Woman loses both legs after salpingectomy: $64.3M award

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 15:45
Display Headline
Woman loses both legs after salpingectomy: $64.3M award

Woman loses both legs after salpingectomy: $64.3M award
Due to an ectopic pregnancy,
a 29-year-old woman underwent laparoscopic salpingectomy in October 2009. A resident supervised by Dr. A (gynecologist) performed the surgery. Although the patient reported abdominal pain and was febrile, Dr. B (gynecologist) discharged her on postsurgical day 2.

The next day, she returned to the emergency department (ED) with abdominal swelling and pain. Dr. C (ED physician), Dr. D (gynecologist), and Dr. E (general surgeon) examined her. Dr. D began conservative treatment for bowel obstruction. Two days later she was in septic shock. Dr. E repaired a 5-mm injury to the sigmoid colon and created a colostomy. The patient was placed in a medically induced coma for 3 weeks. She experienced cardiac arrest 3 times during her 73-day ICU stay. She  underwent skin grafts, and suffered hearing loss as a result of antibiotic treatment. Due to gangrene, both legs were amputated below the knee.

At the trial’s conclusion in January 2014, the colostomy had not been reversed. She has difficulty caring for her daughter and has not worked since the initial operation.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The resident, who injured the colon and did not detect the injury during surgery, was improperly supervised by Dr. A. Hospital staff did not communicate the patient’s problem reports to the physicians. Dr. B should not have discharged her after surgery; based on her reported symptoms, additional testing was warranted. Drs. C, D, and E did not react to the patient’s pain reports in a timely manner, nor treat the resulting sepsis aggressively enough, leading to gangrene.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The patient’s colon injury was diagnosed and treated in a timely manner, but her condition deteriorated rapidly. The physicians acted responsibly based on the available information; a computed tomography scan did not show the colon injury. The injury likely occurred after the procedure due to an underlying bowel condition and is a known risk of the procedure. The colostomy can be reversed. Their efforts saved her life.

VERDICT The patient and Dr. E negotiated a $2.3 million settlement. A $62 million New York verdict was returned. The jury found the hospital 40% liable; Dr. A 30% liable; Dr. B 20% liable; and Dr. D 10% liable. Claims were dropped against the resident and Dr. C.

Related article: Oophorectomy or salpingectomy—which makes more sense? William H. Parker, MD (March 2014)

PARENTS REQUESTED EARLIER CESAREAN: CHILD HAS CP
A woman was in labor for 2 full days
before her ObGyn performed a cesarean delivery. The child was born with abnormal Apgar scores and had seizures. Imaging studies revealed brain damage. She received a diagnosis of cerebral palsy.

PARENTS’ CLAIM The parents first requested cesarean delivery early on the second day, but the ObGyn allowed labor to progress. When the fetal heart-rate monitor showed signs of fetal distress 3 hours later, the parents made a second request; the ObGyn continued with vaginal delivery. The child was ultimately born by cesarean delivery. Her brain damage was caused by lack of oxygen from failure to perform an earlier cesarean delivery.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The case was settled during the trial.

VERDICT A $4.25 million Massachusetts settlement was reached.

BLADDER INJURED DURING CESAREAN DELIVERY
A 33-year-old woman gave birth via cesarean delivery performed by her ObGyn. During the procedure, the patient’s bladder was lacerated and the injury was immediately repaired. The patient reports occasional urinary incontinence and pain.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The ObGyn should have anticipated that the bladder would be shifted because of the patient’s previous cesarean delivery.

PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE The injury is a known risk of the procedure. The patient had developed adhesions that caused the bladder to become displaced. She does not suffer permanent residual effects from the injury.

VERDICT A $125,000 New York verdict was returned.

Related article: 10 practical, evidence-based recommendations for improving maternal outcomes of cesarean delivery. Baha M. Sibai (March 2012)

 

PARENTS REQUESTED SPECIFIC GENETIC TESTING, BUT CHILD IS BORN WITH RARE CHROMOSOMAL CONDITION: $50M VERDICT
Parents sought prenatal genetic testing
to determine if their fetus had a specific genetic condition because the father carries a rare chromosomal abnormality called an unbalanced chromosome translocation. This defect can only be identified if the laboratory is told precisely where to look for the specific translocation; it is not detected on routine prenatal genetic testing. After testing, the parents were told that the fetus did not have the chromosomal abnormality.

The child was born with the condition for which testing was sought, resulting in severe physical and cognitive impairments and multiple physical abnormalities. He will require 24-hour care for life.

 

 

PARENTS’ CLAIM Testing failed to identify the condition; the couple had decided to terminate the pregnancy if the child was affected. Due to budget cuts in the maternal-fetal medicine clinic, the medical center borrowed a genetic counselor from another hospital one day a week. The parents told the genetic counselor of the family’s history of the defect and explained that the laboratory’s procedures require the referring center to obtain and share the necessary detailed information with the lab. The lab was apparently notified that the couple had a family history of the defect, but the genetic counselor did not transmit specific information to the lab, and lab personnel did not appropriately follow-up.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The medical center blamed the laboratory: the lab’s standard procedures state that the lab should call the referring center to obtain the necessary detailed information if it was not provided; the lab employee who handled the specimen did not do so. The lab claimed that the genetic counselor did not transmit the specific information to the lab.

The laboratory disputed the child’s need for 24/7 care, maintaining that he could live in a group home with only occasional nursing care.

VERDICT A $50 million Washington verdict was returned against the medical center and laboratory; each defendant will pay $25 million.

Related article: Noninvasive prenatal testing: Where we are and where we’re going. Lee P. Shulman, MD (Commentary; May 2014)

NECROTIZING FASCIITIS AFTER SURGERY
A 57-year-old woman underwent surgery
to repair vaginal vault prolapse, rectocele, and enterocele, performed by her gynecologist. Several days after discharge, the patient returned to the hospital with an infection in her leg that had evolved into necrotizing fasciitis. She underwent five fasciotomies and was hospitalized for 3 weeks.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The gynecologist should have administered prophylactic antibiotics before, during, and after surgery. The patient has massive scarring of her leg.

PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE The infection was not a result of failing to administer antibiotics. The patient failed to seek timely treatment of symptoms that developed after surgery.

VERDICT A $400,000 New York verdict was returned but reduced because the jury found the patient 49% at fault.

OXYTOCIN BLAMED FOR CHILD’S CP
A mother had bariatric surgery
12 months before becoming pregnant, and she smoked during pregnancy. She developed placental insufficiency and labor was induced shortly after she reached 37 weeks’ gestation.

During delivery, the mother was given oxytocin to increase the frequency and strength of contractions. Nurses repeatedly stopped the oxytocin in response to decelerations in the fetal heart rate, but physicians ordered the oxytocin resumed, even after fetal heart-rate monitoring showed fetal distress.

Three days after birth, the child was transferred to another hospital, and was found to have cerebral palsy and other injuries. At age 5, the child is nonverbal, cannot walk, and requires a feeding tube.

PARENTS’ CLAIM Oxytocin should have been stopped and a cesarean delivery performed when fetal distress was first noted.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE There was no need for cesarean delivery. Apgar scores, blood gases, and fetal presentation indicated that the injury occurred prior to labor.

VERDICT A $6 million Texas settlement was reached during the trial.

Related article: Q: Following cesarean delivery, what is the optimal oxytocin infusion duration to prevent postpartum bleeding? Robert L. Barbieri, MD (Editorial; April 2014)

MOTHER DISCHARGED DESPITE SEVERE ABDOMINAL PAIN
A woman had prenatal care at different locations.
Her history included two cesarean deliveries.

Reporting severe abdominal pain, she was taken from a homeless shelter to an ED by ambulance. The mother was uncertain of the fetus’ gestational age; a 4th-year obstetric resident determined by physical examination that the pregnancy was at 36.5 weeks. The resident discussed the case with the attending ObGyn, who said to discharge the mother if her pain was gone. After 11 hours, the mother was returned to the shelter.

The mother returned to the ED 12 hours later. Thirty-five minutes after fetal distress was identified, an emergency cesarean delivery was performed. At birth, the child was found to be at 38 to 39 weeks’ gestation. He received a diagnosis of severe hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy and was transferred to a children’s hospital for brain cooling.

The child lives in a long-term care facility and is dependent on a ventilator and gastronomy tube.

PARENT’S CLAIM The mother should not have been discharged after the first visit. A cesarean delivery should have been performed at that time. The attending ObGyn never saw the mother.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The mother should have given her correct due date, which was in her prenatal records based on previous ultrasonograpy. The first discharge was proper, as the pain had improved. The homeless shelter should have called an ambulance earlier for the second admission.

 

 

VERDICT A $7.5 million California settlement was reached, plus payment of medical expenses exceeding $300,000. 

Timing of child’s injury disputed
Vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) had been planned.
After reporting to her ObGyn that she was in labor, a mother went to the ED.

During the next few hours, hospital staff called the ObGyn twice to report that fetal monitor strips indicated tachycardia. The ObGyn then spoke to the mother by phone and told her that cesarean delivery was necessary but could wait for him to get to the hospital. After the ObGyn arrived, he removed the fetal heart-rate monitor to prepare the mother’s abdomen; cesarean delivery occurred 15 minutes later.

The child has spastic dystonic quadriplegia and requires 24-hour care.

PARENT’S CLAIM The ObGyn should have come to the hospital and performed cesarean delivery when he was first notified that the fetus was tachycardic. The baby suffered an hypoxic ischemic event in the 15-minute period between when the monitor was removed and birth, causing hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy.

PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE There was no indication of a need for earlier delivery. The brain injury occurred prior to labor and delivery.

VERDICT The hospital settled for a confidential amount before the trial. An Illinois defense verdict was returned for the ObGyn.

Were mammograms properly interpreted?
After reporting a lump in her breast,
a 39-year-old woman underwent mammography in 2008 and 2009. Two different radiologists reported their findings as negative for cancer.

In 2010, the patient was found to have breast cancer. She underwent a mastectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy, and was given a 75%–80% chance of 5-year survival.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The ObGyn failed to follow-up on the patient’s reports of a breast lump. The radiologists did not correctly interpret the 2008 and 2009 mammograms. If cancer had been detected earlier, treatment would have been less extreme.

PHYSICIANS’ DEFENSE The ObGyn claimed that he would have felt a lump if it was present. The first radiologist claimed that the 2008 mammography report was correct, noting that the patient’s cancer was a lobular carcinoma that does not always show on mammography or in patients with dense breasts, which this patient has. 

VERDICT A directed verdict was granted to the radiologist who interpreted the 2009 mammography, as the results were lost. An Ohio defense verdict was returned for the ObGyn and the other radiologist.

Related article: Does screening mammography save lives? Janelle Yates, Senior Editor (April 2014)

These cases were selected by the editors of OBG Management from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements & Experts, with permission of the editor, Lewis Laska (www.verdictslaska.com). The information available to the editors about the cases presented here is sometimes incomplete. Moreover, the cases may or may not have merit. Nevertheless, these cases represent the types of clinical situations that typically result in litigation and are meant to illustrate nationwide variation in jury verdicts and awards.

TELL US WHAT YOU THINK! Drop us a line and let us know what you think about this or other current articles, which topics you'd like to see covered in future issues, and what challenges you face in daily practice.
Tell us what you think by emailing us at:
[email protected] Please include your name, city and state.
Stay in touch! Your feedback is important to us!

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Issue
OBG Management - 26(6)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
46a–c
Legacy Keywords
Medical verdicts,medical malpractice,Lewis Laska,salpingectomy,amputations,ectopic pregnancy,cesarean delivery,CP,cerebral palsy,Apgar scores,seizures,bladder injury,prenatal genetic testing,rare chromosomal condition,unbalanced chromosome translocation,vaginal vault prolapse,rectocele,enterocele,ObGyn,gynecologist,prophylactic antiobiotics,oxytocin,severe abdominal pain,hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy,brain cooling,mammography,radiologist,breast cancer,spastic dystonic quadraplegia,fetal heart-rate monitor,tachycardia
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

Woman loses both legs after salpingectomy: $64.3M award
Due to an ectopic pregnancy,
a 29-year-old woman underwent laparoscopic salpingectomy in October 2009. A resident supervised by Dr. A (gynecologist) performed the surgery. Although the patient reported abdominal pain and was febrile, Dr. B (gynecologist) discharged her on postsurgical day 2.

The next day, she returned to the emergency department (ED) with abdominal swelling and pain. Dr. C (ED physician), Dr. D (gynecologist), and Dr. E (general surgeon) examined her. Dr. D began conservative treatment for bowel obstruction. Two days later she was in septic shock. Dr. E repaired a 5-mm injury to the sigmoid colon and created a colostomy. The patient was placed in a medically induced coma for 3 weeks. She experienced cardiac arrest 3 times during her 73-day ICU stay. She  underwent skin grafts, and suffered hearing loss as a result of antibiotic treatment. Due to gangrene, both legs were amputated below the knee.

At the trial’s conclusion in January 2014, the colostomy had not been reversed. She has difficulty caring for her daughter and has not worked since the initial operation.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The resident, who injured the colon and did not detect the injury during surgery, was improperly supervised by Dr. A. Hospital staff did not communicate the patient’s problem reports to the physicians. Dr. B should not have discharged her after surgery; based on her reported symptoms, additional testing was warranted. Drs. C, D, and E did not react to the patient’s pain reports in a timely manner, nor treat the resulting sepsis aggressively enough, leading to gangrene.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The patient’s colon injury was diagnosed and treated in a timely manner, but her condition deteriorated rapidly. The physicians acted responsibly based on the available information; a computed tomography scan did not show the colon injury. The injury likely occurred after the procedure due to an underlying bowel condition and is a known risk of the procedure. The colostomy can be reversed. Their efforts saved her life.

VERDICT The patient and Dr. E negotiated a $2.3 million settlement. A $62 million New York verdict was returned. The jury found the hospital 40% liable; Dr. A 30% liable; Dr. B 20% liable; and Dr. D 10% liable. Claims were dropped against the resident and Dr. C.

Related article: Oophorectomy or salpingectomy—which makes more sense? William H. Parker, MD (March 2014)

PARENTS REQUESTED EARLIER CESAREAN: CHILD HAS CP
A woman was in labor for 2 full days
before her ObGyn performed a cesarean delivery. The child was born with abnormal Apgar scores and had seizures. Imaging studies revealed brain damage. She received a diagnosis of cerebral palsy.

PARENTS’ CLAIM The parents first requested cesarean delivery early on the second day, but the ObGyn allowed labor to progress. When the fetal heart-rate monitor showed signs of fetal distress 3 hours later, the parents made a second request; the ObGyn continued with vaginal delivery. The child was ultimately born by cesarean delivery. Her brain damage was caused by lack of oxygen from failure to perform an earlier cesarean delivery.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The case was settled during the trial.

VERDICT A $4.25 million Massachusetts settlement was reached.

BLADDER INJURED DURING CESAREAN DELIVERY
A 33-year-old woman gave birth via cesarean delivery performed by her ObGyn. During the procedure, the patient’s bladder was lacerated and the injury was immediately repaired. The patient reports occasional urinary incontinence and pain.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The ObGyn should have anticipated that the bladder would be shifted because of the patient’s previous cesarean delivery.

PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE The injury is a known risk of the procedure. The patient had developed adhesions that caused the bladder to become displaced. She does not suffer permanent residual effects from the injury.

VERDICT A $125,000 New York verdict was returned.

Related article: 10 practical, evidence-based recommendations for improving maternal outcomes of cesarean delivery. Baha M. Sibai (March 2012)

 

PARENTS REQUESTED SPECIFIC GENETIC TESTING, BUT CHILD IS BORN WITH RARE CHROMOSOMAL CONDITION: $50M VERDICT
Parents sought prenatal genetic testing
to determine if their fetus had a specific genetic condition because the father carries a rare chromosomal abnormality called an unbalanced chromosome translocation. This defect can only be identified if the laboratory is told precisely where to look for the specific translocation; it is not detected on routine prenatal genetic testing. After testing, the parents were told that the fetus did not have the chromosomal abnormality.

The child was born with the condition for which testing was sought, resulting in severe physical and cognitive impairments and multiple physical abnormalities. He will require 24-hour care for life.

 

 

PARENTS’ CLAIM Testing failed to identify the condition; the couple had decided to terminate the pregnancy if the child was affected. Due to budget cuts in the maternal-fetal medicine clinic, the medical center borrowed a genetic counselor from another hospital one day a week. The parents told the genetic counselor of the family’s history of the defect and explained that the laboratory’s procedures require the referring center to obtain and share the necessary detailed information with the lab. The lab was apparently notified that the couple had a family history of the defect, but the genetic counselor did not transmit specific information to the lab, and lab personnel did not appropriately follow-up.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The medical center blamed the laboratory: the lab’s standard procedures state that the lab should call the referring center to obtain the necessary detailed information if it was not provided; the lab employee who handled the specimen did not do so. The lab claimed that the genetic counselor did not transmit the specific information to the lab.

The laboratory disputed the child’s need for 24/7 care, maintaining that he could live in a group home with only occasional nursing care.

VERDICT A $50 million Washington verdict was returned against the medical center and laboratory; each defendant will pay $25 million.

Related article: Noninvasive prenatal testing: Where we are and where we’re going. Lee P. Shulman, MD (Commentary; May 2014)

NECROTIZING FASCIITIS AFTER SURGERY
A 57-year-old woman underwent surgery
to repair vaginal vault prolapse, rectocele, and enterocele, performed by her gynecologist. Several days after discharge, the patient returned to the hospital with an infection in her leg that had evolved into necrotizing fasciitis. She underwent five fasciotomies and was hospitalized for 3 weeks.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The gynecologist should have administered prophylactic antibiotics before, during, and after surgery. The patient has massive scarring of her leg.

PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE The infection was not a result of failing to administer antibiotics. The patient failed to seek timely treatment of symptoms that developed after surgery.

VERDICT A $400,000 New York verdict was returned but reduced because the jury found the patient 49% at fault.

OXYTOCIN BLAMED FOR CHILD’S CP
A mother had bariatric surgery
12 months before becoming pregnant, and she smoked during pregnancy. She developed placental insufficiency and labor was induced shortly after she reached 37 weeks’ gestation.

During delivery, the mother was given oxytocin to increase the frequency and strength of contractions. Nurses repeatedly stopped the oxytocin in response to decelerations in the fetal heart rate, but physicians ordered the oxytocin resumed, even after fetal heart-rate monitoring showed fetal distress.

Three days after birth, the child was transferred to another hospital, and was found to have cerebral palsy and other injuries. At age 5, the child is nonverbal, cannot walk, and requires a feeding tube.

PARENTS’ CLAIM Oxytocin should have been stopped and a cesarean delivery performed when fetal distress was first noted.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE There was no need for cesarean delivery. Apgar scores, blood gases, and fetal presentation indicated that the injury occurred prior to labor.

VERDICT A $6 million Texas settlement was reached during the trial.

Related article: Q: Following cesarean delivery, what is the optimal oxytocin infusion duration to prevent postpartum bleeding? Robert L. Barbieri, MD (Editorial; April 2014)

MOTHER DISCHARGED DESPITE SEVERE ABDOMINAL PAIN
A woman had prenatal care at different locations.
Her history included two cesarean deliveries.

Reporting severe abdominal pain, she was taken from a homeless shelter to an ED by ambulance. The mother was uncertain of the fetus’ gestational age; a 4th-year obstetric resident determined by physical examination that the pregnancy was at 36.5 weeks. The resident discussed the case with the attending ObGyn, who said to discharge the mother if her pain was gone. After 11 hours, the mother was returned to the shelter.

The mother returned to the ED 12 hours later. Thirty-five minutes after fetal distress was identified, an emergency cesarean delivery was performed. At birth, the child was found to be at 38 to 39 weeks’ gestation. He received a diagnosis of severe hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy and was transferred to a children’s hospital for brain cooling.

The child lives in a long-term care facility and is dependent on a ventilator and gastronomy tube.

PARENT’S CLAIM The mother should not have been discharged after the first visit. A cesarean delivery should have been performed at that time. The attending ObGyn never saw the mother.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The mother should have given her correct due date, which was in her prenatal records based on previous ultrasonograpy. The first discharge was proper, as the pain had improved. The homeless shelter should have called an ambulance earlier for the second admission.

 

 

VERDICT A $7.5 million California settlement was reached, plus payment of medical expenses exceeding $300,000. 

Timing of child’s injury disputed
Vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) had been planned.
After reporting to her ObGyn that she was in labor, a mother went to the ED.

During the next few hours, hospital staff called the ObGyn twice to report that fetal monitor strips indicated tachycardia. The ObGyn then spoke to the mother by phone and told her that cesarean delivery was necessary but could wait for him to get to the hospital. After the ObGyn arrived, he removed the fetal heart-rate monitor to prepare the mother’s abdomen; cesarean delivery occurred 15 minutes later.

The child has spastic dystonic quadriplegia and requires 24-hour care.

PARENT’S CLAIM The ObGyn should have come to the hospital and performed cesarean delivery when he was first notified that the fetus was tachycardic. The baby suffered an hypoxic ischemic event in the 15-minute period between when the monitor was removed and birth, causing hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy.

PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE There was no indication of a need for earlier delivery. The brain injury occurred prior to labor and delivery.

VERDICT The hospital settled for a confidential amount before the trial. An Illinois defense verdict was returned for the ObGyn.

Were mammograms properly interpreted?
After reporting a lump in her breast,
a 39-year-old woman underwent mammography in 2008 and 2009. Two different radiologists reported their findings as negative for cancer.

In 2010, the patient was found to have breast cancer. She underwent a mastectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy, and was given a 75%–80% chance of 5-year survival.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The ObGyn failed to follow-up on the patient’s reports of a breast lump. The radiologists did not correctly interpret the 2008 and 2009 mammograms. If cancer had been detected earlier, treatment would have been less extreme.

PHYSICIANS’ DEFENSE The ObGyn claimed that he would have felt a lump if it was present. The first radiologist claimed that the 2008 mammography report was correct, noting that the patient’s cancer was a lobular carcinoma that does not always show on mammography or in patients with dense breasts, which this patient has. 

VERDICT A directed verdict was granted to the radiologist who interpreted the 2009 mammography, as the results were lost. An Ohio defense verdict was returned for the ObGyn and the other radiologist.

Related article: Does screening mammography save lives? Janelle Yates, Senior Editor (April 2014)

These cases were selected by the editors of OBG Management from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements & Experts, with permission of the editor, Lewis Laska (www.verdictslaska.com). The information available to the editors about the cases presented here is sometimes incomplete. Moreover, the cases may or may not have merit. Nevertheless, these cases represent the types of clinical situations that typically result in litigation and are meant to illustrate nationwide variation in jury verdicts and awards.

