THE CASE

Ms. L is a 26-year-old woman in acute distress because of a recurrent thought. She worries: “What if I sexually molest my son?” She says she has no desire to act on this recurring thought and recognizes that it is unlikely to be true. The thought is so upsetting, however, that she has begun having panic attacks and avoids being left alone with her child.

She also reports past episodes of thoughts that she may be homosexual and thoughts that something catastrophic happened without her awareness (eg, that she unknowingly ran over someone while driving). She has attempted self-management, including trying to reason with herself, trying to stop thinking the thoughts, and seeking reassurance from her boyfriend and medical providers.

These compulsive behaviors lowered her distress temporarily, thereby reinforcing her need to check and seek reassurance.

HOW WOULD YOU PROCEED WITH THIS PATIENT?

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a common psychiatric disorder with a 12-month prevalence of 1.2% in the United States and internationally.¹ Like other psychiatric disorders, patients with OCD present more often to primary care than specialty settings.² Despite high distress and impairment levels, individuals with OCD are often undiagnosed and do not receive evidence-based care.^3,4 This can be particularly problematic in fast-paced primary care settings due to high medical utilization and increased costs associated with OCD.⁵

A time-consuming disorder associated with distress

OCD is characterized by obsessive thoughts and/or compulsions.¹

Obsessions are repeated, unwanted, distressing thoughts or images (eg, of being contaminated by dirt/germs, fears of causing harm to others without wanting to). Individuals with OCD attempt to avoid these thoughts by suppressing or neutralizing them.

Compulsions are mental or behavioral rituals that the individual feels compelled to perform to reduce distress or prevent a feared consequence (eg, hand-washing, checking locks, counting). Compulsions are not reasonable safety efforts, but are instead out-of-proportion reactions to the situation.

Onset of OCD usually occurs by young adulthood, but may be present in children. Pregnancy and postpartum periods may be associated with increased risk for symptoms.⁶ The course is typically chronic if left untreated, although symptoms can occur episodically.¹

Intrusive thoughts and compulsive behaviors are surprisingly common in the general population. One study found that most individuals in a non-clinical sample reported having occasional intrusive thoughts such as whether they may have accidentally left the stove on, running their car off the road, or engaging in a “disgusting” sex act.⁷ With OCD, however, obsessions and compulsions are time-consuming and associated with distress and/or impairment.¹

In one study, primary care providers were given vignettes describing OCD symptoms; half of these cases were misidentified.

For example, an individual with OCD may restrict their diet due to fears of handling foods that other people may have touched or may limit contact with people for fear they will lose control and act violently. This is partly the result of overestimating the significance of the thoughts.⁸ Individuals with OCD may believe that the thoughts mean something negative about them (eg, that they are immoral) or could lead to serious consequences (eg, thinking about a car accident makes it more likely to occur).

Distinguishing features of OCD

OCD is commonly misdiagnosed,⁹ which may contribute to the long duration of untreated illness (average 17 years).¹⁰ In one study, primary care providers were given vignettes describing OCD symptoms; half of these cases were misidentified.⁹ Certain types of obsessions (eg, aggression, fear of saying certain things, homosexuality, pedophilia) were misdiagnosed 70% to 85% of the time.⁹

Although OCD shares characteristics with other disorders, several features can help family physicians correctly identify OCD. Fears associated with OCD are usually not about everyday concerns or worries. For example, a patient with social anxiety disorder may report fear of embarrassing themselves in public, whereas a patient with OCD may report fear that they will lose control and do something outlandish such as start swearing loudly.

Additionally, obsessions and compulsions in OCD are not exclusively tied to a traumatic experience as in posttraumatic stress disorder. Someone with OCD who has harm-related or sexual obsessions (eg, homosexuality) will report that this is not consistent with their interests and desires. Furthermore, a small subset of people with OCD may have poor insight, meaning they have low self-awareness of the nature of their obsessions or compulsions, but they do not experience psychotic symptoms.

How to make the diagnosis

A clinical interview is an essential component of assessing OCD in primary care. Ask patients who have mood or anxiety concerns about OCD symptoms, due to the high comorbidity rates of these entities.¹ If a family history of OCD is known, assess the patient for this disorder, as higher rates exist among family members.¹⁰ Although primary care providers should indeed screen for OCD and provide provisional diagnoses as warranted, additional assessment by a behavioral health practitioner is recommended, given their specialty training in this area.

Patients with OCD are often reluctant to disclose intrusive thoughts due to perceiving them as shameful or unacceptable. Consider asking direct questions to facilitate the evaluation:

• “Do you ever feel bothered by unwanted or unusual thoughts that you cannot get out of your mind even though you try to?”
• “Do you feel that you have to do anything to get rid of these thoughts or prevent something bad from happening?”
• “Will you feel very uncomfortable if you don’t do something a specific way?”

Evidence-based self-report measures are also available. The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS)¹¹ has become the gold standard psychometric measure for OCD. The updated version (Y-BOCS-II)¹² and child/adolescent version (CY-BOCS)¹¹ are also available.

Treatment: A tandem approach is most effective

Offer patients with OCD both medication options and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) medications are effective first-line treatments.¹³ Treatment with clomipramine has yielded treatment outcomes similar to those seen with SSRIs; however, SSRIs are generally better tolerated.¹⁰ For treating OCD, evidence is lacking to support use of one SSRI over another.¹⁰ Medium- to upper-dose ranges are recommended for all SSRIs.¹⁴

Patient characteristics (eg, comorbid depression, level of adherence to treatment) may also help guide prescribing choices.¹⁰ For patients not responding to pharmacologic treatment in 8 to 12 weeks, consider referral to a psychiatrist.¹⁴

Research suggests that CBT with ERP (exposure with response prevention) produces outcomes equivalent to those achieved with pharmacotherapy.

