules that are pale, smooth, flat topped, and moist.8 Molluscum contagiosum is an infection caused by a poxvirus presenting with flesh-colored, dome-shaped papules with central umbilication.9 The lesions of papulosquamous lichen planus are violaceous polygonal papules that affect the clitoral hood and labia minora and may cause pruritus. The cause of lichen planus is unknown; however, clinically similar lesions may occur in a lichenoid drug eruption due to certain medications.
Vestibular papillomatosis typically does not require treatment, except in symptomatic cases. To date, limited studies have reported variable treatment success utilizing destructive techniques such as CO2 laser or topical application of 5-fluorouracil or trichloroacetic acid.10
The lesions on our patient's left medial labia minora were successfully treated with low-voltage (3.0 V) electrodesiccation. Following local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine, each papule was gently electrodesiccated utilizing a standard hyfrecation electrode tip to a light gray discoloration. Postprocedural care involved only twice-daily cleansing with a gentle soap and application of petrolatum. The patient tolerated the procedure well and was satisfied with the cosmetic and functional results. She subsequently underwent treatment of the lesions on the right labia minora with equivalent treatment success.
The Diagnosis: Vestibular Papillomatosis
Vestibular papillomatosis (VP), the female equivalent of pearly penile papules, is characterized by multiple papules in a linear array on the labia minora and is considered a normal anatomic variant. It typically presents as monomorphous, soft, flesh-colored, filiform papules that are distributed in a symmetric fashion. In women, the papules present as linear arrays on the inner aspects of the labia minora, whereas in men, they present in a circumferential array along the sulcus of the glans penis.1 Lesions often are asymptomatic but may cause itching, burning, and dyspareunia.2 Previously believed to be associated with human papillomavirus infection,3 VP is now considered a noninfectious condition. Biopsy reveals parakeratosis and perinuclear vacuolization in the absence of true koilocytes.4,5 Dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy have been used to differentiate VP from clinically similar lesions (eg, condyloma acuminatum).6,7 The prevalence of this condition is not well established; however, one study found VP in 1% of women attending genitourinary medicine clinics.3
Condyloma acuminatum, known colloquially as genital warts, is a human papillomavirus infection. Lesions tend to be painless and firm and are distributed asymmetrically with a cauliflowerlike appearance.1 Condyloma latum, found in secondary syphilis, is characterized by papules that are pale, smooth, flat topped, and moist.8 Molluscum contagiosum is an infection caused by a poxvirus presenting with flesh-colored, dome-shaped papules with central umbilication.9 The lesions of papulosquamous lichen planus are violaceous polygonal papules that affect the clitoral hood and labia minora and may cause pruritus. The cause of lichen planus is unknown; however, clinically similar lesions may occur in a lichenoid drug eruption due to certain medications.
Vestibular papillomatosis typically does not require treatment, except in symptomatic cases. To date, limited studies have reported variable treatment success utilizing destructive techniques such as CO2 laser or topical application of 5-fluorouracil or trichloroacetic acid.10
The lesions on our patient's left medial labia minora were successfully treated with low-voltage (3.0 V) electrodesiccation. Following local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine, each papule was gently electrodesiccated utilizing a standard hyfrecation electrode tip to a light gray discoloration. Postprocedural care involved only twice-daily cleansing with a gentle soap and application of petrolatum. The patient tolerated the procedure well and was satisfied with the cosmetic and functional results. She subsequently underwent treatment of the lesions on the right labia minora with equivalent treatment success.
- Moyal-Barracco M, Leibowitch M, Orth G. Vestibular papillae of the vulva. lack of evidence for human papillomavirus etiology. Arch Dermatol. 1990;126:1594-1598.
- Strand A, Wilander E, Zehbe I, et al. Vulvar papillomatosis, aceto-white lesions, and normal-looking vulvar mucosa evaluated by microscopy and human papillomavirus analysis. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 1995;40:265-270.
- Welch JM, Nayagam M, Parry G, et al. What is vestibular papillomatosis? a study of its prevalence, aetiology and natural history. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993;100:939-942.
- Wilkinson EJ, Guerrero E, Daniel R, et al. Vulvar vestibulitis is rarely associated with human papillomavirus infection types 6, 11, 16, or 18. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1993;12:344-349.
- Beznos G, Coates V, Focchi J, et al. Biomolecular study of the correlation between papillomatosis of the vulvar vestibule in adolescents and human papillomavirus. ScientificWorldJournal. 2006;6:628-636.
- Kim SH, Seo SH, Ko HC, et al. The use of dermatoscopy to differentiate vestibular papillae, a normal variant of the female external genitalia, from condyloma acuminata. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;60:353-355.
- Ozkur E, Falay T, Turgut Erdemir AV, et al. Vestibular papillomatosis: an important differential diagnosis of vulvar papillomas. Dermatol Online J. 2016;22. pii:13030/qt7933q377
- Chang GJ, Welton ML. Human papillomavirus, condylomata acuminata, and anal neoplasia. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2004;17:221-230.
- Lynch PJ, Moyal-Barracco M, Bogliatto F, et al. 2006 ISSVD classification of vulvar dermatoses: pathologic subsets and their clinical correlates. J Reprod Med. 2007;52:3-9.
- Bergeron C, Ferenczy A, Richart RM, et al. Micropapillomatosis labialis appears unrelated to human papillomavirus. Obstet Gynecol. 1990;76:281-286.
- Moyal-Barracco M, Leibowitch M, Orth G. Vestibular papillae of the vulva. lack of evidence for human papillomavirus etiology. Arch Dermatol. 1990;126:1594-1598.
- Strand A, Wilander E, Zehbe I, et al. Vulvar papillomatosis, aceto-white lesions, and normal-looking vulvar mucosa evaluated by microscopy and human papillomavirus analysis. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 1995;40:265-270.
- Welch JM, Nayagam M, Parry G, et al. What is vestibular papillomatosis? a study of its prevalence, aetiology and natural history. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993;100:939-942.
- Wilkinson EJ, Guerrero E, Daniel R, et al. Vulvar vestibulitis is rarely associated with human papillomavirus infection types 6, 11, 16, or 18. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1993;12:344-349.