TELL US WHAT YOU THINK! Drop us a line and let us know what you think about this or other current articles, which topics you'd like to see covered in future issues, and what challenges you face in daily practice.
Tell us what you think by emailing us at:
[email protected] Please include your name, city and state.
Stay in touch! Your feedback is important to us!

Woman loses both legs after salpingectomy: $64.3M award
Due to an ectopic pregnancy,
a 29-year-old woman underwent laparoscopic salpingectomy in October 2009. A resident supervised by Dr. A (gynecologist) performed the surgery. Although the patient reported abdominal pain and was febrile, Dr. B (gynecologist) discharged her on postsurgical day 2.

The next day, she returned to the emergency department (ED) with abdominal swelling and pain. Dr. C (ED physician), Dr. D (gynecologist), and Dr. E (general surgeon) examined her. Dr. D began conservative treatment for bowel obstruction. Two days later she was in septic shock. Dr. E repaired a 5-mm injury to the sigmoid colon and created a colostomy. The patient was placed in a medically induced coma for 3 weeks. She experienced cardiac arrest 3 times during her 73-day ICU stay. She  underwent skin grafts, and suffered hearing loss as a result of antibiotic treatment. Due to gangrene, both legs were amputated below the knee.

At the trial’s conclusion in January 2014, the colostomy had not been reversed. She has difficulty caring for her daughter and has not worked since the initial operation.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The resident, who injured the colon and did not detect the injury during surgery, was improperly supervised by Dr. A. Hospital staff did not communicate the patient’s problem reports to the physicians. Dr. B should not have discharged her after surgery; based on her reported symptoms, additional testing was warranted. Drs. C, D, and E did not react to the patient’s pain reports in a timely manner, nor treat the resulting sepsis aggressively enough, leading to gangrene.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The patient’s colon injury was diagnosed and treated in a timely manner, but her condition deteriorated rapidly. The physicians acted responsibly based on the available information; a computed tomography scan did not show the colon injury. The injury likely occurred after the procedure due to an underlying bowel condition and is a known risk of the procedure. The colostomy can be reversed. Their efforts saved her life.

VERDICT The patient and Dr. E negotiated a $2.3 million settlement. A $62 million New York verdict was returned. The jury found the hospital 40% liable; Dr. A 30% liable; Dr. B 20% liable; and Dr. D 10% liable. Claims were dropped against the resident and Dr. C.

Related article: Oophorectomy or salpingectomy—which makes more sense? William H. Parker, MD (March 2014)

PARENTS REQUESTED EARLIER CESAREAN: CHILD HAS CP
A woman was in labor for 2 full days
before her ObGyn performed a cesarean delivery. The child was born with abnormal Apgar scores and had seizures. Imaging studies revealed brain damage. She received a diagnosis of cerebral palsy.

PARENTS’ CLAIM The parents first requested cesarean delivery early on the second day, but the ObGyn allowed labor to progress. When the fetal heart-rate monitor showed signs of fetal distress 3 hours later, the parents made a second request; the ObGyn continued with vaginal delivery. The child was ultimately born by cesarean delivery. Her brain damage was caused by lack of oxygen from failure to perform an earlier cesarean delivery.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The case was settled during the trial.

VERDICT A $4.25 million Massachusetts settlement was reached.

BLADDER INJURED DURING CESAREAN DELIVERY
A 33-year-old woman gave birth via cesarean delivery performed by her ObGyn. During the procedure, the patient’s bladder was lacerated and the injury was immediately repaired. The patient reports occasional urinary incontinence and pain.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The ObGyn should have anticipated that the bladder would be shifted because of the patient’s previous cesarean delivery.

PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE The injury is a known risk of the procedure. The patient had developed adhesions that caused the bladder to become displaced. She does not suffer permanent residual effects from the injury.

VERDICT A $125,000 New York verdict was returned.

Related article: 10 practical, evidence-based recommendations for improving maternal outcomes of cesarean delivery. Baha M. Sibai (March 2012)

 

PARENTS REQUESTED SPECIFIC GENETIC TESTING, BUT CHILD IS BORN WITH RARE CHROMOSOMAL CONDITION: $50M VERDICT
Parents sought prenatal genetic testing
to determine if their fetus had a specific genetic condition because the father carries a rare chromosomal abnormality called an unbalanced chromosome translocation. This defect can only be identified if the laboratory is told precisely where to look for the specific translocation; it is not detected on routine prenatal genetic testing. After testing, the parents were told that the fetus did not have the chromosomal abnormality.

The child was born with the condition for which testing was sought, resulting in severe physical and cognitive impairments and multiple physical abnormalities. He will require 24-hour care for life.

 

 

PARENTS’ CLAIM Testing failed to identify the condition; the couple had decided to terminate the pregnancy if the child was affected. Due to budget cuts in the maternal-fetal medicine clinic, the medical center borrowed a genetic counselor from another hospital one day a week. The parents told the genetic counselor of the family’s history of the defect and explained that the laboratory’s procedures require the referring center to obtain and share the necessary detailed information with the lab. The lab was apparently notified that the couple had a family history of the defect, but the genetic counselor did not transmit specific information to the lab, and lab personnel did not appropriately follow-up.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The medical center blamed the laboratory: the lab’s standard procedures state that the lab should call the referring center to obtain the necessary detailed information if it was not provided; the lab employee who handled the specimen did not do so. The lab claimed that the genetic counselor did not transmit the specific information to the lab.

The laboratory disputed the child’s need for 24/7 care, maintaining that he could live in a group home with only occasional nursing care.

VERDICT A $50 million Washington verdict was returned against the medical center and laboratory; each defendant will pay $25 million.

Related article: Noninvasive prenatal testing: Where we are and where we’re going. Lee P. Shulman, MD (Commentary; May 2014)

NECROTIZING FASCIITIS AFTER SURGERY
A 57-year-old woman underwent surgery
to repair vaginal vault prolapse, rectocele, and enterocele, performed by her gynecologist. Several days after discharge, the patient returned to the hospital with an infection in her leg that had evolved into necrotizing fasciitis. She underwent five fasciotomies and was hospitalized for 3 weeks.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The gynecologist should have administered prophylactic antibiotics before, during, and after surgery. The patient has massive scarring of her leg.

PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE The infection was not a result of failing to administer antibiotics. The patient failed to seek timely treatment of symptoms that developed after surgery.

VERDICT A $400,000 New York verdict was returned but reduced because the jury found the patient 49% at fault.

OXYTOCIN BLAMED FOR CHILD’S CP
A mother had bariatric surgery
12 months before becoming pregnant, and she smoked during pregnancy. She developed placental insufficiency and labor was induced shortly after she reached 37 weeks’ gestation.

During delivery, the mother was given oxytocin to increase the frequency and strength of contractions. Nurses repeatedly stopped the oxytocin in response to decelerations in the fetal heart rate, but physicians ordered the oxytocin resumed, even after fetal heart-rate monitoring showed fetal distress.

Three days after birth, the child was transferred to another hospital, and was found to have cerebral palsy and other injuries. At age 5, the child is nonverbal, cannot walk, and requires a feeding tube.

PARENTS’ CLAIM Oxytocin should have been stopped and a cesarean delivery performed when fetal distress was first noted.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE There was no need for cesarean delivery. Apgar scores, blood gases, and fetal presentation indicated that the injury occurred prior to labor.

VERDICT A $6 million Texas settlement was reached during the trial.

Related article: Q: Following cesarean delivery, what is the optimal oxytocin infusion duration to prevent postpartum bleeding? Robert L. Barbieri, MD (Editorial; April 2014)

MOTHER DISCHARGED DESPITE SEVERE ABDOMINAL PAIN
A woman had prenatal care at different locations.
Her history included two cesarean deliveries.

Reporting severe abdominal pain, she was taken from a homeless shelter to an ED by ambulance. The mother was uncertain of the fetus’ gestational age; a 4th-year obstetric resident determined by physical examination that the pregnancy was at 36.5 weeks. The resident discussed the case with the attending ObGyn, who said to discharge the mother if her pain was gone. After 11 hours, the mother was returned to the shelter.

The mother returned to the ED 12 hours later. Thirty-five minutes after fetal distress was identified, an emergency cesarean delivery was performed. At birth, the child was found to be at 38 to 39 weeks’ gestation. He received a diagnosis of severe hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy and was transferred to a children’s hospital for brain cooling.

The child lives in a long-term care facility and is dependent on a ventilator and gastronomy tube.

PARENT’S CLAIM The mother should not have been discharged after the first visit. A cesarean delivery should have been performed at that time. The attending ObGyn never saw the mother.

DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE The mother should have given her correct due date, which was in her prenatal records based on previous ultrasonograpy. The first discharge was proper, as the pain had improved. The homeless shelter should have called an ambulance earlier for the second admission.

 

 

VERDICT A $7.5 million California settlement was reached, plus payment of medical expenses exceeding $300,000. 

Timing of child’s injury disputed
Vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) had been planned.
After reporting to her ObGyn that she was in labor, a mother went to the ED.

During the next few hours, hospital staff called the ObGyn twice to report that fetal monitor strips indicated tachycardia. The ObGyn then spoke to the mother by phone and told her that cesarean delivery was necessary but could wait for him to get to the hospital. After the ObGyn arrived, he removed the fetal heart-rate monitor to prepare the mother’s abdomen; cesarean delivery occurred 15 minutes later.

The child has spastic dystonic quadriplegia and requires 24-hour care.

PARENT’S CLAIM The ObGyn should have come to the hospital and performed cesarean delivery when he was first notified that the fetus was tachycardic. The baby suffered an hypoxic ischemic event in the 15-minute period between when the monitor was removed and birth, causing hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy.

PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE There was no indication of a need for earlier delivery. The brain injury occurred prior to labor and delivery.

VERDICT The hospital settled for a confidential amount before the trial. An Illinois defense verdict was returned for the ObGyn.

Were mammograms properly interpreted?
After reporting a lump in her breast,
a 39-year-old woman underwent mammography in 2008 and 2009. Two different radiologists reported their findings as negative for cancer.

In 2010, the patient was found to have breast cancer. She underwent a mastectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy, and was given a 75%–80% chance of 5-year survival.

PATIENT’S CLAIM The ObGyn failed to follow-up on the patient’s reports of a breast lump. The radiologists did not correctly interpret the 2008 and 2009 mammograms. If cancer had been detected earlier, treatment would have been less extreme.

PHYSICIANS’ DEFENSE The ObGyn claimed that he would have felt a lump if it was present. The first radiologist claimed that the 2008 mammography report was correct, noting that the patient’s cancer was a lobular carcinoma that does not always show on mammography or in patients with dense breasts, which this patient has. 

VERDICT A directed verdict was granted to the radiologist who interpreted the 2009 mammography, as the results were lost. An Ohio defense verdict was returned for the ObGyn and the other radiologist.

Related article: Does screening mammography save lives? Janelle Yates, Senior Editor (April 2014)

These cases were selected by the editors of OBG Management from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements & Experts, with permission of the editor, Lewis Laska (www.verdictslaska.com). The information available to the editors about the cases presented here is sometimes incomplete. Moreover, the cases may or may not have merit. Nevertheless, these cases represent the types of clinical situations that typically result in litigation and are meant to illustrate nationwide variation in jury verdicts and awards.

TELL US WHAT YOU THINK! Drop us a line and let us know what you think about this or other current articles, which topics you'd like to see covered in future issues, and what challenges you face in daily practice.
Tell us what you think by emailing us at:
[email protected] Please include your name, city and state.
Stay in touch! Your feedback is important to us!

Issue
OBG Management - 26(6)
Issue
OBG Management - 26(6)
Page Number
46a–c
Page Number
46a–c
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Woman loses both legs after salpingectomy: $64.3M award
Display Headline
Woman loses both legs after salpingectomy: $64.3M award
Legacy Keywords
Medical verdicts,medical malpractice,Lewis Laska,salpingectomy,amputations,ectopic pregnancy,cesarean delivery,CP,cerebral palsy,Apgar scores,seizures,bladder injury,prenatal genetic testing,rare chromosomal condition,unbalanced chromosome translocation,vaginal vault prolapse,rectocele,enterocele,ObGyn,gynecologist,prophylactic antiobiotics,oxytocin,severe abdominal pain,hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy,brain cooling,mammography,radiologist,breast cancer,spastic dystonic quadraplegia,fetal heart-rate monitor,tachycardia
Legacy Keywords
Medical verdicts,medical malpractice,Lewis Laska,salpingectomy,amputations,ectopic pregnancy,cesarean delivery,CP,cerebral palsy,Apgar scores,seizures,bladder injury,prenatal genetic testing,rare chromosomal condition,unbalanced chromosome translocation,vaginal vault prolapse,rectocele,enterocele,ObGyn,gynecologist,prophylactic antiobiotics,oxytocin,severe abdominal pain,hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy,brain cooling,mammography,radiologist,breast cancer,spastic dystonic quadraplegia,fetal heart-rate monitor,tachycardia
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Wealth appears to affect distribution of cancer types

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 05/28/2014 - 06:00
Display Headline
Wealth appears to affect distribution of cancer types

Cancer patient receives therapy

Credit: Rhoda Baer

Results of a large study suggest certain malignanices are more concentrated in areas with high levels of poverty, while other cancer types arise more often in wealthy regions.

The research, conducted using data from nearly 3 million US cancer cases, also indicated that areas with higher poverty levels tended to have a lower cancer incidence but higher mortality rate than areas with lower poverty levels.

Researchers reported these findings in the journal Cancer.

Francis Boscoe, PhD, of the New York State Cancer Registry in Albany, and his colleagues conducted this research to evaluate the role of socioeconomics in cancer incidence and mortality.

So the team compared individuals living in areas with the highest poverty levels to those living in areas with the lowest poverty levels.

The researchers collected information on nearly 3 million cancer cases diagnosed between 2005 and 2009 in16 states, plus Los Angeles (an area covering 42% of the US population). Cases were divided into 1 of 4 groupings based on the poverty rate of the residential census tract at the time of diagnosis.

For all malignancies combined, there was a negligible association between cancer incidence and poverty. However, 32 of 39 cancer types showed a significant association with poverty.

Fourteen cancers were positively associated with poverty, and 18 were negatively associated. Myeloma, Hodgkin lymphoma, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) were among the negatively associated malignancies.

The cancers most significantly associated with higher poverty levels were Kaposi sarcoma and cancers of the larynx, cervix, penis, and liver. The cancers most significantly associated with lower poverty levels were melanoma, thyroid cancer, other non-epithelial skin cancers, and testis cancer.

Overall, male malignancy rates were more sensitive to poverty level than female rates. And, in general, the race-specific cancer incidence rates differed, but the poverty gradients were similar.

For example, there was a roughly 20-fold difference in rates of melanoma between white and black individuals, but the relationship between poverty and incidence remained regardless of race.

This was not true for NHL, however. Among black individuals, the incidence of NHL increased as the poverty level increased. But among white individuals, the incidence of NHL decreased as the poverty level increased.

The researchers pointed out that—for all cancer sites, races, and sexes combined—the difference in risk between the greatest and lowest poverty category was less than 2%.

“At first glance, the effects seem to cancel one another out,” Dr Boscoe said. “But the cancers more associated with poverty have lower incidence and higher mortality, and those associated with wealth have higher incidence and lower mortality. When it comes to cancer, the poor are more likely to die of the disease, while the affluent are more likely to die with the disease.”

Dr Boscoe noted that recent gains in technology have made it much easier to link patient addresses with neighborhood characteristics, therefore making it possible to incorporate socioeconomic status into cancer surveillance.

“Our hope is that our paper will illustrate the value and necessity of doing this routinely in the future,” he concluded.

Publications
Topics

Cancer patient receives therapy

Credit: Rhoda Baer

Results of a large study suggest certain malignanices are more concentrated in areas with high levels of poverty, while other cancer types arise more often in wealthy regions.

The research, conducted using data from nearly 3 million US cancer cases, also indicated that areas with higher poverty levels tended to have a lower cancer incidence but higher mortality rate than areas with lower poverty levels.

Researchers reported these findings in the journal Cancer.

Francis Boscoe, PhD, of the New York State Cancer Registry in Albany, and his colleagues conducted this research to evaluate the role of socioeconomics in cancer incidence and mortality.

So the team compared individuals living in areas with the highest poverty levels to those living in areas with the lowest poverty levels.

The researchers collected information on nearly 3 million cancer cases diagnosed between 2005 and 2009 in16 states, plus Los Angeles (an area covering 42% of the US population). Cases were divided into 1 of 4 groupings based on the poverty rate of the residential census tract at the time of diagnosis.

For all malignancies combined, there was a negligible association between cancer incidence and poverty. However, 32 of 39 cancer types showed a significant association with poverty.

Fourteen cancers were positively associated with poverty, and 18 were negatively associated. Myeloma, Hodgkin lymphoma, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) were among the negatively associated malignancies.

The cancers most significantly associated with higher poverty levels were Kaposi sarcoma and cancers of the larynx, cervix, penis, and liver. The cancers most significantly associated with lower poverty levels were melanoma, thyroid cancer, other non-epithelial skin cancers, and testis cancer.

Overall, male malignancy rates were more sensitive to poverty level than female rates. And, in general, the race-specific cancer incidence rates differed, but the poverty gradients were similar.

For example, there was a roughly 20-fold difference in rates of melanoma between white and black individuals, but the relationship between poverty and incidence remained regardless of race.

This was not true for NHL, however. Among black individuals, the incidence of NHL increased as the poverty level increased. But among white individuals, the incidence of NHL decreased as the poverty level increased.

The researchers pointed out that—for all cancer sites, races, and sexes combined—the difference in risk between the greatest and lowest poverty category was less than 2%.

“At first glance, the effects seem to cancel one another out,” Dr Boscoe said. “But the cancers more associated with poverty have lower incidence and higher mortality, and those associated with wealth have higher incidence and lower mortality. When it comes to cancer, the poor are more likely to die of the disease, while the affluent are more likely to die with the disease.”

Dr Boscoe noted that recent gains in technology have made it much easier to link patient addresses with neighborhood characteristics, therefore making it possible to incorporate socioeconomic status into cancer surveillance.

“Our hope is that our paper will illustrate the value and necessity of doing this routinely in the future,” he concluded.

Cancer patient receives therapy

Credit: Rhoda Baer

Results of a large study suggest certain malignanices are more concentrated in areas with high levels of poverty, while other cancer types arise more often in wealthy regions.

The research, conducted using data from nearly 3 million US cancer cases, also indicated that areas with higher poverty levels tended to have a lower cancer incidence but higher mortality rate than areas with lower poverty levels.

Researchers reported these findings in the journal Cancer.

Francis Boscoe, PhD, of the New York State Cancer Registry in Albany, and his colleagues conducted this research to evaluate the role of socioeconomics in cancer incidence and mortality.

So the team compared individuals living in areas with the highest poverty levels to those living in areas with the lowest poverty levels.

The researchers collected information on nearly 3 million cancer cases diagnosed between 2005 and 2009 in16 states, plus Los Angeles (an area covering 42% of the US population). Cases were divided into 1 of 4 groupings based on the poverty rate of the residential census tract at the time of diagnosis.

For all malignancies combined, there was a negligible association between cancer incidence and poverty. However, 32 of 39 cancer types showed a significant association with poverty.

Fourteen cancers were positively associated with poverty, and 18 were negatively associated. Myeloma, Hodgkin lymphoma, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) were among the negatively associated malignancies.

The cancers most significantly associated with higher poverty levels were Kaposi sarcoma and cancers of the larynx, cervix, penis, and liver. The cancers most significantly associated with lower poverty levels were melanoma, thyroid cancer, other non-epithelial skin cancers, and testis cancer.

Overall, male malignancy rates were more sensitive to poverty level than female rates. And, in general, the race-specific cancer incidence rates differed, but the poverty gradients were similar.

For example, there was a roughly 20-fold difference in rates of melanoma between white and black individuals, but the relationship between poverty and incidence remained regardless of race.

This was not true for NHL, however. Among black individuals, the incidence of NHL increased as the poverty level increased. But among white individuals, the incidence of NHL decreased as the poverty level increased.

The researchers pointed out that—for all cancer sites, races, and sexes combined—the difference in risk between the greatest and lowest poverty category was less than 2%.

“At first glance, the effects seem to cancel one another out,” Dr Boscoe said. “But the cancers more associated with poverty have lower incidence and higher mortality, and those associated with wealth have higher incidence and lower mortality. When it comes to cancer, the poor are more likely to die of the disease, while the affluent are more likely to die with the disease.”

Dr Boscoe noted that recent gains in technology have made it much easier to link patient addresses with neighborhood characteristics, therefore making it possible to incorporate socioeconomic status into cancer surveillance.

“Our hope is that our paper will illustrate the value and necessity of doing this routinely in the future,” he concluded.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Wealth appears to affect distribution of cancer types
Display Headline
Wealth appears to affect distribution of cancer types
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

CHMP recommends ofatumumab for CLL

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 05/28/2014 - 05:00
Display Headline
CHMP recommends ofatumumab for CLL

Monoclonal antibodies

Credit: Linda Bartlett

The European Medicine Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has issued a positive opinion for ofatumumab (Arzerra), a monoclonal antibody targeting CD20.

The CHMP is recommending that ofatumumab receive conditional approval for use in combination with chlorambucil or bendamustine to treat patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have not received prior therapy and are not eligible for fludarabine-based therapy.

The European Commission (EC) will take the CHMP’s opinion into account when deciding whether to approve ofatumumab for this indication.

Ofatumumab already has conditional approval in the Europe Union to treat CLL patients who are refractory to fludarabine and alemtuzumab.

Ofatumumab received conditional approval because the drug’s benefits appear to outweigh the risks it poses. The drug will not receive full

approval until the companies developing ofatumumab, GlaxoSmithKline and Genmab, submit results of additional research to the EC.

The CHMP’s recommendation for expanded approval is based on results from 2 trials in patients with CLL who were ineligible for fludarabine-based treatment.

The first is a phase 2 study (OMB115991) in which researchers evaluated the efficacy of ofatumumab in combination with bendamustine. The second is the phase 3 COMPLEMENT 1 study (OMB110911), a randomized trial in which researchers compared ofatumumab and chlorambucil in combination to chlorambucil alone.

Phase 2 study

Results from this single-arm study were presented at the 2013 International Workshop on CLL. Researchers enrolled 97 patients with CLL, 44 of whom were previously untreated and 53 who had relapsed. The median ages were 62.5 and 68 years, respectively.

Treatment began with acetaminophen, an antihistamine, and a glucocorticoid. Patients then received ofatumumab at 300 mg on day 1 and 1000 mg on day 8 of cycle 1. For cycles 2 through 6, they received 1000 mg on day 1 every 28 days.