For OCD, CBT provided by a trained specialist typically involves exposure with response prevention (ERP). This entails confronting difficult thoughts and feared situations through exposure therapy and learning to reduce compulsive and excessive safety behaviors (eg, thinking about being contaminated by germs and then refraining from washing hands). Research suggests that CBT with ERP produces outcomes equivalent or superior to those achieved with pharmacotherapy.¹³ In addition to finding large effect sizes, clinical trials have demonstrated a treatment response of 86% in those completing CBT with ERP, compared with 48% of those receiving clomipramine.¹⁵ And Y-BOCS symptom scores have been reduced by 50% to 60% with CBT and ERP.¹⁶

How best to navigate coordination-of-care issues

When selecting a psychotherapy treatment provider for a patient with OCD, ask whether they are trained in ERP. If a trained psychotherapist is not available in the local health care system, you may refer to the International OCD Foundation (iocdf.org), which maintains an online directory of psychotherapists specializing in OCD.

Primary care physicians can also work with psychiatrists or psychotherapy providers to develop shared treatment plans. Part of this plan may involve reducing excess medical utilization and checking/reassurance (eg, requesting repeat medical tests). When there is concern about safety issues (eg, intrusive homicidal or suicidal thoughts), a risk assessment is strongly recommended.
 

CASE

An on-site psychologist evaluated Ms. L and diagnosed OCD. Ms. L had talked to the doctor about the possibility of medication, but she preferred to try behavioral treatment first. Ms. L agreed to participate in CBT with ERP. Treatment included imaginal and situational exposure exercises to decrease emotional reactivity associated with the thoughts, and to challenge beliefs that the thoughts are meaningful (eg, that having the thought means that she may act on it or that she is an unfit mother).

For example, Ms. L practiced repeating the thoughts aloud and going into feared situations (eg, being alone with her child). This was paired with response prevention, meaning that Ms. L was instructed to avoid checking with, or seeking, reassurance from others. She engaged in 4 ERP sessions in the primary care setting, and treatment led to significant symptom improvement that was maintained at follow-up with her primary care provider 6 and 12 months later.

CORRESPONDENCE
Jared L. Skillings, PhD, ABPP, Division of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Spectrum Health System, 2750 East Beltline NE, Grand Rapids, MI 49525; [email protected].

THE CASE

Ms. L is a 26-year-old woman in acute distress because of a recurrent thought. She worries: “What if I sexually molest my son?” She says she has no desire to act on this recurring thought and recognizes that it is unlikely to be true. The thought is so upsetting, however, that she has begun having panic attacks and avoids being left alone with her child.

She also reports past episodes of thoughts that she may be homosexual and thoughts that something catastrophic happened without her awareness (eg, that she unknowingly ran over someone while driving). She has attempted self-management, including trying to reason with herself, trying to stop thinking the thoughts, and seeking reassurance from her boyfriend and medical providers.

These compulsive behaviors lowered her distress temporarily, thereby reinforcing her need to check and seek reassurance.

HOW WOULD YOU PROCEED WITH THIS PATIENT?

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a common psychiatric disorder with a 12-month prevalence of 1.2% in the United States and internationally.¹ Like other psychiatric disorders, patients with OCD present more often to primary care than specialty settings.² Despite high distress and impairment levels, individuals with OCD are often undiagnosed and do not receive evidence-based care.^3,4 This can be particularly problematic in fast-paced primary care settings due to high medical utilization and increased costs associated with OCD.⁵

A time-consuming disorder associated with distress

OCD is characterized by obsessive thoughts and/or compulsions.¹

Obsessions are repeated, unwanted, distressing thoughts or images (eg, of being contaminated by dirt/germs, fears of causing harm to others without wanting to). Individuals with OCD attempt to avoid these thoughts by suppressing or neutralizing them.

Compulsions are mental or behavioral rituals that the individual feels compelled to perform to reduce distress or prevent a feared consequence (eg, hand-washing, checking locks, counting). Compulsions are not reasonable safety efforts, but are instead out-of-proportion reactions to the situation.

Onset of OCD usually occurs by young adulthood, but may be present in children. Pregnancy and postpartum periods may be associated with increased risk for symptoms.⁶ The course is typically chronic if left untreated, although symptoms can occur episodically.¹

Intrusive thoughts and compulsive behaviors are surprisingly common in the general population. One study found that most individuals in a non-clinical sample reported having occasional intrusive thoughts such as whether they may have accidentally left the stove on, running their car off the road, or engaging in a “disgusting” sex act.⁷ With OCD, however, obsessions and compulsions are time-consuming and associated with distress and/or impairment.¹

In one study, primary care providers were given vignettes describing OCD symptoms; half of these cases were misidentified.

For example, an individual with OCD may restrict their diet due to fears of handling foods that other people may have touched or may limit contact with people for fear they will lose control and act violently. This is partly the result of overestimating the significance of the thoughts.⁸ Individuals with OCD may believe that the thoughts mean something negative about them (eg, that they are immoral) or could lead to serious consequences (eg, thinking about a car accident makes it more likely to occur).

Distinguishing features of OCD

OCD is commonly misdiagnosed,⁹ which may contribute to the long duration of untreated illness (average 17 years).¹⁰ In one study, primary care providers were given vignettes describing OCD symptoms; half of these cases were misidentified.⁹ Certain types of obsessions (eg, aggression, fear of saying certain things, homosexuality, pedophilia) were misdiagnosed 70% to 85% of the time.⁹

Although OCD shares characteristics with other disorders, several features can help family physicians correctly identify OCD. Fears associated with OCD are usually not about everyday concerns or worries. For example, a patient with social anxiety disorder may report fear of embarrassing themselves in public, whereas a patient with OCD may report fear that they will lose control and do something outlandish such as start swearing loudly.