- Beznos G, Coates V, Focchi J, et al. Biomolecular study of the correlation between papillomatosis of the vulvar vestibule in adolescents and human papillomavirus. ScientificWorldJournal. 2006;6:628-636.
- Kim SH, Seo SH, Ko HC, et al. The use of dermatoscopy to differentiate vestibular papillae, a normal variant of the female external genitalia, from condyloma acuminata. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;60:353-355.
- Ozkur E, Falay T, Turgut Erdemir AV, et al. Vestibular papillomatosis: an important differential diagnosis of vulvar papillomas. Dermatol Online J. 2016;22. pii:13030/qt7933q377
- Chang GJ, Welton ML. Human papillomavirus, condylomata acuminata, and anal neoplasia. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2004;17:221-230.
- Lynch PJ, Moyal-Barracco M, Bogliatto F, et al. 2006 ISSVD classification of vulvar dermatoses: pathologic subsets and their clinical correlates. J Reprod Med. 2007;52:3-9.
- Bergeron C, Ferenczy A, Richart RM, et al. Micropapillomatosis labialis appears unrelated to human papillomavirus. Obstet Gynecol. 1990;76:281-286.
A 30-year-old woman with congenital absence of the uterus presented to dermatology for a second opinion of vulvar lesions that were first noted during adolescence. The patient reported that the lesions had not changed and were painful during sexual intercourse. The lesions were otherwise asymptomatic, and she had no additional relevant medical history or family history of similar lesions. She denied any history of sexually transmitted infections. Physical examination revealed multiple, soft, flesh-colored, 1- to 2-mm, discrete and coalescing, filiform papules distributed symmetrically in a linear array on the inner aspect of the bilateral medial labia minora. The rest of the mucocutaneous examination was normal.
The lesions on the left medial labia minora were treated with low-voltage (3.0 V) electrodesiccation following local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine (red arrow), while the lesions on the right medial labia minora were left untreated (black arrow). The clinical image shows the left labia minora approximately 1 month after treatment; the papules on the right labia minora were unchanged from the prior examination.
Gone But Not Forgotten: How VA Remembers
Caring for veterans at the end of their lives is a great honor. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care professionals (HCPs) find meaning and take pride in providing this care. We are there to support the patient and their family and loved ones around the time of death. When our patients die, we feel the loss and grieve as well. VA health care providers look to our teams to set up rituals that pay tribute to the veteran and to show respect and gratitude for our role in these moments. It is important to recognize the bonds we share and the grief we feel when a veteran dies. The relationships we form, the recognition of loss, and the honoring of the veterans help nourish and maintain us.
Although the number of VA inpatient deaths nationwide has been declining steadily for years, internal reporting by the Palliative and Hospice Care Program Office has shown that the percentage of VA inpatient deaths that occur in hospice settings has steadily grown. Since 2013, more veterans die in VA inpatient hospice beds than in any other hospital setting. Therefore, it is useful to take stock of the way hospice and palliative care providers and staff process and provide support so that they can continue to provide service to veterans.
In the same way that all loss and grief are unique, there are many diverse rituals across VA facilities. This article highlights some of the unique traditions that hospice and palliative care teams have adopted to embrace this remembrance. We hope that by sharing these practices others will be inspired to find ways to reflect on their work and honor the lives of veterans.
The authors reached out to VA palliative care colleagues across the country via the Veterans Health Administration National Hospice and Palliative Care listserve to ask: How does your team practice remembrance? Palliative care providers responded and shared the unique ways they and their teams reflect on these losses.
There are many moments for reflection from the time of death to the weeks and months after, to the entire year of cumulative loss. Some observances start around the time of death. Susan MacDonald, RN, GEC, from Erie VA Medical Center (VAMC) in Pennsylvania reported that following the death of a veteran in the hospice unit, there is a bedside remembrance that includes the chaplain, care team, family, and other loved ones. At the John D. Dingell VAMC in Detroit, Michigan, the clinical chaplain leads a memorial service after a community living center (CLC) resident dies.
Several VAMCs, such as Detroit and Erie, have an Honors Escort or Final Salute. In these ceremonies, family, employees, residents, and other veterans line the hallways to honor the veteran on their departure from the building.1 At the VA Maine Healthcare System, Kate MacFawn, nurse manager, Inpatient Hospice Unit, explained, “We debrief every death the day after it occurs. The doc[tor]s check in with the nursing staff on each shift, and the rest of the multidisciplinary team discusses [it] in our morning report.”
Palliative care providers consider the physical spaces where the veteran has spent those last moments and the void that is left. Karen Pickler, staff chaplain at Northport VAMC Hospice Unit recounts:
At the time of death, we decorate the tray table with the veteran’s picture, a flag, and an angel. In the CLC they will have a memorial service on Friday if a resident has died that week. This is for the unit and staff. In the past, other residents were not informed of the death. This way, the relationships between residents are honored as well as their natural families.
At VA Boston Healthcare System (VABHS) in Massachusetts in the Inpatient Hospice Unit-CLC, after a veteran dies, a flag, a strand of lights, and a rose in a vase are placed outside the veteran’s room to mark the absence. The VABHS remembrance practice has evolved over time based on input from the team. According to Noah Whiddon, LICSW, CLC complex case coordinator, at a weekly interdisciplinary team (IDT) meeting, the names of veterans who have died in the past week are read, and there is a commemorative ribbon cutting. “Any team member may write the last name of the deceased veteran on the ribbon and place it into a vase,” he said. “One of the nurse team members felt that a moment of silence would be appropriate, and we have added that.”
Every 6 months, VABHS holds a flag burning ceremony to appropriately dispose of worn out flags. Veterans and families are invited. The commemorative ribbons are packaged and burned at this ceremony with the following explanation of the ritual:
We’d like to take a moment to reflect on the lives of veterans we’ve lost in the last 6 months. Each week we remember the veterans for whom we have cared who have passed away. As part of this, we cut a ribbon and inscribe their name on it to commemorate their memory. We might have known these veterans for a few days or for a few years, but each of their lives had meaning for us. The courage that our veterans demonstrate at the end of their lives is an extension of the bravery they displayed in their service to our country. Today we will burn their commemorative ribbons with our country’s flag in tribute to and respect for their selflessness to our country. Please join us in a few moments of silence as their ribbons burn together with our flag.