Patients received bendamustine on days 1 and 2, every 28 days for up to 6 cycles. The initial dose was 90 mg/m2 for the untreated patients and 70 mg/m2 for relapsed patients.

However, patients required a dose reduction due to toxicity. The previously untreated patients were reduced to 60 mg/m2, and the relapsed patients were reduced to 50 mg/m2.

The overall response rate was 95% in the previously untreated group and 74% in the relapsed group. Complete responses occurred in 43% and 11%, respectively.

CT results showed the overall response rate was 82% in the previously untreated group and 70% in the relapsed group. Complete responses occurred in 27% and 9%, respectively. The median time to response was 0.95 months for both groups.

Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 25% of patients in the previously untreated group and 38% of those in the relapsed group.

This included infusion reactions (11% and 8%, respectively), neutropenia (16% and 29%, respectively), infections (11% and 15%, respectively), rash (2% of previously untreated patients), febrile neutropenia (4% of relapsed patients), and thrombocytopenia (4% of relapsed patients).

There were no deaths in the previously untreated group, but 4 patients died in the relapsed group. Two of these deaths may have been related to study treatment. One patient died of pneumonia and hemolytic anemia 15 days after the last dose of treatment, and 1 patient died of sepsis 4 days after the last dose of  treatment.

Phase 3 study

Data from the COMPLEMENT 1 study were presented at ASH 2013. Researchers compared ofatumumab plus chlorambucil to chlorambucil alone in 447 previously untreated patients with CLL who were ineligible for fludarabine-based therapy.

Patients had a median age of 69 years (range, 35 to 92). Seventy-two percent had 2 or more comorbidities, and 48% had a creatinine clearance of less than 70 mL/min.

 

 

Patients in the ofatumumab arm received the drug at 300 mg in cycle 1 on day 1, 1000 mg in cycle 1 on day 8, and 1000 mg administered on day 1 of all subsequent 28-day cycles.

In both arms, patients received chlorambucil at a dose of 10 mg/m2 orally on days 1 to 7, every 28 days. Prior to each infusion of ofatumumab, patients received acetaminophen, an antihistamine, and a glucocorticoid.

The overall response rate was 82% in the ofatumumab-chlorambucil group and 69% in the chlorambucil-alone group (P=0.001). Complete response rates were 12% and 1%, respectively.

At a median follow-up of 29 months, the median overall survival was not reached for either treatment arm. However, ofatumumab-treated patients had longer progression-free survival than patients who received chlorambucil alone—22.4 months and 13.1 months, respectively (P<0.001).

Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 50% of ofatumumab-treated patients and 43% of patients who received chlorambucil alone. The most common event was neutropenia, which occurred in 26% and 14% of patients, respectively.

Grade 3 or higher infections occurred in 15% of ofatumumab-treated patients and 14% of patients who received chlorambucil alone. The most common was pneumonia, which occurred in 4% and 3%, respectively.

In the entire cohort, grade 3 or higher infusion-related events occurred in 10% of patients, but there were no fatal infusion reactions. Two percent of subjects in both arms died during treatment.

Publications
Topics

Monoclonal antibodies

Credit: Linda Bartlett

The European Medicine Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has issued a positive opinion for ofatumumab (Arzerra), a monoclonal antibody targeting CD20.

The CHMP is recommending that ofatumumab receive conditional approval for use in combination with chlorambucil or bendamustine to treat patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have not received prior therapy and are not eligible for fludarabine-based therapy.

The European Commission (EC) will take the CHMP’s opinion into account when deciding whether to approve ofatumumab for this indication.

Ofatumumab already has conditional approval in the Europe Union to treat CLL patients who are refractory to fludarabine and alemtuzumab.

Ofatumumab received conditional approval because the drug’s benefits appear to outweigh the risks it poses. The drug will not receive full

approval until the companies developing ofatumumab, GlaxoSmithKline and Genmab, submit results of additional research to the EC.

The CHMP’s recommendation for expanded approval is based on results from 2 trials in patients with CLL who were ineligible for fludarabine-based treatment.

The first is a phase 2 study (OMB115991) in which researchers evaluated the efficacy of ofatumumab in combination with bendamustine. The second is the phase 3 COMPLEMENT 1 study (OMB110911), a randomized trial in which researchers compared ofatumumab and chlorambucil in combination to chlorambucil alone.

Phase 2 study

Results from this single-arm study were presented at the 2013 International Workshop on CLL. Researchers enrolled 97 patients with CLL, 44 of whom were previously untreated and 53 who had relapsed. The median ages were 62.5 and 68 years, respectively.

Treatment began with acetaminophen, an antihistamine, and a glucocorticoid. Patients then received ofatumumab at 300 mg on day 1 and 1000 mg on day 8 of cycle 1. For cycles 2 through 6, they received 1000 mg on day 1 every 28 days.

Patients received bendamustine on days 1 and 2, every 28 days for up to 6 cycles. The initial dose was 90 mg/m2 for the untreated patients and 70 mg/m2 for relapsed patients.

However, patients required a dose reduction due to toxicity. The previously untreated patients were reduced to 60 mg/m2, and the relapsed patients were reduced to 50 mg/m2.

The overall response rate was 95% in the previously untreated group and 74% in the relapsed group. Complete responses occurred in 43% and 11%, respectively.

CT results showed the overall response rate was 82% in the previously untreated group and 70% in the relapsed group. Complete responses occurred in 27% and 9%, respectively. The median time to response was 0.95 months for both groups.

Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 25% of patients in the previously untreated group and 38% of those in the relapsed group.

This included infusion reactions (11% and 8%, respectively), neutropenia (16% and 29%, respectively), infections (11% and 15%, respectively), rash (2% of previously untreated patients), febrile neutropenia (4% of relapsed patients), and thrombocytopenia (4% of relapsed patients).

There were no deaths in the previously untreated group, but 4 patients died in the relapsed group. Two of these deaths may have been related to study treatment. One patient died of pneumonia and hemolytic anemia 15 days after the last dose of treatment, and 1 patient died of sepsis 4 days after the last dose of  treatment.

Phase 3 study

Data from the COMPLEMENT 1 study were presented at ASH 2013. Researchers compared ofatumumab plus chlorambucil to chlorambucil alone in 447 previously untreated patients with CLL who were ineligible for fludarabine-based therapy.

Patients had a median age of 69 years (range, 35 to 92). Seventy-two percent had 2 or more comorbidities, and 48% had a creatinine clearance of less than 70 mL/min.

 

 

Patients in the ofatumumab arm received the drug at 300 mg in cycle 1 on day 1, 1000 mg in cycle 1 on day 8, and 1000 mg administered on day 1 of all subsequent 28-day cycles.

In both arms, patients received chlorambucil at a dose of 10 mg/m2 orally on days 1 to 7, every 28 days. Prior to each infusion of ofatumumab, patients received acetaminophen, an antihistamine, and a glucocorticoid.

The overall response rate was 82% in the ofatumumab-chlorambucil group and 69% in the chlorambucil-alone group (P=0.001). Complete response rates were 12% and 1%, respectively.

At a median follow-up of 29 months, the median overall survival was not reached for either treatment arm. However, ofatumumab-treated patients had longer progression-free survival than patients who received chlorambucil alone—22.4 months and 13.1 months, respectively (P<0.001).

Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 50% of ofatumumab-treated patients and 43% of patients who received chlorambucil alone. The most common event was neutropenia, which occurred in 26% and 14% of patients, respectively.

Grade 3 or higher infections occurred in 15% of ofatumumab-treated patients and 14% of patients who received chlorambucil alone. The most common was pneumonia, which occurred in 4% and 3%, respectively.

In the entire cohort, grade 3 or higher infusion-related events occurred in 10% of patients, but there were no fatal infusion reactions. Two percent of subjects in both arms died during treatment.

Monoclonal antibodies

Credit: Linda Bartlett

The European Medicine Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has issued a positive opinion for ofatumumab (Arzerra), a monoclonal antibody targeting CD20.

The CHMP is recommending that ofatumumab receive conditional approval for use in combination with chlorambucil or bendamustine to treat patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have not received prior therapy and are not eligible for fludarabine-based therapy.

The European Commission (EC) will take the CHMP’s opinion into account when deciding whether to approve ofatumumab for this indication.

Ofatumumab already has conditional approval in the Europe Union to treat CLL patients who are refractory to fludarabine and alemtuzumab.

Ofatumumab received conditional approval because the drug’s benefits appear to outweigh the risks it poses. The drug will not receive full

approval until the companies developing ofatumumab, GlaxoSmithKline and Genmab, submit results of additional research to the EC.

The CHMP’s recommendation for expanded approval is based on results from 2 trials in patients with CLL who were ineligible for fludarabine-based treatment.

The first is a phase 2 study (OMB115991) in which researchers evaluated the efficacy of ofatumumab in combination with bendamustine. The second is the phase 3 COMPLEMENT 1 study (OMB110911), a randomized trial in which researchers compared ofatumumab and chlorambucil in combination to chlorambucil alone.

Phase 2 study

Results from this single-arm study were presented at the 2013 International Workshop on CLL. Researchers enrolled 97 patients with CLL, 44 of whom were previously untreated and 53 who had relapsed. The median ages were 62.5 and 68 years, respectively.

Treatment began with acetaminophen, an antihistamine, and a glucocorticoid. Patients then received ofatumumab at 300 mg on day 1 and 1000 mg on day 8 of cycle 1. For cycles 2 through 6, they received 1000 mg on day 1 every 28 days.

Patients received bendamustine on days 1 and 2, every 28 days for up to 6 cycles. The initial dose was 90 mg/m2 for the untreated patients and 70 mg/m2 for relapsed patients.

However, patients required a dose reduction due to toxicity. The previously untreated patients were reduced to 60 mg/m2, and the relapsed patients were reduced to 50 mg/m2.

The overall response rate was 95% in the previously untreated group and 74% in the relapsed group. Complete responses occurred in 43% and 11%, respectively.

CT results showed the overall response rate was 82% in the previously untreated group and 70% in the relapsed group. Complete responses occurred in 27% and 9%, respectively. The median time to response was 0.95 months for both groups.

Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 25% of patients in the previously untreated group and 38% of those in the relapsed group.

This included infusion reactions (11% and 8%, respectively), neutropenia (16% and 29%, respectively), infections (11% and 15%, respectively), rash (2% of previously untreated patients), febrile neutropenia (4% of relapsed patients), and thrombocytopenia (4% of relapsed patients).

There were no deaths in the previously untreated group, but 4 patients died in the relapsed group. Two of these deaths may have been related to study treatment. One patient died of pneumonia and hemolytic anemia 15 days after the last dose of treatment, and 1 patient died of sepsis 4 days after the last dose of  treatment.

Phase 3 study

Data from the COMPLEMENT 1 study were presented at ASH 2013. Researchers compared ofatumumab plus chlorambucil to chlorambucil alone in 447 previously untreated patients with CLL who were ineligible for fludarabine-based therapy.

Patients had a median age of 69 years (range, 35 to 92). Seventy-two percent had 2 or more comorbidities, and 48% had a creatinine clearance of less than 70 mL/min.

 

 

Patients in the ofatumumab arm received the drug at 300 mg in cycle 1 on day 1, 1000 mg in cycle 1 on day 8, and 1000 mg administered on day 1 of all subsequent 28-day cycles.

In both arms, patients received chlorambucil at a dose of 10 mg/m2 orally on days 1 to 7, every 28 days. Prior to each infusion of ofatumumab, patients received acetaminophen, an antihistamine, and a glucocorticoid.

The overall response rate was 82% in the ofatumumab-chlorambucil group and 69% in the chlorambucil-alone group (P=0.001). Complete response rates were 12% and 1%, respectively.

At a median follow-up of 29 months, the median overall survival was not reached for either treatment arm. However, ofatumumab-treated patients had longer progression-free survival than patients who received chlorambucil alone—22.4 months and 13.1 months, respectively (P<0.001).

Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 50% of ofatumumab-treated patients and 43% of patients who received chlorambucil alone. The most common event was neutropenia, which occurred in 26% and 14% of patients, respectively.

Grade 3 or higher infections occurred in 15% of ofatumumab-treated patients and 14% of patients who received chlorambucil alone. The most common was pneumonia, which occurred in 4% and 3%, respectively.

In the entire cohort, grade 3 or higher infusion-related events occurred in 10% of patients, but there were no fatal infusion reactions. Two percent of subjects in both arms died during treatment.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
CHMP recommends ofatumumab for CLL
Display Headline
CHMP recommends ofatumumab for CLL
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Development and Validation of TAISCH

Article Type
Changed
Sun, 05/21/2017 - 14:00
Display Headline
Development and validation of the tool to assess inpatient satisfaction with care from hospitalists

Patient satisfaction scores are being reported publicly and will affect hospital reimbursement rates under Hospital Value Based Purchasing.[1] Patient satisfaction scores are currently obtained through metrics such as Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS)[2] and Press Ganey (PG)[3] surveys. Such surveys are mailed to a variable proportion of patients following their discharge from the hospital, and ask patients about the quality of care they received during their admission. Domains assessed regarding the patients' inpatient experiences range from room cleanliness to the amount of time the physician spent with them.

The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM), the largest professional medical society representing hospitalists, encourages the use of patient satisfaction surveys to measure hospitalist providers' quality of patient care.[4] Ideally, accurate information would be delivered as feedback to individual providers in a timely manner in hopes of improving performance; however, the current methodology has shortcomings that limit its usefulness. First, several hospitalists and consultants may be involved in the care of 1 patient during the hospital stay, but the score can only be tied to a single physician. Current survey methods attribute all responses to that particular doctor, usually the attending of record, although patients may very well be thinking of other physicians when responding to questions. Second, only a few questions on the surveys ask about doctors' performance. Aforementioned surveys have 3 to 8 questions about doctors' care, which limits the ability to assess physician performance comprehensively. Finally, the surveys are mailed approximately 1 week after the patient's discharge, usually without a name or photograph of the physician to facilitate patient/caregiver recall. This time lag and lack of information to prompt patient recall likely lead to impreciseness in assessment. In addition, the response rates to these surveys are typically low, around 25% (personal oral communication with our division's service excellence stakeholder Dr. L.P. in September 2013). These deficiencies limit the usefulness of such data in coaching individual providers about their performance because they cannot be delivered in a timely fashion, and the reliability of the attribution is suspect.

With these considerations in mind, we developed and validated a new survey metric, the Tool to Assess Inpatient Satisfaction with Care from Hospitalists (TAISCH). We hypothesized that the results would be different from those collected using conventional methodologies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Study Design and Subjects

Our cross‐sectional study surveyed inpatients under the care of hospitalist physicians working without the support of trainees or allied health professionals (such as nurse practitioners or physician assistants). The subjects were hospitalized at a 560‐bed academic medical center on a general medical floor between September 2012 and December 2012. All participating hospitalist physicians were members of a division of hospital medicine.

TAISCH Development

Several steps were taken to establish content validity evidence.[5] We developed TAISCH by building upon the theoretical underpinnings of the quality of care measures that are endorsed by the SHM Membership Committee Guidelines for Hospitalists Patient Satisfaction.[4] This directive recommends that patient satisfaction with hospitalist care should be assessed across 6 domains: physician availability, physician concern for patients, physician communication skills, physician courteousness, physician clinical skills, and physician involvement of patients' families. Other existing validated measures tied to the quality of patient care were reviewed, and items related to the physician's care were considered for inclusion to further substantiate content validity.[6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12] Input from colleagues with expertise in clinical excellence and service excellence was also solicited. This included the director of Hopkins' Miller Coulson Academy of Clinical Excellence and the grant review committee members of the Johns Hopkins Osler Center for Clinical Excellence (who funded this study).[13, 14]

The preliminary instrument contained 17 items, including 2 conditional questions, and was first pilot tested on 5 hospitalized patients. We assessed the time it took to administer the surveys as well as patients' comments and questions about each survey item. This resulted in minor wording changes for clarification and changes in the order of the questions. We then pursued a second phase of piloting using the revised survey, which was administered to >20 patients. There were no further adjustments as patients reported that TAISCH was clear and concise.

From interviews with patients after pilot testing, it became clear that respondents were carefully reflecting on the quality of care and performance of their treating physician, thereby generating response process validity evidence.[5]

Data Collection

To ensure that patients had perspective upon which to base their assessment, they were only asked to appraise physicians after being cared for by the same hospitalist provider for at least 2 consecutive days. Patients who were on isolation, those who were non‐English speaking, and those with impaired decision‐making capacity (such as mental status change or dementia) were excluded. Patients were enrolled only if they could correctly name their doctor or at least identify a photograph of their hospitalist provider on a page that included pictures of all division members. Those patients who were able to name the provider or correctly select the provider from the page of photographs were considered to have correctly identified their provider. In order to ensure the confidentiality of the patients and their responses, all data collections were performed by a trained research assistant who had no patient‐care responsibilities. The survey was confidential, did not include any patient identifiers, and patients were assured that providers would never see their individual responses. The patients were given options to complete TAISCH either by verbally responding to the research assistant's questions, filling out the paper survey, or completing the survey online using an iPad at the bedside. TAISCH specifically asked the patients to rate their hospitalist provider's performance along several domains: communication skills, clinical skills, availability, empathy, courteousness, and discharge planning; 5‐point Likert scales were used exclusively.

In addition to the TAISCH questions, we asked patients (1) an overall satisfaction question, I would recommend Dr. X to my loved ones should he or she need hospitalization in the future (response options: strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree), (2) their pain level using the Wong‐Baker pain scale,[15] and (3) the Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy (JSPPPE).[16, 17] Associations between TAISCH and these variables (as well as PG data) would be examined to ascertain relations to other variables validity evidence.[5] Specifically, we sought to ascertain discriminant and convergent validity where the TAISCH is associated positively with constructs where we expect positive associations (convergent) and negatively with those we expect negative associations (discriminant).[18] The Wong‐Baker pain scale is a recommended pain‐assessment tool by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, and is widely used in hospitals and various healthcare settings.[19] The scale has a range from 0 to 10 (0 for no pain and 10 indicating the worst pain). The hypothesis was that the patients' pain levels would adversely affect their perception of the physician's performance (discriminant validity). JSPPPE is a 5‐item validated scale developed to measure patients' perceptions of their physicians' empathic engagement. It has significant correlations with the American Board of Internal Medicine's patient rating surveys, and it is used in standardized patient examinations for medical students.[20] The hypothesis was that patient perception about the quality of physician care would correlate positively with their assessment of the physician's empathy (convergent validity).

Although all of the hospitalist providers in the division consented to participate in this study, only hospitalist providers for whom at least 4 patient surveys were collected were included in the analysis. The study was approved by our institutional review board.

Data Analysis

All data were analyzed using Stata 11 (StataCorp, College Station, TX). Data were analyzed to determine the potential for a single comprehensive assessment of physician performance with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using maximum likelihood extraction. Additional factor analyses examined the potential for a multiple factor solution using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with principle component factor analysis and varimax rotation. Examination of scree plots, factor loadings for individual items greater than 0.40, eigenvalues greater than 1.0, and substantive meaning of the factors were all taken into consideration when determining the number of factors to retain from factor analytic models.[21] Cronbach's s were calculated for each factor to assess reliability. These data provided internal structure validity evidence (demonstrated by acceptable reliability and factor structure) to TAISCH.[5]

After arriving at the final TAISCH scale, composite TAISCH scores were computed. Associations between composite TAISCH scores with the Wong‐Baker pain scale, the JSPPPE, and the overall satisfaction question were assessed using linear regression with the svy command in Stata to account for the nested design of having each patient report on a single hospitalist provider. Correlation between composite TAISCH score and PG physician care scores (comprised of 5 questions: time physician spent with you, physician concern with questions/worries, physician kept you informed, friendliness/courtesy of physician, and skill of physician) were assessed at the provider level when both data were available.

RESULTS

A total of 330 patients were considered to be eligible through medical record screening. Of those patients, 73 (22%) were already discharged by the time the research assistant attempted to enroll them after 2 days of care by a single physician. Of 257 inpatients approached, 30 patients (12%) refused to participate. Among the 227 consented patients, 24 (9%) were excluded as they were unable to correctly identify their hospitalist provider. A total of 203 patients were enrolled, and each patient rated a single hospitalist; a total of 29 unique hospitalists were assessed by these patients. The patients' mean age was 60 years, 114 (56%) were female, and 61 (30%) were of nonwhite race (Table 1). The hospitalist physicians' demographic information is also shown in Table 1. Two hospitalists with fewer than 4 surveys collected were excluded from the analysis. Thus, final analysis included 200 unique patients assessing 1 of the 27 hospitalists (mean=7.4 surveys per hospitalist).

Characteristics of the 203 Patients and 29 Hospitalist Physicians Studied
CharacteristicsValue
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation.

Patients, N=203 
Age, y, mean (SD)60.0 (17.2)
Female, n (%)114 (56.1)
Nonwhite race, n (%)61 (30.5)
Observation stay, n (%)45 (22.1)
How are you feeling today? n (%) 
Very poor11 (5.5)
Poor14 (7.0)
Fair67 (33.5)
Good71 (35.5)
Very good33 (16.5)
Excellent4 (2.0)
Hospitalists, N=29 
Age, n (%) 
2630 years7 (24.1)
3135 years8 (27.6)
3640 years12 (41.4)
4145 years2 (6.9)
Female, n (%)11 (37.9)
International medical graduate, n (%)18 (62.1)
Years in current practice, n (%) 
<19 (31.0)
127 (24.1)
346 (20.7)
565 (17.2)
7 or more2 (6.9)
Race, n (%) 
Caucasian4 (13.8)
Asian19 (65.5)
African/African American5 (17.2)
Other1 (3.4)
Academic rank, n (%) 
Assistant professor9 (31.0)
Clinical instructor10 (34.5)
Clinical associate/nonfaculty10 (34.5)
Percentage of clinical effort, n (%) 
>70%6 (20.7)
50%70%19 (65.5)
<50%4 (13.8)

Validation of TAISCH

On the 17‐item TAISCH administered, the 2 conditional questions (When I asked to see Dr. X, s/he came within a reasonable amount of time. and If Dr. X interacted with your family, how well did s/he deal with them?) were applicable to fewer than 40% of patients. As such, they were not included in the analysis.

Internal Structure Validity Evidence

Results from factor analyses are shown in Table 2. The CFA modeling of a single factor solution with 15 items explained 42% of the total variance. The 27 hospitalists' average 15‐item TAISCH score ranged from 3.25 to 4.28 (mean [standard deviation]=3.82 [0.24]; possible score range: 15). Reliability of the 15‐item TAISCH was appropriate (Cronbach's =0.88).