Additionally, obsessions and compulsions in OCD are not exclusively tied to a traumatic experience as in posttraumatic stress disorder. Someone with OCD who has harm-related or sexual obsessions (eg, homosexuality) will report that this is not consistent with their interests and desires. Furthermore, a small subset of people with OCD may have poor insight, meaning they have low self-awareness of the nature of their obsessions or compulsions, but they do not experience psychotic symptoms.

How to make the diagnosis

A clinical interview is an essential component of assessing OCD in primary care. Ask patients who have mood or anxiety concerns about OCD symptoms, due to the high comorbidity rates of these entities.¹ If a family history of OCD is known, assess the patient for this disorder, as higher rates exist among family members.¹⁰ Although primary care providers should indeed screen for OCD and provide provisional diagnoses as warranted, additional assessment by a behavioral health practitioner is recommended, given their specialty training in this area.

Patients with OCD are often reluctant to disclose intrusive thoughts due to perceiving them as shameful or unacceptable. Consider asking direct questions to facilitate the evaluation:

• “Do you ever feel bothered by unwanted or unusual thoughts that you cannot get out of your mind even though you try to?”
• “Do you feel that you have to do anything to get rid of these thoughts or prevent something bad from happening?”
• “Will you feel very uncomfortable if you don’t do something a specific way?”

Evidence-based self-report measures are also available. The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS)¹¹ has become the gold standard psychometric measure for OCD. The updated version (Y-BOCS-II)¹² and child/adolescent version (CY-BOCS)¹¹ are also available.

Treatment: A tandem approach is most effective

Offer patients with OCD both medication options and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) medications are effective first-line treatments.¹³ Treatment with clomipramine has yielded treatment outcomes similar to those seen with SSRIs; however, SSRIs are generally better tolerated.¹⁰ For treating OCD, evidence is lacking to support use of one SSRI over another.¹⁰ Medium- to upper-dose ranges are recommended for all SSRIs.¹⁴

Patient characteristics (eg, comorbid depression, level of adherence to treatment) may also help guide prescribing choices.¹⁰ For patients not responding to pharmacologic treatment in 8 to 12 weeks, consider referral to a psychiatrist.¹⁴

Research suggests that CBT with ERP (exposure with response prevention) produces outcomes equivalent to those achieved with pharmacotherapy.

For OCD, CBT provided by a trained specialist typically involves exposure with response prevention (ERP). This entails confronting difficult thoughts and feared situations through exposure therapy and learning to reduce compulsive and excessive safety behaviors (eg, thinking about being contaminated by germs and then refraining from washing hands). Research suggests that CBT with ERP produces outcomes equivalent or superior to those achieved with pharmacotherapy.¹³ In addition to finding large effect sizes, clinical trials have demonstrated a treatment response of 86% in those completing CBT with ERP, compared with 48% of those receiving clomipramine.¹⁵ And Y-BOCS symptom scores have been reduced by 50% to 60% with CBT and ERP.¹⁶

How best to navigate coordination-of-care issues

When selecting a psychotherapy treatment provider for a patient with OCD, ask whether they are trained in ERP. If a trained psychotherapist is not available in the local health care system, you may refer to the International OCD Foundation (iocdf.org), which maintains an online directory of psychotherapists specializing in OCD.

Primary care physicians can also work with psychiatrists or psychotherapy providers to develop shared treatment plans. Part of this plan may involve reducing excess medical utilization and checking/reassurance (eg, requesting repeat medical tests). When there is concern about safety issues (eg, intrusive homicidal or suicidal thoughts), a risk assessment is strongly recommended.
 

CASE

An on-site psychologist evaluated Ms. L and diagnosed OCD. Ms. L had talked to the doctor about the possibility of medication, but she preferred to try behavioral treatment first. Ms. L agreed to participate in CBT with ERP. Treatment included imaginal and situational exposure exercises to decrease emotional reactivity associated with the thoughts, and to challenge beliefs that the thoughts are meaningful (eg, that having the thought means that she may act on it or that she is an unfit mother).

For example, Ms. L practiced repeating the thoughts aloud and going into feared situations (eg, being alone with her child). This was paired with response prevention, meaning that Ms. L was instructed to avoid checking with, or seeking, reassurance from others. She engaged in 4 ERP sessions in the primary care setting, and treatment led to significant symptom improvement that was maintained at follow-up with her primary care provider 6 and 12 months later.

CORRESPONDENCE
Jared L. Skillings, PhD, ABPP, Division of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Spectrum Health System, 2750 East Beltline NE, Grand Rapids, MI 49525; [email protected].

THE CASE

Ms. L is a 26-year-old woman in acute distress because of a recurrent thought. She worries: “What if I sexually molest my son?” She says she has no desire to act on this recurring thought and recognizes that it is unlikely to be true. The thought is so upsetting, however, that she has begun having panic attacks and avoids being left alone with her child.

She also reports past episodes of thoughts that she may be homosexual and thoughts that something catastrophic happened without her awareness (eg, that she unknowingly ran over someone while driving). She has attempted self-management, including trying to reason with herself, trying to stop thinking the thoughts, and seeking reassurance from her boyfriend and medical providers.

These compulsive behaviors lowered her distress temporarily, thereby reinforcing her need to check and seek reassurance.

HOW WOULD YOU PROCEED WITH THIS PATIENT?