In the VABHS acute care hospital, the palliative care IDT reserves 30 minutes, twice monthly for a chaplain-led remembrance. A large bowl-shaped shell is placed in the center of the table with smaller shells around it. Any team member can read the names of veterans who have died in prior weeks and share a memory of the patient or family, and then place a smaller shell into the larger bowl. This represents the transition from the smallest part of the universe back into the larger part. At the end, a moment of silence is observed or a poem is read. This tradition was brought to the team by the palliative care chaplain, Douglas Falls, MDiv.
Bimonthly bereavement meetings are held at the James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital-Pasco County branch, and each veteran who has died is remembered. Whoever wants to share is welcome. “We conclude with a poem, usually shared by the physician, but it can be any team member,” explained Linda Falzetta-Gross, ARNP-BC. “This process is led by the team social worker. In the past, we used to ring a bell prior to each name.”
Bells also are used at the Greater West Los Angeles VAMC in California. At the weekly clinic, veterans who have died are remembered, and each team member has an opportunity to share memories. “We ring a Tibetan bell for a moment without words,” explains Geoffrey Tyrell, palliative care chaplain. “It is introduced with a few words to allow new staff members in our clinic to participate, as a moment of mindfulness to let go of our words and to go inside, to see what we might need for our own wellness.” Afterward the chaplain says a few words and wishes for peace for the veterans and their families. The team also has responded well to more participatory group activities, such as placing rocks in a bowl of water, to symbolize letting go of something that has been difficult.
Additionally, there are practices of a larger scope. Many VAMCs have established facility-wide memorial services annually, biannually, or quarterly. At this time, families and staff come together to remember and honor veterans who have died within the VAMC. These memorials might involve a variety of service lines, such as chaplaincy, voluntary services, nursing, and social work and may consist of an honor guard, music, and readings. In accordance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and privacy regulations, only family members of deceased veterans may speak the names at the ceremony unless written consent is given. At the Tennessee Valley Healthcare System in Nashville, family members may stand and give the name of the person they are honoring. Balloons are released, stories are told, and a poem or appropriate passage is read. Families are given a book pinned with a flag, according to Jennifer C. Crenshaw, clinical staff chaplain. Family members are moved knowing that the VA remembers their loved ones even months after they are gone.
Due to the overwhelming positive feedback from veterans’ families who participated in these ceremonies, on January 24, 2018, Carolyn Clancy, MD, VHA Executive-in-Charge, Office of the Under Secretary for Health issued a memorandum requesting that all VAMCs immediately adopt this best practice: to host periodic ceremonies to publicly recognize and honor deceased veterans in the presence of their families, VA care providers, veterans service organizations and community members. Clancy recommended calling the ceremonies “The Last Roll Call Ceremony of Remembrance.”2
These rituals are a small sample of the rich diversity of practice in VAs across the country. What unifies VA palliative care providers is our mission to serve the veterans, honor their deaths, show respect and gratitude, and recognize that we, too, feel the pain of loss. We mark these moments with solemnity and beauty—a bell, a poem, a prayer—to honor our shared experience caring for veterans.
1. Saint S. A VA hospital you may not know: The Final Salute, and how much we doctors care. https://theconversation.com/a-va-hospital-you-may-not-know-the-final-salute-and-how-much-we-doctors-care-94217. Published March 30, 2018. Accessed May 8, 2019.
2. Clancy CM. VAIQ Memorandum 7866347: Implementation of the last roll call ceremony of remembrance at all Veterans Affairs medical centers. Published 2018.
Caring for veterans at the end of their lives is a great honor. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care professionals (HCPs) find meaning and take pride in providing this care. We are there to support the patient and their family and loved ones around the time of death. When our patients die, we feel the loss and grieve as well. VA health care providers look to our teams to set up rituals that pay tribute to the veteran and to show respect and gratitude for our role in these moments. It is important to recognize the bonds we share and the grief we feel when a veteran dies. The relationships we form, the recognition of loss, and the honoring of the veterans help nourish and maintain us.
Although the number of VA inpatient deaths nationwide has been declining steadily for years, internal reporting by the Palliative and Hospice Care Program Office has shown that the percentage of VA inpatient deaths that occur in hospice settings has steadily grown. Since 2013, more veterans die in VA inpatient hospice beds than in any other hospital setting. Therefore, it is useful to take stock of the way hospice and palliative care providers and staff process and provide support so that they can continue to provide service to veterans.
In the same way that all loss and grief are unique, there are many diverse rituals across VA facilities. This article highlights some of the unique traditions that hospice and palliative care teams have adopted to embrace this remembrance. We hope that by sharing these practices others will be inspired to find ways to reflect on their work and honor the lives of veterans.
The authors reached out to VA palliative care colleagues across the country via the Veterans Health Administration National Hospice and Palliative Care listserve to ask: How does your team practice remembrance? Palliative care providers responded and shared the unique ways they and their teams reflect on these losses.
There are many moments for reflection from the time of death to the weeks and months after, to the entire year of cumulative loss. Some observances start around the time of death. Susan MacDonald, RN, GEC, from Erie VA Medical Center (VAMC) in Pennsylvania reported that following the death of a veteran in the hospice unit, there is a bedside remembrance that includes the chaplain, care team, family, and other loved ones. At the John D. Dingell VAMC in Detroit, Michigan, the clinical chaplain leads a memorial service after a community living center (CLC) resident dies.
Several VAMCs, such as Detroit and Erie, have an Honors Escort or Final Salute. In these ceremonies, family, employees, residents, and other veterans line the hallways to honor the veteran on their departure from the building.1 At the VA Maine Healthcare System, Kate MacFawn, nurse manager, Inpatient Hospice Unit, explained, “We debrief every death the day after it occurs. The doc[tor]s check in with the nursing staff on each shift, and the rest of the multidisciplinary team discusses [it] in our morning report.”
