User login
Doctors’ happiness has not rebounded as pandemic drags on
Physicians reported similar levels of unhappiness in 2022 too.
Fewer than half of physicians said they were currently somewhat or very happy at work, compared with 75% of physicians who said they were somewhat or very happy at work in a previous survey conducted before the pandemic, the new Medscape Physician Lifestyle & Happiness Report 2023 shows.*
“I am not surprised that we’re less happy now,” said Amaryllis Sánchez, MD, a board-certified family medicine physician and a certified physician coach.
“I speak to physicians around the country and I hear that their workplaces are understaffed, they’re overworked and they don’t feel safe. Although we’re in a different phase of the pandemic, doctors feel that the ground beneath them is still shaky,” said Dr. Sánchez, the author of “Recapturing Joy in Medicine.”
Most doctors are seeing more patients than they can handle and are expected to do that consistently. “When you no longer have the capacity to give of yourself, that becomes a nearly impossible task,” said Dr. Sánchez.
Also, physicians in understaffed workplaces often must take on additional work such as administrative or nursing duties, said Katie Cole, DO, a board-certified psychiatrist and a physician coach.
While health systems are aware that physicians need time to rest and recharge, staffing shortages prevent doctors from taking time off because they can’t find coverage, said Dr. Cole.
“While we know that it’s important for physicians to take vacations, more than one-third of doctors still take 2 weeks or less of vacation annually,” said Dr. Cole.
Physicians also tend to have less compassion for themselves and sacrifice self-care compared to other health care workers. “When a patient dies, nurses get together, debrief, and hug each other, whereas doctors have another patient to see. The culture of medicine doesn’t support self-compassion for physicians,” said Dr. Cole.
Physicians also felt less safe at work during the pandemic because of to shortages of personal protective equipment, said Dr. Sánchez. They have also witnessed or experienced an increase in abusive behavior, violence and threats of violence.
Physicians’ personal life suffers
Doctors maintain their mental health primarily by spending time with family members and friends, according to 2022’s Medscape Physician Lifestyle & Happiness Report. Yet half of doctors reported in a survey by the Physicians Foundation that they withdrew from family, friends or coworkers in 2022, said Dr. Sánchez.
“When you exceed your mental, emotional, and physical capacity at work, you have no reserve left for your personal life,” said Dr. Cole.
That may explain why only 58% of doctors reported feeling somewhat or very happy outside of work, compared with 84% who felt that way before the pandemic.
More women doctors said they deal with stronger feelings of conflict in trying to balance parenting responsibilities with a highly demanding job. Nearly one in two women physician-parents reported feeling very conflicted at work, compared with about one in four male physician-parents.
When physicians go home, they may be emotionally drained and tired mentally from making a lot of decisions at work, said Dr. Cole.
“As a woman, if you have children and a husband and you’re responsible for dinner, picking up the kids at daycare or helping them with homework, and making all these decisions when you get home, it’s overwhelming,” said Dr. Cole.
Prioritize your well-being
Doctors need to prioritize their own well-being, said Dr. Sánchez. “That’s not being selfish, that’s doing what’s necessary to stay well and be able to take care of patients. If doctors don’t take care of themselves, no one else will.”
Dr. Sánchez recommended that doctors regularly interact with relatives, friends, trusted colleagues, or clergy to help maintain their well-being, rather than waiting until a crisis to reach out.
A good coach, mentor, or counselor can help physicians gain enough self-awareness to handle their emotions and gain more clarity about what changes need to be made, she said.
Dr. Cole suggested that doctors figure out what makes them happy and fulfilled at work and try to spend more time on that activity. “Knowing what makes you happy and your strengths are foundational for creating a life you love.”
She urged doctors to “start thinking now about what you love about medicine and what is going right at home, and what areas you want to change. Then, start advocating for your needs.”
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
Correction, 1/26/23: An earlier version of this article misstated the findings of the survey.
Physicians reported similar levels of unhappiness in 2022 too.
Fewer than half of physicians said they were currently somewhat or very happy at work, compared with 75% of physicians who said they were somewhat or very happy at work in a previous survey conducted before the pandemic, the new Medscape Physician Lifestyle & Happiness Report 2023 shows.*
“I am not surprised that we’re less happy now,” said Amaryllis Sánchez, MD, a board-certified family medicine physician and a certified physician coach.
“I speak to physicians around the country and I hear that their workplaces are understaffed, they’re overworked and they don’t feel safe. Although we’re in a different phase of the pandemic, doctors feel that the ground beneath them is still shaky,” said Dr. Sánchez, the author of “Recapturing Joy in Medicine.”
Most doctors are seeing more patients than they can handle and are expected to do that consistently. “When you no longer have the capacity to give of yourself, that becomes a nearly impossible task,” said Dr. Sánchez.
Also, physicians in understaffed workplaces often must take on additional work such as administrative or nursing duties, said Katie Cole, DO, a board-certified psychiatrist and a physician coach.
While health systems are aware that physicians need time to rest and recharge, staffing shortages prevent doctors from taking time off because they can’t find coverage, said Dr. Cole.
“While we know that it’s important for physicians to take vacations, more than one-third of doctors still take 2 weeks or less of vacation annually,” said Dr. Cole.
Physicians also tend to have less compassion for themselves and sacrifice self-care compared to other health care workers. “When a patient dies, nurses get together, debrief, and hug each other, whereas doctors have another patient to see. The culture of medicine doesn’t support self-compassion for physicians,” said Dr. Cole.
Physicians also felt less safe at work during the pandemic because of to shortages of personal protective equipment, said Dr. Sánchez. They have also witnessed or experienced an increase in abusive behavior, violence and threats of violence.
Physicians’ personal life suffers
Doctors maintain their mental health primarily by spending time with family members and friends, according to 2022’s Medscape Physician Lifestyle & Happiness Report. Yet half of doctors reported in a survey by the Physicians Foundation that they withdrew from family, friends or coworkers in 2022, said Dr. Sánchez.
“When you exceed your mental, emotional, and physical capacity at work, you have no reserve left for your personal life,” said Dr. Cole.
That may explain why only 58% of doctors reported feeling somewhat or very happy outside of work, compared with 84% who felt that way before the pandemic.
More women doctors said they deal with stronger feelings of conflict in trying to balance parenting responsibilities with a highly demanding job. Nearly one in two women physician-parents reported feeling very conflicted at work, compared with about one in four male physician-parents.
When physicians go home, they may be emotionally drained and tired mentally from making a lot of decisions at work, said Dr. Cole.
“As a woman, if you have children and a husband and you’re responsible for dinner, picking up the kids at daycare or helping them with homework, and making all these decisions when you get home, it’s overwhelming,” said Dr. Cole.
Prioritize your well-being
Doctors need to prioritize their own well-being, said Dr. Sánchez. “That’s not being selfish, that’s doing what’s necessary to stay well and be able to take care of patients. If doctors don’t take care of themselves, no one else will.”
Dr. Sánchez recommended that doctors regularly interact with relatives, friends, trusted colleagues, or clergy to help maintain their well-being, rather than waiting until a crisis to reach out.
A good coach, mentor, or counselor can help physicians gain enough self-awareness to handle their emotions and gain more clarity about what changes need to be made, she said.
Dr. Cole suggested that doctors figure out what makes them happy and fulfilled at work and try to spend more time on that activity. “Knowing what makes you happy and your strengths are foundational for creating a life you love.”
She urged doctors to “start thinking now about what you love about medicine and what is going right at home, and what areas you want to change. Then, start advocating for your needs.”
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
Correction, 1/26/23: An earlier version of this article misstated the findings of the survey.
Physicians reported similar levels of unhappiness in 2022 too.
Fewer than half of physicians said they were currently somewhat or very happy at work, compared with 75% of physicians who said they were somewhat or very happy at work in a previous survey conducted before the pandemic, the new Medscape Physician Lifestyle & Happiness Report 2023 shows.*
“I am not surprised that we’re less happy now,” said Amaryllis Sánchez, MD, a board-certified family medicine physician and a certified physician coach.
“I speak to physicians around the country and I hear that their workplaces are understaffed, they’re overworked and they don’t feel safe. Although we’re in a different phase of the pandemic, doctors feel that the ground beneath them is still shaky,” said Dr. Sánchez, the author of “Recapturing Joy in Medicine.”
Most doctors are seeing more patients than they can handle and are expected to do that consistently. “When you no longer have the capacity to give of yourself, that becomes a nearly impossible task,” said Dr. Sánchez.
Also, physicians in understaffed workplaces often must take on additional work such as administrative or nursing duties, said Katie Cole, DO, a board-certified psychiatrist and a physician coach.
While health systems are aware that physicians need time to rest and recharge, staffing shortages prevent doctors from taking time off because they can’t find coverage, said Dr. Cole.
“While we know that it’s important for physicians to take vacations, more than one-third of doctors still take 2 weeks or less of vacation annually,” said Dr. Cole.
Physicians also tend to have less compassion for themselves and sacrifice self-care compared to other health care workers. “When a patient dies, nurses get together, debrief, and hug each other, whereas doctors have another patient to see. The culture of medicine doesn’t support self-compassion for physicians,” said Dr. Cole.
Physicians also felt less safe at work during the pandemic because of to shortages of personal protective equipment, said Dr. Sánchez. They have also witnessed or experienced an increase in abusive behavior, violence and threats of violence.
Physicians’ personal life suffers
Doctors maintain their mental health primarily by spending time with family members and friends, according to 2022’s Medscape Physician Lifestyle & Happiness Report. Yet half of doctors reported in a survey by the Physicians Foundation that they withdrew from family, friends or coworkers in 2022, said Dr. Sánchez.
“When you exceed your mental, emotional, and physical capacity at work, you have no reserve left for your personal life,” said Dr. Cole.
That may explain why only 58% of doctors reported feeling somewhat or very happy outside of work, compared with 84% who felt that way before the pandemic.
More women doctors said they deal with stronger feelings of conflict in trying to balance parenting responsibilities with a highly demanding job. Nearly one in two women physician-parents reported feeling very conflicted at work, compared with about one in four male physician-parents.
When physicians go home, they may be emotionally drained and tired mentally from making a lot of decisions at work, said Dr. Cole.
“As a woman, if you have children and a husband and you’re responsible for dinner, picking up the kids at daycare or helping them with homework, and making all these decisions when you get home, it’s overwhelming,” said Dr. Cole.
Prioritize your well-being
Doctors need to prioritize their own well-being, said Dr. Sánchez. “That’s not being selfish, that’s doing what’s necessary to stay well and be able to take care of patients. If doctors don’t take care of themselves, no one else will.”
Dr. Sánchez recommended that doctors regularly interact with relatives, friends, trusted colleagues, or clergy to help maintain their well-being, rather than waiting until a crisis to reach out.
A good coach, mentor, or counselor can help physicians gain enough self-awareness to handle their emotions and gain more clarity about what changes need to be made, she said.
Dr. Cole suggested that doctors figure out what makes them happy and fulfilled at work and try to spend more time on that activity. “Knowing what makes you happy and your strengths are foundational for creating a life you love.”
She urged doctors to “start thinking now about what you love about medicine and what is going right at home, and what areas you want to change. Then, start advocating for your needs.”
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
Correction, 1/26/23: An earlier version of this article misstated the findings of the survey.
Docs treating other doctors: What can go wrong?
It’s not unusual for physicians to see other doctors as patients – often they’re colleagues or even friends.
“When doctors don’t get the proper care, that’s when things go south. Any time physicians lower their standard of care, there is a risk of missing something that could affect their differential diagnosis, ultimate working diagnosis, and treatment plan,” said Michael Myers, MD, professor of clinical psychiatry at State University of New York, Brooklyn, who saw only medical students, physicians, and their family members in his private practice for over 3 decades.
Of the more than 200 physicians who responded to a recent Medscape poll, more than half said they treated physician-patients differently from other patients.
They granted their peers special privileges: They spent more time with them than other patients, gave out their personal contact information, and granted them professional courtesy by waiving or discounting their fees.
Published studies have reported that special treatment of physician-patients, such as giving personal contact information or avoiding uncomfortable testing, can create challenges for the treating physicians who may feel pressure to deviate from the standard of care.
The American Medical Association has recognized the challenges that physicians have when they treat other physicians they know personally or professionally, including a potential loss of objectivity, privacy, or confidentiality.
The AMA recommends that physicians treat physician-patients the same way they would other patients. The guidance states that the treating physician should exercise objective professional judgment and make unbiased treatment recommendations; be sensitive to the potential psychological discomfort of the physician-patient, and respect the physical and informational privacy of physician-patients.
Dr. Myers recalled that one doctor-patient said his primary care physician was his business partner in the practice. They ordered tests for each other and occasionally examined each other, but the patient never felt comfortable asking his partner for a full physical, said Dr. Myers, the author of “Becoming a Doctors’ Doctor: A Memoir.”
“I recommended that he choose a primary care doctor whom he didn’t know so that he could truly be a patient and the doctor could truly be a treating doctor,” said Dr. Myers.
Physician-patients may also be concerned about running into their physicians and being judged, or that they will break confidentiality and tell their spouse or another colleague, said Dr. Myers.