Factor Loadings for 15‐Item TAISCH Measure Based on Confirmatory Factor Analysis
TAISCH (Cronbach's =0.88)Factor Loading
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: TAISCH, Tool to Assess Inpatient Satisfaction with Care from Hospitalists. *Response category: below average, average, above average, top 10% of all doctors, the very best of any doctor I have come across. Response category: none, a little, some, a lot, tremendously. Response category: strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree. Response category: poor, fair, good, very good, excellent. Response category: never, rarely, sometimes, most of the time, every single time.

Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's compassion, empathy, and concern for you?*0.91
Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's ability to communicate with you?*0.88
Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's skill in diagnosing and treating your medical conditions?*0.88
Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's fund of knowledge?*0.80
How much confidence do you have in Dr. X's plan for your care?0.71
Dr. X kept me informed of the plans for my care.0.69
Effectively preparing patients for discharge is an important part of what doctors in the hospital do. How well has Dr. X done in getting you ready to be discharged from the hospital?0.67
Dr. X let me talk without interrupting.0.60
Dr. X encouraged me to ask questions.0.59
Dr. X checks to be sure I understood everything.0.55
I sensed Dr. X was in a rush when s/he was with me. (reverse coded)0.55
Dr. X showed interest in my views and opinions about my health.0.54
Dr. X discusses options with me and involves me in decision making.0.47
Dr. X asked permission to enter the room and waited for an answer.0.25
Dr. X sat down when s/he visited my bedside.0.14

As shown in Table 2, 2 variables had factor loadings below the minimum threshold of 0.40 in the CFA for the 15‐item TAISCH when modeling a single factor solution. Both items were related to physician etiquette: Dr. X asked permission to enter the room and waited for an answer. and Dr. X sat down when he/she visited my bedside.

When CFA was executed again, as a single factor omitting the 2 items that demonstrated lower factor loadings, the 13‐item single factor solution explained 47% of the total variance, and the Cronbach's was 0.92.

EFA models were also explored for potential alternate solutions. These analyses resulted in lesser reliability (low Cronbach's ), weak construct operationalization, and poor face validity (as judged by the research team).

Both the 13‐ and 15‐item single factor solutions were examined further to determine whether associations with criterion variables (pain, empathy) differed substantively. Given that results were similar across both solutions, subsequent analyses were completed with the 15‐item single factor solution, which included the etiquette‐related variables.

Relationship to Other Variables Validity Evidence

The association between the 15‐item TAISCH and JSPPPE was significantly positive (=12.2, P<0.001). Additionally, there was a positive and significant association between TAISCH and the overall satisfaction question: I would recommend Dr. X to my loved ones should they need hospitalization in the future. (=11.2, P<0.001). This overall satisfaction question was also associated positively with JSPPPE (=13.2, P<0.001). There was a statistically significant negative association between TAISCH and Wong‐Baker pain scale (=2.42, P<0.05).

The PG data from the same period were available for 24 out of 27 hospitalists. The number of PG surveys collected per provider ranged from 5 to 30 (mean=14). At the provider level, there was not a statistically significant correlation between PG and the 15‐item TAISCH (P=0.51). Of note, PG was also not significantly correlated with the overall satisfaction question, JSPPPE, or the Wong‐Baker pain scale (all P>0.10).

DISCUSSION

Our new metric, TAISCH, was found to be a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess patient satisfaction with the hospitalist physician's care. Because we only surveyed patients who could correctly identify their hospitalist physicians after interacting for at least 2 consecutive days, the attribution of the data to the individual hospitalist is almost certainly correct. The high participation rate indicates that the patients were not hesitant about rating their hospitalist provider's quality of care, even when asked while they were still in the hospital.

The majority of the patients approached were able to correctly identify their hospitalist provider. This rate (91%) was much higher than the rate previously reported in the literature where a picture card was used to improve provider recognition.[22] It is also likely that 1 physician, rather than a team of physicians, taking care of patients make it easier for patients to recall the name and recognize the face of their inpatient provider.

The CFA of TAISCH showed good fit but suggests that 2 variables, both from Kahn's etiquette‐based medicine (EtBM) checklist,[9] may not load in the same way as the other items. Tackett and colleagues reported that hospitalists who performed more EtBM behaviors scored higher on PG evaluations.[23] Such results, along with the comparable explanation of variance and reliability, convinced us to retain these 2 items in the final 15‐item TAISCH as dictated by the CFA. Although the literature supports the fact that physician etiquette is related to perception of high‐quality care, it is possible that these 2 questions were answered differently (and thereby failed to load the same way), because environmental limitations may be preventing physicians' ability to perform them consistently. We prefer the 15‐item version of TAISCH and future studies may provide additional information about its performance as compared to the 13‐item adaptation.

The significantly negative association between the Wong‐Baker pain scale and TAISCH stresses the importance of adequately addressing and treating the patient's pain. Hanna et al. showed that the patients' perceptions of pain control was associated with their overall satisfaction score measured by HCAHPS.[24] The association seen in our study was not unexpected, because TAISCH is administered while the patients are acutely ill in the hospital, when pain is likely more prevalent and severe than it is during the postdischarge settings (when the HCAHPS or PG surveys are administered). Interestingly, Hanna et al. discovered that the team's attention to controlling pain was more strongly correlated with overall satisfaction than was the actual pain control.[24] These data, now confirmed by our study, should serve to remind us that a hospitalist's concern and effort to relieve pain may augment patient satisfaction with the quality of care, even when eliminating the pain may be difficult or impossible.

TAISCH was found not to be correlated with PG scores. Several explanations for this deserve consideration. First, the postdischarge PG survey that is used for our institution does not list the name of the specific hospitalist providers for the patients to evaluate. Because patients encounter multiple physicians during their hospital stay (eg, emergency department physicians, hospitalist providers, consultants), it is possible that patients are not reflecting on the named doctor when assessing the the attending of record on the PG mailed questionnaire. Second, the representation of patients who responded to TAISCH and PG were different; almost all patients completed TAISCH as opposed to a small minority who decide to respond to the PG survey. Third, TAISCH measures the physicians' performance more comprehensively with a larger number of variables. Last, it is possible that we were underpowered to detect significant correlation, because there were only 24 providers who had data from both TAISCH and PG. However, our results endorse using caution in interpreting PG scores for individual hospitalist's performance, particularly for high‐stakes consequences (including the provision of incentives to high performer and the insistence on remediation for low performers).

Several limitations of this study should be considered. First, only hospitalist providers from a single division were assessed. This may limit the generalizability of our findings. Second, although patients were assured about confidentiality of their responses, they might have provided more favorable answers, because they may have felt uncomfortable rating their physician poorly. One review article of the measurement of healthcare satisfaction indicated that impersonal (mailed) methods result in more criticism and lower satisfaction than assessments made in person using interviews. As the trade‐off, the mailed surveys yield lower response rates that may introduce other forms of bias.[25] Even on the HCHAPS survey report for the same period from our institution, 78% of patients gave top box ratings for our doctors' communication skills, which is at the state average.[26] Similarly, a study that used postdischarge telephone interviews to collect patients' satisfaction with hospitalists' care quality reported an average score of 4.20 out of 5.[27] These findings confirm that highly skewed ratings are common for these types of surveys, irrespective of how or when the data are collected.

Despite the aforementioned limitations, TAISCH use need not be limited to hospitalist physicians. It may also be used to assess allied health professionals or trainees performance, which cannot be assessed by HCHAPS or PG. Applying TAISCH in different hospital settings (eg, emergency department or critical care units), assessing hospitalists' reactions to TAISCH, learning whether TAISCH leads to hospitalists' behavior changes or appraising whether performance can improve in response to coaching interventions for those performing poorly are all research questions that merit additional consideration.

CONCLUSION

TAISCH allows for obtaining patient satisfaction data that are highly attributable to specific hospitalist providers. The data collection method also permits high response rates so that input comes from almost all patients. The timeliness of the TAISCH assessments also makes it possible for real‐time service recovery, which is impossible with other commonly used metrics assessing patient satisfaction. Our next step will include testing the most effective way to provide feedback to providers and to coach these individuals so as to improve performance.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Po‐Han Chen at the BEAD Core for his statistical analysis support.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Johns Hopkins Osler Center for Clinical Excellence. Dr. Wright is a Miller‐Coulson Family Scholar and is supported through the Johns Hopkins Center for Innovative Medicine. The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Files
References
  1. Brumenthal D, Jena AB. Hospital value‐based purchasing. J Hosp Med. 2013;8:271277.
  2. HCAHPS survey. Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems website. Available at: http://www.hcahpsonline.org/home.aspx. Accessed August 27, 2011.
  3. Press Ganey survey. Press Ganey website. Available at: http://www.pressganey.com/index.aspx. Accessed February 12, 2013.
  4. Society of Hospital Medicine. Membership Committee Guidelines for Hospitalists Patient Satisfaction Surveys. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Practice_Resources119:166.e7e16.
  5. Makoul G, Krupat E, Chang CH. Measuring patient views of physician communication skills: development and testing of the Communication Assessment Tool. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;67:333342.
  6. Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Bruster S. The Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire: development and validation using data from in‐patient surveys in five countries. Int J Qual Health Care. 2002;14:353358.
  7. The Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire from RAND Health. RAND Health website. Available at: http://www.rand.org/health/surveys_tools/psq.html. Accessed December 30, 2011.
  8. Kahn MW. Etiquette‐based medicine. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:19881989.
  9. Christmas C, Kravet S, Durso C, Wright SM. Defining clinical excellence in academic medicine: a qualitative study of the master clinicians. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83:989994.
  10. Wright SM, Christmas C, Burkhart K, Kravet S, Durso C. Creating an academy of clinical excellence at Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center: a 3‐year experience. Acad Med. 2010;85:18331839.
  11. Bendapudi NM, Berry LL, Keith FA, Turner Parish J, Rayburn WL. Patients' perspectives on ideal physician behaviors. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81(3):338344.
  12. The Miller‐Coulson Academy of Clinical Excellence at Johns Hopkins. Available at: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/innovative/signature_programs/academy_of_clinical_excellence/. Accessed April 25, 2014.
  13. Osler Center for Clinical Excellence at Johns Hopkins. Available at: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/johns_hopkins_bayview/education_training/continuing_education/osler_center_for_clinical_excellence. Accessed April 25, 2014.
  14. Wong‐Baker FACES Foundation. Available at: http://www.wongbakerfaces.org. Accessed July 8, 2013.
  15. Kane GC, Gotto JL, Mangione S, West S, Hojat M. Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy: preliminary psychometric data. Croat Med J. 2007;48:8186.
  16. Glaser KM, Markham FW, Adler HM, McManus PR, Hojat M. Relationships between scores on the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy, patient perceptions of physician empathy, and humanistic approaches to patient care: a validity study. Med Sci Monit. 2007;13(7):CR291CR294.
  17. Campbell DT, Fiske DW. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait‐multimethod matrix. Psychol Bul. 1959;56(2):81105.
  18. The Joint Commission. Facts about pain management. Available at: http://www.jointcommission.org/pain_management. Accessed April 25, 2014.
  19. Berg K, Majdan JF, Berg D, et al. Medical students' self‐reported empathy and simulated patients' assessments of student empathy: an analysis by gender and ethnicity. Acad Med. 2011;86(8):984988.
  20. Gorsuch RL. Factor Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1983.
  21. Arora VM, Schaninger C, D'Arcy M, et al. Improving inpatients' identification of their doctors: use of FACE cards. Jt Comm J Qual Pateint Saf. 1009;35(12):613619.
  22. Tackett S, Tad‐y D, Rios R et al. Appraising the practice of etiquette‐based medicine in the inpatient setting. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(7):908913.
  23. Hanna MN, Gonzalez‐Fernandez M, Barrett AD, et al. Does patient perception of pain control affect patient satisfaction across surgical units in a tertiary teaching hospital? Am J Med Qual. 2012;27:411416.
  24. Crow R, Gage H, Hampson S, et al. The measurement of satisfaction with health care: implications for practice from a systematic review of the literature. Health Technol Assess. 2002;6(32):1244.
  25. Centers for Medicare 7(2):131136.
Article PDF
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(9)
Page Number
553-558
Sections
Files
Files
Article PDF
Article PDF

Patient satisfaction scores are being reported publicly and will affect hospital reimbursement rates under Hospital Value Based Purchasing.[1] Patient satisfaction scores are currently obtained through metrics such as Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS)[2] and Press Ganey (PG)[3] surveys. Such surveys are mailed to a variable proportion of patients following their discharge from the hospital, and ask patients about the quality of care they received during their admission. Domains assessed regarding the patients' inpatient experiences range from room cleanliness to the amount of time the physician spent with them.

The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM), the largest professional medical society representing hospitalists, encourages the use of patient satisfaction surveys to measure hospitalist providers' quality of patient care.[4] Ideally, accurate information would be delivered as feedback to individual providers in a timely manner in hopes of improving performance; however, the current methodology has shortcomings that limit its usefulness. First, several hospitalists and consultants may be involved in the care of 1 patient during the hospital stay, but the score can only be tied to a single physician. Current survey methods attribute all responses to that particular doctor, usually the attending of record, although patients may very well be thinking of other physicians when responding to questions. Second, only a few questions on the surveys ask about doctors' performance. Aforementioned surveys have 3 to 8 questions about doctors' care, which limits the ability to assess physician performance comprehensively. Finally, the surveys are mailed approximately 1 week after the patient's discharge, usually without a name or photograph of the physician to facilitate patient/caregiver recall. This time lag and lack of information to prompt patient recall likely lead to impreciseness in assessment. In addition, the response rates to these surveys are typically low, around 25% (personal oral communication with our division's service excellence stakeholder Dr. L.P. in September 2013). These deficiencies limit the usefulness of such data in coaching individual providers about their performance because they cannot be delivered in a timely fashion, and the reliability of the attribution is suspect.

With these considerations in mind, we developed and validated a new survey metric, the Tool to Assess Inpatient Satisfaction with Care from Hospitalists (TAISCH). We hypothesized that the results would be different from those collected using conventional methodologies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Study Design and Subjects

Our cross‐sectional study surveyed inpatients under the care of hospitalist physicians working without the support of trainees or allied health professionals (such as nurse practitioners or physician assistants). The subjects were hospitalized at a 560‐bed academic medical center on a general medical floor between September 2012 and December 2012. All participating hospitalist physicians were members of a division of hospital medicine.

TAISCH Development

Several steps were taken to establish content validity evidence.[5] We developed TAISCH by building upon the theoretical underpinnings of the quality of care measures that are endorsed by the SHM Membership Committee Guidelines for Hospitalists Patient Satisfaction.[4] This directive recommends that patient satisfaction with hospitalist care should be assessed across 6 domains: physician availability, physician concern for patients, physician communication skills, physician courteousness, physician clinical skills, and physician involvement of patients' families. Other existing validated measures tied to the quality of patient care were reviewed, and items related to the physician's care were considered for inclusion to further substantiate content validity.[6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12] Input from colleagues with expertise in clinical excellence and service excellence was also solicited. This included the director of Hopkins' Miller Coulson Academy of Clinical Excellence and the grant review committee members of the Johns Hopkins Osler Center for Clinical Excellence (who funded this study).[13, 14]

The preliminary instrument contained 17 items, including 2 conditional questions, and was first pilot tested on 5 hospitalized patients. We assessed the time it took to administer the surveys as well as patients' comments and questions about each survey item. This resulted in minor wording changes for clarification and changes in the order of the questions. We then pursued a second phase of piloting using the revised survey, which was administered to >20 patients. There were no further adjustments as patients reported that TAISCH was clear and concise.

From interviews with patients after pilot testing, it became clear that respondents were carefully reflecting on the quality of care and performance of their treating physician, thereby generating response process validity evidence.[5]

Data Collection

To ensure that patients had perspective upon which to base their assessment, they were only asked to appraise physicians after being cared for by the same hospitalist provider for at least 2 consecutive days. Patients who were on isolation, those who were non‐English speaking, and those with impaired decision‐making capacity (such as mental status change or dementia) were excluded. Patients were enrolled only if they could correctly name their doctor or at least identify a photograph of their hospitalist provider on a page that included pictures of all division members. Those patients who were able to name the provider or correctly select the provider from the page of photographs were considered to have correctly identified their provider. In order to ensure the confidentiality of the patients and their responses, all data collections were performed by a trained research assistant who had no patient‐care responsibilities. The survey was confidential, did not include any patient identifiers, and patients were assured that providers would never see their individual responses. The patients were given options to complete TAISCH either by verbally responding to the research assistant's questions, filling out the paper survey, or completing the survey online using an iPad at the bedside. TAISCH specifically asked the patients to rate their hospitalist provider's performance along several domains: communication skills, clinical skills, availability, empathy, courteousness, and discharge planning; 5‐point Likert scales were used exclusively.

In addition to the TAISCH questions, we asked patients (1) an overall satisfaction question, I would recommend Dr. X to my loved ones should he or she need hospitalization in the future (response options: strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree), (2) their pain level using the Wong‐Baker pain scale,[15] and (3) the Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy (JSPPPE).[16, 17] Associations between TAISCH and these variables (as well as PG data) would be examined to ascertain relations to other variables validity evidence.[5] Specifically, we sought to ascertain discriminant and convergent validity where the TAISCH is associated positively with constructs where we expect positive associations (convergent) and negatively with those we expect negative associations (discriminant).[18] The Wong‐Baker pain scale is a recommended pain‐assessment tool by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, and is widely used in hospitals and various healthcare settings.[19] The scale has a range from 0 to 10 (0 for no pain and 10 indicating the worst pain). The hypothesis was that the patients' pain levels would adversely affect their perception of the physician's performance (discriminant validity). JSPPPE is a 5‐item validated scale developed to measure patients' perceptions of their physicians' empathic engagement. It has significant correlations with the American Board of Internal Medicine's patient rating surveys, and it is used in standardized patient examinations for medical students.[20] The hypothesis was that patient perception about the quality of physician care would correlate positively with their assessment of the physician's empathy (convergent validity).

Although all of the hospitalist providers in the division consented to participate in this study, only hospitalist providers for whom at least 4 patient surveys were collected were included in the analysis. The study was approved by our institutional review board.

Data Analysis

All data were analyzed using Stata 11 (StataCorp, College Station, TX). Data were analyzed to determine the potential for a single comprehensive assessment of physician performance with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using maximum likelihood extraction. Additional factor analyses examined the potential for a multiple factor solution using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with principle component factor analysis and varimax rotation. Examination of scree plots, factor loadings for individual items greater than 0.40, eigenvalues greater than 1.0, and substantive meaning of the factors were all taken into consideration when determining the number of factors to retain from factor analytic models.[21] Cronbach's s were calculated for each factor to assess reliability. These data provided internal structure validity evidence (demonstrated by acceptable reliability and factor structure) to TAISCH.[5]

After arriving at the final TAISCH scale, composite TAISCH scores were computed. Associations between composite TAISCH scores with the Wong‐Baker pain scale, the JSPPPE, and the overall satisfaction question were assessed using linear regression with the svy command in Stata to account for the nested design of having each patient report on a single hospitalist provider. Correlation between composite TAISCH score and PG physician care scores (comprised of 5 questions: time physician spent with you, physician concern with questions/worries, physician kept you informed, friendliness/courtesy of physician, and skill of physician) were assessed at the provider level when both data were available.

RESULTS

A total of 330 patients were considered to be eligible through medical record screening. Of those patients, 73 (22%) were already discharged by the time the research assistant attempted to enroll them after 2 days of care by a single physician. Of 257 inpatients approached, 30 patients (12%) refused to participate. Among the 227 consented patients, 24 (9%) were excluded as they were unable to correctly identify their hospitalist provider. A total of 203 patients were enrolled, and each patient rated a single hospitalist; a total of 29 unique hospitalists were assessed by these patients. The patients' mean age was 60 years, 114 (56%) were female, and 61 (30%) were of nonwhite race (Table 1). The hospitalist physicians' demographic information is also shown in Table 1. Two hospitalists with fewer than 4 surveys collected were excluded from the analysis. Thus, final analysis included 200 unique patients assessing 1 of the 27 hospitalists (mean=7.4 surveys per hospitalist).

Characteristics of the 203 Patients and 29 Hospitalist Physicians Studied
CharacteristicsValue
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation.

Patients, N=203 
Age, y, mean (SD)60.0 (17.2)
Female, n (%)114 (56.1)
Nonwhite race, n (%)61 (30.5)
Observation stay, n (%)45 (22.1)
How are you feeling today? n (%) 
Very poor11 (5.5)
Poor14 (7.0)
Fair67 (33.5)
Good71 (35.5)
Very good33 (16.5)
Excellent4 (2.0)
Hospitalists, N=29 
Age, n (%) 
2630 years7 (24.1)
3135 years8 (27.6)
3640 years12 (41.4)
4145 years2 (6.9)
Female, n (%)11 (37.9)
International medical graduate, n (%)18 (62.1)
Years in current practice, n (%) 
<19 (31.0)
127 (24.1)
346 (20.7)
565 (17.2)
7 or more2 (6.9)
Race, n (%) 
Caucasian4 (13.8)
Asian19 (65.5)
African/African American5 (17.2)
Other1 (3.4)
Academic rank, n (%) 
Assistant professor9 (31.0)
Clinical instructor10 (34.5)
Clinical associate/nonfaculty10 (34.5)
Percentage of clinical effort, n (%) 
>70%6 (20.7)
50%70%19 (65.5)
<50%4 (13.8)

Validation of TAISCH

On the 17‐item TAISCH administered, the 2 conditional questions (When I asked to see Dr. X, s/he came within a reasonable amount of time. and If Dr. X interacted with your family, how well did s/he deal with them?) were applicable to fewer than 40% of patients. As such, they were not included in the analysis.

Internal Structure Validity Evidence

Results from factor analyses are shown in Table 2. The CFA modeling of a single factor solution with 15 items explained 42% of the total variance. The 27 hospitalists' average 15‐item TAISCH score ranged from 3.25 to 4.28 (mean [standard deviation]=3.82 [0.24]; possible score range: 15). Reliability of the 15‐item TAISCH was appropriate (Cronbach's =0.88).

Factor Loadings for 15‐Item TAISCH Measure Based on Confirmatory Factor Analysis
TAISCH (Cronbach's =0.88)Factor Loading
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: TAISCH, Tool to Assess Inpatient Satisfaction with Care from Hospitalists. *Response category: below average, average, above average, top 10% of all doctors, the very best of any doctor I have come across. Response category: none, a little, some, a lot, tremendously. Response category: strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree. Response category: poor, fair, good, very good, excellent. Response category: never, rarely, sometimes, most of the time, every single time.

Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's compassion, empathy, and concern for you?*0.91
Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's ability to communicate with you?*0.88
Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's skill in diagnosing and treating your medical conditions?*0.88
Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's fund of knowledge?*0.80
How much confidence do you have in Dr. X's plan for your care?0.71
Dr. X kept me informed of the plans for my care.0.69
Effectively preparing patients for discharge is an important part of what doctors in the hospital do. How well has Dr. X done in getting you ready to be discharged from the hospital?0.67
Dr. X let me talk without interrupting.0.60
Dr. X encouraged me to ask questions.0.59
Dr. X checks to be sure I understood everything.0.55
I sensed Dr. X was in a rush when s/he was with me. (reverse coded)0.55
Dr. X showed interest in my views and opinions about my health.0.54
Dr. X discusses options with me and involves me in decision making.0.47
Dr. X asked permission to enter the room and waited for an answer.0.25
Dr. X sat down when s/he visited my bedside.0.14

As shown in Table 2, 2 variables had factor loadings below the minimum threshold of 0.40 in the CFA for the 15‐item TAISCH when modeling a single factor solution. Both items were related to physician etiquette: Dr. X asked permission to enter the room and waited for an answer. and Dr. X sat down when he/she visited my bedside.

When CFA was executed again, as a single factor omitting the 2 items that demonstrated lower factor loadings, the 13‐item single factor solution explained 47% of the total variance, and the Cronbach's was 0.92.

EFA models were also explored for potential alternate solutions. These analyses resulted in lesser reliability (low Cronbach's ), weak construct operationalization, and poor face validity (as judged by the research team).

Both the 13‐ and 15‐item single factor solutions were examined further to determine whether associations with criterion variables (pain, empathy) differed substantively. Given that results were similar across both solutions, subsequent analyses were completed with the 15‐item single factor solution, which included the etiquette‐related variables.

Relationship to Other Variables Validity Evidence

The association between the 15‐item TAISCH and JSPPPE was significantly positive (=12.2, P<0.001). Additionally, there was a positive and significant association between TAISCH and the overall satisfaction question: I would recommend Dr. X to my loved ones should they need hospitalization in the future. (=11.2, P<0.001). This overall satisfaction question was also associated positively with JSPPPE (=13.2, P<0.001). There was a statistically significant negative association between TAISCH and Wong‐Baker pain scale (=2.42, P<0.05).

The PG data from the same period were available for 24 out of 27 hospitalists. The number of PG surveys collected per provider ranged from 5 to 30 (mean=14). At the provider level, there was not a statistically significant correlation between PG and the 15‐item TAISCH (P=0.51). Of note, PG was also not significantly correlated with the overall satisfaction question, JSPPPE, or the Wong‐Baker pain scale (all P>0.10).

DISCUSSION

Our new metric, TAISCH, was found to be a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess patient satisfaction with the hospitalist physician's care. Because we only surveyed patients who could correctly identify their hospitalist physicians after interacting for at least 2 consecutive days, the attribution of the data to the individual hospitalist is almost certainly correct. The high participation rate indicates that the patients were not hesitant about rating their hospitalist provider's quality of care, even when asked while they were still in the hospital.

The majority of the patients approached were able to correctly identify their hospitalist provider. This rate (91%) was much higher than the rate previously reported in the literature where a picture card was used to improve provider recognition.[22] It is also likely that 1 physician, rather than a team of physicians, taking care of patients make it easier for patients to recall the name and recognize the face of their inpatient provider.

The CFA of TAISCH showed good fit but suggests that 2 variables, both from Kahn's etiquette‐based medicine (EtBM) checklist,[9] may not load in the same way as the other items. Tackett and colleagues reported that hospitalists who performed more EtBM behaviors scored higher on PG evaluations.[23] Such results, along with the comparable explanation of variance and reliability, convinced us to retain these 2 items in the final 15‐item TAISCH as dictated by the CFA. Although the literature supports the fact that physician etiquette is related to perception of high‐quality care, it is possible that these 2 questions were answered differently (and thereby failed to load the same way), because environmental limitations may be preventing physicians' ability to perform them consistently. We prefer the 15‐item version of TAISCH and future studies may provide additional information about its performance as compared to the 13‐item adaptation.

The significantly negative association between the Wong‐Baker pain scale and TAISCH stresses the importance of adequately addressing and treating the patient's pain. Hanna et al. showed that the patients' perceptions of pain control was associated with their overall satisfaction score measured by HCAHPS.[24] The association seen in our study was not unexpected, because TAISCH is administered while the patients are acutely ill in the hospital, when pain is likely more prevalent and severe than it is during the postdischarge settings (when the HCAHPS or PG surveys are administered). Interestingly, Hanna et al. discovered that the team's attention to controlling pain was more strongly correlated with overall satisfaction than was the actual pain control.[24] These data, now confirmed by our study, should serve to remind us that a hospitalist's concern and effort to relieve pain may augment patient satisfaction with the quality of care, even when eliminating the pain may be difficult or impossible.

TAISCH was found not to be correlated with PG scores. Several explanations for this deserve consideration. First, the postdischarge PG survey that is used for our institution does not list the name of the specific hospitalist providers for the patients to evaluate. Because patients encounter multiple physicians during their hospital stay (eg, emergency department physicians, hospitalist providers, consultants), it is possible that patients are not reflecting on the named doctor when assessing the the attending of record on the PG mailed questionnaire. Second, the representation of patients who responded to TAISCH and PG were different; almost all patients completed TAISCH as opposed to a small minority who decide to respond to the PG survey. Third, TAISCH measures the physicians' performance more comprehensively with a larger number of variables. Last, it is possible that we were underpowered to detect significant correlation, because there were only 24 providers who had data from both TAISCH and PG. However, our results endorse using caution in interpreting PG scores for individual hospitalist's performance, particularly for high‐stakes consequences (including the provision of incentives to high performer and the insistence on remediation for low performers).

Several limitations of this study should be considered. First, only hospitalist providers from a single division were assessed. This may limit the generalizability of our findings. Second, although patients were assured about confidentiality of their responses, they might have provided more favorable answers, because they may have felt uncomfortable rating their physician poorly. One review article of the measurement of healthcare satisfaction indicated that impersonal (mailed) methods result in more criticism and lower satisfaction than assessments made in person using interviews. As the trade‐off, the mailed surveys yield lower response rates that may introduce other forms of bias.[25] Even on the HCHAPS survey report for the same period from our institution, 78% of patients gave top box ratings for our doctors' communication skills, which is at the state average.[26] Similarly, a study that used postdischarge telephone interviews to collect patients' satisfaction with hospitalists' care quality reported an average score of 4.20 out of 5.[27] These findings confirm that highly skewed ratings are common for these types of surveys, irrespective of how or when the data are collected.

Despite the aforementioned limitations, TAISCH use need not be limited to hospitalist physicians. It may also be used to assess allied health professionals or trainees performance, which cannot be assessed by HCHAPS or PG. Applying TAISCH in different hospital settings (eg, emergency department or critical care units), assessing hospitalists' reactions to TAISCH, learning whether TAISCH leads to hospitalists' behavior changes or appraising whether performance can improve in response to coaching interventions for those performing poorly are all research questions that merit additional consideration.

CONCLUSION

TAISCH allows for obtaining patient satisfaction data that are highly attributable to specific hospitalist providers. The data collection method also permits high response rates so that input comes from almost all patients. The timeliness of the TAISCH assessments also makes it possible for real‐time service recovery, which is impossible with other commonly used metrics assessing patient satisfaction. Our next step will include testing the most effective way to provide feedback to providers and to coach these individuals so as to improve performance.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Po‐Han Chen at the BEAD Core for his statistical analysis support.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Johns Hopkins Osler Center for Clinical Excellence. Dr. Wright is a Miller‐Coulson Family Scholar and is supported through the Johns Hopkins Center for Innovative Medicine. The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Patient satisfaction scores are being reported publicly and will affect hospital reimbursement rates under Hospital Value Based Purchasing.[1] Patient satisfaction scores are currently obtained through metrics such as Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS)[2] and Press Ganey (PG)[3] surveys. Such surveys are mailed to a variable proportion of patients following their discharge from the hospital, and ask patients about the quality of care they received during their admission. Domains assessed regarding the patients' inpatient experiences range from room cleanliness to the amount of time the physician spent with them.

The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM), the largest professional medical society representing hospitalists, encourages the use of patient satisfaction surveys to measure hospitalist providers' quality of patient care.[4] Ideally, accurate information would be delivered as feedback to individual providers in a timely manner in hopes of improving performance; however, the current methodology has shortcomings that limit its usefulness. First, several hospitalists and consultants may be involved in the care of 1 patient during the hospital stay, but the score can only be tied to a single physician. Current survey methods attribute all responses to that particular doctor, usually the attending of record, although patients may very well be thinking of other physicians when responding to questions. Second, only a few questions on the surveys ask about doctors' performance. Aforementioned surveys have 3 to 8 questions about doctors' care, which limits the ability to assess physician performance comprehensively. Finally, the surveys are mailed approximately 1 week after the patient's discharge, usually without a name or photograph of the physician to facilitate patient/caregiver recall. This time lag and lack of information to prompt patient recall likely lead to impreciseness in assessment. In addition, the response rates to these surveys are typically low, around 25% (personal oral communication with our division's service excellence stakeholder Dr. L.P. in September 2013). These deficiencies limit the usefulness of such data in coaching individual providers about their performance because they cannot be delivered in a timely fashion, and the reliability of the attribution is suspect.

With these considerations in mind, we developed and validated a new survey metric, the Tool to Assess Inpatient Satisfaction with Care from Hospitalists (TAISCH). We hypothesized that the results would be different from those collected using conventional methodologies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Study Design and Subjects

Our cross‐sectional study surveyed inpatients under the care of hospitalist physicians working without the support of trainees or allied health professionals (such as nurse practitioners or physician assistants). The subjects were hospitalized at a 560‐bed academic medical center on a general medical floor between September 2012 and December 2012. All participating hospitalist physicians were members of a division of hospital medicine.

TAISCH Development

Several steps were taken to establish content validity evidence.[5] We developed TAISCH by building upon the theoretical underpinnings of the quality of care measures that are endorsed by the SHM Membership Committee Guidelines for Hospitalists Patient Satisfaction.[4] This directive recommends that patient satisfaction with hospitalist care should be assessed across 6 domains: physician availability, physician concern for patients, physician communication skills, physician courteousness, physician clinical skills, and physician involvement of patients' families. Other existing validated measures tied to the quality of patient care were reviewed, and items related to the physician's care were considered for inclusion to further substantiate content validity.[6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12] Input from colleagues with expertise in clinical excellence and service excellence was also solicited. This included the director of Hopkins' Miller Coulson Academy of Clinical Excellence and the grant review committee members of the Johns Hopkins Osler Center for Clinical Excellence (who funded this study).[13, 14]

The preliminary instrument contained 17 items, including 2 conditional questions, and was first pilot tested on 5 hospitalized patients. We assessed the time it took to administer the surveys as well as patients' comments and questions about each survey item. This resulted in minor wording changes for clarification and changes in the order of the questions. We then pursued a second phase of piloting using the revised survey, which was administered to >20 patients. There were no further adjustments as patients reported that TAISCH was clear and concise.

From interviews with patients after pilot testing, it became clear that respondents were carefully reflecting on the quality of care and performance of their treating physician, thereby generating response process validity evidence.[5]

Data Collection

To ensure that patients had perspective upon which to base their assessment, they were only asked to appraise physicians after being cared for by the same hospitalist provider for at least 2 consecutive days. Patients who were on isolation, those who were non‐English speaking, and those with impaired decision‐making capacity (such as mental status change or dementia) were excluded. Patients were enrolled only if they could correctly name their doctor or at least identify a photograph of their hospitalist provider on a page that included pictures of all division members. Those patients who were able to name the provider or correctly select the provider from the page of photographs were considered to have correctly identified their provider. In order to ensure the confidentiality of the patients and their responses, all data collections were performed by a trained research assistant who had no patient‐care responsibilities. The survey was confidential, did not include any patient identifiers, and patients were assured that providers would never see their individual responses. The patients were given options to complete TAISCH either by verbally responding to the research assistant's questions, filling out the paper survey, or completing the survey online using an iPad at the bedside. TAISCH specifically asked the patients to rate their hospitalist provider's performance along several domains: communication skills, clinical skills, availability, empathy, courteousness, and discharge planning; 5‐point Likert scales were used exclusively.

In addition to the TAISCH questions, we asked patients (1) an overall satisfaction question, I would recommend Dr. X to my loved ones should he or she need hospitalization in the future (response options: strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree), (2) their pain level using the Wong‐Baker pain scale,[15] and (3) the Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy (JSPPPE).[16, 17] Associations between TAISCH and these variables (as well as PG data) would be examined to ascertain relations to other variables validity evidence.[5] Specifically, we sought to ascertain discriminant and convergent validity where the TAISCH is associated positively with constructs where we expect positive associations (convergent) and negatively with those we expect negative associations (discriminant).[18] The Wong‐Baker pain scale is a recommended pain‐assessment tool by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, and is widely used in hospitals and various healthcare settings.[19] The scale has a range from 0 to 10 (0 for no pain and 10 indicating the worst pain). The hypothesis was that the patients' pain levels would adversely affect their perception of the physician's performance (discriminant validity). JSPPPE is a 5‐item validated scale developed to measure patients' perceptions of their physicians' empathic engagement. It has significant correlations with the American Board of Internal Medicine's patient rating surveys, and it is used in standardized patient examinations for medical students.[20] The hypothesis was that patient perception about the quality of physician care would correlate positively with their assessment of the physician's empathy (convergent validity).

Although all of the hospitalist providers in the division consented to participate in this study, only hospitalist providers for whom at least 4 patient surveys were collected were included in the analysis. The study was approved by our institutional review board.

Data Analysis

All data were analyzed using Stata 11 (StataCorp, College Station, TX). Data were analyzed to determine the potential for a single comprehensive assessment of physician performance with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using maximum likelihood extraction. Additional factor analyses examined the potential for a multiple factor solution using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with principle component factor analysis and varimax rotation. Examination of scree plots, factor loadings for individual items greater than 0.40, eigenvalues greater than 1.0, and substantive meaning of the factors were all taken into consideration when determining the number of factors to retain from factor analytic models.[21] Cronbach's s were calculated for each factor to assess reliability. These data provided internal structure validity evidence (demonstrated by acceptable reliability and factor structure) to TAISCH.[5]

After arriving at the final TAISCH scale, composite TAISCH scores were computed. Associations between composite TAISCH scores with the Wong‐Baker pain scale, the JSPPPE, and the overall satisfaction question were assessed using linear regression with the svy command in Stata to account for the nested design of having each patient report on a single hospitalist provider. Correlation between composite TAISCH score and PG physician care scores (comprised of 5 questions: time physician spent with you, physician concern with questions/worries, physician kept you informed, friendliness/courtesy of physician, and skill of physician) were assessed at the provider level when both data were available.

RESULTS

A total of 330 patients were considered to be eligible through medical record screening. Of those patients, 73 (22%) were already discharged by the time the research assistant attempted to enroll them after 2 days of care by a single physician. Of 257 inpatients approached, 30 patients (12%) refused to participate. Among the 227 consented patients, 24 (9%) were excluded as they were unable to correctly identify their hospitalist provider. A total of 203 patients were enrolled, and each patient rated a single hospitalist; a total of 29 unique hospitalists were assessed by these patients. The patients' mean age was 60 years, 114 (56%) were female, and 61 (30%) were of nonwhite race (Table 1). The hospitalist physicians' demographic information is also shown in Table 1. Two hospitalists with fewer than 4 surveys collected were excluded from the analysis. Thus, final analysis included 200 unique patients assessing 1 of the 27 hospitalists (mean=7.4 surveys per hospitalist).

Characteristics of the 203 Patients and 29 Hospitalist Physicians Studied
CharacteristicsValue
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation.

Patients, N=203 
Age, y, mean (SD)60.0 (17.2)
Female, n (%)114 (56.1)
Nonwhite race, n (%)61 (30.5)
Observation stay, n (%)45 (22.1)
How are you feeling today? n (%) 
Very poor11 (5.5)
Poor14 (7.0)
Fair67 (33.5)
Good71 (35.5)
Very good33 (16.5)
Excellent4 (2.0)
Hospitalists, N=29 
Age, n (%) 
2630 years7 (24.1)
3135 years8 (27.6)
3640 years12 (41.4)
4145 years2 (6.9)
Female, n (%)11 (37.9)
International medical graduate, n (%)18 (62.1)
Years in current practice, n (%) 
<19 (31.0)
127 (24.1)
346 (20.7)
565 (17.2)
7 or more2 (6.9)
Race, n (%) 
Caucasian4 (13.8)
Asian19 (65.5)
African/African American5 (17.2)
Other1 (3.4)
Academic rank, n (%) 
Assistant professor9 (31.0)
Clinical instructor10 (34.5)
Clinical associate/nonfaculty10 (34.5)
Percentage of clinical effort, n (%) 
>70%6 (20.7)
50%70%19 (65.5)
<50%4 (13.8)

Validation of TAISCH

On the 17‐item TAISCH administered, the 2 conditional questions (When I asked to see Dr. X, s/he came within a reasonable amount of time. and If Dr. X interacted with your family, how well did s/he deal with them?) were applicable to fewer than 40% of patients. As such, they were not included in the analysis.

Internal Structure Validity Evidence

Results from factor analyses are shown in Table 2. The CFA modeling of a single factor solution with 15 items explained 42% of the total variance. The 27 hospitalists' average 15‐item TAISCH score ranged from 3.25 to 4.28 (mean [standard deviation]=3.82 [0.24]; possible score range: 15). Reliability of the 15‐item TAISCH was appropriate (Cronbach's =0.88).

Factor Loadings for 15‐Item TAISCH Measure Based on Confirmatory Factor Analysis
TAISCH (Cronbach's =0.88)Factor Loading
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: TAISCH, Tool to Assess Inpatient Satisfaction with Care from Hospitalists. *Response category: below average, average, above average, top 10% of all doctors, the very best of any doctor I have come across. Response category: none, a little, some, a lot, tremendously. Response category: strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree. Response category: poor, fair, good, very good, excellent. Response category: never, rarely, sometimes, most of the time, every single time.

Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's compassion, empathy, and concern for you?*0.91
Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's ability to communicate with you?*0.88
Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's skill in diagnosing and treating your medical conditions?*0.88
Compared to all other physicians that you know, how do you rate Dr. X's fund of knowledge?*0.80
How much confidence do you have in Dr. X's plan for your care?0.71
Dr. X kept me informed of the plans for my care.0.69
Effectively preparing patients for discharge is an important part of what doctors in the hospital do. How well has Dr. X done in getting you ready to be discharged from the hospital?0.67
Dr. X let me talk without interrupting.0.60
Dr. X encouraged me to ask questions.0.59
Dr. X checks to be sure I understood everything.0.55
I sensed Dr. X was in a rush when s/he was with me. (reverse coded)0.55
Dr. X showed interest in my views and opinions about my health.0.54
Dr. X discusses options with me and involves me in decision making.0.47
Dr. X asked permission to enter the room and waited for an answer.0.25
Dr. X sat down when s/he visited my bedside.0.14

As shown in Table 2, 2 variables had factor loadings below the minimum threshold of 0.40 in the CFA for the 15‐item TAISCH when modeling a single factor solution. Both items were related to physician etiquette: Dr. X asked permission to enter the room and waited for an answer. and Dr. X sat down when he/she visited my bedside.

When CFA was executed again, as a single factor omitting the 2 items that demonstrated lower factor loadings, the 13‐item single factor solution explained 47% of the total variance, and the Cronbach's was 0.92.

EFA models were also explored for potential alternate solutions. These analyses resulted in lesser reliability (low Cronbach's ), weak construct operationalization, and poor face validity (as judged by the research team).

Both the 13‐ and 15‐item single factor solutions were examined further to determine whether associations with criterion variables (pain, empathy) differed substantively. Given that results were similar across both solutions, subsequent analyses were completed with the 15‐item single factor solution, which included the etiquette‐related variables.

Relationship to Other Variables Validity Evidence

The association between the 15‐item TAISCH and JSPPPE was significantly positive (=12.2, P<0.001). Additionally, there was a positive and significant association between TAISCH and the overall satisfaction question: I would recommend Dr. X to my loved ones should they need hospitalization in the future. (=11.2, P<0.001). This overall satisfaction question was also associated positively with JSPPPE (=13.2, P<0.001). There was a statistically significant negative association between TAISCH and Wong‐Baker pain scale (=2.42, P<0.05).

The PG data from the same period were available for 24 out of 27 hospitalists. The number of PG surveys collected per provider ranged from 5 to 30 (mean=14). At the provider level, there was not a statistically significant correlation between PG and the 15‐item TAISCH (P=0.51). Of note, PG was also not significantly correlated with the overall satisfaction question, JSPPPE, or the Wong‐Baker pain scale (all P>0.10).

DISCUSSION

Our new metric, TAISCH, was found to be a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess patient satisfaction with the hospitalist physician's care. Because we only surveyed patients who could correctly identify their hospitalist physicians after interacting for at least 2 consecutive days, the attribution of the data to the individual hospitalist is almost certainly correct. The high participation rate indicates that the patients were not hesitant about rating their hospitalist provider's quality of care, even when asked while they were still in the hospital.

The majority of the patients approached were able to correctly identify their hospitalist provider. This rate (91%) was much higher than the rate previously reported in the literature where a picture card was used to improve provider recognition.[22] It is also likely that 1 physician, rather than a team of physicians, taking care of patients make it easier for patients to recall the name and recognize the face of their inpatient provider.

The CFA of TAISCH showed good fit but suggests that 2 variables, both from Kahn's etiquette‐based medicine (EtBM) checklist,[9] may not load in the same way as the other items. Tackett and colleagues reported that hospitalists who performed more EtBM behaviors scored higher on PG evaluations.[23] Such results, along with the comparable explanation of variance and reliability, convinced us to retain these 2 items in the final 15‐item TAISCH as dictated by the CFA. Although the literature supports the fact that physician etiquette is related to perception of high‐quality care, it is possible that these 2 questions were answered differently (and thereby failed to load the same way), because environmental limitations may be preventing physicians' ability to perform them consistently. We prefer the 15‐item version of TAISCH and future studies may provide additional information about its performance as compared to the 13‐item adaptation.

The significantly negative association between the Wong‐Baker pain scale and TAISCH stresses the importance of adequately addressing and treating the patient's pain. Hanna et al. showed that the patients' perceptions of pain control was associated with their overall satisfaction score measured by HCAHPS.[24] The association seen in our study was not unexpected, because TAISCH is administered while the patients are acutely ill in the hospital, when pain is likely more prevalent and severe than it is during the postdischarge settings (when the HCAHPS or PG surveys are administered). Interestingly, Hanna et al. discovered that the team's attention to controlling pain was more strongly correlated with overall satisfaction than was the actual pain control.[24] These data, now confirmed by our study, should serve to remind us that a hospitalist's concern and effort to relieve pain may augment patient satisfaction with the quality of care, even when eliminating the pain may be difficult or impossible.