Palliative care providers consider the physical spaces where the veteran has spent those last moments and the void that is left. Karen Pickler, staff chaplain at Northport VAMC Hospice Unit recounts:
At the time of death, we decorate the tray table with the veteran’s picture, a flag, and an angel. In the CLC they will have a memorial service on Friday if a resident has died that week. This is for the unit and staff. In the past, other residents were not informed of the death. This way, the relationships between residents are honored as well as their natural families.
At VA Boston Healthcare System (VABHS) in Massachusetts in the Inpatient Hospice Unit-CLC, after a veteran dies, a flag, a strand of lights, and a rose in a vase are placed outside the veteran’s room to mark the absence. The VABHS remembrance practice has evolved over time based on input from the team. According to Noah Whiddon, LICSW, CLC complex case coordinator, at a weekly interdisciplinary team (IDT) meeting, the names of veterans who have died in the past week are read, and there is a commemorative ribbon cutting. “Any team member may write the last name of the deceased veteran on the ribbon and place it into a vase,” he said. “One of the nurse team members felt that a moment of silence would be appropriate, and we have added that.”
Every 6 months, VABHS holds a flag burning ceremony to appropriately dispose of worn out flags. Veterans and families are invited. The commemorative ribbons are packaged and burned at this ceremony with the following explanation of the ritual:
We’d like to take a moment to reflect on the lives of veterans we’ve lost in the last 6 months. Each week we remember the veterans for whom we have cared who have passed away. As part of this, we cut a ribbon and inscribe their name on it to commemorate their memory. We might have known these veterans for a few days or for a few years, but each of their lives had meaning for us. The courage that our veterans demonstrate at the end of their lives is an extension of the bravery they displayed in their service to our country. Today we will burn their commemorative ribbons with our country’s flag in tribute to and respect for their selflessness to our country. Please join us in a few moments of silence as their ribbons burn together with our flag.
In the VABHS acute care hospital, the palliative care IDT reserves 30 minutes, twice monthly for a chaplain-led remembrance. A large bowl-shaped shell is placed in the center of the table with smaller shells around it. Any team member can read the names of veterans who have died in prior weeks and share a memory of the patient or family, and then place a smaller shell into the larger bowl. This represents the transition from the smallest part of the universe back into the larger part. At the end, a moment of silence is observed or a poem is read. This tradition was brought to the team by the palliative care chaplain, Douglas Falls, MDiv.
Bimonthly bereavement meetings are held at the James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital-Pasco County branch, and each veteran who has died is remembered. Whoever wants to share is welcome. “We conclude with a poem, usually shared by the physician, but it can be any team member,” explained Linda Falzetta-Gross, ARNP-BC. “This process is led by the team social worker. In the past, we used to ring a bell prior to each name.”
Bells also are used at the Greater West Los Angeles VAMC in California. At the weekly clinic, veterans who have died are remembered, and each team member has an opportunity to share memories. “We ring a Tibetan bell for a moment without words,” explains Geoffrey Tyrell, palliative care chaplain. “It is introduced with a few words to allow new staff members in our clinic to participate, as a moment of mindfulness to let go of our words and to go inside, to see what we might need for our own wellness.” Afterward the chaplain says a few words and wishes for peace for the veterans and their families. The team also has responded well to more participatory group activities, such as placing rocks in a bowl of water, to symbolize letting go of something that has been difficult.
Additionally, there are practices of a larger scope. Many VAMCs have established facility-wide memorial services annually, biannually, or quarterly. At this time, families and staff come together to remember and honor veterans who have died within the VAMC. These memorials might involve a variety of service lines, such as chaplaincy, voluntary services, nursing, and social work and may consist of an honor guard, music, and readings. In accordance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and privacy regulations, only family members of deceased veterans may speak the names at the ceremony unless written consent is given. At the Tennessee Valley Healthcare System in Nashville, family members may stand and give the name of the person they are honoring. Balloons are released, stories are told, and a poem or appropriate passage is read. Families are given a book pinned with a flag, according to Jennifer C. Crenshaw, clinical staff chaplain. Family members are moved knowing that the VA remembers their loved ones even months after they are gone.
Due to the overwhelming positive feedback from veterans’ families who participated in these ceremonies, on January 24, 2018, Carolyn Clancy, MD, VHA Executive-in-Charge, Office of the Under Secretary for Health issued a memorandum requesting that all VAMCs immediately adopt this best practice: to host periodic ceremonies to publicly recognize and honor deceased veterans in the presence of their families, VA care providers, veterans service organizations and community members. Clancy recommended calling the ceremonies “The Last Roll Call Ceremony of Remembrance.”2
These rituals are a small sample of the rich diversity of practice in VAs across the country. What unifies VA palliative care providers is our mission to serve the veterans, honor their deaths, show respect and gratitude, and recognize that we, too, feel the pain of loss. We mark these moments with solemnity and beauty—a bell, a poem, a prayer—to honor our shared experience caring for veterans.
Caring for veterans at the end of their lives is a great honor. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care professionals (HCPs) find meaning and take pride in providing this care. We are there to support the patient and their family and loved ones around the time of death. When our patients die, we feel the loss and grieve as well. VA health care providers look to our teams to set up rituals that pay tribute to the veteran and to show respect and gratitude for our role in these moments. It is important to recognize the bonds we share and the grief we feel when a veteran dies. The relationships we form, the recognition of loss, and the honoring of the veterans help nourish and maintain us.
Although the number of VA inpatient deaths nationwide has been declining steadily for years, internal reporting by the Palliative and Hospice Care Program Office has shown that the percentage of VA inpatient deaths that occur in hospice settings has steadily grown. Since 2013, more veterans die in VA inpatient hospice beds than in any other hospital setting. Therefore, it is useful to take stock of the way hospice and palliative care providers and staff process and provide support so that they can continue to provide service to veterans.
In the same way that all loss and grief are unique, there are many diverse rituals across VA facilities. This article highlights some of the unique traditions that hospice and palliative care teams have adopted to embrace this remembrance. We hope that by sharing these practices others will be inspired to find ways to reflect on their work and honor the lives of veterans.