“When your doctor is a complete and total stranger, and especially if you live in a sizable community and your paths never cross, you don’t have that added worry,” he said.
Do docs expect special treatment as patients?
Some doctors expect special treatment from other doctors when they’re patients – 14% of physician poll respondents said that was their experience.
Dr. Myers recommends setting boundaries with doctor-patients early on in the relationship. “Some doctors expected me to go over my regular appointment time and when they realized that I started and stopped on time, they got upset. Once, one doctor insisted to my answering service that he had to talk to me although I was at home. When he started talking, I interrupted him and asked if the matter was urgent. He said no, so I offered to fit him in before his next appointment if he felt it couldn’t wait,” said Dr. Myers.
Some doctors also give physician-patients “professional courtesy” when it comes to payment. One in four poll respondents said they waived or discounted their professional fees for a doctor-patient. As most doctors have health insurance, doctors may waive copayments or other out-of-pocket fees, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.
However, waiving or discounting health insurance fees, especially for government funded insurance, may be illegal under federal anti-fraud and abuse laws and payer contracts as well as state laws, the AAP says. It’s best to check with an attorney.
Treating other physicians can be rewarding
“Physicians can be the most rewarding patients because they are allies and partners in the effort to overcome whatever is ailing them,” said one doctor who responded to the Medscape poll.
Over two-thirds of respondents said that doctor-patients participated much more in their care than did other patients – typically, they discussed their care in more depth than did other patients.
Most doctors also felt that it was easier to communicate with their physician-patients than other patients because they understood medicine and were knowledgeable about their conditions.
Being judged by your peers can be stressful
How physicians feel about treating physician-patients is complicated. Nearly half of respondents said that it was more stressful than treating other patients.
One respondent said, “If we are honest, treating other physicians as patients is more stressful because we know that our skills are being assessed by someone who is at our level. There is no training for treating physicians, as there is for the Pope’s confessor. And we can be challenging in more ways than one!”
About one-third of poll respondents said they were afraid of disappointing their physician-patients.
“I’m not surprised,” said Dr. Myers, when told of that poll response. “This is why some doctors are reluctant to treat other physicians; they may wonder whether they’re up to speed. I have always thrived on having a high bar set for me – it spurs me on to really stay current with the literature and be humble,” he said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
It’s not unusual for physicians to see other doctors as patients – often they’re colleagues or even friends.
“When doctors don’t get the proper care, that’s when things go south. Any time physicians lower their standard of care, there is a risk of missing something that could affect their differential diagnosis, ultimate working diagnosis, and treatment plan,” said Michael Myers, MD, professor of clinical psychiatry at State University of New York, Brooklyn, who saw only medical students, physicians, and their family members in his private practice for over 3 decades.
Of the more than 200 physicians who responded to a recent Medscape poll, more than half said they treated physician-patients differently from other patients.
They granted their peers special privileges: They spent more time with them than other patients, gave out their personal contact information, and granted them professional courtesy by waiving or discounting their fees.
Published studies have reported that special treatment of physician-patients, such as giving personal contact information or avoiding uncomfortable testing, can create challenges for the treating physicians who may feel pressure to deviate from the standard of care.
The American Medical Association has recognized the challenges that physicians have when they treat other physicians they know personally or professionally, including a potential loss of objectivity, privacy, or confidentiality.
The AMA recommends that physicians treat physician-patients the same way they would other patients. The guidance states that the treating physician should exercise objective professional judgment and make unbiased treatment recommendations; be sensitive to the potential psychological discomfort of the physician-patient, and respect the physical and informational privacy of physician-patients.
Dr. Myers recalled that one doctor-patient said his primary care physician was his business partner in the practice. They ordered tests for each other and occasionally examined each other, but the patient never felt comfortable asking his partner for a full physical, said Dr. Myers, the author of “Becoming a Doctors’ Doctor: A Memoir.”
“I recommended that he choose a primary care doctor whom he didn’t know so that he could truly be a patient and the doctor could truly be a treating doctor,” said Dr. Myers.
Physician-patients may also be concerned about running into their physicians and being judged, or that they will break confidentiality and tell their spouse or another colleague, said Dr. Myers.
“When your doctor is a complete and total stranger, and especially if you live in a sizable community and your paths never cross, you don’t have that added worry,” he said.
Do docs expect special treatment as patients?
Some doctors expect special treatment from other doctors when they’re patients – 14% of physician poll respondents said that was their experience.
Dr. Myers recommends setting boundaries with doctor-patients early on in the relationship. “Some doctors expected me to go over my regular appointment time and when they realized that I started and stopped on time, they got upset. Once, one doctor insisted to my answering service that he had to talk to me although I was at home. When he started talking, I interrupted him and asked if the matter was urgent. He said no, so I offered to fit him in before his next appointment if he felt it couldn’t wait,” said Dr. Myers.
Some doctors also give physician-patients “professional courtesy” when it comes to payment. One in four poll respondents said they waived or discounted their professional fees for a doctor-patient. As most doctors have health insurance, doctors may waive copayments or other out-of-pocket fees, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.
However, waiving or discounting health insurance fees, especially for government funded insurance, may be illegal under federal anti-fraud and abuse laws and payer contracts as well as state laws, the AAP says. It’s best to check with an attorney.
Treating other physicians can be rewarding
“Physicians can be the most rewarding patients because they are allies and partners in the effort to overcome whatever is ailing them,” said one doctor who responded to the Medscape poll.
Over two-thirds of respondents said that doctor-patients participated much more in their care than did other patients – typically, they discussed their care in more depth than did other patients.
Most doctors also felt that it was easier to communicate with their physician-patients than other patients because they understood medicine and were knowledgeable about their conditions.
Being judged by your peers can be stressful
How physicians feel about treating physician-patients is complicated. Nearly half of respondents said that it was more stressful than treating other patients.
One respondent said, “If we are honest, treating other physicians as patients is more stressful because we know that our skills are being assessed by someone who is at our level. There is no training for treating physicians, as there is for the Pope’s confessor. And we can be challenging in more ways than one!”
About one-third of poll respondents said they were afraid of disappointing their physician-patients.
“I’m not surprised,” said Dr. Myers, when told of that poll response. “This is why some doctors are reluctant to treat other physicians; they may wonder whether they’re up to speed. I have always thrived on having a high bar set for me – it spurs me on to really stay current with the literature and be humble,” he said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
It’s not unusual for physicians to see other doctors as patients – often they’re colleagues or even friends.
“When doctors don’t get the proper care, that’s when things go south. Any time physicians lower their standard of care, there is a risk of missing something that could affect their differential diagnosis, ultimate working diagnosis, and treatment plan,” said Michael Myers, MD, professor of clinical psychiatry at State University of New York, Brooklyn, who saw only medical students, physicians, and their family members in his private practice for over 3 decades.
Of the more than 200 physicians who responded to a recent Medscape poll, more than half said they treated physician-patients differently from other patients.
They granted their peers special privileges: They spent more time with them than other patients, gave out their personal contact information, and granted them professional courtesy by waiving or discounting their fees.
Published studies have reported that special treatment of physician-patients, such as giving personal contact information or avoiding uncomfortable testing, can create challenges for the treating physicians who may feel pressure to deviate from the standard of care.
The American Medical Association has recognized the challenges that physicians have when they treat other physicians they know personally or professionally, including a potential loss of objectivity, privacy, or confidentiality.
The AMA recommends that physicians treat physician-patients the same way they would other patients. The guidance states that the treating physician should exercise objective professional judgment and make unbiased treatment recommendations; be sensitive to the potential psychological discomfort of the physician-patient, and respect the physical and informational privacy of physician-patients.
Dr. Myers recalled that one doctor-patient said his primary care physician was his business partner in the practice. They ordered tests for each other and occasionally examined each other, but the patient never felt comfortable asking his partner for a full physical, said Dr. Myers, the author of “Becoming a Doctors’ Doctor: A Memoir.”
“I recommended that he choose a primary care doctor whom he didn’t know so that he could truly be a patient and the doctor could truly be a treating doctor,” said Dr. Myers.
Physician-patients may also be concerned about running into their physicians and being judged, or that they will break confidentiality and tell their spouse or another colleague, said Dr. Myers.
“When your doctor is a complete and total stranger, and especially if you live in a sizable community and your paths never cross, you don’t have that added worry,” he said.
Do docs expect special treatment as patients?
Some doctors expect special treatment from other doctors when they’re patients – 14% of physician poll respondents said that was their experience.
Dr. Myers recommends setting boundaries with doctor-patients early on in the relationship. “Some doctors expected me to go over my regular appointment time and when they realized that I started and stopped on time, they got upset. Once, one doctor insisted to my answering service that he had to talk to me although I was at home. When he started talking, I interrupted him and asked if the matter was urgent. He said no, so I offered to fit him in before his next appointment if he felt it couldn’t wait,” said Dr. Myers.
Some doctors also give physician-patients “professional courtesy” when it comes to payment. One in four poll respondents said they waived or discounted their professional fees for a doctor-patient. As most doctors have health insurance, doctors may waive copayments or other out-of-pocket fees, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.
However, waiving or discounting health insurance fees, especially for government funded insurance, may be illegal under federal anti-fraud and abuse laws and payer contracts as well as state laws, the AAP says. It’s best to check with an attorney.
Treating other physicians can be rewarding
“Physicians can be the most rewarding patients because they are allies and partners in the effort to overcome whatever is ailing them,” said one doctor who responded to the Medscape poll.
Over two-thirds of respondents said that doctor-patients participated much more in their care than did other patients – typically, they discussed their care in more depth than did other patients.
Most doctors also felt that it was easier to communicate with their physician-patients than other patients because they understood medicine and were knowledgeable about their conditions.
Being judged by your peers can be stressful
How physicians feel about treating physician-patients is complicated. Nearly half of respondents said that it was more stressful than treating other patients.
One respondent said, “If we are honest, treating other physicians as patients is more stressful because we know that our skills are being assessed by someone who is at our level. There is no training for treating physicians, as there is for the Pope’s confessor. And we can be challenging in more ways than one!”
About one-third of poll respondents said they were afraid of disappointing their physician-patients.
“I’m not surprised,” said Dr. Myers, when told of that poll response. “This is why some doctors are reluctant to treat other physicians; they may wonder whether they’re up to speed. I have always thrived on having a high bar set for me – it spurs me on to really stay current with the literature and be humble,” he said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A gruesome murder changes two docs’ lives, and one was the killer
Driving from his home in Asheville, N.C., to his new job at the tiny Cane Creek clinic, Benjamin Gilmer, MD, was eager to start his new life and pay off his medical school debts.
The rural clinic had been forced to close after his predecessor, family physician Vince Gilmer, MD, (no relation) had been convicted of first-degree murder 4 years earlier. He was serving a life sentence in a West Virginia prison without the possibility of parole. He is still behind bars and could not comment on this story.
As the months flew by, Benjamin Gilmer’s patients shared stories about the other Dr. Gilmer that surprised him. They described Vince Gilmer as a caring, generous person who went out of his way to help them. He made house calls, and if a patient couldn’t afford to pay him, he would accept a bushel of corn instead.
Yet there was no doubt about the gruesome murder. Vince Gilmer was convicted of strangling his frail 60-year-old father with a rope in his Toyota truck. He then cut off all his father’s fingers and dumped his father’s body by the side of the road.
“Four years later, his patients were still shocked about what happened and couldn’t reconcile the person they knew with the event that happened,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
Yet, Vince Gilmer had admitted to the killing, and the prosecution had presented evidence at the trial that it was premeditated and that he tried to cover up the crime. The detectives found the “murder” weapons in Vince’s truck: the ropes he strangled his father with and the garden shears that he cut off his fingers with. They also had evidence that he drove to Virginia to dump the body, returned to see patients for several days as if nothing had happened, and then ran away when a detective came to arrest him.
But something kept gnawing away at Benjamin Gilmer.
Little did he know that he would embark on a journey to solve a medical mystery, and then even fight to get the convicted killer out of prison.
Solving a medical mystery
Benjamin Gilmer decided to investigate what might have happened to Vince in the months leading up to the murder. He talked to his friends and found several clues about Vince’s medical history. They recalled that he suffered a concussion in a car accident 6 months before the murder, which suggested he could have had a traumatic brain injury.
Benjamin Gilmer also discovered that Vince’s father was diagnosed with schizophrenia and had been in a residential psychiatric facility in Virginia until he was released that fateful night to Vince’s custody.
Vince had written to friends that “something is wrong with my brain and help me.” He mentioned SSRI discontinuation syndrome because he abruptly stopped taking his medication the week of the murder (which can cause electric shock sensations and mood swings among other symptoms).
Vince had mentioned the SSRI discontinuation syndrome at his trial and that his father had sexually molested him for years and that he tried to molest him again during the ride in his truck. However, the court dismissed that information because Vince represented himself, dismissed his court-appointed attorneys, and lacked expert testimony about his mental state.
The prosecutor portrayed Vince as a lying sociopath who had planned his father’s murder down to the last detail. The judge agreed. Two psychiatrists and a psychologist who later evaluated him in prison concluded that he was faking his symptoms and denied his requests for an SSRI.