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a common psychiatric disorder with a 12-month prevalence of 1.2% in the United States and internationally.¹ Like other psychiatric disorders, patients with OCD present more often to primary care than specialty settings.² Despite high distress and impairment levels, individuals with OCD are often undiagnosed and do not receive evidence-based care.^3,4 This can be particularly problematic in fast-paced primary care settings due to high medical utilization and increased costs associated with OCD.⁵

A time-consuming disorder associated with distress

OCD is characterized by obsessive thoughts and/or compulsions.¹

Obsessions are repeated, unwanted, distressing thoughts or images (eg, of being contaminated by dirt/germs, fears of causing harm to others without wanting to). Individuals with OCD attempt to avoid these thoughts by suppressing or neutralizing them.

Compulsions are mental or behavioral rituals that the individual feels compelled to perform to reduce distress or prevent a feared consequence (eg, hand-washing, checking locks, counting). Compulsions are not reasonable safety efforts, but are instead out-of-proportion reactions to the situation.

Onset of OCD usually occurs by young adulthood, but may be present in children. Pregnancy and postpartum periods may be associated with increased risk for symptoms.⁶ The course is typically chronic if left untreated, although symptoms can occur episodically.¹

Intrusive thoughts and compulsive behaviors are surprisingly common in the general population. One study found that most individuals in a non-clinical sample reported having occasional intrusive thoughts such as whether they may have accidentally left the stove on, running their car off the road, or engaging in a “disgusting” sex act.⁷ With OCD, however, obsessions and compulsions are time-consuming and associated with distress and/or impairment.¹

In one study, primary care providers were given vignettes describing OCD symptoms; half of these cases were misidentified.

For example, an individual with OCD may restrict their diet due to fears of handling foods that other people may have touched or may limit contact with people for fear they will lose control and act violently. This is partly the result of overestimating the significance of the thoughts.⁸ Individuals with OCD may believe that the thoughts mean something negative about them (eg, that they are immoral) or could lead to serious consequences (eg, thinking about a car accident makes it more likely to occur).

Distinguishing features of OCD

OCD is commonly misdiagnosed,⁹ which may contribute to the long duration of untreated illness (average 17 years).¹⁰ In one study, primary care providers were given vignettes describing OCD symptoms; half of these cases were misidentified.⁹ Certain types of obsessions (eg, aggression, fear of saying certain things, homosexuality, pedophilia) were misdiagnosed 70% to 85% of the time.⁹

Although OCD shares characteristics with other disorders, several features can help family physicians correctly identify OCD. Fears associated with OCD are usually not about everyday concerns or worries. For example, a patient with social anxiety disorder may report fear of embarrassing themselves in public, whereas a patient with OCD may report fear that they will lose control and do something outlandish such as start swearing loudly.

Additionally, obsessions and compulsions in OCD are not exclusively tied to a traumatic experience as in posttraumatic stress disorder. Someone with OCD who has harm-related or sexual obsessions (eg, homosexuality) will report that this is not consistent with their interests and desires. Furthermore, a small subset of people with OCD may have poor insight, meaning they have low self-awareness of the nature of their obsessions or compulsions, but they do not experience psychotic symptoms.

How to make the diagnosis

A clinical interview is an essential component of assessing OCD in primary care. Ask patients who have mood or anxiety concerns about OCD symptoms, due to the high comorbidity rates of these entities.¹ If a family history of OCD is known, assess the patient for this disorder, as higher rates exist among family members.¹⁰ Although primary care providers should indeed screen for OCD and provide provisional diagnoses as warranted, additional assessment by a behavioral health practitioner is recommended, given their specialty training in this area.

Patients with OCD are often reluctant to disclose intrusive thoughts due to perceiving them as shameful or unacceptable. Consider asking direct questions to facilitate the evaluation:

• “Do you ever feel bothered by unwanted or unusual thoughts that you cannot get out of your mind even though you try to?”
• “Do you feel that you have to do anything to get rid of these thoughts or prevent something bad from happening?”
• “Will you feel very uncomfortable if you don’t do something a specific way?”

Evidence-based self-report measures are also available. The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS)¹¹ has become the gold standard psychometric measure for OCD. The updated version (Y-BOCS-II)¹² and child/adolescent version (CY-BOCS)¹¹ are also available.

Treatment: A tandem approach is most effective

Offer patients with OCD both medication options and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) medications are effective first-line treatments.¹³ Treatment with clomipramine has yielded treatment outcomes similar to those seen with SSRIs; however, SSRIs are generally better tolerated.¹⁰ For treating OCD, evidence is lacking to support use of one SSRI over another.¹⁰ Medium- to upper-dose ranges are recommended for all SSRIs.¹⁴

Patient characteristics (eg, comorbid depression, level of adherence to treatment) may also help guide prescribing choices.¹⁰ For patients not responding to pharmacologic treatment in 8 to 12 weeks, consider referral to a psychiatrist.¹⁴

Research suggests that CBT with ERP (exposure with response prevention) produces outcomes equivalent to those achieved with pharmacotherapy.

For OCD, CBT provided by a trained specialist typically involves exposure with response prevention (ERP). This entails confronting difficult thoughts and feared situations through exposure therapy and learning to reduce compulsive and excessive safety behaviors (eg, thinking about being contaminated by germs and then refraining from washing hands). Research suggests that CBT with ERP produces outcomes equivalent or superior to those achieved with pharmacotherapy.¹³ In addition to finding large effect sizes, clinical trials have demonstrated a treatment response of 86% in those completing CBT with ERP, compared with 48% of those receiving clomipramine.¹⁵ And Y-BOCS symptom scores have been reduced by 50% to 60% with CBT and ERP.¹⁶

How best to navigate coordination-of-care issues

When selecting a psychotherapy treatment provider for a patient with OCD, ask whether they are trained in ERP. If a trained psychotherapist is not available in the local health care system, you may refer to the International OCD Foundation (iocdf.org), which maintains an online directory of psychotherapists specializing in OCD.