The authors reached out to VA palliative care colleagues across the country via the Veterans Health Administration National Hospice and Palliative Care listserve to ask: How does your team practice remembrance? Palliative care providers responded and shared the unique ways they and their teams reflect on these losses.
There are many moments for reflection from the time of death to the weeks and months after, to the entire year of cumulative loss. Some observances start around the time of death. Susan MacDonald, RN, GEC, from Erie VA Medical Center (VAMC) in Pennsylvania reported that following the death of a veteran in the hospice unit, there is a bedside remembrance that includes the chaplain, care team, family, and other loved ones. At the John D. Dingell VAMC in Detroit, Michigan, the clinical chaplain leads a memorial service after a community living center (CLC) resident dies.
Several VAMCs, such as Detroit and Erie, have an Honors Escort or Final Salute. In these ceremonies, family, employees, residents, and other veterans line the hallways to honor the veteran on their departure from the building.1 At the VA Maine Healthcare System, Kate MacFawn, nurse manager, Inpatient Hospice Unit, explained, “We debrief every death the day after it occurs. The doc[tor]s check in with the nursing staff on each shift, and the rest of the multidisciplinary team discusses [it] in our morning report.”
Palliative care providers consider the physical spaces where the veteran has spent those last moments and the void that is left. Karen Pickler, staff chaplain at Northport VAMC Hospice Unit recounts:
At the time of death, we decorate the tray table with the veteran’s picture, a flag, and an angel. In the CLC they will have a memorial service on Friday if a resident has died that week. This is for the unit and staff. In the past, other residents were not informed of the death. This way, the relationships between residents are honored as well as their natural families.
At VA Boston Healthcare System (VABHS) in Massachusetts in the Inpatient Hospice Unit-CLC, after a veteran dies, a flag, a strand of lights, and a rose in a vase are placed outside the veteran’s room to mark the absence. The VABHS remembrance practice has evolved over time based on input from the team. According to Noah Whiddon, LICSW, CLC complex case coordinator, at a weekly interdisciplinary team (IDT) meeting, the names of veterans who have died in the past week are read, and there is a commemorative ribbon cutting. “Any team member may write the last name of the deceased veteran on the ribbon and place it into a vase,” he said. “One of the nurse team members felt that a moment of silence would be appropriate, and we have added that.”
Every 6 months, VABHS holds a flag burning ceremony to appropriately dispose of worn out flags. Veterans and families are invited. The commemorative ribbons are packaged and burned at this ceremony with the following explanation of the ritual:
We’d like to take a moment to reflect on the lives of veterans we’ve lost in the last 6 months. Each week we remember the veterans for whom we have cared who have passed away. As part of this, we cut a ribbon and inscribe their name on it to commemorate their memory. We might have known these veterans for a few days or for a few years, but each of their lives had meaning for us. The courage that our veterans demonstrate at the end of their lives is an extension of the bravery they displayed in their service to our country. Today we will burn their commemorative ribbons with our country’s flag in tribute to and respect for their selflessness to our country. Please join us in a few moments of silence as their ribbons burn together with our flag.
In the VABHS acute care hospital, the palliative care IDT reserves 30 minutes, twice monthly for a chaplain-led remembrance. A large bowl-shaped shell is placed in the center of the table with smaller shells around it. Any team member can read the names of veterans who have died in prior weeks and share a memory of the patient or family, and then place a smaller shell into the larger bowl. This represents the transition from the smallest part of the universe back into the larger part. At the end, a moment of silence is observed or a poem is read. This tradition was brought to the team by the palliative care chaplain, Douglas Falls, MDiv.
Bimonthly bereavement meetings are held at the James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital-Pasco County branch, and each veteran who has died is remembered. Whoever wants to share is welcome. “We conclude with a poem, usually shared by the physician, but it can be any team member,” explained Linda Falzetta-Gross, ARNP-BC. “This process is led by the team social worker. In the past, we used to ring a bell prior to each name.”
Bells also are used at the Greater West Los Angeles VAMC in California. At the weekly clinic, veterans who have died are remembered, and each team member has an opportunity to share memories. “We ring a Tibetan bell for a moment without words,” explains Geoffrey Tyrell, palliative care chaplain. “It is introduced with a few words to allow new staff members in our clinic to participate, as a moment of mindfulness to let go of our words and to go inside, to see what we might need for our own wellness.” Afterward the chaplain says a few words and wishes for peace for the veterans and their families. The team also has responded well to more participatory group activities, such as placing rocks in a bowl of water, to symbolize letting go of something that has been difficult.
Additionally, there are practices of a larger scope. Many VAMCs have established facility-wide memorial services annually, biannually, or quarterly. At this time, families and staff come together to remember and honor veterans who have died within the VAMC. These memorials might involve a variety of service lines, such as chaplaincy, voluntary services, nursing, and social work and may consist of an honor guard, music, and readings. In accordance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and privacy regulations, only family members of deceased veterans may speak the names at the ceremony unless written consent is given. At the Tennessee Valley Healthcare System in Nashville, family members may stand and give the name of the person they are honoring. Balloons are released, stories are told, and a poem or appropriate passage is read. Families are given a book pinned with a flag, according to Jennifer C. Crenshaw, clinical staff chaplain. Family members are moved knowing that the VA remembers their loved ones even months after they are gone.
Due to the overwhelming positive feedback from veterans’ families who participated in these ceremonies, on January 24, 2018, Carolyn Clancy, MD, VHA Executive-in-Charge, Office of the Under Secretary for Health issued a memorandum requesting that all VAMCs immediately adopt this best practice: to host periodic ceremonies to publicly recognize and honor deceased veterans in the presence of their families, VA care providers, veterans service organizations and community members. Clancy recommended calling the ceremonies “The Last Roll Call Ceremony of Remembrance.”2
These rituals are a small sample of the rich diversity of practice in VAs across the country. What unifies VA palliative care providers is our mission to serve the veterans, honor their deaths, show respect and gratitude, and recognize that we, too, feel the pain of loss. We mark these moments with solemnity and beauty—a bell, a poem, a prayer—to honor our shared experience caring for veterans.