TAISCH was found not to be correlated with PG scores. Several explanations for this deserve consideration. First, the postdischarge PG survey that is used for our institution does not list the name of the specific hospitalist providers for the patients to evaluate. Because patients encounter multiple physicians during their hospital stay (eg, emergency department physicians, hospitalist providers, consultants), it is possible that patients are not reflecting on the named doctor when assessing the the attending of record on the PG mailed questionnaire. Second, the representation of patients who responded to TAISCH and PG were different; almost all patients completed TAISCH as opposed to a small minority who decide to respond to the PG survey. Third, TAISCH measures the physicians' performance more comprehensively with a larger number of variables. Last, it is possible that we were underpowered to detect significant correlation, because there were only 24 providers who had data from both TAISCH and PG. However, our results endorse using caution in interpreting PG scores for individual hospitalist's performance, particularly for high‐stakes consequences (including the provision of incentives to high performer and the insistence on remediation for low performers).

Several limitations of this study should be considered. First, only hospitalist providers from a single division were assessed. This may limit the generalizability of our findings. Second, although patients were assured about confidentiality of their responses, they might have provided more favorable answers, because they may have felt uncomfortable rating their physician poorly. One review article of the measurement of healthcare satisfaction indicated that impersonal (mailed) methods result in more criticism and lower satisfaction than assessments made in person using interviews. As the trade‐off, the mailed surveys yield lower response rates that may introduce other forms of bias.[25] Even on the HCHAPS survey report for the same period from our institution, 78% of patients gave top box ratings for our doctors' communication skills, which is at the state average.[26] Similarly, a study that used postdischarge telephone interviews to collect patients' satisfaction with hospitalists' care quality reported an average score of 4.20 out of 5.[27] These findings confirm that highly skewed ratings are common for these types of surveys, irrespective of how or when the data are collected.

Despite the aforementioned limitations, TAISCH use need not be limited to hospitalist physicians. It may also be used to assess allied health professionals or trainees performance, which cannot be assessed by HCHAPS or PG. Applying TAISCH in different hospital settings (eg, emergency department or critical care units), assessing hospitalists' reactions to TAISCH, learning whether TAISCH leads to hospitalists' behavior changes or appraising whether performance can improve in response to coaching interventions for those performing poorly are all research questions that merit additional consideration.

CONCLUSION

TAISCH allows for obtaining patient satisfaction data that are highly attributable to specific hospitalist providers. The data collection method also permits high response rates so that input comes from almost all patients. The timeliness of the TAISCH assessments also makes it possible for real‐time service recovery, which is impossible with other commonly used metrics assessing patient satisfaction. Our next step will include testing the most effective way to provide feedback to providers and to coach these individuals so as to improve performance.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Po‐Han Chen at the BEAD Core for his statistical analysis support.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Johns Hopkins Osler Center for Clinical Excellence. Dr. Wright is a Miller‐Coulson Family Scholar and is supported through the Johns Hopkins Center for Innovative Medicine. The authors report no conflicts of interest.

References
  1. Brumenthal D, Jena AB. Hospital value‐based purchasing. J Hosp Med. 2013;8:271277.
  2. HCAHPS survey. Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems website. Available at: http://www.hcahpsonline.org/home.aspx. Accessed August 27, 2011.
  3. Press Ganey survey. Press Ganey website. Available at: http://www.pressganey.com/index.aspx. Accessed February 12, 2013.
  4. Society of Hospital Medicine. Membership Committee Guidelines for Hospitalists Patient Satisfaction Surveys. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Practice_Resources119:166.e7e16.
  5. Makoul G, Krupat E, Chang CH. Measuring patient views of physician communication skills: development and testing of the Communication Assessment Tool. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;67:333342.
  6. Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Bruster S. The Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire: development and validation using data from in‐patient surveys in five countries. Int J Qual Health Care. 2002;14:353358.
  7. The Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire from RAND Health. RAND Health website. Available at: http://www.rand.org/health/surveys_tools/psq.html. Accessed December 30, 2011.
  8. Kahn MW. Etiquette‐based medicine. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:19881989.
  9. Christmas C, Kravet S, Durso C, Wright SM. Defining clinical excellence in academic medicine: a qualitative study of the master clinicians. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83:989994.
  10. Wright SM, Christmas C, Burkhart K, Kravet S, Durso C. Creating an academy of clinical excellence at Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center: a 3‐year experience. Acad Med. 2010;85:18331839.
  11. Bendapudi NM, Berry LL, Keith FA, Turner Parish J, Rayburn WL. Patients' perspectives on ideal physician behaviors. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81(3):338344.
  12. The Miller‐Coulson Academy of Clinical Excellence at Johns Hopkins. Available at: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/innovative/signature_programs/academy_of_clinical_excellence/. Accessed April 25, 2014.
  13. Osler Center for Clinical Excellence at Johns Hopkins. Available at: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/johns_hopkins_bayview/education_training/continuing_education/osler_center_for_clinical_excellence. Accessed April 25, 2014.
  14. Wong‐Baker FACES Foundation. Available at: http://www.wongbakerfaces.org. Accessed July 8, 2013.
  15. Kane GC, Gotto JL, Mangione S, West S, Hojat M. Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy: preliminary psychometric data. Croat Med J. 2007;48:8186.
  16. Glaser KM, Markham FW, Adler HM, McManus PR, Hojat M. Relationships between scores on the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy, patient perceptions of physician empathy, and humanistic approaches to patient care: a validity study. Med Sci Monit. 2007;13(7):CR291CR294.
  17. Campbell DT, Fiske DW. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait‐multimethod matrix. Psychol Bul. 1959;56(2):81105.
  18. The Joint Commission. Facts about pain management. Available at: http://www.jointcommission.org/pain_management. Accessed April 25, 2014.
  19. Berg K, Majdan JF, Berg D, et al. Medical students' self‐reported empathy and simulated patients' assessments of student empathy: an analysis by gender and ethnicity. Acad Med. 2011;86(8):984988.
  20. Gorsuch RL. Factor Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1983.
  21. Arora VM, Schaninger C, D'Arcy M, et al. Improving inpatients' identification of their doctors: use of FACE cards. Jt Comm J Qual Pateint Saf. 1009;35(12):613619.
  22. Tackett S, Tad‐y D, Rios R et al. Appraising the practice of etiquette‐based medicine in the inpatient setting. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(7):908913.
  23. Hanna MN, Gonzalez‐Fernandez M, Barrett AD, et al. Does patient perception of pain control affect patient satisfaction across surgical units in a tertiary teaching hospital? Am J Med Qual. 2012;27:411416.
  24. Crow R, Gage H, Hampson S, et al. The measurement of satisfaction with health care: implications for practice from a systematic review of the literature. Health Technol Assess. 2002;6(32):1244.
  25. Centers for Medicare 7(2):131136.
References
  1. Brumenthal D, Jena AB. Hospital value‐based purchasing. J Hosp Med. 2013;8:271277.
  2. HCAHPS survey. Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems website. Available at: http://www.hcahpsonline.org/home.aspx. Accessed August 27, 2011.
  3. Press Ganey survey. Press Ganey website. Available at: http://www.pressganey.com/index.aspx. Accessed February 12, 2013.
  4. Society of Hospital Medicine. Membership Committee Guidelines for Hospitalists Patient Satisfaction Surveys. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Practice_Resources119:166.e7e16.
  5. Makoul G, Krupat E, Chang CH. Measuring patient views of physician communication skills: development and testing of the Communication Assessment Tool. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;67:333342.
  6. Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Bruster S. The Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire: development and validation using data from in‐patient surveys in five countries. Int J Qual Health Care. 2002;14:353358.
  7. The Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire from RAND Health. RAND Health website. Available at: http://www.rand.org/health/surveys_tools/psq.html. Accessed December 30, 2011.
  8. Kahn MW. Etiquette‐based medicine. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:19881989.
  9. Christmas C, Kravet S, Durso C, Wright SM. Defining clinical excellence in academic medicine: a qualitative study of the master clinicians. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83:989994.
  10. Wright SM, Christmas C, Burkhart K, Kravet S, Durso C. Creating an academy of clinical excellence at Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center: a 3‐year experience. Acad Med. 2010;85:18331839.
  11. Bendapudi NM, Berry LL, Keith FA, Turner Parish J, Rayburn WL. Patients' perspectives on ideal physician behaviors. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81(3):338344.
  12. The Miller‐Coulson Academy of Clinical Excellence at Johns Hopkins. Available at: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/innovative/signature_programs/academy_of_clinical_excellence/. Accessed April 25, 2014.
  13. Osler Center for Clinical Excellence at Johns Hopkins. Available at: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/johns_hopkins_bayview/education_training/continuing_education/osler_center_for_clinical_excellence. Accessed April 25, 2014.
  14. Wong‐Baker FACES Foundation. Available at: http://www.wongbakerfaces.org. Accessed July 8, 2013.
  15. Kane GC, Gotto JL, Mangione S, West S, Hojat M. Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy: preliminary psychometric data. Croat Med J. 2007;48:8186.
  16. Glaser KM, Markham FW, Adler HM, McManus PR, Hojat M. Relationships between scores on the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy, patient perceptions of physician empathy, and humanistic approaches to patient care: a validity study. Med Sci Monit. 2007;13(7):CR291CR294.
  17. Campbell DT, Fiske DW. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait‐multimethod matrix. Psychol Bul. 1959;56(2):81105.
  18. The Joint Commission. Facts about pain management. Available at: http://www.jointcommission.org/pain_management. Accessed April 25, 2014.
  19. Berg K, Majdan JF, Berg D, et al. Medical students' self‐reported empathy and simulated patients' assessments of student empathy: an analysis by gender and ethnicity. Acad Med. 2011;86(8):984988.
  20. Gorsuch RL. Factor Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1983.
  21. Arora VM, Schaninger C, D'Arcy M, et al. Improving inpatients' identification of their doctors: use of FACE cards. Jt Comm J Qual Pateint Saf. 1009;35(12):613619.
  22. Tackett S, Tad‐y D, Rios R et al. Appraising the practice of etiquette‐based medicine in the inpatient setting. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(7):908913.
  23. Hanna MN, Gonzalez‐Fernandez M, Barrett AD, et al. Does patient perception of pain control affect patient satisfaction across surgical units in a tertiary teaching hospital? Am J Med Qual. 2012;27:411416.
  24. Crow R, Gage H, Hampson S, et al. The measurement of satisfaction with health care: implications for practice from a systematic review of the literature. Health Technol Assess. 2002;6(32):1244.
  25. Centers for Medicare 7(2):131136.
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(9)
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(9)
Page Number
553-558
Page Number
553-558
Article Type
Display Headline
Development and validation of the tool to assess inpatient satisfaction with care from hospitalists
Display Headline
Development and validation of the tool to assess inpatient satisfaction with care from hospitalists
Sections
Article Source

© 2014 Society of Hospital Medicine

Disallow All Ads
Correspondence Location
Address for correspondence and reprint requests: Haruka Torok, MD, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, 5200 Eastern Ave., MFL Bldg, West Tower 6th Floor CIMS Suite, Baltimore, MD 21224; Telephone: 410‐550‐5018; Fax: 410‐550‐2972; E‐mail: [email protected]
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media
Media Files

Guideline updates for non-Hodgkin lymphomas

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/04/2019 - 11:09
Display Headline
Guideline updates for non-Hodgkin lymphomas

At the 2014 National Comprehensive Cancer Network annual conference in Hollywood, Florida, Dr Andrew D Zelenetz, chair of the NCCN Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas Guidelines panel, presented guideline updates for non-Hodgkin lymphomas.

 

Click on the PDF icon at the top of this introduction to read the full article.

 

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

 

 

Issue
The Journal of Community and Supportive Oncology - 12(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
193-194
Legacy Keywords
non-Hodgkin lymphoma, MYC, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, DLBCL, T-cell large granular lymphocytic leukemia, TLGLL
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

 

 

Author and Disclosure Information

 

 

Article PDF
Article PDF

At the 2014 National Comprehensive Cancer Network annual conference in Hollywood, Florida, Dr Andrew D Zelenetz, chair of the NCCN Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas Guidelines panel, presented guideline updates for non-Hodgkin lymphomas.

 

Click on the PDF icon at the top of this introduction to read the full article.

 

At the 2014 National Comprehensive Cancer Network annual conference in Hollywood, Florida, Dr Andrew D Zelenetz, chair of the NCCN Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas Guidelines panel, presented guideline updates for non-Hodgkin lymphomas.

 

Click on the PDF icon at the top of this introduction to read the full article.

 

Issue
The Journal of Community and Supportive Oncology - 12(5)
Issue
The Journal of Community and Supportive Oncology - 12(5)
Page Number
193-194
Page Number
193-194
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Guideline updates for non-Hodgkin lymphomas
Display Headline
Guideline updates for non-Hodgkin lymphomas
Legacy Keywords
non-Hodgkin lymphoma, MYC, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, DLBCL, T-cell large granular lymphocytic leukemia, TLGLL
Legacy Keywords
non-Hodgkin lymphoma, MYC, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, DLBCL, T-cell large granular lymphocytic leukemia, TLGLL
Sections
Citation Override
JCSO 2014;12:193-194
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

The importance of hematologic, cytogenetic, and molecular testing and mutational analysis in chronic myeloid leukemia

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/04/2019 - 11:09
Display Headline
The importance of hematologic, cytogenetic, and molecular testing and mutational analysis in chronic myeloid leukemia

The introduction of BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) has made it possible for this cancer to be controlled in many patients for long periods with chronic medication and regular monitoring of disease status. Hematologic and cytogenetic testing, molecular monitoring, and BCR-ABL1 mutational analysis have become integral to the routine management of CML. The information that each type of test provides is essential to confirm a diagnosis, determine the disease stage, assess response to treatment, and monitor for signals of disease progression – all of which can be used to identify patients who might require further evaluation, closer follow-up, and additional intervention, and to guide clinical decisions.


Click on the PDF icon at the top of this introduction to read the full article.
 

Article PDF
Issue
The Journal of Community and Supportive Oncology - 12(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
179-187
Legacy Keywords
chronic myeloid leukemia, CML, BCR-ABL1, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, TKI
Sections
Article PDF
Article PDF

The introduction of BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) has made it possible for this cancer to be controlled in many patients for long periods with chronic medication and regular monitoring of disease status. Hematologic and cytogenetic testing, molecular monitoring, and BCR-ABL1 mutational analysis have become integral to the routine management of CML. The information that each type of test provides is essential to confirm a diagnosis, determine the disease stage, assess response to treatment, and monitor for signals of disease progression – all of which can be used to identify patients who might require further evaluation, closer follow-up, and additional intervention, and to guide clinical decisions.


Click on the PDF icon at the top of this introduction to read the full article.
 

The introduction of BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) has made it possible for this cancer to be controlled in many patients for long periods with chronic medication and regular monitoring of disease status. Hematologic and cytogenetic testing, molecular monitoring, and BCR-ABL1 mutational analysis have become integral to the routine management of CML. The information that each type of test provides is essential to confirm a diagnosis, determine the disease stage, assess response to treatment, and monitor for signals of disease progression – all of which can be used to identify patients who might require further evaluation, closer follow-up, and additional intervention, and to guide clinical decisions.


Click on the PDF icon at the top of this introduction to read the full article.
 

Issue
The Journal of Community and Supportive Oncology - 12(5)
Issue
The Journal of Community and Supportive Oncology - 12(5)
Page Number
179-187
Page Number
179-187
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
The importance of hematologic, cytogenetic, and molecular testing and mutational analysis in chronic myeloid leukemia
Display Headline
The importance of hematologic, cytogenetic, and molecular testing and mutational analysis in chronic myeloid leukemia
Legacy Keywords
chronic myeloid leukemia, CML, BCR-ABL1, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, TKI
Legacy Keywords
chronic myeloid leukemia, CML, BCR-ABL1, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, TKI
Sections
Citation Override
JCSO 2014;12(5):179-187
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

Molecular monitoring and minimal residual disease in the management of chronic myelogenous leukemia

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/04/2019 - 09:38
Display Headline
Molecular monitoring and minimal residual disease in the management of chronic myelogenous leukemia

The introduction of BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in 2001 for treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) marked a paradigm shift in management of the disease. With that advance, CML has been largely managed as a chronic condition, with daily medication and frequent monitoring. Optimizing monitoring methods and identifying factors associated with response and long-term outcomes has thus been a major clinical research focus. Given the improved understanding of surveillance techniques in CML and the advent of several recently approved second- and third-generation TKIs, there have been recent updates to clinical practice guidelines.

 

Click on the PDF icon at the top of this introduction to read the full article.
 

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Michael R Savona, MD, FACP

Issue
The Journal of Community and Supportive Oncology - 12(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
171-178
Legacy Keywords
chronic myelogenous leukemia, CML, minimal residual disease, MRD, BCR-ABL1, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, TKI,
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Michael R Savona, MD, FACP

Author and Disclosure Information

Michael R Savona, MD, FACP

Article PDF
Article PDF

The introduction of BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in 2001 for treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) marked a paradigm shift in management of the disease. With that advance, CML has been largely managed as a chronic condition, with daily medication and frequent monitoring. Optimizing monitoring methods and identifying factors associated with response and long-term outcomes has thus been a major clinical research focus. Given the improved understanding of surveillance techniques in CML and the advent of several recently approved second- and third-generation TKIs, there have been recent updates to clinical practice guidelines.

 

Click on the PDF icon at the top of this introduction to read the full article.
 

The introduction of BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in 2001 for treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) marked a paradigm shift in management of the disease. With that advance, CML has been largely managed as a chronic condition, with daily medication and frequent monitoring. Optimizing monitoring methods and identifying factors associated with response and long-term outcomes has thus been a major clinical research focus. Given the improved understanding of surveillance techniques in CML and the advent of several recently approved second- and third-generation TKIs, there have been recent updates to clinical practice guidelines.

 

Click on the PDF icon at the top of this introduction to read the full article.
 

Issue
The Journal of Community and Supportive Oncology - 12(5)
Issue
The Journal of Community and Supportive Oncology - 12(5)
Page Number
171-178
Page Number
171-178
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Molecular monitoring and minimal residual disease in the management of chronic myelogenous leukemia
Display Headline
Molecular monitoring and minimal residual disease in the management of chronic myelogenous leukemia
Legacy Keywords
chronic myelogenous leukemia, CML, minimal residual disease, MRD, BCR-ABL1, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, TKI,
Legacy Keywords
chronic myelogenous leukemia, CML, minimal residual disease, MRD, BCR-ABL1, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, TKI,
Sections
Citation Override
JCSO 2014;12(5):171-178
Disallow All Ads
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

Distinguishing the killers among us

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 04/16/2018 - 13:31
Display Headline
Distinguishing the killers among us

When I was in high school, one of my friends told me he intended to kill another one of my friends. It was a different day and age back then, and with more than 4,000 students, my high school was rather large and impersonal – it was easy to get lost in the crowd.

"Juan" (not his real name) confided in me that he wanted to kill "Joe" (also not his real name), which I found a bit odd. Joe was well liked but not did really stand out. Juan was perhaps quieter and more studious, but he also did not stand out. Both boys had friends, did well in school, and were not obviously troubled. When I asked Juan why he wanted to kill Joe, he responded, "Because he’s the all-American boy."

I worried about this. I told my mother, and I told a teacher I trusted. No one knew what to do, and Juan’s plan did not sound feasible. He was going to bring a knife to school in a folder, and when Joe was walking in a crowded hallway, Juan would walk behind him and thrust out the folder to sent the knife flying. The physics of this just didn’t make sense to me, and I didn’t see how the knife would gain enough momentum to travel very far, much less penetrate a person through their clothes. Feasible, or not, however, the equation changed on a day that Juan and I were sitting together in the back row of Latin class. Juan opened his calculus book and showed me the butcher knife.

I excused myself from class, went to a pay phone, and called my mother. She called the school, the principal called the police, and Juan was quietly removed from school when the period ended. It would be hard to imagine that a teenager who plotted the murder of another student, by illogical means for an illogical reason, wasn’t emotionally disturbed. I don’t know what happens to someone like Juan in 2014 – I’m thinking nothing good – but let me tell you what happened to Juan in the late 1970s.

Juan was out of high school for 6 weeks. I heard he had psychological testing, but aside from that, I have no idea what transpired. One of his friends told me it was a joke. He returned to high school, never said another word to me, graduated, and attended an Ivy League university – one of several prestigious schools to which he gained admission. A Google search reveals that Juan later earned a graduate degree and works as an executive making a six-figure salary. (Isn’t Google great?) He’s an adjunct professor at a college where he gets glowing reviews on RateMyProfessors.com. He was elected to serve on a local government committee. He’s married and has children. Compliments of Facebook, I know that he continues to have contact with high school friends.

From what I can tell, Juan’s brief period of being a disturbed adolescent did not progress to a life defined by chronic mental illness, and he did not go on to become a violent felon. I have no idea if I did Juan a favor, prevented a murder, got him much-needed treatment, or simply added an embarrassing diversion to his life. I don’t know if he ever really would have harmed Joe, or if it was in fact a joke designed to yank my chain.

Apparently, my threshold is on the low side, and not long ago I called a friend late one night and insisted she check on her teenager when a Facebook post struck me as alarming and a bit too final. The response I got was, "They were lyrics from a song and you’re overreacting." So be it. I called the mother and not the National Guard, and if the teen had become a statistic, I would have regretted not reacting.

I did wonder, while writing this article, how it would be received if I were to contact Juan and ask his thoughts on those events decades ago. Somehow, it seemed best not to uncover old wounds.

The media talk about the dangerously mentally ill as though they are a separate breed of humans, ones who can be easily distinguished by simply assessing who stands on which side of a well-marked "us-versus-them" line. Human beings, especially young human beings, may go through phases, and they may struggle with controlling their emotions, behaviors, and impulses and with finding their identity at a time in life when fitting in has undue importance. Some of them, no doubt, have these crises in the throes of an acute episode of mental distress – illness, if you’d prefer – and others do so at the genesis of what will prove to be a chronic and persistent psychiatric disorder. It may not be clear at any given moment who is going through a phase, who is suffering from an acute episode of mental illness, and who is beginning their course of a severe and persistent disorder.

 

 

Still, there are those who want to neatly categorize those with "serious" mental illness so that we can focus more of our resources on their needs and not on those who they deem to be the "worried well." Juan, it appears, did not fall into that category of chronically or persistently mentally ill. Similarly, all of us know chaotic, misbehaving, and even suicidal teenagers who go on to live productive lives. Does that designation matter if those not-so-seriously (or not-so-obviously) mentally ill individuals kill someone or die during their brief moments of emotional turbulence?