Meanwhile, Benjamin Gilmer became increasingly preoccupied with what happened to Vince. “It was hard to erase a memory that had so tainted that community,” he said.
When Sarah Koenig, a journalist and former producer of the radio program This American Life, called Benjamin Gilmer to interview him about the coincidence of taking over Vince Gilmer’s practice and sharing the same last name, he refused. “I was scared and didn’t want to be on his radar, I was afraid of how he might react.”
In spring 2012, he called Koenig and agreed to collaborate on an episode about Vince’s case. Benjamin Gilmer wrote to Vince Gilmer in prison, asking for a meeting. To his surprise, Vince wanted to meet them.
When Vince shuffled into the waiting area at the Wallens Ridge State Prison in West Virginia, Benjamin Gilmer was shocked by his appearance. “He looked like a caged animal, it was very hard for him to string together ideas and express himself, and he was twitching and shaking dramatically. He looked 20 years older than his actual age of 50 and like someone you would imagine in the movie One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” said Benjamin Gilmer.
He felt that “there was something clearly wrong with him.” They agreed to a second meeting, and this time Benjamin Gilmer invited a psychiatrist, Steve Buie, MD, to observe Vince. As the visit ended and Vince turned to leave, Dr. Buie watched his shuffling gait. They suspected he may have Huntington’s disease, “which explained why he had delusions and his mind was unraveling,” says Benjamin Gilmer. But they had no way of testing him in prison.
Unexpectedly, an event happened that turned the whole case on its head. Vince was moved to a psychiatric hospital in southern Virginia because he had threatened to commit suicide. The chief psychiatrist, Colin Angliker, MD, was willing to order a genetic test, and the results confirmed the diagnosis: Vince Gilmer had a terminal degenerative brain disease.
Benjamin Gilmer worried how Vince would take the news. To his surprise, Vince was grateful and relieved. He finally knew what was wrong with him.
Vince also improved with the SSRI that Dr. Angliker prescribed — he was less anxious and more mentally alert. “He expressed joy for the first time, despite the death sentence of a diagnosis.”
Still, he was going to spend the rest of his life in prison for the crime he committed.
After the This American Life episode aired in 2013, Benjamin Gilmer felt that he couldn’t just abandon Vince to the prison system, where thousands of inmates with mental illness languish without adequate treatment.
Benjamin Gilmer decided he had a new — although controversial — mission — to get Vince out.
Confronting the politics of a pardon
After nearly a decade of trying, Benjamin Gilmer now admits that he was naive to think he could get him released quickly.
After the episode aired, offers of legal help started to arrive, and a team was assembled who agreed to work on the case pro bono. They wanted justice for Vince but also to prevent anyone else with mental illness from experiencing a similar tragedy.
The goal was to get Vince transferred to a secure hospital, a psychiatric facility dedicated to Huntington’s patients, or a nursing home with a dementia unit.
However, after realizing that Vince may not survive a potentially lengthy court battle, the legal team decided to ask the governor of Virginia to grant a clemency pardon.
They gathered the evidence for Vince’s case and presented their petition to Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D). He rejected it at the end of his term in 2017.
The team tried again with his successor, Gov. Ralph Northam (D), a neurologist. He dashed their hopes when he rejected their petition in late 2021.
That was a huge setback. The team had spent $1 million and had exhausted every contact they could make with the governor’s office, says Gilmer. “We were totally demoralized.”
He dreaded having to tell Vince that yet another governor had rejected their clemency petition. “I went to prison and could see the hopelessness and despair in his reaction. I lost it emotionally,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
Vince surprised him by hugging and comforting him and thanking him for all his efforts. They had developed a strong bond over a decade of visits and calls. Benjamin Gilmer had even brought his wife and children along on special occasions.
“I thought of him as a friend, as a patient, and someone who was really suffering, all those things helped our relationship evolve and kept me engaged with him all these years and continued to inspire me to fight for him. I also liked him because I knew what he was like before the murder from the stories I was hearing from his friends and patients.”
But his continuous advocacy came at a personal cost. “This battle pushed me to my limits emotionally and intellectually. I was busy building my career, trying to be a good doctor, teacher, husband, and father to two young children. I became so distracted that my wife confronted me several times about not being more emotionally present,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
But he knows that without Vince in his life, he would not have written his first book (released earlier this year) about the case and their unlikely friendship.
A pardon is finally granted
He had also given Gov. Northam’s staff advance copies of the book. In a highly unusual move, the governor reversed his previous rejection and granted Vince Gilmer his long-awaited pardon on January 12.
Benjamin Gilmer isn’t ready to celebrate yet. “Despite being a free man, Vince is still living behind bars because we haven’t been able to find him an available bed in a secure treatment facility. There has been a shortage of beds due to COVID.”
He says Vince is looking forward to being safe and being surrounded by people who are committed to caring for him and not punishing him. He can’t wait to be around his family and to give and receive hugs.
“After a while, it was hard not to believe that I was supposed to be in his path and this was just part of my destiny,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Driving from his home in Asheville, N.C., to his new job at the tiny Cane Creek clinic, Benjamin Gilmer, MD, was eager to start his new life and pay off his medical school debts.
The rural clinic had been forced to close after his predecessor, family physician Vince Gilmer, MD, (no relation) had been convicted of first-degree murder 4 years earlier. He was serving a life sentence in a West Virginia prison without the possibility of parole. He is still behind bars and could not comment on this story.
As the months flew by, Benjamin Gilmer’s patients shared stories about the other Dr. Gilmer that surprised him. They described Vince Gilmer as a caring, generous person who went out of his way to help them. He made house calls, and if a patient couldn’t afford to pay him, he would accept a bushel of corn instead.
Yet there was no doubt about the gruesome murder. Vince Gilmer was convicted of strangling his frail 60-year-old father with a rope in his Toyota truck. He then cut off all his father’s fingers and dumped his father’s body by the side of the road.
“Four years later, his patients were still shocked about what happened and couldn’t reconcile the person they knew with the event that happened,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
Yet, Vince Gilmer had admitted to the killing, and the prosecution had presented evidence at the trial that it was premeditated and that he tried to cover up the crime. The detectives found the “murder” weapons in Vince’s truck: the ropes he strangled his father with and the garden shears that he cut off his fingers with. They also had evidence that he drove to Virginia to dump the body, returned to see patients for several days as if nothing had happened, and then ran away when a detective came to arrest him.
But something kept gnawing away at Benjamin Gilmer.
Little did he know that he would embark on a journey to solve a medical mystery, and then even fight to get the convicted killer out of prison.
Solving a medical mystery
Benjamin Gilmer decided to investigate what might have happened to Vince in the months leading up to the murder. He talked to his friends and found several clues about Vince’s medical history. They recalled that he suffered a concussion in a car accident 6 months before the murder, which suggested he could have had a traumatic brain injury.
Benjamin Gilmer also discovered that Vince’s father was diagnosed with schizophrenia and had been in a residential psychiatric facility in Virginia until he was released that fateful night to Vince’s custody.
Vince had written to friends that “something is wrong with my brain and help me.” He mentioned SSRI discontinuation syndrome because he abruptly stopped taking his medication the week of the murder (which can cause electric shock sensations and mood swings among other symptoms).
Vince had mentioned the SSRI discontinuation syndrome at his trial and that his father had sexually molested him for years and that he tried to molest him again during the ride in his truck. However, the court dismissed that information because Vince represented himself, dismissed his court-appointed attorneys, and lacked expert testimony about his mental state.
The prosecutor portrayed Vince as a lying sociopath who had planned his father’s murder down to the last detail. The judge agreed. Two psychiatrists and a psychologist who later evaluated him in prison concluded that he was faking his symptoms and denied his requests for an SSRI.
Meanwhile, Benjamin Gilmer became increasingly preoccupied with what happened to Vince. “It was hard to erase a memory that had so tainted that community,” he said.
When Sarah Koenig, a journalist and former producer of the radio program This American Life, called Benjamin Gilmer to interview him about the coincidence of taking over Vince Gilmer’s practice and sharing the same last name, he refused. “I was scared and didn’t want to be on his radar, I was afraid of how he might react.”
In spring 2012, he called Koenig and agreed to collaborate on an episode about Vince’s case. Benjamin Gilmer wrote to Vince Gilmer in prison, asking for a meeting. To his surprise, Vince wanted to meet them.
When Vince shuffled into the waiting area at the Wallens Ridge State Prison in West Virginia, Benjamin Gilmer was shocked by his appearance. “He looked like a caged animal, it was very hard for him to string together ideas and express himself, and he was twitching and shaking dramatically. He looked 20 years older than his actual age of 50 and like someone you would imagine in the movie One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” said Benjamin Gilmer.
He felt that “there was something clearly wrong with him.” They agreed to a second meeting, and this time Benjamin Gilmer invited a psychiatrist, Steve Buie, MD, to observe Vince. As the visit ended and Vince turned to leave, Dr. Buie watched his shuffling gait. They suspected he may have Huntington’s disease, “which explained why he had delusions and his mind was unraveling,” says Benjamin Gilmer. But they had no way of testing him in prison.
Unexpectedly, an event happened that turned the whole case on its head. Vince was moved to a psychiatric hospital in southern Virginia because he had threatened to commit suicide. The chief psychiatrist, Colin Angliker, MD, was willing to order a genetic test, and the results confirmed the diagnosis: Vince Gilmer had a terminal degenerative brain disease.
Benjamin Gilmer worried how Vince would take the news. To his surprise, Vince was grateful and relieved. He finally knew what was wrong with him.
Vince also improved with the SSRI that Dr. Angliker prescribed — he was less anxious and more mentally alert. “He expressed joy for the first time, despite the death sentence of a diagnosis.”
Still, he was going to spend the rest of his life in prison for the crime he committed.
After the This American Life episode aired in 2013, Benjamin Gilmer felt that he couldn’t just abandon Vince to the prison system, where thousands of inmates with mental illness languish without adequate treatment.
Benjamin Gilmer decided he had a new — although controversial — mission — to get Vince out.
Confronting the politics of a pardon
After nearly a decade of trying, Benjamin Gilmer now admits that he was naive to think he could get him released quickly.
After the episode aired, offers of legal help started to arrive, and a team was assembled who agreed to work on the case pro bono. They wanted justice for Vince but also to prevent anyone else with mental illness from experiencing a similar tragedy.
The goal was to get Vince transferred to a secure hospital, a psychiatric facility dedicated to Huntington’s patients, or a nursing home with a dementia unit.
However, after realizing that Vince may not survive a potentially lengthy court battle, the legal team decided to ask the governor of Virginia to grant a clemency pardon.
They gathered the evidence for Vince’s case and presented their petition to Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D). He rejected it at the end of his term in 2017.
The team tried again with his successor, Gov. Ralph Northam (D), a neurologist. He dashed their hopes when he rejected their petition in late 2021.
That was a huge setback. The team had spent $1 million and had exhausted every contact they could make with the governor’s office, says Gilmer. “We were totally demoralized.”
He dreaded having to tell Vince that yet another governor had rejected their clemency petition. “I went to prison and could see the hopelessness and despair in his reaction. I lost it emotionally,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
Vince surprised him by hugging and comforting him and thanking him for all his efforts. They had developed a strong bond over a decade of visits and calls. Benjamin Gilmer had even brought his wife and children along on special occasions.
“I thought of him as a friend, as a patient, and someone who was really suffering, all those things helped our relationship evolve and kept me engaged with him all these years and continued to inspire me to fight for him. I also liked him because I knew what he was like before the murder from the stories I was hearing from his friends and patients.”
But his continuous advocacy came at a personal cost. “This battle pushed me to my limits emotionally and intellectually. I was busy building my career, trying to be a good doctor, teacher, husband, and father to two young children. I became so distracted that my wife confronted me several times about not being more emotionally present,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
But he knows that without Vince in his life, he would not have written his first book (released earlier this year) about the case and their unlikely friendship.
A pardon is finally granted
He had also given Gov. Northam’s staff advance copies of the book. In a highly unusual move, the governor reversed his previous rejection and granted Vince Gilmer his long-awaited pardon on January 12.
Benjamin Gilmer isn’t ready to celebrate yet. “Despite being a free man, Vince is still living behind bars because we haven’t been able to find him an available bed in a secure treatment facility. There has been a shortage of beds due to COVID.”
He says Vince is looking forward to being safe and being surrounded by people who are committed to caring for him and not punishing him. He can’t wait to be around his family and to give and receive hugs.
“After a while, it was hard not to believe that I was supposed to be in his path and this was just part of my destiny,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Driving from his home in Asheville, N.C., to his new job at the tiny Cane Creek clinic, Benjamin Gilmer, MD, was eager to start his new life and pay off his medical school debts.
The rural clinic had been forced to close after his predecessor, family physician Vince Gilmer, MD, (no relation) had been convicted of first-degree murder 4 years earlier. He was serving a life sentence in a West Virginia prison without the possibility of parole. He is still behind bars and could not comment on this story.