1. Saint S. A VA hospital you may not know: The Final Salute, and how much we doctors care. https://theconversation.com/a-va-hospital-you-may-not-know-the-final-salute-and-how-much-we-doctors-care-94217. Published March 30, 2018. Accessed May 8, 2019.
2. Clancy CM. VAIQ Memorandum 7866347: Implementation of the last roll call ceremony of remembrance at all Veterans Affairs medical centers. Published 2018.
1. Saint S. A VA hospital you may not know: The Final Salute, and how much we doctors care. https://theconversation.com/a-va-hospital-you-may-not-know-the-final-salute-and-how-much-we-doctors-care-94217. Published March 30, 2018. Accessed May 8, 2019.
2. Clancy CM. VAIQ Memorandum 7866347: Implementation of the last roll call ceremony of remembrance at all Veterans Affairs medical centers. Published 2018.
GI practice consolidation continues
Digestive Disease Week® (DDW) 2019 is now history. This was the 50th anniversary of DDW and again, it lived up to its reputation as the world’s foremost meeting dedicated to digestive diseases. GI & Hepatology News will publish multiple articles highlighting the best of DDW in the coming months.
The AGA Presidential Plenary session is an annual DDW highlight. This year’s session did not disappoint and was attended by a large crowd. David Lieberman, MD, AGAF (outgoing AGA president) and Hashem B. El-Serag MD, MPH, AGAF (incoming AGA president) moderated the session. Outstanding presentations about management of obesity, new findings in IBD, the use of virtual reality in the treatment of functional abdominal pain, and findings from a long-term colorectal cancer screening trial were some of the key presentations.
Recent behind-the-scenes work by the AGA is paying off for its members and the larger GI community. The AGA was again awarded an NIH-funded grant to advance its education and training of under-represented minorities. This is the second NIH grant given to the AGA, who now has become a leader in diversity and inclusive education. The AGA has strengthened its close bond with the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation, adding to its portfolio of scientific and clinical offerings focused on IBD. The AGA Center for Gut Microbiome Research and Education has emerged as one of the best sources of education and research about the microbiome’s impact on digestive health.
On the business front, there are tectonic changes occurring. In 2018, three large GI practices were sold to private equity companies and each has completed multiple arbitrage plays (acquisition of smaller practices), growing to over 200 physicians. This year we will see 6-10 additional private equity acquisitions and will likely see one or more GI practices of 500-1000 providers. This consolidation will have profound implications for the practice of gastroenterology and will provide some interesting opportunities to conduct population-based research for physicians who can capture that potential through academic-community partnerships.
John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF
Editor in Chief
Digestive Disease Week® (DDW) 2019 is now history. This was the 50th anniversary of DDW and again, it lived up to its reputation as the world’s foremost meeting dedicated to digestive diseases. GI & Hepatology News will publish multiple articles highlighting the best of DDW in the coming months.
The AGA Presidential Plenary session is an annual DDW highlight. This year’s session did not disappoint and was attended by a large crowd. David Lieberman, MD, AGAF (outgoing AGA president) and Hashem B. El-Serag MD, MPH, AGAF (incoming AGA president) moderated the session. Outstanding presentations about management of obesity, new findings in IBD, the use of virtual reality in the treatment of functional abdominal pain, and findings from a long-term colorectal cancer screening trial were some of the key presentations.
Recent behind-the-scenes work by the AGA is paying off for its members and the larger GI community. The AGA was again awarded an NIH-funded grant to advance its education and training of under-represented minorities. This is the second NIH grant given to the AGA, who now has become a leader in diversity and inclusive education. The AGA has strengthened its close bond with the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation, adding to its portfolio of scientific and clinical offerings focused on IBD. The AGA Center for Gut Microbiome Research and Education has emerged as one of the best sources of education and research about the microbiome’s impact on digestive health.
On the business front, there are tectonic changes occurring. In 2018, three large GI practices were sold to private equity companies and each has completed multiple arbitrage plays (acquisition of smaller practices), growing to over 200 physicians. This year we will see 6-10 additional private equity acquisitions and will likely see one or more GI practices of 500-1000 providers. This consolidation will have profound implications for the practice of gastroenterology and will provide some interesting opportunities to conduct population-based research for physicians who can capture that potential through academic-community partnerships.
John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF
Editor in Chief
Digestive Disease Week® (DDW) 2019 is now history. This was the 50th anniversary of DDW and again, it lived up to its reputation as the world’s foremost meeting dedicated to digestive diseases. GI & Hepatology News will publish multiple articles highlighting the best of DDW in the coming months.
The AGA Presidential Plenary session is an annual DDW highlight. This year’s session did not disappoint and was attended by a large crowd. David Lieberman, MD, AGAF (outgoing AGA president) and Hashem B. El-Serag MD, MPH, AGAF (incoming AGA president) moderated the session. Outstanding presentations about management of obesity, new findings in IBD, the use of virtual reality in the treatment of functional abdominal pain, and findings from a long-term colorectal cancer screening trial were some of the key presentations.
Recent behind-the-scenes work by the AGA is paying off for its members and the larger GI community. The AGA was again awarded an NIH-funded grant to advance its education and training of under-represented minorities. This is the second NIH grant given to the AGA, who now has become a leader in diversity and inclusive education. The AGA has strengthened its close bond with the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation, adding to its portfolio of scientific and clinical offerings focused on IBD. The AGA Center for Gut Microbiome Research and Education has emerged as one of the best sources of education and research about the microbiome’s impact on digestive health.
On the business front, there are tectonic changes occurring. In 2018, three large GI practices were sold to private equity companies and each has completed multiple arbitrage plays (acquisition of smaller practices), growing to over 200 physicians. This year we will see 6-10 additional private equity acquisitions and will likely see one or more GI practices of 500-1000 providers. This consolidation will have profound implications for the practice of gastroenterology and will provide some interesting opportunities to conduct population-based research for physicians who can capture that potential through academic-community partnerships.