It seems to me that the goal is to keep people safe and help usher them through difficult periods in their lives, regardless of any diagnostic certainty or severity. I would contend that the mentally healthy among us also are subject to impulsive, distressed, and dangerous moments and that the world does not always neatly divide people into proper categorical entities.

Dr. Miller is a coauthor of "Shrink Rap: Three Psychiatrists Explain Their Work" (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011).

Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

When I was in high school, one of my friends told me he intended to kill another one of my friends. It was a different day and age back then, and with more than 4,000 students, my high school was rather large and impersonal – it was easy to get lost in the crowd.

"Juan" (not his real name) confided in me that he wanted to kill "Joe" (also not his real name), which I found a bit odd. Joe was well liked but not did really stand out. Juan was perhaps quieter and more studious, but he also did not stand out. Both boys had friends, did well in school, and were not obviously troubled. When I asked Juan why he wanted to kill Joe, he responded, "Because he’s the all-American boy."

I worried about this. I told my mother, and I told a teacher I trusted. No one knew what to do, and Juan’s plan did not sound feasible. He was going to bring a knife to school in a folder, and when Joe was walking in a crowded hallway, Juan would walk behind him and thrust out the folder to sent the knife flying. The physics of this just didn’t make sense to me, and I didn’t see how the knife would gain enough momentum to travel very far, much less penetrate a person through their clothes. Feasible, or not, however, the equation changed on a day that Juan and I were sitting together in the back row of Latin class. Juan opened his calculus book and showed me the butcher knife.

I excused myself from class, went to a pay phone, and called my mother. She called the school, the principal called the police, and Juan was quietly removed from school when the period ended. It would be hard to imagine that a teenager who plotted the murder of another student, by illogical means for an illogical reason, wasn’t emotionally disturbed. I don’t know what happens to someone like Juan in 2014 – I’m thinking nothing good – but let me tell you what happened to Juan in the late 1970s.

Juan was out of high school for 6 weeks. I heard he had psychological testing, but aside from that, I have no idea what transpired. One of his friends told me it was a joke. He returned to high school, never said another word to me, graduated, and attended an Ivy League university – one of several prestigious schools to which he gained admission. A Google search reveals that Juan later earned a graduate degree and works as an executive making a six-figure salary. (Isn’t Google great?) He’s an adjunct professor at a college where he gets glowing reviews on RateMyProfessors.com. He was elected to serve on a local government committee. He’s married and has children. Compliments of Facebook, I know that he continues to have contact with high school friends.

From what I can tell, Juan’s brief period of being a disturbed adolescent did not progress to a life defined by chronic mental illness, and he did not go on to become a violent felon. I have no idea if I did Juan a favor, prevented a murder, got him much-needed treatment, or simply added an embarrassing diversion to his life. I don’t know if he ever really would have harmed Joe, or if it was in fact a joke designed to yank my chain.

Apparently, my threshold is on the low side, and not long ago I called a friend late one night and insisted she check on her teenager when a Facebook post struck me as alarming and a bit too final. The response I got was, "They were lyrics from a song and you’re overreacting." So be it. I called the mother and not the National Guard, and if the teen had become a statistic, I would have regretted not reacting.

I did wonder, while writing this article, how it would be received if I were to contact Juan and ask his thoughts on those events decades ago. Somehow, it seemed best not to uncover old wounds.

The media talk about the dangerously mentally ill as though they are a separate breed of humans, ones who can be easily distinguished by simply assessing who stands on which side of a well-marked "us-versus-them" line. Human beings, especially young human beings, may go through phases, and they may struggle with controlling their emotions, behaviors, and impulses and with finding their identity at a time in life when fitting in has undue importance. Some of them, no doubt, have these crises in the throes of an acute episode of mental distress – illness, if you’d prefer – and others do so at the genesis of what will prove to be a chronic and persistent psychiatric disorder. It may not be clear at any given moment who is going through a phase, who is suffering from an acute episode of mental illness, and who is beginning their course of a severe and persistent disorder.

 

 

Still, there are those who want to neatly categorize those with "serious" mental illness so that we can focus more of our resources on their needs and not on those who they deem to be the "worried well." Juan, it appears, did not fall into that category of chronically or persistently mentally ill. Similarly, all of us know chaotic, misbehaving, and even suicidal teenagers who go on to live productive lives. Does that designation matter if those not-so-seriously (or not-so-obviously) mentally ill individuals kill someone or die during their brief moments of emotional turbulence?

It seems to me that the goal is to keep people safe and help usher them through difficult periods in their lives, regardless of any diagnostic certainty or severity. I would contend that the mentally healthy among us also are subject to impulsive, distressed, and dangerous moments and that the world does not always neatly divide people into proper categorical entities.

Dr. Miller is a coauthor of "Shrink Rap: Three Psychiatrists Explain Their Work" (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011).

When I was in high school, one of my friends told me he intended to kill another one of my friends. It was a different day and age back then, and with more than 4,000 students, my high school was rather large and impersonal – it was easy to get lost in the crowd.

"Juan" (not his real name) confided in me that he wanted to kill "Joe" (also not his real name), which I found a bit odd. Joe was well liked but not did really stand out. Juan was perhaps quieter and more studious, but he also did not stand out. Both boys had friends, did well in school, and were not obviously troubled. When I asked Juan why he wanted to kill Joe, he responded, "Because he’s the all-American boy."

I worried about this. I told my mother, and I told a teacher I trusted. No one knew what to do, and Juan’s plan did not sound feasible. He was going to bring a knife to school in a folder, and when Joe was walking in a crowded hallway, Juan would walk behind him and thrust out the folder to sent the knife flying. The physics of this just didn’t make sense to me, and I didn’t see how the knife would gain enough momentum to travel very far, much less penetrate a person through their clothes. Feasible, or not, however, the equation changed on a day that Juan and I were sitting together in the back row of Latin class. Juan opened his calculus book and showed me the butcher knife.

I excused myself from class, went to a pay phone, and called my mother. She called the school, the principal called the police, and Juan was quietly removed from school when the period ended. It would be hard to imagine that a teenager who plotted the murder of another student, by illogical means for an illogical reason, wasn’t emotionally disturbed. I don’t know what happens to someone like Juan in 2014 – I’m thinking nothing good – but let me tell you what happened to Juan in the late 1970s.

Juan was out of high school for 6 weeks. I heard he had psychological testing, but aside from that, I have no idea what transpired. One of his friends told me it was a joke. He returned to high school, never said another word to me, graduated, and attended an Ivy League university – one of several prestigious schools to which he gained admission. A Google search reveals that Juan later earned a graduate degree and works as an executive making a six-figure salary. (Isn’t Google great?) He’s an adjunct professor at a college where he gets glowing reviews on RateMyProfessors.com. He was elected to serve on a local government committee. He’s married and has children. Compliments of Facebook, I know that he continues to have contact with high school friends.

From what I can tell, Juan’s brief period of being a disturbed adolescent did not progress to a life defined by chronic mental illness, and he did not go on to become a violent felon. I have no idea if I did Juan a favor, prevented a murder, got him much-needed treatment, or simply added an embarrassing diversion to his life. I don’t know if he ever really would have harmed Joe, or if it was in fact a joke designed to yank my chain.

Apparently, my threshold is on the low side, and not long ago I called a friend late one night and insisted she check on her teenager when a Facebook post struck me as alarming and a bit too final. The response I got was, "They were lyrics from a song and you’re overreacting." So be it. I called the mother and not the National Guard, and if the teen had become a statistic, I would have regretted not reacting.

I did wonder, while writing this article, how it would be received if I were to contact Juan and ask his thoughts on those events decades ago. Somehow, it seemed best not to uncover old wounds.

The media talk about the dangerously mentally ill as though they are a separate breed of humans, ones who can be easily distinguished by simply assessing who stands on which side of a well-marked "us-versus-them" line. Human beings, especially young human beings, may go through phases, and they may struggle with controlling their emotions, behaviors, and impulses and with finding their identity at a time in life when fitting in has undue importance. Some of them, no doubt, have these crises in the throes of an acute episode of mental distress – illness, if you’d prefer – and others do so at the genesis of what will prove to be a chronic and persistent psychiatric disorder. It may not be clear at any given moment who is going through a phase, who is suffering from an acute episode of mental illness, and who is beginning their course of a severe and persistent disorder.

 

 

Still, there are those who want to neatly categorize those with "serious" mental illness so that we can focus more of our resources on their needs and not on those who they deem to be the "worried well." Juan, it appears, did not fall into that category of chronically or persistently mentally ill. Similarly, all of us know chaotic, misbehaving, and even suicidal teenagers who go on to live productive lives. Does that designation matter if those not-so-seriously (or not-so-obviously) mentally ill individuals kill someone or die during their brief moments of emotional turbulence?

It seems to me that the goal is to keep people safe and help usher them through difficult periods in their lives, regardless of any diagnostic certainty or severity. I would contend that the mentally healthy among us also are subject to impulsive, distressed, and dangerous moments and that the world does not always neatly divide people into proper categorical entities.

Dr. Miller is a coauthor of "Shrink Rap: Three Psychiatrists Explain Their Work" (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011).

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Distinguishing the killers among us
Display Headline
Distinguishing the killers among us
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

New and Noteworthy Information—June 2014

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 01/07/2019 - 09:50
Display Headline
New and Noteworthy Information—June 2014

Older patients with migraine may be more likely to have silent brain injury than older patients without migraine, according to research published online ahead of print May 15 in Stroke. Researchers analyzed data from the Northern Manhattan Study, which quantified subclinical brain infarctions and white matter hyperintensity volumes among participants with migraine. Of the 546 participants analyzed, 41% were men, 65% were Hispanic, and mean age at MRI was 71. Patients with migraine had double the odds of subclinical brain infarction, compared with those reporting no migraine, after the investigators adjusted for sociodemographics and vascular risk factors. No association was observed between migraine with or without aura and white matter hyperintensity volume. Patients with migraine should not worry, because their risk of ischemic stroke is small, said the authors.

People who are exposed to paint, glue, or degreaser fumes at work may experience memory and thinking problems in retirement, according to a study published May 13 in Neurology. Researchers examined data for 2,143 retired utility workers who underwent cognitive testing in 2010. The authors assessed workers’ lifetime exposure to chlorinated solvents, petroleum solvents, and benzene using a job exposure matrix. Approximately 33% of participants were exposed to chlorinated solvents, 26% to benzene, and 25% to petroleum solvents. Workers highly exposed to chlorinated solvents were at risk of impairment on the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test, semantic fluency test, and the Trail Making Test B. Retirees at greatest risk for deficits had high lifetime exposure to solvents and were last exposed 12 to 30 years before testing.

Females susceptible to multiple sclerosis (MS) produce higher levels of the blood vessel receptor protein S1PR2 than males, according to data published online ahead of print May 8 in the Journal of Clinical Investigation. S1PR2 is present at high levels in the brain areas that MS typically damages. Investigators studied a mouse model of MS and found increased activity of S1PR2, which opens up the blood–brain barrier. When the researchers tested brain tissue samples obtained from 20 human patients after death, they found more S1PR2 in patients with MS than in those without the disorder. Brain tissue from females also had higher levels of S1PR2, compared with male brain tissue. These findings may help explain why more women than men get the disease, said the authors.

The FDA has required the manufacturer of the sleep drug Lunesta (eszopiclone) to lower the recommended starting dose from 2 mg to 1 mg for men and women. Data show that eszopiclone levels in some patients may be high enough on the morning after treatment to impair activities that require alertness, including driving. The 1-mg dose, taken at bedtime, can be increased to 2 mg or 3 mg if needed, but the higher doses are more likely to result in next-day impairment. Using lower doses ensures that less drug will remain in the body during the morning hours. Patients currently taking the 2-mg and 3-mg doses of Lunesta should contact their health care professional to ask for instructions, according to the FDA.

The rate of visits to an emergency department (ED) for traumatic brain injury (TBI) increased by approximately 30% between 2006 and 2010, according to research published in the May 14 issue of JAMA. The increase may be attributable to various factors, including increased awareness and diagnoses, said the authors. The investigators examined data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample database to determine national trends in ED visits for TBI from 2006 through 2010. An estimated 2.5 million ED visits for TBI occurred in 2010, representing a 29% increase in the rate of visits for TBI during the study period. By comparison, total ED visits increased by 3.6%. Children younger than 3 and adults older than 60 had the largest increase in TBI rates.

The pathophysiologic biomarkers and the topographic markers of Alzheimer’s disease should be revised, according to a position paper by the International Working Group published in the June issue of Lancet Neurology. The group proposed that biomarkers of Alzheimer’s pathology be restricted to those indicating the presence of tau pathology (ie, CSF or PET tau) and amyloid pathology (ie, CSF or PET amyloid). These biomarkers are specific enough to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease at any point on the disease continuum, said the authors. Downstream topographic markers of brain regional structural and metabolic changes have insufficient pathologic specificity and should not be used in diagnosis, according to the researchers. Instead, these markers can be used to measure disease progression. The group also provided diagnostic criteria for atypical, mixed, and preclinical Alzheimer’s disease.

 

 

Prenatal supplementation with docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) does not result in improved cognitive, problem-solving, or language abilities for children at age 4, according to the results of a trial published in the May 7 issue of JAMA. Investigators conducted longer-term follow-up from a previous study in which pregnant women received 800 mg/day of DHA or placebo. In the initial study, the researchers found that average cognitive, language, and motor scores did not differ between children at 18 months of age. Approximately 92% of eligible families participated in the follow-up study. The DHA group included 313 participants, and the control group included 333 participants. The investigators found that measures of cognition, the ability to perform complex mental processing, language, and executive functioning (eg, memory, reasoning, and problem solving) did not differ significantly between groups at age 4.

The FDA has informed Acorda Therapeutics that it has completed its review of the company’s new drug application for Plumiaz (diazepam) nasal spray and that the application cannot be approved in its present form. The drug was developed for the treatment of people with epilepsy who experience cluster seizures. Acorda Therapeutics is developing a response to address the items outlined in the letter. Based on the requirements for approval outlined in the letter, the company does not expect Plumiaz to receive FDA approval in 2014. Plumiaz previously received orphan drug designation for the treatment of cluster seizures. [For related news, see page 9.]

Older people with memory and thinking problems who do not have dementia may have a lower risk of dying from cancer than people who have no memory and thinking problems, according to a study published April 22 in Neurology. Researchers studied 2,627 people age 65 and older who did not have dementia at baseline. Participants underwent tests of memory and thinking skills at baseline and at three years. Follow-up lasted for an average of approximately 13 years. During the study, 1,003 participants died. About 34% of deaths occurred among patients with the fastest decline in thinking skills. Approximately 21% of participants in the group with the fastest decline in thinking skills died of cancer, compared with 29% of participants in the other two groups.

A new technique may predict with 95% accuracy which patients with stroke will benefit from IV t-PA and which will have potentially lethal bleeding in the brain, according to a study published online ahead of print May 15 in Stroke. Researchers used a computer program that shows physicians the amount of gadolinium, injected during an MRI scan, that has leaked into the brain tissue from surrounding blood vessels. By quantifying this damage in 75 patients with stroke, the researchers identified a threshold for determining how much leakage was dangerous. They applied this threshold to the records for the 75 patients to determine how well it would predict who had had a brain hemorrhage and who had not. The new test correctly predicted the outcome with 95% accuracy.

Freezing of gait in patients with Parkinson’s disease may correlate with poor quality of life, disease severity, apathy, and exposure to antimuscarinics, according to a study published online ahead of print May 19 in JAMA Neurology. Investigators performed a cross-sectional survey of 672 patients with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease. Patients with freezing of gait were identified as those with a score of 1 or greater on item 14 of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) in the on condition. Approximately 38% of patients reported freezing of gait during the on state, which was significantly related to lower quality of life scores. Freezing of gait was also correlated with longer disease duration, higher UPDRS parts II and III scores, apathy, and a higher levodopa equivalent daily dose.

Among college football players, concussion and years of football played may have a significant inverse relationship with hippocampal volume, according to research published May 14 in JAMA. Years of football experience also may correlate with slower reaction time. Investigators conducted a cross-sectional study of 25 college football players with a history of clinician-diagnosed concussion, 25 college football players without a history of concussion, and 25 nonfootball-playing, age-, sex-, and education-matched healthy controls. Players with and without a history of concussion had smaller hippocampal volumes, compared with healthy controls. Players with a history of concussion had smaller hippocampal volumes than players without concussion. In both athlete groups, investigators found a statistically significant inverse relationship between left hippocampal volume and number of years of football played.

Deficiencies in hyaluronan can lead to spontaneous epileptic seizures, according to research published April 30 in the Journal of Neuroscience. In a multicenter study, investigators examined the role of hyaluronan using mutant mice deficient in each of the three hyaluronan synthase genes (ie, Has1, Has2, Has3). The mutant mice were prone to epileptic seizures. In Has3(-/-) mice, this phenotype likely results from a reduction in the size of the brain extracellular space (ECS), said the researchers. Among the three Has knockout models, seizures were most prevalent in Has3(-/-) mice, which also had the greatest hyaluronan reduction in the hippocampus. The results provide the first direct evidence for the physiologic role of hyaluronan in the regulation of ECS volume, according to the investigators.

 

 

Erik Greb

Author and Disclosure Information

Issue
Neurology Reviews - 22(6)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
3-7
Legacy Keywords
neurology reviews, erik greb, silent brain injury, lunesta, biomarkers, DHA
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Older patients with migraine may be more likely to have silent brain injury than older patients without migraine, according to research published online ahead of print May 15 in Stroke. Researchers analyzed data from the Northern Manhattan Study, which quantified subclinical brain infarctions and white matter hyperintensity volumes among participants with migraine. Of the 546 participants analyzed, 41% were men, 65% were Hispanic, and mean age at MRI was 71. Patients with migraine had double the odds of subclinical brain infarction, compared with those reporting no migraine, after the investigators adjusted for sociodemographics and vascular risk factors. No association was observed between migraine with or without aura and white matter hyperintensity volume. Patients with migraine should not worry, because their risk of ischemic stroke is small, said the authors.

People who are exposed to paint, glue, or degreaser fumes at work may experience memory and thinking problems in retirement, according to a study published May 13 in Neurology. Researchers examined data for 2,143 retired utility workers who underwent cognitive testing in 2010. The authors assessed workers’ lifetime exposure to chlorinated solvents, petroleum solvents, and benzene using a job exposure matrix. Approximately 33% of participants were exposed to chlorinated solvents, 26% to benzene, and 25% to petroleum solvents. Workers highly exposed to chlorinated solvents were at risk of impairment on the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test, semantic fluency test, and the Trail Making Test B. Retirees at greatest risk for deficits had high lifetime exposure to solvents and were last exposed 12 to 30 years before testing.

Females susceptible to multiple sclerosis (MS) produce higher levels of the blood vessel receptor protein S1PR2 than males, according to data published online ahead of print May 8 in the Journal of Clinical Investigation. S1PR2 is present at high levels in the brain areas that MS typically damages. Investigators studied a mouse model of MS and found increased activity of S1PR2, which opens up the blood–brain barrier. When the researchers tested brain tissue samples obtained from 20 human patients after death, they found more S1PR2 in patients with MS than in those without the disorder. Brain tissue from females also had higher levels of S1PR2, compared with male brain tissue. These findings may help explain why more women than men get the disease, said the authors.

The FDA has required the manufacturer of the sleep drug Lunesta (eszopiclone) to lower the recommended starting dose from 2 mg to 1 mg for men and women. Data show that eszopiclone levels in some patients may be high enough on the morning after treatment to impair activities that require alertness, including driving. The 1-mg dose, taken at bedtime, can be increased to 2 mg or 3 mg if needed, but the higher doses are more likely to result in next-day impairment. Using lower doses ensures that less drug will remain in the body during the morning hours. Patients currently taking the 2-mg and 3-mg doses of Lunesta should contact their health care professional to ask for instructions, according to the FDA.

The rate of visits to an emergency department (ED) for traumatic brain injury (TBI) increased by approximately 30% between 2006 and 2010, according to research published in the May 14 issue of JAMA. The increase may be attributable to various factors, including increased awareness and diagnoses, said the authors. The investigators examined data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample database to determine national trends in ED visits for TBI from 2006 through 2010. An estimated 2.5 million ED visits for TBI occurred in 2010, representing a 29% increase in the rate of visits for TBI during the study period. By comparison, total ED visits increased by 3.6%. Children younger than 3 and adults older than 60 had the largest increase in TBI rates.

The pathophysiologic biomarkers and the topographic markers of Alzheimer’s disease should be revised, according to a position paper by the International Working Group published in the June issue of Lancet Neurology. The group proposed that biomarkers of Alzheimer’s pathology be restricted to those indicating the presence of tau pathology (ie, CSF or PET tau) and amyloid pathology (ie, CSF or PET amyloid). These biomarkers are specific enough to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease at any point on the disease continuum, said the authors. Downstream topographic markers of brain regional structural and metabolic changes have insufficient pathologic specificity and should not be used in diagnosis, according to the researchers. Instead, these markers can be used to measure disease progression. The group also provided diagnostic criteria for atypical, mixed, and preclinical Alzheimer’s disease.

 

 

Prenatal supplementation with docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) does not result in improved cognitive, problem-solving, or language abilities for children at age 4, according to the results of a trial published in the May 7 issue of JAMA. Investigators conducted longer-term follow-up from a previous study in which pregnant women received 800 mg/day of DHA or placebo. In the initial study, the researchers found that average cognitive, language, and motor scores did not differ between children at 18 months of age. Approximately 92% of eligible families participated in the follow-up study. The DHA group included 313 participants, and the control group included 333 participants. The investigators found that measures of cognition, the ability to perform complex mental processing, language, and executive functioning (eg, memory, reasoning, and problem solving) did not differ significantly between groups at age 4.

The FDA has informed Acorda Therapeutics that it has completed its review of the company’s new drug application for Plumiaz (diazepam) nasal spray and that the application cannot be approved in its present form. The drug was developed for the treatment of people with epilepsy who experience cluster seizures. Acorda Therapeutics is developing a response to address the items outlined in the letter. Based on the requirements for approval outlined in the letter, the company does not expect Plumiaz to receive FDA approval in 2014. Plumiaz previously received orphan drug designation for the treatment of cluster seizures. [For related news, see page 9.]

Older people with memory and thinking problems who do not have dementia may have a lower risk of dying from cancer than people who have no memory and thinking problems, according to a study published April 22 in Neurology. Researchers studied 2,627 people age 65 and older who did not have dementia at baseline. Participants underwent tests of memory and thinking skills at baseline and at three years. Follow-up lasted for an average of approximately 13 years. During the study, 1,003 participants died. About 34% of deaths occurred among patients with the fastest decline in thinking skills. Approximately 21% of participants in the group with the fastest decline in thinking skills died of cancer, compared with 29% of participants in the other two groups.