As the months flew by, Benjamin Gilmer’s patients shared stories about the other Dr. Gilmer that surprised him. They described Vince Gilmer as a caring, generous person who went out of his way to help them. He made house calls, and if a patient couldn’t afford to pay him, he would accept a bushel of corn instead.
Yet there was no doubt about the gruesome murder. Vince Gilmer was convicted of strangling his frail 60-year-old father with a rope in his Toyota truck. He then cut off all his father’s fingers and dumped his father’s body by the side of the road.
“Four years later, his patients were still shocked about what happened and couldn’t reconcile the person they knew with the event that happened,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
Yet, Vince Gilmer had admitted to the killing, and the prosecution had presented evidence at the trial that it was premeditated and that he tried to cover up the crime. The detectives found the “murder” weapons in Vince’s truck: the ropes he strangled his father with and the garden shears that he cut off his fingers with. They also had evidence that he drove to Virginia to dump the body, returned to see patients for several days as if nothing had happened, and then ran away when a detective came to arrest him.
But something kept gnawing away at Benjamin Gilmer.
Little did he know that he would embark on a journey to solve a medical mystery, and then even fight to get the convicted killer out of prison.
Solving a medical mystery
Benjamin Gilmer decided to investigate what might have happened to Vince in the months leading up to the murder. He talked to his friends and found several clues about Vince’s medical history. They recalled that he suffered a concussion in a car accident 6 months before the murder, which suggested he could have had a traumatic brain injury.
Benjamin Gilmer also discovered that Vince’s father was diagnosed with schizophrenia and had been in a residential psychiatric facility in Virginia until he was released that fateful night to Vince’s custody.
Vince had written to friends that “something is wrong with my brain and help me.” He mentioned SSRI discontinuation syndrome because he abruptly stopped taking his medication the week of the murder (which can cause electric shock sensations and mood swings among other symptoms).
Vince had mentioned the SSRI discontinuation syndrome at his trial and that his father had sexually molested him for years and that he tried to molest him again during the ride in his truck. However, the court dismissed that information because Vince represented himself, dismissed his court-appointed attorneys, and lacked expert testimony about his mental state.
The prosecutor portrayed Vince as a lying sociopath who had planned his father’s murder down to the last detail. The judge agreed. Two psychiatrists and a psychologist who later evaluated him in prison concluded that he was faking his symptoms and denied his requests for an SSRI.
Meanwhile, Benjamin Gilmer became increasingly preoccupied with what happened to Vince. “It was hard to erase a memory that had so tainted that community,” he said.
When Sarah Koenig, a journalist and former producer of the radio program This American Life, called Benjamin Gilmer to interview him about the coincidence of taking over Vince Gilmer’s practice and sharing the same last name, he refused. “I was scared and didn’t want to be on his radar, I was afraid of how he might react.”
In spring 2012, he called Koenig and agreed to collaborate on an episode about Vince’s case. Benjamin Gilmer wrote to Vince Gilmer in prison, asking for a meeting. To his surprise, Vince wanted to meet them.
When Vince shuffled into the waiting area at the Wallens Ridge State Prison in West Virginia, Benjamin Gilmer was shocked by his appearance. “He looked like a caged animal, it was very hard for him to string together ideas and express himself, and he was twitching and shaking dramatically. He looked 20 years older than his actual age of 50 and like someone you would imagine in the movie One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” said Benjamin Gilmer.
He felt that “there was something clearly wrong with him.” They agreed to a second meeting, and this time Benjamin Gilmer invited a psychiatrist, Steve Buie, MD, to observe Vince. As the visit ended and Vince turned to leave, Dr. Buie watched his shuffling gait. They suspected he may have Huntington’s disease, “which explained why he had delusions and his mind was unraveling,” says Benjamin Gilmer. But they had no way of testing him in prison.
Unexpectedly, an event happened that turned the whole case on its head. Vince was moved to a psychiatric hospital in southern Virginia because he had threatened to commit suicide. The chief psychiatrist, Colin Angliker, MD, was willing to order a genetic test, and the results confirmed the diagnosis: Vince Gilmer had a terminal degenerative brain disease.
Benjamin Gilmer worried how Vince would take the news. To his surprise, Vince was grateful and relieved. He finally knew what was wrong with him.
Vince also improved with the SSRI that Dr. Angliker prescribed — he was less anxious and more mentally alert. “He expressed joy for the first time, despite the death sentence of a diagnosis.”
Still, he was going to spend the rest of his life in prison for the crime he committed.
After the This American Life episode aired in 2013, Benjamin Gilmer felt that he couldn’t just abandon Vince to the prison system, where thousands of inmates with mental illness languish without adequate treatment.
Benjamin Gilmer decided he had a new — although controversial — mission — to get Vince out.
Confronting the politics of a pardon
After nearly a decade of trying, Benjamin Gilmer now admits that he was naive to think he could get him released quickly.
After the episode aired, offers of legal help started to arrive, and a team was assembled who agreed to work on the case pro bono. They wanted justice for Vince but also to prevent anyone else with mental illness from experiencing a similar tragedy.
The goal was to get Vince transferred to a secure hospital, a psychiatric facility dedicated to Huntington’s patients, or a nursing home with a dementia unit.
However, after realizing that Vince may not survive a potentially lengthy court battle, the legal team decided to ask the governor of Virginia to grant a clemency pardon.
They gathered the evidence for Vince’s case and presented their petition to Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D). He rejected it at the end of his term in 2017.
The team tried again with his successor, Gov. Ralph Northam (D), a neurologist. He dashed their hopes when he rejected their petition in late 2021.
That was a huge setback. The team had spent $1 million and had exhausted every contact they could make with the governor’s office, says Gilmer. “We were totally demoralized.”
He dreaded having to tell Vince that yet another governor had rejected their clemency petition. “I went to prison and could see the hopelessness and despair in his reaction. I lost it emotionally,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
Vince surprised him by hugging and comforting him and thanking him for all his efforts. They had developed a strong bond over a decade of visits and calls. Benjamin Gilmer had even brought his wife and children along on special occasions.
“I thought of him as a friend, as a patient, and someone who was really suffering, all those things helped our relationship evolve and kept me engaged with him all these years and continued to inspire me to fight for him. I also liked him because I knew what he was like before the murder from the stories I was hearing from his friends and patients.”
But his continuous advocacy came at a personal cost. “This battle pushed me to my limits emotionally and intellectually. I was busy building my career, trying to be a good doctor, teacher, husband, and father to two young children. I became so distracted that my wife confronted me several times about not being more emotionally present,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
But he knows that without Vince in his life, he would not have written his first book (released earlier this year) about the case and their unlikely friendship.
A pardon is finally granted
He had also given Gov. Northam’s staff advance copies of the book. In a highly unusual move, the governor reversed his previous rejection and granted Vince Gilmer his long-awaited pardon on January 12.
Benjamin Gilmer isn’t ready to celebrate yet. “Despite being a free man, Vince is still living behind bars because we haven’t been able to find him an available bed in a secure treatment facility. There has been a shortage of beds due to COVID.”
He says Vince is looking forward to being safe and being surrounded by people who are committed to caring for him and not punishing him. He can’t wait to be around his family and to give and receive hugs.
“After a while, it was hard not to believe that I was supposed to be in his path and this was just part of my destiny,” says Benjamin Gilmer.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
You’re not on a ‘best doctor’ list – does it matter?
Thousands of doctors get a shout out every year when they make the “Top Doctor” lists in various magazines. Some may be your colleagues or competitors. Should you be concerned if you’re not on the list?
Best Doctor lists are clearly popular with readers and make money for the magazines. They can also bring in patient revenue for doctors and their employers who promote them in news releases and on their websites.
For doctors on some of the top lists, the recognition can bring not only patients, but national or international visibility.
While the dollar value is hard to come by, some doctors say that these lists have attracted new patients to their practice.
Sarah St. Louis, MD, a physician manager of Associates in Urogynecology, is one of Orlando Style magazine’s Doctors of the Year and Orlando Family Magazine’s Top Doctors.
Several new patients have told her that they read about her in the magazines’ Top Doctor lists. “Urogynecology is not a well-known specialty – it’s a helpful way to get the word out about the women’s health specialty and what I do,” said Dr. St. Louis, an early career physician who started her practice in 2017.
The additional patient revenue has been worth the cost of displaying her profile in Orlando Style, which was about $800 for a half-page spread with her photo.
Top Doctor lists also work well for specialty practices whose patients can self-refer, such as plastic surgery, dermatology, orthopedics, gastroenterology, and geriatric medicine, said Andrea Eliscu, RN, founder and president of Medical Marketing in Orlando.
Being in a competitive market also matters. If a practice is the only one in town, those doctors may not need the publicity as much as doctors in an urban practice that faces stiff competition.
How do doctors get on these lists?
In most cases, doctors have to be nominated by their peers, a process that some say is flawed because it may shut out doctors who are less popular or well-connected.
Forty-eight regional magazines, including Chicago magazine and Philadelphia Magazine , partner with Castle Connolly to use their online Top Doctor database of more than 61,000 physicians in every major metropolitan area, said Steve Leibforth, managing director of Castle Connolly’s Top Doctors.
The company says it sends annual surveys to tens of thousands of practicing doctors asking them to nominate colleagues in their specialty. The nominated doctors are vetted by Castle Connolly’s physician-led research team on several criteria including professional qualifications, education, hospital and faculty appointments, research leadership, professional reputation and disciplinary history, and outcomes data when available, said Mr. Leibforth.
Washingtonian magazine says it sends annual online surveys to 13,500 physicians in the DC metro area asking them to nominate one colleague in their specialty. The top vote-getters in each of 39 categories are designated Top Doctors.
Orlando Family Magazine says its annual Top Doctor selections are based on reader polls and doctor nominations.
Consumers’ Research Council of America uses a point system based on each year the doctor has been in practice, education and continuing education, board certification, and membership in professional medical societies.
Doctors have many ways to promote that they’re listed as a “top” doctor. Dr. St. Louis takes advantage of the magazine’s free reprints, which she puts in her waiting room.
Others buy plaques to hang up in their waiting rooms or offices and announce the distinction on their websites, blogs, or social media. “They have to maximize the magazine distinction or it’s worthless,” said Ms. Eliscu.
Employers also like to spread the word when their doctors make it on “Top Doctor” lists.
“With Emory physicians making up nearly 50 percent of the list, that’s more than any other health system in Atlanta,” said an Emory University press release after nearly half of the university’s doctors made the Top Doctors list in Atlanta magazine.
Patients may be impressed: What about your peers?
Dr. St. Louis said that making some of these lists is less impressive than having a peer-reviewed journal article or receiving professional awards.
“Just because a physician is listed in a magazine as a ‘top doctor’ does not mean they are the best. There are far more medical, clinical, and scientific points to consider than just a pretty picture in a style magazine,” she said.
Wanda Filer, MD, MBA, who practiced family medicine until last year when she became chief medical officer for VaxCare in Orlando, said she ignores the many congratulatory letters in the mail announcing that she’s made one list or another.
“I don’t put much credence in the lists. I get notifications fairly often, and to me it always looks like they’re trying to sell a plaque. I’d rather let my work speak for itself.”
Arlen Meyers, MD, MBA, president and CEO of the Society of Physician Entrepreneurs and a paid strategic adviser to RYTE, a data-driven site for “best doctors” and “best hospitals,” said he received several of these “top doctor” awards when he was a professor of otolaryngology at the University of Colorado.
He has been critical of these awards for some time. “These doctor beauty pageants may be good for business but have little value for patients.”
He would like to see a new approach that is driven by data and what patients value. “If I have a lump in my thyroid, I want to know the best doctor to treat me based on outcomes data.”
He said a good rating system would include a data-driven approach based on treatment outcomes, publicly available data, price transparency, and patient values.
Whether a physician feels honored to be named a top physician or sees little value in it, most doctors are aware of the list’s marketing value for their practices and many choose to make use of it.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Thousands of doctors get a shout out every year when they make the “Top Doctor” lists in various magazines. Some may be your colleagues or competitors. Should you be concerned if you’re not on the list?
Best Doctor lists are clearly popular with readers and make money for the magazines. They can also bring in patient revenue for doctors and their employers who promote them in news releases and on their websites.
For doctors on some of the top lists, the recognition can bring not only patients, but national or international visibility.
While the dollar value is hard to come by, some doctors say that these lists have attracted new patients to their practice.
Sarah St. Louis, MD, a physician manager of Associates in Urogynecology, is one of Orlando Style magazine’s Doctors of the Year and Orlando Family Magazine’s Top Doctors.
Several new patients have told her that they read about her in the magazines’ Top Doctor lists. “Urogynecology is not a well-known specialty – it’s a helpful way to get the word out about the women’s health specialty and what I do,” said Dr. St. Louis, an early career physician who started her practice in 2017.
The additional patient revenue has been worth the cost of displaying her profile in Orlando Style, which was about $800 for a half-page spread with her photo.
Top Doctor lists also work well for specialty practices whose patients can self-refer, such as plastic surgery, dermatology, orthopedics, gastroenterology, and geriatric medicine, said Andrea Eliscu, RN, founder and president of Medical Marketing in Orlando.