John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF
Editor in Chief
Steroids May Not Benefit Patients With Mild Asthma
The gold-standard treatment is no more effective than placebo for patients with mild persistent asthma, say researchers from the Steroids in Eosinophil Negative Asthma (SIENA) study, funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
The researchers divided 295 participants into groups based on low- or high-sputum eosinophil levels and assigned them randomly to each of 3 treatment groups for 12-week periods: inhaled steroids (mometasone), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) (tiotropium), or placebo.
Surprisingly, 221 participants—nearly 73%—were classified as having low-sputum eosinophils (< 2%), a much higher frequency than the researchers expected. And of those, the number who responded better to steroids was no different from the number responding to placebo. Of the Eos-low group, 60% had better symptom control with LAMA; 40% had better symptom control with placebo.
By contrast, patients classified as “Eos-high” were nearly 3 times as likely to respond to inhaled steroids compared with placebo.
Other research has indicated that about half the population with mild persistent asthma have < 2% sputum eosinophils and are not likely to respond well to steroids. But laboratory tests to measure sputum eosinophils are not routinely used in most clinics, the researchers say.
The difference between the groups is not large enough to conclude that patients are more likely to do better on LAMA drugs, the researchers say, but their study highlights the need to look for alternatives to inhaled steroids for patients with mild asthma.
The research underscores the value of customizing treatments to help people with asthma, said James Kiley, PhD, director of the Division of Lung Diseases at NHLBI. “This study adds to a growing body of evidence that different patients with mild asthma should be treated differently, perhaps using biomarkers like sputum eosinophils to select which drugs should be used—a precision medicine approach.”
The gold-standard treatment is no more effective than placebo for patients with mild persistent asthma, say researchers from the Steroids in Eosinophil Negative Asthma (SIENA) study, funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
The researchers divided 295 participants into groups based on low- or high-sputum eosinophil levels and assigned them randomly to each of 3 treatment groups for 12-week periods: inhaled steroids (mometasone), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) (tiotropium), or placebo.
Surprisingly, 221 participants—nearly 73%—were classified as having low-sputum eosinophils (< 2%), a much higher frequency than the researchers expected. And of those, the number who responded better to steroids was no different from the number responding to placebo. Of the Eos-low group, 60% had better symptom control with LAMA; 40% had better symptom control with placebo.
By contrast, patients classified as “Eos-high” were nearly 3 times as likely to respond to inhaled steroids compared with placebo.
Other research has indicated that about half the population with mild persistent asthma have < 2% sputum eosinophils and are not likely to respond well to steroids. But laboratory tests to measure sputum eosinophils are not routinely used in most clinics, the researchers say.
The difference between the groups is not large enough to conclude that patients are more likely to do better on LAMA drugs, the researchers say, but their study highlights the need to look for alternatives to inhaled steroids for patients with mild asthma.
The research underscores the value of customizing treatments to help people with asthma, said James Kiley, PhD, director of the Division of Lung Diseases at NHLBI. “This study adds to a growing body of evidence that different patients with mild asthma should be treated differently, perhaps using biomarkers like sputum eosinophils to select which drugs should be used—a precision medicine approach.”
The gold-standard treatment is no more effective than placebo for patients with mild persistent asthma, say researchers from the Steroids in Eosinophil Negative Asthma (SIENA) study, funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
The researchers divided 295 participants into groups based on low- or high-sputum eosinophil levels and assigned them randomly to each of 3 treatment groups for 12-week periods: inhaled steroids (mometasone), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) (tiotropium), or placebo.
Surprisingly, 221 participants—nearly 73%—were classified as having low-sputum eosinophils (< 2%), a much higher frequency than the researchers expected. And of those, the number who responded better to steroids was no different from the number responding to placebo. Of the Eos-low group, 60% had better symptom control with LAMA; 40% had better symptom control with placebo.
By contrast, patients classified as “Eos-high” were nearly 3 times as likely to respond to inhaled steroids compared with placebo.
Other research has indicated that about half the population with mild persistent asthma have < 2% sputum eosinophils and are not likely to respond well to steroids. But laboratory tests to measure sputum eosinophils are not routinely used in most clinics, the researchers say.
The difference between the groups is not large enough to conclude that patients are more likely to do better on LAMA drugs, the researchers say, but their study highlights the need to look for alternatives to inhaled steroids for patients with mild asthma.
The research underscores the value of customizing treatments to help people with asthma, said James Kiley, PhD, director of the Division of Lung Diseases at NHLBI. “This study adds to a growing body of evidence that different patients with mild asthma should be treated differently, perhaps using biomarkers like sputum eosinophils to select which drugs should be used—a precision medicine approach.”
SPIRITT: What does ‘spirituality’ mean?
Both patients and clinicians alike have shown increasing interest in spirituality as a component of physical and mental well-being.1 However, there’s no clear consensus on what spirituality actually means. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it “affecting the spirit, relating to sacred matters, concerned with religious issues.”2 Spirituality is sometimes defined in broadly secular terms, such as the feeling of “being part of something greater than ourselves,” or in connection to ideas rooted in a specific belief system, such as “aligning oneself with the Will of God.”
I prefer to think of the word “spiritual” as encompassing multiple practices and beliefs that have the common goal of helping us deepen our capacity for self-awareness, joy, compassion, love, freedom, justice, and mutual cooperation, not only for our own benefit, but also to create a better world. To help clinicians better understand what the term spirituality implies, whether for themselves or for their patients, I offer the acronym SPIRITT to describe core components of varied spiritual perspectives, beliefs, and practices.
Sacred. Considering certain aspects of life, time, or place as non-ordinary and worthy of reverence and awe.
Presence. Cultivating an inner presence that is open, accepting, compassionate, and loving toward others. During a spiritual experience, some may feel embraced in this way by a presence outside of themselves, such as an encounter with a spiritual teacher or an experience of feeling held lovingly by a transcendent power.
Interconnection. Understanding that we are not separate entities but are interconnected beings existing in interdependent unity, starting with our families and extending out universally. According to this perspective, harming anything or anyone is doing harm to ourself.
Rest. Taking a Sabbath or unplugging. Dedicating time each week for resting your mind and body. Spending quality time with family. Decreasing excessive stimulation and loosening the grip of consumerism.