Primary care physicians can also work with psychiatrists or psychotherapy providers to develop shared treatment plans. Part of this plan may involve reducing excess medical utilization and checking/reassurance (eg, requesting repeat medical tests). When there is concern about safety issues (eg, intrusive homicidal or suicidal thoughts), a risk assessment is strongly recommended.
 

CASE

An on-site psychologist evaluated Ms. L and diagnosed OCD. Ms. L had talked to the doctor about the possibility of medication, but she preferred to try behavioral treatment first. Ms. L agreed to participate in CBT with ERP. Treatment included imaginal and situational exposure exercises to decrease emotional reactivity associated with the thoughts, and to challenge beliefs that the thoughts are meaningful (eg, that having the thought means that she may act on it or that she is an unfit mother).

For example, Ms. L practiced repeating the thoughts aloud and going into feared situations (eg, being alone with her child). This was paired with response prevention, meaning that Ms. L was instructed to avoid checking with, or seeking, reassurance from others. She engaged in 4 ERP sessions in the primary care setting, and treatment led to significant symptom improvement that was maintained at follow-up with her primary care provider 6 and 12 months later.

CORRESPONDENCE
Jared L. Skillings, PhD, ABPP, Division of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Spectrum Health System, 2750 East Beltline NE, Grand Rapids, MI 49525; [email protected].

With the number of aging Americans projected to grow dramatically in the next several years, the need for primary palliative care and advance care planning (ACP) is more important than ever. Patients and their families want and expect palliative care when needed, but initial conversations about ACP can be difficult for them. Appropriate timing in raising this subject and clear communication can give patients the opportunity, while they are still independent, to set their goals for medical care.

For the past several decades, political decisions and judicial cases have shaped palliative care as we know it today. And its shape is still evolving. In support of ACP, advocacy groups at a national level are developing models that practitioners can use to engage patients in setting goals. And Medicare is now reimbursing primary care providers for this work that they have been doing for years (although many still may not be billing for the service).

Finally, the busy primary care office may have its own set of challenges in addressing ACP. Our aim in this review is to identify the barriers we face and the solutions we can implement to make a difference in our patients’ end-of-life care planning.

[polldaddy:9795119]

Landmark events have defined advance care planning today

In 1969, Luis Kutner, an Illinois attorney, proposed the idea of a “living will,” envisioned as a document specifying the types of treatment a person would be willing to receive were they unable at a later time to participate in making a decision.¹ In 1976, California became the first state to give living wills the power of the law through the Natural Death Act.²

Throughout the 1970s and '80s, several high-profile court cases brought this idea into the national spotlight. In 1975, the New Jersey Supreme Court granted the parents of 21-year-old Karen Ann Quinlan the right to discontinue the treatment sustaining her in a persistent vegetative state. Ms. Quinlan was removed from the ventilator and lived 9 more months before dying in a nursing home.

A few years later, Nancy Cruzan, a 32-year-old woman involved in a 1983 motor vehicle accident, was also in a persistent vegetative state and remained so until 1988 when her parents asked that her feeding tube be removed. The hospital refused, indicating that it would lead to her death. The family sued and the case eventually went to the US Supreme Court in 1989.

In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that a state was legally able to require “clear and convincing evidence” of a patient’s wish for removal of life-sustaining therapies. Cruzan’s family was able to provide such evidence and her artificial nutrition was withheld. She died 12 days later.

Among all individuals older than 18 years, only 26% have an advance directive.

The Cruzan case was instrumental in furthering ACP, leading to the passage of the Patient Self Determination Act (PSDA) by Congress in 1990. All federally funded health care facilities were now required to educate patients of their rights in determining their medical care and to ask about advance directives.³ The ACP movement gained additional momentum from the landmark SUPPORT study that documented shortcomings in communication between physicians and patients/families about treatment preferences and end-of-life care in US hospitals.⁴

In the Terri Schiavo case, the patient’s husband disagreed with the life-sustaining decisions of his wife’s parents given her persistent vegetative state and the fact that she had no chance of meaningful recovery. After a prolonged national debate, it was ultimately decided that the husband could elect to withhold artificial nutrition. (She died in 2005.) The Schiavo case, as well as the Institute of Medicine’s report on “Dying in America,”⁵ influenced Congress in 2016 to pass legislation funding ACP conversations.

The demonstrated benefits of advance care planning

When done comprehensively, ACP yields many benefits for patients and families and for the health care system. A systematic review demonstrated that, despite the few studies examining the economic cost of ACP, the process may lead to decreased health care costs in certain populations (nursing home residents, community dwelling adults with dementia, and those living in high health care spending regions) and at the very least does not increase health care costs.⁶ ACP has increased the number of do-not-resuscitate orders⁷ and has decreased hospitalizations,⁸ admissions to intensive care units,^7,8 and rates of cardiopulmonary resuscitation,^7,8 mechanical ventilation,^7,8 and use of tube feeding.⁸

More noteworthy than the decrease in resource utilization and potential cost savings is the impact that ACP can have on a patient’s quality of life. Patients who receive aggressive care at the end of life tend to experience decreased quality of life compared with those receiving hospice care.⁷ Quality-of-life scores for patients in hospice improved with the length of enrollment in that care.⁷ When ACP discussions have taken place, the care patients receive at the end of life tends to conform more closely to their wishes and to increase family satisfaction.^9-11

One reason that practitioners often give for not completing ACP is the fear of increasing patient or family anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, studies have shown this concern to be unfounded.^7,12 While ACP studies have not shown a decrease in rates of anxiety or PTSD, no study has shown an increase in these psychological morbidities.⁸

Caveats to keep in mind. Not all studies have shown unambiguous benefits related to ACP. Among the systematic reviews previously noted, there was significant variability in quality of data. Additionally, some experts argue that the traditional view of ACP (ie, completion of a single advance directive/living will) is outdated and should be replaced with a method that prepares patients and families to anticipate “in-the-moment decision making.”¹³ While we still believe that completion of an advance directive is useful, the experts’ point is well taken, especially since many patients change their preferences over time (and typically towards more aggressive care).^14,15 While the advance directive serves a role, it is more important to help patients recognize their goals and preferences and to facilitate ongoing discussions between the patient and their families/surrogate decision maker and providers.