Being in a competitive market also matters. If a practice is the only one in town, those doctors may not need the publicity as much as doctors in an urban practice that faces stiff competition.
How do doctors get on these lists?
In most cases, doctors have to be nominated by their peers, a process that some say is flawed because it may shut out doctors who are less popular or well-connected.
Forty-eight regional magazines, including Chicago magazine and Philadelphia Magazine , partner with Castle Connolly to use their online Top Doctor database of more than 61,000 physicians in every major metropolitan area, said Steve Leibforth, managing director of Castle Connolly’s Top Doctors.
The company says it sends annual surveys to tens of thousands of practicing doctors asking them to nominate colleagues in their specialty. The nominated doctors are vetted by Castle Connolly’s physician-led research team on several criteria including professional qualifications, education, hospital and faculty appointments, research leadership, professional reputation and disciplinary history, and outcomes data when available, said Mr. Leibforth.
Washingtonian magazine says it sends annual online surveys to 13,500 physicians in the DC metro area asking them to nominate one colleague in their specialty. The top vote-getters in each of 39 categories are designated Top Doctors.
Orlando Family Magazine says its annual Top Doctor selections are based on reader polls and doctor nominations.
Consumers’ Research Council of America uses a point system based on each year the doctor has been in practice, education and continuing education, board certification, and membership in professional medical societies.
Doctors have many ways to promote that they’re listed as a “top” doctor. Dr. St. Louis takes advantage of the magazine’s free reprints, which she puts in her waiting room.
Others buy plaques to hang up in their waiting rooms or offices and announce the distinction on their websites, blogs, or social media. “They have to maximize the magazine distinction or it’s worthless,” said Ms. Eliscu.
Employers also like to spread the word when their doctors make it on “Top Doctor” lists.
“With Emory physicians making up nearly 50 percent of the list, that’s more than any other health system in Atlanta,” said an Emory University press release after nearly half of the university’s doctors made the Top Doctors list in Atlanta magazine.
Patients may be impressed: What about your peers?
Dr. St. Louis said that making some of these lists is less impressive than having a peer-reviewed journal article or receiving professional awards.
“Just because a physician is listed in a magazine as a ‘top doctor’ does not mean they are the best. There are far more medical, clinical, and scientific points to consider than just a pretty picture in a style magazine,” she said.
Wanda Filer, MD, MBA, who practiced family medicine until last year when she became chief medical officer for VaxCare in Orlando, said she ignores the many congratulatory letters in the mail announcing that she’s made one list or another.
“I don’t put much credence in the lists. I get notifications fairly often, and to me it always looks like they’re trying to sell a plaque. I’d rather let my work speak for itself.”
Arlen Meyers, MD, MBA, president and CEO of the Society of Physician Entrepreneurs and a paid strategic adviser to RYTE, a data-driven site for “best doctors” and “best hospitals,” said he received several of these “top doctor” awards when he was a professor of otolaryngology at the University of Colorado.
He has been critical of these awards for some time. “These doctor beauty pageants may be good for business but have little value for patients.”
He would like to see a new approach that is driven by data and what patients value. “If I have a lump in my thyroid, I want to know the best doctor to treat me based on outcomes data.”
He said a good rating system would include a data-driven approach based on treatment outcomes, publicly available data, price transparency, and patient values.
Whether a physician feels honored to be named a top physician or sees little value in it, most doctors are aware of the list’s marketing value for their practices and many choose to make use of it.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Thousands of doctors get a shout out every year when they make the “Top Doctor” lists in various magazines. Some may be your colleagues or competitors. Should you be concerned if you’re not on the list?
Best Doctor lists are clearly popular with readers and make money for the magazines. They can also bring in patient revenue for doctors and their employers who promote them in news releases and on their websites.
For doctors on some of the top lists, the recognition can bring not only patients, but national or international visibility.
While the dollar value is hard to come by, some doctors say that these lists have attracted new patients to their practice.
Sarah St. Louis, MD, a physician manager of Associates in Urogynecology, is one of Orlando Style magazine’s Doctors of the Year and Orlando Family Magazine’s Top Doctors.
Several new patients have told her that they read about her in the magazines’ Top Doctor lists. “Urogynecology is not a well-known specialty – it’s a helpful way to get the word out about the women’s health specialty and what I do,” said Dr. St. Louis, an early career physician who started her practice in 2017.
The additional patient revenue has been worth the cost of displaying her profile in Orlando Style, which was about $800 for a half-page spread with her photo.
Top Doctor lists also work well for specialty practices whose patients can self-refer, such as plastic surgery, dermatology, orthopedics, gastroenterology, and geriatric medicine, said Andrea Eliscu, RN, founder and president of Medical Marketing in Orlando.
Being in a competitive market also matters. If a practice is the only one in town, those doctors may not need the publicity as much as doctors in an urban practice that faces stiff competition.
How do doctors get on these lists?
In most cases, doctors have to be nominated by their peers, a process that some say is flawed because it may shut out doctors who are less popular or well-connected.
Forty-eight regional magazines, including Chicago magazine and Philadelphia Magazine , partner with Castle Connolly to use their online Top Doctor database of more than 61,000 physicians in every major metropolitan area, said Steve Leibforth, managing director of Castle Connolly’s Top Doctors.
The company says it sends annual surveys to tens of thousands of practicing doctors asking them to nominate colleagues in their specialty. The nominated doctors are vetted by Castle Connolly’s physician-led research team on several criteria including professional qualifications, education, hospital and faculty appointments, research leadership, professional reputation and disciplinary history, and outcomes data when available, said Mr. Leibforth.
Washingtonian magazine says it sends annual online surveys to 13,500 physicians in the DC metro area asking them to nominate one colleague in their specialty. The top vote-getters in each of 39 categories are designated Top Doctors.
Orlando Family Magazine says its annual Top Doctor selections are based on reader polls and doctor nominations.
Consumers’ Research Council of America uses a point system based on each year the doctor has been in practice, education and continuing education, board certification, and membership in professional medical societies.
Doctors have many ways to promote that they’re listed as a “top” doctor. Dr. St. Louis takes advantage of the magazine’s free reprints, which she puts in her waiting room.
Others buy plaques to hang up in their waiting rooms or offices and announce the distinction on their websites, blogs, or social media. “They have to maximize the magazine distinction or it’s worthless,” said Ms. Eliscu.
Employers also like to spread the word when their doctors make it on “Top Doctor” lists.
“With Emory physicians making up nearly 50 percent of the list, that’s more than any other health system in Atlanta,” said an Emory University press release after nearly half of the university’s doctors made the Top Doctors list in Atlanta magazine.
Patients may be impressed: What about your peers?
Dr. St. Louis said that making some of these lists is less impressive than having a peer-reviewed journal article or receiving professional awards.
“Just because a physician is listed in a magazine as a ‘top doctor’ does not mean they are the best. There are far more medical, clinical, and scientific points to consider than just a pretty picture in a style magazine,” she said.
Wanda Filer, MD, MBA, who practiced family medicine until last year when she became chief medical officer for VaxCare in Orlando, said she ignores the many congratulatory letters in the mail announcing that she’s made one list or another.
“I don’t put much credence in the lists. I get notifications fairly often, and to me it always looks like they’re trying to sell a plaque. I’d rather let my work speak for itself.”
Arlen Meyers, MD, MBA, president and CEO of the Society of Physician Entrepreneurs and a paid strategic adviser to RYTE, a data-driven site for “best doctors” and “best hospitals,” said he received several of these “top doctor” awards when he was a professor of otolaryngology at the University of Colorado.
He has been critical of these awards for some time. “These doctor beauty pageants may be good for business but have little value for patients.”
He would like to see a new approach that is driven by data and what patients value. “If I have a lump in my thyroid, I want to know the best doctor to treat me based on outcomes data.”
He said a good rating system would include a data-driven approach based on treatment outcomes, publicly available data, price transparency, and patient values.
Whether a physician feels honored to be named a top physician or sees little value in it, most doctors are aware of the list’s marketing value for their practices and many choose to make use of it.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Seven ways doctors could get better payment from insurers
, say experts in physician-payer contracts.
Many doctors sign long-term agreements and then forget about them, says Marcia Brauchler, president and founder of Physicians’ Ally, Littleton, Colorado, a health care consulting company. “The average doctor is trying to run a practice on 2010 rates because they haven’t touched their insurance contracts for 10 years,” she says.
Payers also make a lot of money by adopting dozens of unilateral policy and procedure changes every year that they know physicians are too busy to read. They are counting on the fact that few doctors will understand what the policy changes are and that even fewer will contest them, says Greg Brodek, JD, chair of the health law practice group and head of the managed care litigation practice at Duane Morris, who represents doctors in disputes with payers.
These experts say doctors can push back on one-sided payer contracts and negotiate changes. Mr. Brodek says some practices have more leverage than others to influence payers – if they are larger, in a specialty that the payer needs in its network, or located in a remote area where the payer has limited options.
Here are seven key areas to pay attention to:
1. Long-term contracts. Most doctors sign multiyear “evergreen” contracts that renew automatically every year. This allows insurers to continue to pay doctors the same rate for years.
To avoid this, doctors should negotiate new rates when their agreements renew or, if they prefer, ask that a cost-of-living adjustment be included in the multiyear contract that applies to subsequent years, says Ms. Brauchler.
2. Fee schedules. Payers will “whitewash” what they’re paying you by saying it’s 100% of the payer fee schedule. When it comes to Medicare, they may be paying you a lot less, says Ms. Brauchler.
“My biggest takeaway is to compare the CPT codes of the payer’s fee schedule against what Medicare allows. For example, for CPT code 99213, a 15-minute established office visit, if Medicare pays you $100 and Aetna pays you $75.00, you’re getting 75% of Medicare,” says Ms. Brauchler. To avoid this, doctors should ask that the contract state that reimbursement be made according to Medicare’s medical policies rather than the payer’s.
3. Audits. Commercial payers will claim they have a contractual right to conduct pre- and post-payment audits of physicians’ claims that can result in reduced payments. The contract only states that if doctors correctly submit claims, they will get paid, not that they will have to go through extra steps, which is a breach of their agreement, says Mr. Brodek.
In his experience, 90% of payers back down when asked to provide the contractual basis to conduct these audits. “Or, they take the position that it’s not in the contract but that they have a policy.”
4. Contract amendments versus policies and procedures. This is a huge area that needs to be clarified in contracts and monitored by providers throughout their relationships with payers. Contracts have three elements: the parties, the services provided, and the payment. Changing any one of those terms requires an amendment and advance written notice that has to be delivered to the other party in a certain way, such as by overnight delivery, says Mr. Brodek.
In addition, both parties have to sign that they agree to an amendment. “But, that’s too cumbersome and complicated for payers who have decided to adopt policies instead. These are unilateral changes made with no advance notice given, since the payer typically posts the change on its website,” says Mr. Brodek.
5. Recoupment efforts. Payers will review claims after they’re paid and contact the doctor saying they found a mistake, such as inappropriate coding. They will claim that the doctor now owes them a large sum of money based on a percentage of claims reviewed. “They typically send the doctor a letter that ends with, ‘If you do not pay this amount within 30 days, we will offset the amount due against future payments that we would otherwise make to you,’” says Mr. Brodek.
He recommends that contracts include the doctors’ right to contest an audit so the “payer doesn’t have the unilateral right to disregard the initial coding that the doctor appropriately assigned to the claim and recoup the money anyway,” says Mr. Brodek.
6. Medical network rentals and products. Most contracts say that payers can rent out their medical networks to other health plans, such as HMOs, and that the clinicians agree to comply with all of their policies and procedures. The agreement may also cover the products of other plans.
“The problem is that physicians are not given information about the other plans, including their terms and conditions for getting paid,” says Mr. Brodek. If a problem with payment arises, they have no written agreement with that plan, which makes it harder to enforce.
“That’s why we recommend that doctors negotiate agreements that only cover the main payer. Most of the time, the payer is amenable to putting that language in the contract,” he says.
7. Payer products. In the past several years, a typical contract has included appendices that list the payer’s products, such as Medicare, workers compensation, auto insurance liability, or health care exchange products. Many clinicians don’t realize they can pick the plans they want to participate in by accepting or opting out, says Mr. Brodek.
“We advise clients to limit the contract to what you want covered and to make informed decisions, because some products have low fees set by the states, such as workers compensation and health care exchanges,” says Mr. Brodek.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, say experts in physician-payer contracts.
Many doctors sign long-term agreements and then forget about them, says Marcia Brauchler, president and founder of Physicians’ Ally, Littleton, Colorado, a health care consulting company. “The average doctor is trying to run a practice on 2010 rates because they haven’t touched their insurance contracts for 10 years,” she says.
Payers also make a lot of money by adopting dozens of unilateral policy and procedure changes every year that they know physicians are too busy to read. They are counting on the fact that few doctors will understand what the policy changes are and that even fewer will contest them, says Greg Brodek, JD, chair of the health law practice group and head of the managed care litigation practice at Duane Morris, who represents doctors in disputes with payers.