Introspection. Looking inwardly. Eastern traditions emphasize deepening self-awareness through mindful meditation practices, while Western traditions include taking a personal inventory through self-examination or confessional practices.
Continue to: Traditions
Traditions. Studying sacred texts, participating in communal prayer, meditating, or engaging in rituals. This requires sorting through outmoded beliefs and ways of thinking while updating beliefs that are compatible with our lived experiences.
Transcendence. Experiencing moments, whether through nature, music, dance, ritual, prayer, art, etc., in which the narrow sense of being a separate self fades away and there is a deeper sense of a larger connection and belonging that is transpersonal, timeless, and expansive.
The components of SPIRITT have helped me to think about and pursue the physical, emotional, and social benefits of adopting a spiritual practice for my well-being as well as for the benefit of my patients.
1. Koenig HG. Religion, spirituality, and health: a review and update. Adv Mind Body Med. 2015;29(3):19-26.
2. Spiritual. Miriam-Webster Dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spiritual. Accessed May 9, 2019.
Both patients and clinicians alike have shown increasing interest in spirituality as a component of physical and mental well-being.1 However, there’s no clear consensus on what spirituality actually means. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it “affecting the spirit, relating to sacred matters, concerned with religious issues.”2 Spirituality is sometimes defined in broadly secular terms, such as the feeling of “being part of something greater than ourselves,” or in connection to ideas rooted in a specific belief system, such as “aligning oneself with the Will of God.”
I prefer to think of the word “spiritual” as encompassing multiple practices and beliefs that have the common goal of helping us deepen our capacity for self-awareness, joy, compassion, love, freedom, justice, and mutual cooperation, not only for our own benefit, but also to create a better world. To help clinicians better understand what the term spirituality implies, whether for themselves or for their patients, I offer the acronym SPIRITT to describe core components of varied spiritual perspectives, beliefs, and practices.
Sacred. Considering certain aspects of life, time, or place as non-ordinary and worthy of reverence and awe.
Presence. Cultivating an inner presence that is open, accepting, compassionate, and loving toward others. During a spiritual experience, some may feel embraced in this way by a presence outside of themselves, such as an encounter with a spiritual teacher or an experience of feeling held lovingly by a transcendent power.
Interconnection. Understanding that we are not separate entities but are interconnected beings existing in interdependent unity, starting with our families and extending out universally. According to this perspective, harming anything or anyone is doing harm to ourself.
Rest. Taking a Sabbath or unplugging. Dedicating time each week for resting your mind and body. Spending quality time with family. Decreasing excessive stimulation and loosening the grip of consumerism.
Introspection. Looking inwardly. Eastern traditions emphasize deepening self-awareness through mindful meditation practices, while Western traditions include taking a personal inventory through self-examination or confessional practices.
Continue to: Traditions
Traditions. Studying sacred texts, participating in communal prayer, meditating, or engaging in rituals. This requires sorting through outmoded beliefs and ways of thinking while updating beliefs that are compatible with our lived experiences.
Transcendence. Experiencing moments, whether through nature, music, dance, ritual, prayer, art, etc., in which the narrow sense of being a separate self fades away and there is a deeper sense of a larger connection and belonging that is transpersonal, timeless, and expansive.
The components of SPIRITT have helped me to think about and pursue the physical, emotional, and social benefits of adopting a spiritual practice for my well-being as well as for the benefit of my patients.
Both patients and clinicians alike have shown increasing interest in spirituality as a component of physical and mental well-being.1 However, there’s no clear consensus on what spirituality actually means. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it “affecting the spirit, relating to sacred matters, concerned with religious issues.”2 Spirituality is sometimes defined in broadly secular terms, such as the feeling of “being part of something greater than ourselves,” or in connection to ideas rooted in a specific belief system, such as “aligning oneself with the Will of God.”
I prefer to think of the word “spiritual” as encompassing multiple practices and beliefs that have the common goal of helping us deepen our capacity for self-awareness, joy, compassion, love, freedom, justice, and mutual cooperation, not only for our own benefit, but also to create a better world. To help clinicians better understand what the term spirituality implies, whether for themselves or for their patients, I offer the acronym SPIRITT to describe core components of varied spiritual perspectives, beliefs, and practices.
Sacred. Considering certain aspects of life, time, or place as non-ordinary and worthy of reverence and awe.
Presence. Cultivating an inner presence that is open, accepting, compassionate, and loving toward others. During a spiritual experience, some may feel embraced in this way by a presence outside of themselves, such as an encounter with a spiritual teacher or an experience of feeling held lovingly by a transcendent power.
Interconnection. Understanding that we are not separate entities but are interconnected beings existing in interdependent unity, starting with our families and extending out universally. According to this perspective, harming anything or anyone is doing harm to ourself.
Rest. Taking a Sabbath or unplugging. Dedicating time each week for resting your mind and body. Spending quality time with family. Decreasing excessive stimulation and loosening the grip of consumerism.
Introspection. Looking inwardly. Eastern traditions emphasize deepening self-awareness through mindful meditation practices, while Western traditions include taking a personal inventory through self-examination or confessional practices.
Continue to: Traditions
Traditions. Studying sacred texts, participating in communal prayer, meditating, or engaging in rituals. This requires sorting through outmoded beliefs and ways of thinking while updating beliefs that are compatible with our lived experiences.
Transcendence. Experiencing moments, whether through nature, music, dance, ritual, prayer, art, etc., in which the narrow sense of being a separate self fades away and there is a deeper sense of a larger connection and belonging that is transpersonal, timeless, and expansive.
The components of SPIRITT have helped me to think about and pursue the physical, emotional, and social benefits of adopting a spiritual practice for my well-being as well as for the benefit of my patients.
1. Koenig HG. Religion, spirituality, and health: a review and update. Adv Mind Body Med. 2015;29(3):19-26.
2. Spiritual. Miriam-Webster Dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spiritual. Accessed May 9, 2019.
1. Koenig HG. Religion, spirituality, and health: a review and update. Adv Mind Body Med. 2015;29(3):19-26.
2. Spiritual. Miriam-Webster Dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spiritual. Accessed May 9, 2019.