A snapshot of participation in advance care planning

Despite the ACP movement and the likely benefits associated with it, most individuals have not participated. Rates of completion do seem to be rising, but there is still room for improvement. Among all individuals older than 18 years, only 26.3% have an advance directive.¹⁶ In a cohort of older patients seen in an emergency department, only 40% had a living will, while nearly 54% had a designated health care power of attorney.¹⁷ Perhaps more alarming is the lack of ACP for those patients almost all physicians would agree need it—the long-term care population. The National Center for Health Statistics has reported that only 28% of home health care patients, 65% of nursing home residents, and 88% of hospice patients have an advance directive on file.¹⁸

Physician and patient barriers to advance care planning

If ACP can decrease resource utilization and improve caregiver compliance with a patient’s wishes for end of life, the obvious question is: Why isn’t it done more often? A longstanding barrier for physicians has been that these types of discussions are time intensive and have not been billable. However, since January 1, 2016, we are now able to bill for these discussions. (More on this in a bit.) Physicians do cite other barriers, though.

A recent systematic review showed that ACP is hindered by time constraints imposed by other clinical and administrative tasks that are heavily monitored.¹⁹ Barriers to engaging in ACP reported by patients include a reluctance to think about dying, a belief that family or physicians will know what to do, difficulty understanding ACP forms, and the absence of a person who can serve as a surrogate decision-maker.^20,21

There are national models to help with implementation

The percentage of individuals with an advance directive in the United States has not increased significantly over the past decade.²² The lack of traction in completion and use of advance directives has lead several authors to question the utility of this older model of ACP.²² Several experts in the field believe that more robust, ongoing goals-of-care conversations between patients, families, and providers are equally, or even more, important than the completion of actual advance directive documents.^23,24

Explore recognized models for advance care planning, such as the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) paradigm and the Respecting Choices program.

National models such as the POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) paradigm have become popular in several states (http://www.polst.org). Intended for those with estimated life expectancy of less than one year, POLST is not an advance directive but a physician order for these seriously ill patients. Emergency medical service workers are legally able to follow a POLST document but not a living will or advance directive—a significant reason for those with end-stage illness to consider completing a POLST document with their health care provider. Programs such as, “Respecting Choices,” have incorporated POLST documentation as part of ongoing goals-of-care conversations between patients and health care providers (http://www.gundersenhealth.org/respecting-choices).

Many groups have developed products to encourage patients and their families to initiate conversations at home. An example is the Conversation Project, a free online resource available in multiple languages that can help break the ice for patients and get them talking about their wishes for end-of-life care (http://www.theconversationproject.org). It poses simple stimulating questions such as: “What kind of role do you want to have in the decision-making process?” and “What are your concerns about treatment?”

How-to tips for advance care planning in the outpatient setting

When approaching the topic of ACP with patients, it’s important to do so over time, starting as soon as possible with older patients and those with chronic illness conferring a high risk of significant morbidity or mortality. Assess each patient’s understanding of ACP and readiness to discuss the topic. Many patients think of ACP in the context of a document (eg, living will), so asking about the existence of a living will may help to start the conversation. Alternatively, consider inquiring about whether the patient has had experience with family or friends at the end of life or during a difficult medical situation, and whether the patient has thought about making personal plans for such a situation.²⁵

When a patient is ready to have this conversation, your goal should be three-fold: ²⁶

1. Help the patient articulate personal values, goals, and preferences.
2. Ask the patient to formally assign health care power of attorney (POA) to a trusted individual or to name a surrogate decision-maker. Document this decision in the medical record.
3. Help the patient translate expressed values into specific medical care plans, if applicable.

Because ACP conversations are often time consuming, it’s a good idea to schedule separate appointments to focus on this alone. If, however, a patient is unable to return for a dedicated ACP visit, a first step that can be completed in a reasonably short period would be choosing a surrogate decision-maker.

Helping a patient articulate personal values may be eased by asking, "Have you ever thought about what kind of care you would want if you could not make your own decisions?"

Helping a patient articulate personal values may be eased by asking such questions as: “Have you ever thought about what kind of care you would want if the time came when you could not make your own decisions?” or “What worries you the most about possibly not being able to make your own decisions?”²⁷ If the patient is able to identify a surrogate decision maker before the ACP appointment, ask that this person attend. A family member or close friend may remember instances in which the patient expressed health care preferences, and their presence can help to minimize gaps in communication.

Once the patient’s preferences are clear, document them in the medical record. Some preferences may be suitable for translation into POLST orders or an advance directive, but this is less important than the overall discussion. ACP should be an ongoing conversation, since a patient’s goals may change over time. And encourage the patient to share any desired change in plans with their surrogate decision-maker or update the POA document.

Be sure to bill for advance care planning services

To encourage office-based providers to conduct ACP, CMS implemented payment for CPT codes 99497 and 99498.

CPT code 99497 covers the first 30 minutes of face-to-face time with patients or their family members or medical decision-makers. This time can be used to discuss living wills or advance directives.

CPT code 99498 can be applied to each additional 30 minutes of ACP services. Typically, this billing code would be used as an add-on for a particular diagnosis such as heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or pancreatic cancer.