These experts say doctors can push back on one-sided payer contracts and negotiate changes. Mr. Brodek says some practices have more leverage than others to influence payers – if they are larger, in a specialty that the payer needs in its network, or located in a remote area where the payer has limited options.
Here are seven key areas to pay attention to:
1. Long-term contracts. Most doctors sign multiyear “evergreen” contracts that renew automatically every year. This allows insurers to continue to pay doctors the same rate for years.
To avoid this, doctors should negotiate new rates when their agreements renew or, if they prefer, ask that a cost-of-living adjustment be included in the multiyear contract that applies to subsequent years, says Ms. Brauchler.
2. Fee schedules. Payers will “whitewash” what they’re paying you by saying it’s 100% of the payer fee schedule. When it comes to Medicare, they may be paying you a lot less, says Ms. Brauchler.
“My biggest takeaway is to compare the CPT codes of the payer’s fee schedule against what Medicare allows. For example, for CPT code 99213, a 15-minute established office visit, if Medicare pays you $100 and Aetna pays you $75.00, you’re getting 75% of Medicare,” says Ms. Brauchler. To avoid this, doctors should ask that the contract state that reimbursement be made according to Medicare’s medical policies rather than the payer’s.
3. Audits. Commercial payers will claim they have a contractual right to conduct pre- and post-payment audits of physicians’ claims that can result in reduced payments. The contract only states that if doctors correctly submit claims, they will get paid, not that they will have to go through extra steps, which is a breach of their agreement, says Mr. Brodek.
In his experience, 90% of payers back down when asked to provide the contractual basis to conduct these audits. “Or, they take the position that it’s not in the contract but that they have a policy.”
4. Contract amendments versus policies and procedures. This is a huge area that needs to be clarified in contracts and monitored by providers throughout their relationships with payers. Contracts have three elements: the parties, the services provided, and the payment. Changing any one of those terms requires an amendment and advance written notice that has to be delivered to the other party in a certain way, such as by overnight delivery, says Mr. Brodek.
In addition, both parties have to sign that they agree to an amendment. “But, that’s too cumbersome and complicated for payers who have decided to adopt policies instead. These are unilateral changes made with no advance notice given, since the payer typically posts the change on its website,” says Mr. Brodek.
5. Recoupment efforts. Payers will review claims after they’re paid and contact the doctor saying they found a mistake, such as inappropriate coding. They will claim that the doctor now owes them a large sum of money based on a percentage of claims reviewed. “They typically send the doctor a letter that ends with, ‘If you do not pay this amount within 30 days, we will offset the amount due against future payments that we would otherwise make to you,’” says Mr. Brodek.
He recommends that contracts include the doctors’ right to contest an audit so the “payer doesn’t have the unilateral right to disregard the initial coding that the doctor appropriately assigned to the claim and recoup the money anyway,” says Mr. Brodek.
6. Medical network rentals and products. Most contracts say that payers can rent out their medical networks to other health plans, such as HMOs, and that the clinicians agree to comply with all of their policies and procedures. The agreement may also cover the products of other plans.
“The problem is that physicians are not given information about the other plans, including their terms and conditions for getting paid,” says Mr. Brodek. If a problem with payment arises, they have no written agreement with that plan, which makes it harder to enforce.
“That’s why we recommend that doctors negotiate agreements that only cover the main payer. Most of the time, the payer is amenable to putting that language in the contract,” he says.
7. Payer products. In the past several years, a typical contract has included appendices that list the payer’s products, such as Medicare, workers compensation, auto insurance liability, or health care exchange products. Many clinicians don’t realize they can pick the plans they want to participate in by accepting or opting out, says Mr. Brodek.
“We advise clients to limit the contract to what you want covered and to make informed decisions, because some products have low fees set by the states, such as workers compensation and health care exchanges,” says Mr. Brodek.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, say experts in physician-payer contracts.
Many doctors sign long-term agreements and then forget about them, says Marcia Brauchler, president and founder of Physicians’ Ally, Littleton, Colorado, a health care consulting company. “The average doctor is trying to run a practice on 2010 rates because they haven’t touched their insurance contracts for 10 years,” she says.
Payers also make a lot of money by adopting dozens of unilateral policy and procedure changes every year that they know physicians are too busy to read. They are counting on the fact that few doctors will understand what the policy changes are and that even fewer will contest them, says Greg Brodek, JD, chair of the health law practice group and head of the managed care litigation practice at Duane Morris, who represents doctors in disputes with payers.
These experts say doctors can push back on one-sided payer contracts and negotiate changes. Mr. Brodek says some practices have more leverage than others to influence payers – if they are larger, in a specialty that the payer needs in its network, or located in a remote area where the payer has limited options.
Here are seven key areas to pay attention to:
1. Long-term contracts. Most doctors sign multiyear “evergreen” contracts that renew automatically every year. This allows insurers to continue to pay doctors the same rate for years.
To avoid this, doctors should negotiate new rates when their agreements renew or, if they prefer, ask that a cost-of-living adjustment be included in the multiyear contract that applies to subsequent years, says Ms. Brauchler.
2. Fee schedules. Payers will “whitewash” what they’re paying you by saying it’s 100% of the payer fee schedule. When it comes to Medicare, they may be paying you a lot less, says Ms. Brauchler.
“My biggest takeaway is to compare the CPT codes of the payer’s fee schedule against what Medicare allows. For example, for CPT code 99213, a 15-minute established office visit, if Medicare pays you $100 and Aetna pays you $75.00, you’re getting 75% of Medicare,” says Ms. Brauchler. To avoid this, doctors should ask that the contract state that reimbursement be made according to Medicare’s medical policies rather than the payer’s.
3. Audits. Commercial payers will claim they have a contractual right to conduct pre- and post-payment audits of physicians’ claims that can result in reduced payments. The contract only states that if doctors correctly submit claims, they will get paid, not that they will have to go through extra steps, which is a breach of their agreement, says Mr. Brodek.
In his experience, 90% of payers back down when asked to provide the contractual basis to conduct these audits. “Or, they take the position that it’s not in the contract but that they have a policy.”
4. Contract amendments versus policies and procedures. This is a huge area that needs to be clarified in contracts and monitored by providers throughout their relationships with payers. Contracts have three elements: the parties, the services provided, and the payment. Changing any one of those terms requires an amendment and advance written notice that has to be delivered to the other party in a certain way, such as by overnight delivery, says Mr. Brodek.
In addition, both parties have to sign that they agree to an amendment. “But, that’s too cumbersome and complicated for payers who have decided to adopt policies instead. These are unilateral changes made with no advance notice given, since the payer typically posts the change on its website,” says Mr. Brodek.
5. Recoupment efforts. Payers will review claims after they’re paid and contact the doctor saying they found a mistake, such as inappropriate coding. They will claim that the doctor now owes them a large sum of money based on a percentage of claims reviewed. “They typically send the doctor a letter that ends with, ‘If you do not pay this amount within 30 days, we will offset the amount due against future payments that we would otherwise make to you,’” says Mr. Brodek.
He recommends that contracts include the doctors’ right to contest an audit so the “payer doesn’t have the unilateral right to disregard the initial coding that the doctor appropriately assigned to the claim and recoup the money anyway,” says Mr. Brodek.
6. Medical network rentals and products. Most contracts say that payers can rent out their medical networks to other health plans, such as HMOs, and that the clinicians agree to comply with all of their policies and procedures. The agreement may also cover the products of other plans.
“The problem is that physicians are not given information about the other plans, including their terms and conditions for getting paid,” says Mr. Brodek. If a problem with payment arises, they have no written agreement with that plan, which makes it harder to enforce.
“That’s why we recommend that doctors negotiate agreements that only cover the main payer. Most of the time, the payer is amenable to putting that language in the contract,” he says.
7. Payer products. In the past several years, a typical contract has included appendices that list the payer’s products, such as Medicare, workers compensation, auto insurance liability, or health care exchange products. Many clinicians don’t realize they can pick the plans they want to participate in by accepting or opting out, says Mr. Brodek.
“We advise clients to limit the contract to what you want covered and to make informed decisions, because some products have low fees set by the states, such as workers compensation and health care exchanges,” says Mr. Brodek.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
How to deal with offensive or impaired doctors
Knowing what to say and do can lead to a positive outcome for the physician involved and the organization.
Misbehaving and impaired physicians put their organizations at risk, which can lead to malpractice/patient injury lawsuits, labor law and harassment claims, and a damaged reputation through negative social media reviews, said Debra Phairas, MBA, president of Practice and Liability Consultants LLC, at the annual meeting of the Medical Group Management Association (MGMA) .
“Verbal harassment or bullying claims can result in large dollar awards against the organizations that knew about the behavior and did nothing to stop it. Organizations can be sued for that,” says Ms. Phairas.
She recalls a doctor who called a female doctor “an entitled bitch” and the administrator “incompetent” in front of other staff. “He would pick on one department manager at every meeting and humiliate them in front of the others,” says Ms. Phairas.
After working with a human resources (HR) attorney and conducting independent reviews, they used a strategy Ms. Phairas calls her “3 C’s” for dealing with disruptive doctors.
Confront, correct, and/or counsel
The three C’s can work individually or together, depending on the doctor’s situation. Confronting a physician can start with an informal discussion; correcting can involve seeking a written apology that directly addresses the problem or sending a letter of admonition; and coaching or counseling can be offered. If the doctor resists those efforts, practice administrators can issue a final letter of warning and then suspend or terminate the physician, says Ms. Phairas.
Sometimes having a conversation with a disruptive doctor about the risks and consequences is enough to change the offending behavior, says Ms. Phairas.
She recalled being asked by a medical group to meet with a physician who she says was “snapping the bra straps of medical assistants in the hall — everyone there was horrified. I told him that’s not appropriate, that he was placing everyone at risk and they will terminate him if he didn’t stop. I asked for his commitment to stop, and he agreed,” says Ms. Phairas.
She also recommends implementing these strategies to prevent and deal with disruptive physicians:
- Implement a code of conduct and share it during interviews;
- Have zero tolerance policies and procedures for documenting behavior;
- Get advice from a good employment attorney;
- Implement written performance improvement plans;
- Provide resources to change the behavior;
- Follow through with suspension and termination; and
- Add to shareholder agreements a clause stating that partners/shareholders can gently ask or insist that the physician obtain counseling or help.
Getting impaired doctors help
Doctors can be impaired through substance abuse, a serious medical illness, mental illness, or age-related deterioration.
Life events such as divorce or the death of a spouse, child, or a physician partner can affect a doctor’s mental health. “In those cases, you need to have the courage to say you’re really depressed and we all agree you need to get help,” says Ms. Phairas.
She recalls one occasion in which a practice administration staff member could not locate a doctor whose patients were waiting to be seen. “He was so devastated from his divorce that he had crawled into a ball beneath his desk. She had to coax him out and tell him that they were worried about him and he needed to get help.”
Another reason doctors may not be performing well may be because of an undiagnosed medical illness. Doctors in an orthopedic group were mad at another partner who had slowed down and couldn’t help pay the expenses. “They were ready to terminate him when he went to the doctor and learned he had colon cancer,” says Ms. Phairas.
Ms. Phairas recommends that practices update their partner shareholder agreements regularly with the following:
- Include “fit for duty” examinations, especially after age 65.
- Insist that a physician be evaluated by a doctor outside the practice. The doctor may be one that they agree upon or one chosen by the local medical society president.
- Include in the agreement the clause, “Partners and employees will be subject to review for impairment due to matters including but not limited to age-related, physical, or mental conditions.”
- Establish a voting mechanism for terminating a physician.
Aging doctors who won’t retire
Some doctors have retired early because of COVID, whereas others are staying on because they are feeling financial pressures — they lost a lot of money last year and need to make up for it, says Ms. Phairas.
She warned that administrators have to be careful in dealing with older doctors because of age discrimination laws.
Doctors may not notice they are declining mentally until it becomes a problem. Ms. Phairas recalls an internist senior partner who started behaving erratically when he was 78 years old. “He wrote himself a $25,000 check from the organization’s funds without telling his partners, left a patient he should have been watching and she fell over and sued the practice, and the staff started noticing that he was forgetting or not doing things,” says Ms. Phairas.
She sought guidance from a good HR attorney and involved a malpractice attorney. She then met with the senior partner. “I reminded him of his Hippocratic Oath that he took when he became a doctor and told him that his actions were harming patients. I pleaded with him that it was time to retire. He didn’t.”
Because this physician wouldn’t retire, the practice referred to their updated shareholder agreement, which stated that they could insist that the physician undergo a neuropsychiatric assessment from a certified specialist. He didn’t pass the evaluation, which then provided evidence of his declining cognitive skills.
“All the doctors, myself, and the HR attorney talked to him about this and laid out all the facts. It was hard to say these things, but he listened and left. We went through the termination process to protect the practice and avoid litigation. The malpractice insurer also refused to renew his policy,” says Ms. Phairas.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Knowing what to say and do can lead to a positive outcome for the physician involved and the organization.