A new technique may predict with 95% accuracy which patients with stroke will benefit from IV t-PA and which will have potentially lethal bleeding in the brain, according to a study published online ahead of print May 15 in Stroke. Researchers used a computer program that shows physicians the amount of gadolinium, injected during an MRI scan, that has leaked into the brain tissue from surrounding blood vessels. By quantifying this damage in 75 patients with stroke, the researchers identified a threshold for determining how much leakage was dangerous. They applied this threshold to the records for the 75 patients to determine how well it would predict who had had a brain hemorrhage and who had not. The new test correctly predicted the outcome with 95% accuracy.

Freezing of gait in patients with Parkinson’s disease may correlate with poor quality of life, disease severity, apathy, and exposure to antimuscarinics, according to a study published online ahead of print May 19 in JAMA Neurology. Investigators performed a cross-sectional survey of 672 patients with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease. Patients with freezing of gait were identified as those with a score of 1 or greater on item 14 of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) in the on condition. Approximately 38% of patients reported freezing of gait during the on state, which was significantly related to lower quality of life scores. Freezing of gait was also correlated with longer disease duration, higher UPDRS parts II and III scores, apathy, and a higher levodopa equivalent daily dose.

Among college football players, concussion and years of football played may have a significant inverse relationship with hippocampal volume, according to research published May 14 in JAMA. Years of football experience also may correlate with slower reaction time. Investigators conducted a cross-sectional study of 25 college football players with a history of clinician-diagnosed concussion, 25 college football players without a history of concussion, and 25 nonfootball-playing, age-, sex-, and education-matched healthy controls. Players with and without a history of concussion had smaller hippocampal volumes, compared with healthy controls. Players with a history of concussion had smaller hippocampal volumes than players without concussion. In both athlete groups, investigators found a statistically significant inverse relationship between left hippocampal volume and number of years of football played.

Deficiencies in hyaluronan can lead to spontaneous epileptic seizures, according to research published April 30 in the Journal of Neuroscience. In a multicenter study, investigators examined the role of hyaluronan using mutant mice deficient in each of the three hyaluronan synthase genes (ie, Has1, Has2, Has3). The mutant mice were prone to epileptic seizures. In Has3(-/-) mice, this phenotype likely results from a reduction in the size of the brain extracellular space (ECS), said the researchers. Among the three Has knockout models, seizures were most prevalent in Has3(-/-) mice, which also had the greatest hyaluronan reduction in the hippocampus. The results provide the first direct evidence for the physiologic role of hyaluronan in the regulation of ECS volume, according to the investigators.

 

 

Erik Greb

Older patients with migraine may be more likely to have silent brain injury than older patients without migraine, according to research published online ahead of print May 15 in Stroke. Researchers analyzed data from the Northern Manhattan Study, which quantified subclinical brain infarctions and white matter hyperintensity volumes among participants with migraine. Of the 546 participants analyzed, 41% were men, 65% were Hispanic, and mean age at MRI was 71. Patients with migraine had double the odds of subclinical brain infarction, compared with those reporting no migraine, after the investigators adjusted for sociodemographics and vascular risk factors. No association was observed between migraine with or without aura and white matter hyperintensity volume. Patients with migraine should not worry, because their risk of ischemic stroke is small, said the authors.

People who are exposed to paint, glue, or degreaser fumes at work may experience memory and thinking problems in retirement, according to a study published May 13 in Neurology. Researchers examined data for 2,143 retired utility workers who underwent cognitive testing in 2010. The authors assessed workers’ lifetime exposure to chlorinated solvents, petroleum solvents, and benzene using a job exposure matrix. Approximately 33% of participants were exposed to chlorinated solvents, 26% to benzene, and 25% to petroleum solvents. Workers highly exposed to chlorinated solvents were at risk of impairment on the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test, semantic fluency test, and the Trail Making Test B. Retirees at greatest risk for deficits had high lifetime exposure to solvents and were last exposed 12 to 30 years before testing.

Females susceptible to multiple sclerosis (MS) produce higher levels of the blood vessel receptor protein S1PR2 than males, according to data published online ahead of print May 8 in the Journal of Clinical Investigation. S1PR2 is present at high levels in the brain areas that MS typically damages. Investigators studied a mouse model of MS and found increased activity of S1PR2, which opens up the blood–brain barrier. When the researchers tested brain tissue samples obtained from 20 human patients after death, they found more S1PR2 in patients with MS than in those without the disorder. Brain tissue from females also had higher levels of S1PR2, compared with male brain tissue. These findings may help explain why more women than men get the disease, said the authors.

The FDA has required the manufacturer of the sleep drug Lunesta (eszopiclone) to lower the recommended starting dose from 2 mg to 1 mg for men and women. Data show that eszopiclone levels in some patients may be high enough on the morning after treatment to impair activities that require alertness, including driving. The 1-mg dose, taken at bedtime, can be increased to 2 mg or 3 mg if needed, but the higher doses are more likely to result in next-day impairment. Using lower doses ensures that less drug will remain in the body during the morning hours. Patients currently taking the 2-mg and 3-mg doses of Lunesta should contact their health care professional to ask for instructions, according to the FDA.

The rate of visits to an emergency department (ED) for traumatic brain injury (TBI) increased by approximately 30% between 2006 and 2010, according to research published in the May 14 issue of JAMA. The increase may be attributable to various factors, including increased awareness and diagnoses, said the authors. The investigators examined data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample database to determine national trends in ED visits for TBI from 2006 through 2010. An estimated 2.5 million ED visits for TBI occurred in 2010, representing a 29% increase in the rate of visits for TBI during the study period. By comparison, total ED visits increased by 3.6%. Children younger than 3 and adults older than 60 had the largest increase in TBI rates.

The pathophysiologic biomarkers and the topographic markers of Alzheimer’s disease should be revised, according to a position paper by the International Working Group published in the June issue of Lancet Neurology. The group proposed that biomarkers of Alzheimer’s pathology be restricted to those indicating the presence of tau pathology (ie, CSF or PET tau) and amyloid pathology (ie, CSF or PET amyloid). These biomarkers are specific enough to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease at any point on the disease continuum, said the authors. Downstream topographic markers of brain regional structural and metabolic changes have insufficient pathologic specificity and should not be used in diagnosis, according to the researchers. Instead, these markers can be used to measure disease progression. The group also provided diagnostic criteria for atypical, mixed, and preclinical Alzheimer’s disease.

 

 

Prenatal supplementation with docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) does not result in improved cognitive, problem-solving, or language abilities for children at age 4, according to the results of a trial published in the May 7 issue of JAMA. Investigators conducted longer-term follow-up from a previous study in which pregnant women received 800 mg/day of DHA or placebo. In the initial study, the researchers found that average cognitive, language, and motor scores did not differ between children at 18 months of age. Approximately 92% of eligible families participated in the follow-up study. The DHA group included 313 participants, and the control group included 333 participants. The investigators found that measures of cognition, the ability to perform complex mental processing, language, and executive functioning (eg, memory, reasoning, and problem solving) did not differ significantly between groups at age 4.

The FDA has informed Acorda Therapeutics that it has completed its review of the company’s new drug application for Plumiaz (diazepam) nasal spray and that the application cannot be approved in its present form. The drug was developed for the treatment of people with epilepsy who experience cluster seizures. Acorda Therapeutics is developing a response to address the items outlined in the letter. Based on the requirements for approval outlined in the letter, the company does not expect Plumiaz to receive FDA approval in 2014. Plumiaz previously received orphan drug designation for the treatment of cluster seizures. [For related news, see page 9.]

Older people with memory and thinking problems who do not have dementia may have a lower risk of dying from cancer than people who have no memory and thinking problems, according to a study published April 22 in Neurology. Researchers studied 2,627 people age 65 and older who did not have dementia at baseline. Participants underwent tests of memory and thinking skills at baseline and at three years. Follow-up lasted for an average of approximately 13 years. During the study, 1,003 participants died. About 34% of deaths occurred among patients with the fastest decline in thinking skills. Approximately 21% of participants in the group with the fastest decline in thinking skills died of cancer, compared with 29% of participants in the other two groups.

A new technique may predict with 95% accuracy which patients with stroke will benefit from IV t-PA and which will have potentially lethal bleeding in the brain, according to a study published online ahead of print May 15 in Stroke. Researchers used a computer program that shows physicians the amount of gadolinium, injected during an MRI scan, that has leaked into the brain tissue from surrounding blood vessels. By quantifying this damage in 75 patients with stroke, the researchers identified a threshold for determining how much leakage was dangerous. They applied this threshold to the records for the 75 patients to determine how well it would predict who had had a brain hemorrhage and who had not. The new test correctly predicted the outcome with 95% accuracy.

Freezing of gait in patients with Parkinson’s disease may correlate with poor quality of life, disease severity, apathy, and exposure to antimuscarinics, according to a study published online ahead of print May 19 in JAMA Neurology. Investigators performed a cross-sectional survey of 672 patients with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease. Patients with freezing of gait were identified as those with a score of 1 or greater on item 14 of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) in the on condition. Approximately 38% of patients reported freezing of gait during the on state, which was significantly related to lower quality of life scores. Freezing of gait was also correlated with longer disease duration, higher UPDRS parts II and III scores, apathy, and a higher levodopa equivalent daily dose.

Among college football players, concussion and years of football played may have a significant inverse relationship with hippocampal volume, according to research published May 14 in JAMA. Years of football experience also may correlate with slower reaction time. Investigators conducted a cross-sectional study of 25 college football players with a history of clinician-diagnosed concussion, 25 college football players without a history of concussion, and 25 nonfootball-playing, age-, sex-, and education-matched healthy controls. Players with and without a history of concussion had smaller hippocampal volumes, compared with healthy controls. Players with a history of concussion had smaller hippocampal volumes than players without concussion. In both athlete groups, investigators found a statistically significant inverse relationship between left hippocampal volume and number of years of football played.

Deficiencies in hyaluronan can lead to spontaneous epileptic seizures, according to research published April 30 in the Journal of Neuroscience. In a multicenter study, investigators examined the role of hyaluronan using mutant mice deficient in each of the three hyaluronan synthase genes (ie, Has1, Has2, Has3). The mutant mice were prone to epileptic seizures. In Has3(-/-) mice, this phenotype likely results from a reduction in the size of the brain extracellular space (ECS), said the researchers. Among the three Has knockout models, seizures were most prevalent in Has3(-/-) mice, which also had the greatest hyaluronan reduction in the hippocampus. The results provide the first direct evidence for the physiologic role of hyaluronan in the regulation of ECS volume, according to the investigators.

 

 

Erik Greb

Issue
Neurology Reviews - 22(6)
Issue
Neurology Reviews - 22(6)
Page Number
3-7
Page Number
3-7
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
New and Noteworthy Information—June 2014
Display Headline
New and Noteworthy Information—June 2014
Legacy Keywords
neurology reviews, erik greb, silent brain injury, lunesta, biomarkers, DHA
Legacy Keywords
neurology reviews, erik greb, silent brain injury, lunesta, biomarkers, DHA
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Hepatitis B screening recommended for high-risk patients

A ‘long overdue’ update
Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 13:37
Display Headline
Hepatitis B screening recommended for high-risk patients

Physicians should screen all asymptomatic but high-risk adolescents and adults for hepatitis B virus infection, according to an updated recommendation by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force that was published online May 27 in Annals of Internal Medicine.

Since the last USPSTF recommendation on HBV screening in 2004, which focused on the general population and didn’t advocate screening of this subset of patients, research has documented that antiviral treatment improves both intermediate outcomes such as virologic and histologic responses and long-term outcomes such as prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma, cirrhosis, and end-stage liver disease.

Dr. Michael LeFevre

Given this effectiveness, along with the 98% sensitivity and specificity of HBV screening tests, the group has now issued a level B recommendation that high-risk patients be screened, said Dr. Michael L. LeFevre, chair of the USPSTF and professor of family and community medicine at the University of Missouri, Columbia, and his associates.

High-risk patients include the following:

• People born in regions where the prevalence of HBV infection is 2% or greater, such as sub-Saharan Africa, central and southeast Asia, China, the Pacific Islands, and parts of Latin America. People born in these areas account for 47%-95% of the chronic HBV infection in the United States.

• American-born children of parents from these regions, who may not have been vaccinated in infancy.

• HIV-positive persons.

• IV-drug users.

• Household contacts of people with HBV infection.

• Men who have sex with men.

The updated USPSTF recommendations are in line with those of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, the Institute of Medicine, and the American Academy of Family Physicians. The CDC additionally recommends HBV screening for blood, organ, or tissue donors; people with occupational or other exposure to infectious blood or body fluids; and patients receiving hemodialysis, cytotoxic therapy, or immunosuppressive therapy.

The USPSTF still does not recommend HBV screening for the general population. The prevalence of the infection is low in the U.S. general population, and most members of the general population who are infected with HBV do not develop the chronic form of the infection and do not develop complications like hepatocellular carcinoma or cirrhosis. The potential harms of general screening, then, probably exceed the potential benefits, Dr. LeFevre and his associates noted (Ann Intern. Med. 2014 May 27 [doi:10.7326/M14-1018]).

The USPSTF has separate recommendations regarding hepatitis B in pregnant women. These, along with the updated recommendations for high-risk patients, are available at www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.

The USPSTF is a voluntary group funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality but otherwise independent of the federal government. Dr. LeFevre and his associates reported no potential financial conflicts of interest.

Body

These "long overdue" recommendations are "a dramatic and welcome upgrade from the 2004 USPSTF guidelines, which issued a grade D recommendation against screening asymptomatic persons for HBV infection," said Dr. Ruma Rajbhandari and Dr. Raymond T. Chung.

"Many would argue that the USPSTF should have endorsed screening for HBV infection in high-risk populations a decade ago," they wrote. The group lagged far behind the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases’ recommendations in 2001 and the CDC’s recommendations in 2005. "We may have thus missed an opportunity to screen many high-risk persons in the United States," Dr. Rajbhandari and Dr. Chung said.

The USPSTF update "would be more useful if they provided a clearer definition of the high-risk patient. ... We worry that busy generalist clinicians do not have the time to estimate their patients’ risks for HBV infection." Physicians may find it more helpful to look up the CDC’s table listing all the factors that render a patient high risk, they added.

Dr. Rajbhandari and Dr. Chung are with the liver center and gastrointestinal division at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston. They reported no relevant conflicts of interest. These remarks were taken from their editorial accompanying Dr. Lefevre’s report (Ann. Intern. Med. 2014 May 27 [doi:10.7326/M14-1153]).

Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
hepatitis B virus infection, USPSTF, HBV screening, antiviral treatment, virologic, histologic responses, hepatocellular carcinoma, cirrhosis, liver disease,
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Body

These "long overdue" recommendations are "a dramatic and welcome upgrade from the 2004 USPSTF guidelines, which issued a grade D recommendation against screening asymptomatic persons for HBV infection," said Dr. Ruma Rajbhandari and Dr. Raymond T. Chung.

"Many would argue that the USPSTF should have endorsed screening for HBV infection in high-risk populations a decade ago," they wrote. The group lagged far behind the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases’ recommendations in 2001 and the CDC’s recommendations in 2005. "We may have thus missed an opportunity to screen many high-risk persons in the United States," Dr. Rajbhandari and Dr. Chung said.

The USPSTF update "would be more useful if they provided a clearer definition of the high-risk patient. ... We worry that busy generalist clinicians do not have the time to estimate their patients’ risks for HBV infection." Physicians may find it more helpful to look up the CDC’s table listing all the factors that render a patient high risk, they added.

Dr. Rajbhandari and Dr. Chung are with the liver center and gastrointestinal division at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston. They reported no relevant conflicts of interest. These remarks were taken from their editorial accompanying Dr. Lefevre’s report (Ann. Intern. Med. 2014 May 27 [doi:10.7326/M14-1153]).

Body

These "long overdue" recommendations are "a dramatic and welcome upgrade from the 2004 USPSTF guidelines, which issued a grade D recommendation against screening asymptomatic persons for HBV infection," said Dr. Ruma Rajbhandari and Dr. Raymond T. Chung.

"Many would argue that the USPSTF should have endorsed screening for HBV infection in high-risk populations a decade ago," they wrote. The group lagged far behind the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases’ recommendations in 2001 and the CDC’s recommendations in 2005. "We may have thus missed an opportunity to screen many high-risk persons in the United States," Dr. Rajbhandari and Dr. Chung said.

The USPSTF update "would be more useful if they provided a clearer definition of the high-risk patient. ... We worry that busy generalist clinicians do not have the time to estimate their patients’ risks for HBV infection." Physicians may find it more helpful to look up the CDC’s table listing all the factors that render a patient high risk, they added.

Dr. Rajbhandari and Dr. Chung are with the liver center and gastrointestinal division at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston. They reported no relevant conflicts of interest. These remarks were taken from their editorial accompanying Dr. Lefevre’s report (Ann. Intern. Med. 2014 May 27 [doi:10.7326/M14-1153]).

Title
A ‘long overdue’ update
A ‘long overdue’ update

Physicians should screen all asymptomatic but high-risk adolescents and adults for hepatitis B virus infection, according to an updated recommendation by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force that was published online May 27 in Annals of Internal Medicine.

Since the last USPSTF recommendation on HBV screening in 2004, which focused on the general population and didn’t advocate screening of this subset of patients, research has documented that antiviral treatment improves both intermediate outcomes such as virologic and histologic responses and long-term outcomes such as prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma, cirrhosis, and end-stage liver disease.

Dr. Michael LeFevre

Given this effectiveness, along with the 98% sensitivity and specificity of HBV screening tests, the group has now issued a level B recommendation that high-risk patients be screened, said Dr. Michael L. LeFevre, chair of the USPSTF and professor of family and community medicine at the University of Missouri, Columbia, and his associates.

High-risk patients include the following:

• People born in regions where the prevalence of HBV infection is 2% or greater, such as sub-Saharan Africa, central and southeast Asia, China, the Pacific Islands, and parts of Latin America. People born in these areas account for 47%-95% of the chronic HBV infection in the United States.

• American-born children of parents from these regions, who may not have been vaccinated in infancy.

• HIV-positive persons.

• IV-drug users.

• Household contacts of people with HBV infection.

• Men who have sex with men.

The updated USPSTF recommendations are in line with those of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, the Institute of Medicine, and the American Academy of Family Physicians. The CDC additionally recommends HBV screening for blood, organ, or tissue donors; people with occupational or other exposure to infectious blood or body fluids; and patients receiving hemodialysis, cytotoxic therapy, or immunosuppressive therapy.

The USPSTF still does not recommend HBV screening for the general population. The prevalence of the infection is low in the U.S. general population, and most members of the general population who are infected with HBV do not develop the chronic form of the infection and do not develop complications like hepatocellular carcinoma or cirrhosis. The potential harms of general screening, then, probably exceed the potential benefits, Dr. LeFevre and his associates noted (Ann Intern. Med. 2014 May 27 [doi:10.7326/M14-1018]).

The USPSTF has separate recommendations regarding hepatitis B in pregnant women. These, along with the updated recommendations for high-risk patients, are available at www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.

The USPSTF is a voluntary group funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality but otherwise independent of the federal government. Dr. LeFevre and his associates reported no potential financial conflicts of interest.

Physicians should screen all asymptomatic but high-risk adolescents and adults for hepatitis B virus infection, according to an updated recommendation by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force that was published online May 27 in Annals of Internal Medicine.

Since the last USPSTF recommendation on HBV screening in 2004, which focused on the general population and didn’t advocate screening of this subset of patients, research has documented that antiviral treatment improves both intermediate outcomes such as virologic and histologic responses and long-term outcomes such as prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma, cirrhosis, and end-stage liver disease.

Dr. Michael LeFevre

Given this effectiveness, along with the 98% sensitivity and specificity of HBV screening tests, the group has now issued a level B recommendation that high-risk patients be screened, said Dr. Michael L. LeFevre, chair of the USPSTF and professor of family and community medicine at the University of Missouri, Columbia, and his associates.

High-risk patients include the following:

• People born in regions where the prevalence of HBV infection is 2% or greater, such as sub-Saharan Africa, central and southeast Asia, China, the Pacific Islands, and parts of Latin America. People born in these areas account for 47%-95% of the chronic HBV infection in the United States.

• American-born children of parents from these regions, who may not have been vaccinated in infancy.

• HIV-positive persons.

• IV-drug users.

• Household contacts of people with HBV infection.

• Men who have sex with men.

The updated USPSTF recommendations are in line with those of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, the Institute of Medicine, and the American Academy of Family Physicians. The CDC additionally recommends HBV screening for blood, organ, or tissue donors; people with occupational or other exposure to infectious blood or body fluids; and patients receiving hemodialysis, cytotoxic therapy, or immunosuppressive therapy.

The USPSTF still does not recommend HBV screening for the general population. The prevalence of the infection is low in the U.S. general population, and most members of the general population who are infected with HBV do not develop the chronic form of the infection and do not develop complications like hepatocellular carcinoma or cirrhosis. The potential harms of general screening, then, probably exceed the potential benefits, Dr. LeFevre and his associates noted (Ann Intern. Med. 2014 May 27 [doi:10.7326/M14-1018]).

The USPSTF has separate recommendations regarding hepatitis B in pregnant women. These, along with the updated recommendations for high-risk patients, are available at www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.

The USPSTF is a voluntary group funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality but otherwise independent of the federal government. Dr. LeFevre and his associates reported no potential financial conflicts of interest.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Hepatitis B screening recommended for high-risk patients
Display Headline
Hepatitis B screening recommended for high-risk patients
Legacy Keywords
hepatitis B virus infection, USPSTF, HBV screening, antiviral treatment, virologic, histologic responses, hepatocellular carcinoma, cirrhosis, liver disease,
Legacy Keywords
hepatitis B virus infection, USPSTF, HBV screening, antiviral treatment, virologic, histologic responses, hepatocellular carcinoma, cirrhosis, liver disease,
Sections
Article Source

FROM ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Vitals

Key clinical point: HBV screening is appropriate in all at-risk populations.

Major finding: Physicians should screen all adolescents and adults at high risk for HBV infection, including those born in regions where the virus is endemic, American-born children of such parents, household contacts of people with HBV, people with HIV, IV-drug users, and men who have sex with men.

Data source: A comprehensive review of the literature since 2004 regarding the benefits and harms of screening high-risk patients for HBV infection, and a compilation of recommendations for screening high-risk patients.

Disclosures: The USPSTF is a voluntary group funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality but otherwise independent of the federal government. Dr. LeFevre and his associates reported no potential financial conflicts of interest.