CPT Code 99497 equates to 2.40 relative-value units (RVU) with an estimated payment of $85.99, while CPT code 99498 equates to 2.09 RVU with an estimated payment of $74.88.²⁸

According to CMS, there is no annual limit to the number of times the ACP codes can be billed for a particular patient. And there are no restrictions regarding location of service, meaning a provider could perform this in an outpatient setting, an inpatient setting, or a long-term care facility. Both physicians and non-physician practitioners are allowed to bill with this code. Also worth noting: You don’t need to complete any particular documentation for a visit to be billed as an ACP service. CMS provides a helpful Q & A at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/PhysicianFeeSched/Downloads/FAQ-Advance-Care-Planning.pdf.

CORRESPONDENCE
John Liantonio, MD, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Department of Family and Community Medicine, 1015 Walnut Street, Suite 401, Philadelphia, PA 19107; [email protected]

With the number of aging Americans projected to grow dramatically in the next several years, the need for primary palliative care and advance care planning (ACP) is more important than ever. Patients and their families want and expect palliative care when needed, but initial conversations about ACP can be difficult for them. Appropriate timing in raising this subject and clear communication can give patients the opportunity, while they are still independent, to set their goals for medical care.

For the past several decades, political decisions and judicial cases have shaped palliative care as we know it today. And its shape is still evolving. In support of ACP, advocacy groups at a national level are developing models that practitioners can use to engage patients in setting goals. And Medicare is now reimbursing primary care providers for this work that they have been doing for years (although many still may not be billing for the service).

Finally, the busy primary care office may have its own set of challenges in addressing ACP. Our aim in this review is to identify the barriers we face and the solutions we can implement to make a difference in our patients’ end-of-life care planning.

[polldaddy:9795119]

Landmark events have defined advance care planning today

In 1969, Luis Kutner, an Illinois attorney, proposed the idea of a “living will,” envisioned as a document specifying the types of treatment a person would be willing to receive were they unable at a later time to participate in making a decision.¹ In 1976, California became the first state to give living wills the power of the law through the Natural Death Act.²

Throughout the 1970s and '80s, several high-profile court cases brought this idea into the national spotlight. In 1975, the New Jersey Supreme Court granted the parents of 21-year-old Karen Ann Quinlan the right to discontinue the treatment sustaining her in a persistent vegetative state. Ms. Quinlan was removed from the ventilator and lived 9 more months before dying in a nursing home.

A few years later, Nancy Cruzan, a 32-year-old woman involved in a 1983 motor vehicle accident, was also in a persistent vegetative state and remained so until 1988 when her parents asked that her feeding tube be removed. The hospital refused, indicating that it would lead to her death. The family sued and the case eventually went to the US Supreme Court in 1989.

In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that a state was legally able to require “clear and convincing evidence” of a patient’s wish for removal of life-sustaining therapies. Cruzan’s family was able to provide such evidence and her artificial nutrition was withheld. She died 12 days later.

Among all individuals older than 18 years, only 26% have an advance directive.

The Cruzan case was instrumental in furthering ACP, leading to the passage of the Patient Self Determination Act (PSDA) by Congress in 1990. All federally funded health care facilities were now required to educate patients of their rights in determining their medical care and to ask about advance directives.³ The ACP movement gained additional momentum from the landmark SUPPORT study that documented shortcomings in communication between physicians and patients/families about treatment preferences and end-of-life care in US hospitals.⁴

In the Terri Schiavo case, the patient’s husband disagreed with the life-sustaining decisions of his wife’s parents given her persistent vegetative state and the fact that she had no chance of meaningful recovery. After a prolonged national debate, it was ultimately decided that the husband could elect to withhold artificial nutrition. (She died in 2005.) The Schiavo case, as well as the Institute of Medicine’s report on “Dying in America,”⁵ influenced Congress in 2016 to pass legislation funding ACP conversations.

The demonstrated benefits of advance care planning

When done comprehensively, ACP yields many benefits for patients and families and for the health care system. A systematic review demonstrated that, despite the few studies examining the economic cost of ACP, the process may lead to decreased health care costs in certain populations (nursing home residents, community dwelling adults with dementia, and those living in high health care spending regions) and at the very least does not increase health care costs.⁶ ACP has increased the number of do-not-resuscitate orders⁷ and has decreased hospitalizations,⁸ admissions to intensive care units,^7,8 and rates of cardiopulmonary resuscitation,^7,8 mechanical ventilation,^7,8 and use of tube feeding.⁸

More noteworthy than the decrease in resource utilization and potential cost savings is the impact that ACP can have on a patient’s quality of life. Patients who receive aggressive care at the end of life tend to experience decreased quality of life compared with those receiving hospice care.⁷ Quality-of-life scores for patients in hospice improved with the length of enrollment in that care.⁷ When ACP discussions have taken place, the care patients receive at the end of life tends to conform more closely to their wishes and to increase family satisfaction.^9-11

One reason that practitioners often give for not completing ACP is the fear of increasing patient or family anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, studies have shown this concern to be unfounded.^7,12 While ACP studies have not shown a decrease in rates of anxiety or PTSD, no study has shown an increase in these psychological morbidities.⁸

Caveats to keep in mind. Not all studies have shown unambiguous benefits related to ACP. Among the systematic reviews previously noted, there was significant variability in quality of data. Additionally, some experts argue that the traditional view of ACP (ie, completion of a single advance directive/living will) is outdated and should be replaced with a method that prepares patients and families to anticipate “in-the-moment decision making.”¹³ While we still believe that completion of an advance directive is useful, the experts’ point is well taken, especially since many patients change their preferences over time (and typically towards more aggressive care).^14,15 While the advance directive serves a role, it is more important to help patients recognize their goals and preferences and to facilitate ongoing discussions between the patient and their families/surrogate decision maker and providers.