Misbehaving and impaired physicians put their organizations at risk, which can lead to malpractice/patient injury lawsuits, labor law and harassment claims, and a damaged reputation through negative social media reviews, said Debra Phairas, MBA, president of Practice and Liability Consultants LLC, at the annual meeting of the Medical Group Management Association (MGMA) .
“Verbal harassment or bullying claims can result in large dollar awards against the organizations that knew about the behavior and did nothing to stop it. Organizations can be sued for that,” says Ms. Phairas.
She recalls a doctor who called a female doctor “an entitled bitch” and the administrator “incompetent” in front of other staff. “He would pick on one department manager at every meeting and humiliate them in front of the others,” says Ms. Phairas.
After working with a human resources (HR) attorney and conducting independent reviews, they used a strategy Ms. Phairas calls her “3 C’s” for dealing with disruptive doctors.
Confront, correct, and/or counsel
The three C’s can work individually or together, depending on the doctor’s situation. Confronting a physician can start with an informal discussion; correcting can involve seeking a written apology that directly addresses the problem or sending a letter of admonition; and coaching or counseling can be offered. If the doctor resists those efforts, practice administrators can issue a final letter of warning and then suspend or terminate the physician, says Ms. Phairas.
Sometimes having a conversation with a disruptive doctor about the risks and consequences is enough to change the offending behavior, says Ms. Phairas.
She recalled being asked by a medical group to meet with a physician who she says was “snapping the bra straps of medical assistants in the hall — everyone there was horrified. I told him that’s not appropriate, that he was placing everyone at risk and they will terminate him if he didn’t stop. I asked for his commitment to stop, and he agreed,” says Ms. Phairas.
She also recommends implementing these strategies to prevent and deal with disruptive physicians:
- Implement a code of conduct and share it during interviews;
- Have zero tolerance policies and procedures for documenting behavior;
- Get advice from a good employment attorney;
- Implement written performance improvement plans;
- Provide resources to change the behavior;
- Follow through with suspension and termination; and
- Add to shareholder agreements a clause stating that partners/shareholders can gently ask or insist that the physician obtain counseling or help.
Getting impaired doctors help
Doctors can be impaired through substance abuse, a serious medical illness, mental illness, or age-related deterioration.
Life events such as divorce or the death of a spouse, child, or a physician partner can affect a doctor’s mental health. “In those cases, you need to have the courage to say you’re really depressed and we all agree you need to get help,” says Ms. Phairas.
She recalls one occasion in which a practice administration staff member could not locate a doctor whose patients were waiting to be seen. “He was so devastated from his divorce that he had crawled into a ball beneath his desk. She had to coax him out and tell him that they were worried about him and he needed to get help.”
Another reason doctors may not be performing well may be because of an undiagnosed medical illness. Doctors in an orthopedic group were mad at another partner who had slowed down and couldn’t help pay the expenses. “They were ready to terminate him when he went to the doctor and learned he had colon cancer,” says Ms. Phairas.
Ms. Phairas recommends that practices update their partner shareholder agreements regularly with the following:
- Include “fit for duty” examinations, especially after age 65.
- Insist that a physician be evaluated by a doctor outside the practice. The doctor may be one that they agree upon or one chosen by the local medical society president.
- Include in the agreement the clause, “Partners and employees will be subject to review for impairment due to matters including but not limited to age-related, physical, or mental conditions.”
- Establish a voting mechanism for terminating a physician.
Aging doctors who won’t retire
Some doctors have retired early because of COVID, whereas others are staying on because they are feeling financial pressures — they lost a lot of money last year and need to make up for it, says Ms. Phairas.
She warned that administrators have to be careful in dealing with older doctors because of age discrimination laws.
Doctors may not notice they are declining mentally until it becomes a problem. Ms. Phairas recalls an internist senior partner who started behaving erratically when he was 78 years old. “He wrote himself a $25,000 check from the organization’s funds without telling his partners, left a patient he should have been watching and she fell over and sued the practice, and the staff started noticing that he was forgetting or not doing things,” says Ms. Phairas.
She sought guidance from a good HR attorney and involved a malpractice attorney. She then met with the senior partner. “I reminded him of his Hippocratic Oath that he took when he became a doctor and told him that his actions were harming patients. I pleaded with him that it was time to retire. He didn’t.”
Because this physician wouldn’t retire, the practice referred to their updated shareholder agreement, which stated that they could insist that the physician undergo a neuropsychiatric assessment from a certified specialist. He didn’t pass the evaluation, which then provided evidence of his declining cognitive skills.
“All the doctors, myself, and the HR attorney talked to him about this and laid out all the facts. It was hard to say these things, but he listened and left. We went through the termination process to protect the practice and avoid litigation. The malpractice insurer also refused to renew his policy,” says Ms. Phairas.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Knowing what to say and do can lead to a positive outcome for the physician involved and the organization.
Misbehaving and impaired physicians put their organizations at risk, which can lead to malpractice/patient injury lawsuits, labor law and harassment claims, and a damaged reputation through negative social media reviews, said Debra Phairas, MBA, president of Practice and Liability Consultants LLC, at the annual meeting of the Medical Group Management Association (MGMA) .
“Verbal harassment or bullying claims can result in large dollar awards against the organizations that knew about the behavior and did nothing to stop it. Organizations can be sued for that,” says Ms. Phairas.
She recalls a doctor who called a female doctor “an entitled bitch” and the administrator “incompetent” in front of other staff. “He would pick on one department manager at every meeting and humiliate them in front of the others,” says Ms. Phairas.
After working with a human resources (HR) attorney and conducting independent reviews, they used a strategy Ms. Phairas calls her “3 C’s” for dealing with disruptive doctors.
Confront, correct, and/or counsel
The three C’s can work individually or together, depending on the doctor’s situation. Confronting a physician can start with an informal discussion; correcting can involve seeking a written apology that directly addresses the problem or sending a letter of admonition; and coaching or counseling can be offered. If the doctor resists those efforts, practice administrators can issue a final letter of warning and then suspend or terminate the physician, says Ms. Phairas.
Sometimes having a conversation with a disruptive doctor about the risks and consequences is enough to change the offending behavior, says Ms. Phairas.
She recalled being asked by a medical group to meet with a physician who she says was “snapping the bra straps of medical assistants in the hall — everyone there was horrified. I told him that’s not appropriate, that he was placing everyone at risk and they will terminate him if he didn’t stop. I asked for his commitment to stop, and he agreed,” says Ms. Phairas.
She also recommends implementing these strategies to prevent and deal with disruptive physicians:
- Implement a code of conduct and share it during interviews;
- Have zero tolerance policies and procedures for documenting behavior;
- Get advice from a good employment attorney;
- Implement written performance improvement plans;
- Provide resources to change the behavior;
- Follow through with suspension and termination; and
- Add to shareholder agreements a clause stating that partners/shareholders can gently ask or insist that the physician obtain counseling or help.
Getting impaired doctors help
Doctors can be impaired through substance abuse, a serious medical illness, mental illness, or age-related deterioration.
Life events such as divorce or the death of a spouse, child, or a physician partner can affect a doctor’s mental health. “In those cases, you need to have the courage to say you’re really depressed and we all agree you need to get help,” says Ms. Phairas.
She recalls one occasion in which a practice administration staff member could not locate a doctor whose patients were waiting to be seen. “He was so devastated from his divorce that he had crawled into a ball beneath his desk. She had to coax him out and tell him that they were worried about him and he needed to get help.”
Another reason doctors may not be performing well may be because of an undiagnosed medical illness. Doctors in an orthopedic group were mad at another partner who had slowed down and couldn’t help pay the expenses. “They were ready to terminate him when he went to the doctor and learned he had colon cancer,” says Ms. Phairas.
Ms. Phairas recommends that practices update their partner shareholder agreements regularly with the following:
- Include “fit for duty” examinations, especially after age 65.
- Insist that a physician be evaluated by a doctor outside the practice. The doctor may be one that they agree upon or one chosen by the local medical society president.
- Include in the agreement the clause, “Partners and employees will be subject to review for impairment due to matters including but not limited to age-related, physical, or mental conditions.”
- Establish a voting mechanism for terminating a physician.
Aging doctors who won’t retire
Some doctors have retired early because of COVID, whereas others are staying on because they are feeling financial pressures — they lost a lot of money last year and need to make up for it, says Ms. Phairas.
She warned that administrators have to be careful in dealing with older doctors because of age discrimination laws.
Doctors may not notice they are declining mentally until it becomes a problem. Ms. Phairas recalls an internist senior partner who started behaving erratically when he was 78 years old. “He wrote himself a $25,000 check from the organization’s funds without telling his partners, left a patient he should have been watching and she fell over and sued the practice, and the staff started noticing that he was forgetting or not doing things,” says Ms. Phairas.
She sought guidance from a good HR attorney and involved a malpractice attorney. She then met with the senior partner. “I reminded him of his Hippocratic Oath that he took when he became a doctor and told him that his actions were harming patients. I pleaded with him that it was time to retire. He didn’t.”
Because this physician wouldn’t retire, the practice referred to their updated shareholder agreement, which stated that they could insist that the physician undergo a neuropsychiatric assessment from a certified specialist. He didn’t pass the evaluation, which then provided evidence of his declining cognitive skills.
“All the doctors, myself, and the HR attorney talked to him about this and laid out all the facts. It was hard to say these things, but he listened and left. We went through the termination process to protect the practice and avoid litigation. The malpractice insurer also refused to renew his policy,” says Ms. Phairas.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Social relationships predict risk of major depression
The quality of social relationships is a significant risk factor for major depression, findings from a longitudinal study of more than 4,000 American adults showed.
The estimated risk of developing major depression was 14% for people with poor-quality relationships, compared with 6.7% for people with high-quality relationships.
The nationally representative study by Dr. Alan R. Teo and his associates looked at whether the quality and quantity of social relationships in a community population increased the risk of developing major depression a decade later.
Dr. Teo and his associates conducted surveys at baseline in 1995-1996 and again in 2004-2006 with 4,642 participants aged 25-75. Women made up slightly more than half of the sample, and 92% of the participants were white. Five hundred fifty-nine participants (12.3%) had a major depressive episode at baseline, based on the results of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview Short Form.
The investigators measured social relationship quality at baseline using composite scales that included items of social support and social strain. Social isolation was measured by the presence of a partner and reported frequency of social contact with friends and neighbors and with family members who did not live with the survey participants (PLoS ONE 8:e62396).
Even after accounting for participants with baseline depression, the researchers found that the quality of social relationships predicted future depression. "The results were similar when analyses were restricted to those participants without major depression at baseline, which suggests that the predictive power of social relationship quality is not explained by depression’s influence on self-report of one’s social relationships," wrote Dr. Teo of the department of psychiatry at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Poor-quality relationships with spouses or partners and, to a lesser extent, with family members, independently increased the risk of depression. "This extends and corroborates earlier cross-sectional research that showed not getting along with one’s spouse was related to more psychiatric disorders than not getting along with relatives or friends," the authors reported.
Contrary to what the researchers expected, social isolation at baseline did not predict the risk of depression or moderate the effect of quality of social relationships on subsequent depression risk.
The authors cited several limitations. Among them is that focusing on only two time periods for analysis with long intervals in between might have opened the possibility for the participants’ quality of social relationships to change. Another limitation was that the analyses lacked specific data to distinguish between incident and recurrent major depression, "though given the age of the participants and the known epidemiology of depression, it is likely that many cases were current," the authors wrote.
Still, the study has important implications for clinicians and public health officials. "Asking patients about their subjective perceptions of their social relationships should be a priority," Dr. Teo and his associates wrote. "Including questions in the clinical encounter about, for instance, how much others understand and care about the patient ... should be considered evidence based, much like inquiring about past depressive episodes."
The study was supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The authors reported having no financial conflicts.
The quality of social relationships is a significant risk factor for major depression, findings from a longitudinal study of more than 4,000 American adults showed.
The estimated risk of developing major depression was 14% for people with poor-quality relationships, compared with 6.7% for people with high-quality relationships.
The nationally representative study by Dr. Alan R. Teo and his associates looked at whether the quality and quantity of social relationships in a community population increased the risk of developing major depression a decade later.
Dr. Teo and his associates conducted surveys at baseline in 1995-1996 and again in 2004-2006 with 4,642 participants aged 25-75. Women made up slightly more than half of the sample, and 92% of the participants were white. Five hundred fifty-nine participants (12.3%) had a major depressive episode at baseline, based on the results of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview Short Form.
The investigators measured social relationship quality at baseline using composite scales that included items of social support and social strain. Social isolation was measured by the presence of a partner and reported frequency of social contact with friends and neighbors and with family members who did not live with the survey participants (PLoS ONE 8:e62396).
Even after accounting for participants with baseline depression, the researchers found that the quality of social relationships predicted future depression. "The results were similar when analyses were restricted to those participants without major depression at baseline, which suggests that the predictive power of social relationship quality is not explained by depression’s influence on self-report of one’s social relationships," wrote Dr. Teo of the department of psychiatry at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Poor-quality relationships with spouses or partners and, to a lesser extent, with family members, independently increased the risk of depression. "This extends and corroborates earlier cross-sectional research that showed not getting along with one’s spouse was related to more psychiatric disorders than not getting along with relatives or friends," the authors reported.
Contrary to what the researchers expected, social isolation at baseline did not predict the risk of depression or moderate the effect of quality of social relationships on subsequent depression risk.
The authors cited several limitations. Among them is that focusing on only two time periods for analysis with long intervals in between might have opened the possibility for the participants’ quality of social relationships to change. Another limitation was that the analyses lacked specific data to distinguish between incident and recurrent major depression, "though given the age of the participants and the known epidemiology of depression, it is likely that many cases were current," the authors wrote.
Still, the study has important implications for clinicians and public health officials. "Asking patients about their subjective perceptions of their social relationships should be a priority," Dr. Teo and his associates wrote. "Including questions in the clinical encounter about, for instance, how much others understand and care about the patient ... should be considered evidence based, much like inquiring about past depressive episodes."
The study was supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The authors reported having no financial conflicts.
The quality of social relationships is a significant risk factor for major depression, findings from a longitudinal study of more than 4,000 American adults showed.
The estimated risk of developing major depression was 14% for people with poor-quality relationships, compared with 6.7% for people with high-quality relationships.
The nationally representative study by Dr. Alan R. Teo and his associates looked at whether the quality and quantity of social relationships in a community population increased the risk of developing major depression a decade later.
Dr. Teo and his associates conducted surveys at baseline in 1995-1996 and again in 2004-2006 with 4,642 participants aged 25-75. Women made up slightly more than half of the sample, and 92% of the participants were white. Five hundred fifty-nine participants (12.3%) had a major depressive episode at baseline, based on the results of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview Short Form.
The investigators measured social relationship quality at baseline using composite scales that included items of social support and social strain. Social isolation was measured by the presence of a partner and reported frequency of social contact with friends and neighbors and with family members who did not live with the survey participants (PLoS ONE 8:e62396).
Even after accounting for participants with baseline depression, the researchers found that the quality of social relationships predicted future depression. "The results were similar when analyses were restricted to those participants without major depression at baseline, which suggests that the predictive power of social relationship quality is not explained by depression’s influence on self-report of one’s social relationships," wrote Dr. Teo of the department of psychiatry at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Poor-quality relationships with spouses or partners and, to a lesser extent, with family members, independently increased the risk of depression. "This extends and corroborates earlier cross-sectional research that showed not getting along with one’s spouse was related to more psychiatric disorders than not getting along with relatives or friends," the authors reported.
Contrary to what the researchers expected, social isolation at baseline did not predict the risk of depression or moderate the effect of quality of social relationships on subsequent depression risk.
The authors cited several limitations. Among them is that focusing on only two time periods for analysis with long intervals in between might have opened the possibility for the participants’ quality of social relationships to change. Another limitation was that the analyses lacked specific data to distinguish between incident and recurrent major depression, "though given the age of the participants and the known epidemiology of depression, it is likely that many cases were current," the authors wrote.
Still, the study has important implications for clinicians and public health officials. "Asking patients about their subjective perceptions of their social relationships should be a priority," Dr. Teo and his associates wrote. "Including questions in the clinical encounter about, for instance, how much others understand and care about the patient ... should be considered evidence based, much like inquiring about past depressive episodes."
The study was supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The authors reported having no financial conflicts.
FROM PLoS ONE
Major Finding: People with poor-quality relationships had a 14% risk of developing major depression, compared with 6.7% of people with high-quality relationships.
Data Source: A cohort of 4,642 English-speaking adults aged 25-75 who completed surveys at baseline in 1995-1996 and again in 2004-2006.
Disclosures: The study was supported by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The authors reported having no financial conflicts.
Late-life depression increases risk of dementia
Depression in late life can accelerate cognitive decline. A new study shows that depression in older adults significantly increased the risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia.
Depression after age 50 years increased the risk of all-cause dementia by 1.85 times, Alzheimer’s disease by 1.65 times, and vascular dementia by 2.52 times, according to the results of a study published in the May issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry.
The meta-analysis, conducted by Dr. Breno S. Diniz and his associates at Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, is the first of its kind to examine both the risk of Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia in older adults with depression. Alzheimer’s disease is the most common form of dementia, followed by vascular dementia, which is characterized by impaired judgment or an inability to plan and complete tasks.
Dr. Diniz and his colleagues said their study also distinguished itself in another way. "This is the first study to show that late-life depression increases the risk of vascular dementia, and that the risk of vascular dementia is greater than the risk of Alzheimer’s disease for older adults with depression," they wrote.
A meta-analysis of 23 prospective community-based cohort studies was conducted to calculate the pooled risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia. Only studies with baseline cases of depression in adults aged 50 years or older were included. Data from 49,612 participants were used for the pooled analysis for all-cause dementia; 28,746 participants were included in the pooled analysis for Alzheimer’s disease; and 14,901 participants were included in the pooled analysis for vascular dementia. The median follow-up interval for all-cause dementia studies was 5 years. For Alzheimer’s disease studies, the median follow-up interval was 5 years and for vascular dementia studies, it was 6.1 years (Br. J. Psychiatry 2013;202:329-35).
After excluding studies that did not report risk measures adjusted for multiple confounders, a reduced, although statistically significant, association was found between late-life depression and the risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia. The adjusted pooled risk for all-cause dementia was 1.59 and 1.55 for Alzheimer’s. For vascular dementia, the adjusted pooled risk was 2.02, with a confidence interval of 95%.
They said their results were in line with a report showing an increased risk of all three conditions among participants with mid- and late-life depression. These findings came from a retrospective analysis of 13,535 older participants who were followed on the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program of Northern California (Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 2012;69:493-8).
In the current meta-analysis, the researchers recommended conducting new clinical trials to investigate the potential impact of depression prevention on the risk of cognitive impairment and dementia among older adults.
"Also, the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular risk factors and an improvement of general health in people with late-life depression may have a significant impact not only in a reduction of late-life depression cases but also [in the] reduction of dementia cases (vascular dementia and Alzheimer’s disease) associated with this disorder," the authors commented.
The researchers cited several limitations. Among them is that their meta-analysis was limited to PubMed and Scopus databases. A search of international databases such as EMBASE and PsychINFO might have led to additional studies, but they believe that their literature search was comprehensive.
In the past 3 years, Dr. Diniz received payment for lectures from Novartis and has had travel/meeting expenses covered by Pfizer. His colleagues reported associations with several organizations, including Northstar Neuroscience, Medtronic, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Forest Laboratories This work was supported in part by the John Hartford Foundation, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Endowment in Geriatric Psychiatry, and the National Institutes of Health.
Depression in late life can accelerate cognitive decline. A new study shows that depression in older adults significantly increased the risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia.
Depression after age 50 years increased the risk of all-cause dementia by 1.85 times, Alzheimer’s disease by 1.65 times, and vascular dementia by 2.52 times, according to the results of a study published in the May issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry.
The meta-analysis, conducted by Dr. Breno S. Diniz and his associates at Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, is the first of its kind to examine both the risk of Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia in older adults with depression. Alzheimer’s disease is the most common form of dementia, followed by vascular dementia, which is characterized by impaired judgment or an inability to plan and complete tasks.
Dr. Diniz and his colleagues said their study also distinguished itself in another way. "This is the first study to show that late-life depression increases the risk of vascular dementia, and that the risk of vascular dementia is greater than the risk of Alzheimer’s disease for older adults with depression," they wrote.
A meta-analysis of 23 prospective community-based cohort studies was conducted to calculate the pooled risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia. Only studies with baseline cases of depression in adults aged 50 years or older were included. Data from 49,612 participants were used for the pooled analysis for all-cause dementia; 28,746 participants were included in the pooled analysis for Alzheimer’s disease; and 14,901 participants were included in the pooled analysis for vascular dementia. The median follow-up interval for all-cause dementia studies was 5 years. For Alzheimer’s disease studies, the median follow-up interval was 5 years and for vascular dementia studies, it was 6.1 years (Br. J. Psychiatry 2013;202:329-35).
After excluding studies that did not report risk measures adjusted for multiple confounders, a reduced, although statistically significant, association was found between late-life depression and the risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia. The adjusted pooled risk for all-cause dementia was 1.59 and 1.55 for Alzheimer’s. For vascular dementia, the adjusted pooled risk was 2.02, with a confidence interval of 95%.
They said their results were in line with a report showing an increased risk of all three conditions among participants with mid- and late-life depression. These findings came from a retrospective analysis of 13,535 older participants who were followed on the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program of Northern California (Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 2012;69:493-8).
In the current meta-analysis, the researchers recommended conducting new clinical trials to investigate the potential impact of depression prevention on the risk of cognitive impairment and dementia among older adults.
"Also, the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular risk factors and an improvement of general health in people with late-life depression may have a significant impact not only in a reduction of late-life depression cases but also [in the] reduction of dementia cases (vascular dementia and Alzheimer’s disease) associated with this disorder," the authors commented.
The researchers cited several limitations. Among them is that their meta-analysis was limited to PubMed and Scopus databases. A search of international databases such as EMBASE and PsychINFO might have led to additional studies, but they believe that their literature search was comprehensive.
In the past 3 years, Dr. Diniz received payment for lectures from Novartis and has had travel/meeting expenses covered by Pfizer. His colleagues reported associations with several organizations, including Northstar Neuroscience, Medtronic, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Forest Laboratories This work was supported in part by the John Hartford Foundation, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Endowment in Geriatric Psychiatry, and the National Institutes of Health.
Depression in late life can accelerate cognitive decline. A new study shows that depression in older adults significantly increased the risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia.
Depression after age 50 years increased the risk of all-cause dementia by 1.85 times, Alzheimer’s disease by 1.65 times, and vascular dementia by 2.52 times, according to the results of a study published in the May issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry.
The meta-analysis, conducted by Dr. Breno S. Diniz and his associates at Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, is the first of its kind to examine both the risk of Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia in older adults with depression. Alzheimer’s disease is the most common form of dementia, followed by vascular dementia, which is characterized by impaired judgment or an inability to plan and complete tasks.
Dr. Diniz and his colleagues said their study also distinguished itself in another way. "This is the first study to show that late-life depression increases the risk of vascular dementia, and that the risk of vascular dementia is greater than the risk of Alzheimer’s disease for older adults with depression," they wrote.
A meta-analysis of 23 prospective community-based cohort studies was conducted to calculate the pooled risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia. Only studies with baseline cases of depression in adults aged 50 years or older were included. Data from 49,612 participants were used for the pooled analysis for all-cause dementia; 28,746 participants were included in the pooled analysis for Alzheimer’s disease; and 14,901 participants were included in the pooled analysis for vascular dementia. The median follow-up interval for all-cause dementia studies was 5 years. For Alzheimer’s disease studies, the median follow-up interval was 5 years and for vascular dementia studies, it was 6.1 years (Br. J. Psychiatry 2013;202:329-35).
After excluding studies that did not report risk measures adjusted for multiple confounders, a reduced, although statistically significant, association was found between late-life depression and the risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia. The adjusted pooled risk for all-cause dementia was 1.59 and 1.55 for Alzheimer’s. For vascular dementia, the adjusted pooled risk was 2.02, with a confidence interval of 95%.
They said their results were in line with a report showing an increased risk of all three conditions among participants with mid- and late-life depression. These findings came from a retrospective analysis of 13,535 older participants who were followed on the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program of Northern California (Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 2012;69:493-8).
In the current meta-analysis, the researchers recommended conducting new clinical trials to investigate the potential impact of depression prevention on the risk of cognitive impairment and dementia among older adults.
"Also, the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular risk factors and an improvement of general health in people with late-life depression may have a significant impact not only in a reduction of late-life depression cases but also [in the] reduction of dementia cases (vascular dementia and Alzheimer’s disease) associated with this disorder," the authors commented.
The researchers cited several limitations. Among them is that their meta-analysis was limited to PubMed and Scopus databases. A search of international databases such as EMBASE and PsychINFO might have led to additional studies, but they believe that their literature search was comprehensive.
In the past 3 years, Dr. Diniz received payment for lectures from Novartis and has had travel/meeting expenses covered by Pfizer. His colleagues reported associations with several organizations, including Northstar Neuroscience, Medtronic, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Forest Laboratories This work was supported in part by the John Hartford Foundation, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Endowment in Geriatric Psychiatry, and the National Institutes of Health.
FROM THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
Major Finding: People with late-life depression are 1.85 times more likely to develop all-cause dementia, 1.65 times more likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease, and 2.52 times more likely to develop vascular dementia.
Data Source: A meta-analysis of 23 community-based cohort studies was conducted to calculate the pooled risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia. The total sample size for all-cause dementia was 49,612 participants (5,116 cases of late-life depression and 44,496 nondepressed controls).
Disclosures: In the past 3 years, Dr. Diniz received payment for lectures from Novartis and has had travel/meeting expenses covered by Pfizer. His colleagues reported associations with several organizations, including Northstar Neuroscience, Medtronic, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Forest Laboratories. This work was supported in part by the John Hartford Foundation, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Endowment in Geriatric Psychiatry, and the National Institutes of Health.