A snapshot of participation in advance care planning

Despite the ACP movement and the likely benefits associated with it, most individuals have not participated. Rates of completion do seem to be rising, but there is still room for improvement. Among all individuals older than 18 years, only 26.3% have an advance directive.¹⁶ In a cohort of older patients seen in an emergency department, only 40% had a living will, while nearly 54% had a designated health care power of attorney.¹⁷ Perhaps more alarming is the lack of ACP for those patients almost all physicians would agree need it—the long-term care population. The National Center for Health Statistics has reported that only 28% of home health care patients, 65% of nursing home residents, and 88% of hospice patients have an advance directive on file.¹⁸

Physician and patient barriers to advance care planning

If ACP can decrease resource utilization and improve caregiver compliance with a patient’s wishes for end of life, the obvious question is: Why isn’t it done more often? A longstanding barrier for physicians has been that these types of discussions are time intensive and have not been billable. However, since January 1, 2016, we are now able to bill for these discussions. (More on this in a bit.) Physicians do cite other barriers, though.

A recent systematic review showed that ACP is hindered by time constraints imposed by other clinical and administrative tasks that are heavily monitored.¹⁹ Barriers to engaging in ACP reported by patients include a reluctance to think about dying, a belief that family or physicians will know what to do, difficulty understanding ACP forms, and the absence of a person who can serve as a surrogate decision-maker.^20,21

There are national models to help with implementation

The percentage of individuals with an advance directive in the United States has not increased significantly over the past decade.²² The lack of traction in completion and use of advance directives has lead several authors to question the utility of this older model of ACP.²² Several experts in the field believe that more robust, ongoing goals-of-care conversations between patients, families, and providers are equally, or even more, important than the completion of actual advance directive documents.^23,24

Explore recognized models for advance care planning, such as the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) paradigm and the Respecting Choices program.

National models such as the POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) paradigm have become popular in several states (http://www.polst.org). Intended for those with estimated life expectancy of less than one year, POLST is not an advance directive but a physician order for these seriously ill patients. Emergency medical service workers are legally able to follow a POLST document but not a living will or advance directive—a significant reason for those with end-stage illness to consider completing a POLST document with their health care provider. Programs such as, “Respecting Choices,” have incorporated POLST documentation as part of ongoing goals-of-care conversations between patients and health care providers (http://www.gundersenhealth.org/respecting-choices).

Many groups have developed products to encourage patients and their families to initiate conversations at home. An example is the Conversation Project, a free online resource available in multiple languages that can help break the ice for patients and get them talking about their wishes for end-of-life care (http://www.theconversationproject.org). It poses simple stimulating questions such as: “What kind of role do you want to have in the decision-making process?” and “What are your concerns about treatment?”

How-to tips for advance care planning in the outpatient setting

When approaching the topic of ACP with patients, it’s important to do so over time, starting as soon as possible with older patients and those with chronic illness conferring a high risk of significant morbidity or mortality. Assess each patient’s understanding of ACP and readiness to discuss the topic. Many patients think of ACP in the context of a document (eg, living will), so asking about the existence of a living will may help to start the conversation. Alternatively, consider inquiring about whether the patient has had experience with family or friends at the end of life or during a difficult medical situation, and whether the patient has thought about making personal plans for such a situation.²⁵

When a patient is ready to have this conversation, your goal should be three-fold: ²⁶

1. Help the patient articulate personal values, goals, and preferences.
2. Ask the patient to formally assign health care power of attorney (POA) to a trusted individual or to name a surrogate decision-maker. Document this decision in the medical record.
3. Help the patient translate expressed values into specific medical care plans, if applicable.

Because ACP conversations are often time consuming, it’s a good idea to schedule separate appointments to focus on this alone. If, however, a patient is unable to return for a dedicated ACP visit, a first step that can be completed in a reasonably short period would be choosing a surrogate decision-maker.

Helping a patient articulate personal values may be eased by asking, "Have you ever thought about what kind of care you would want if you could not make your own decisions?"

Helping a patient articulate personal values may be eased by asking such questions as: “Have you ever thought about what kind of care you would want if the time came when you could not make your own decisions?” or “What worries you the most about possibly not being able to make your own decisions?”²⁷ If the patient is able to identify a surrogate decision maker before the ACP appointment, ask that this person attend. A family member or close friend may remember instances in which the patient expressed health care preferences, and their presence can help to minimize gaps in communication.

Once the patient’s preferences are clear, document them in the medical record. Some preferences may be suitable for translation into POLST orders or an advance directive, but this is less important than the overall discussion. ACP should be an ongoing conversation, since a patient’s goals may change over time. And encourage the patient to share any desired change in plans with their surrogate decision-maker or update the POA document.

Be sure to bill for advance care planning services

To encourage office-based providers to conduct ACP, CMS implemented payment for CPT codes 99497 and 99498.

CPT code 99497 covers the first 30 minutes of face-to-face time with patients or their family members or medical decision-makers. This time can be used to discuss living wills or advance directives.

CPT code 99498 can be applied to each additional 30 minutes of ACP services. Typically, this billing code would be used as an add-on for a particular diagnosis such as heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or pancreatic cancer.

CPT Code 99497 equates to 2.40 relative-value units (RVU) with an estimated payment of $85.99, while CPT code 99498 equates to 2.09 RVU with an estimated payment of $74.88.²⁸

According to CMS, there is no annual limit to the number of times the ACP codes can be billed for a particular patient. And there are no restrictions regarding location of service, meaning a provider could perform this in an outpatient setting, an inpatient setting, or a long-term care facility. Both physicians and non-physician practitioners are allowed to bill with this code. Also worth noting: You don’t need to complete any particular documentation for a visit to be billed as an ACP service. CMS provides a helpful Q & A at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/PhysicianFeeSched/Downloads/FAQ-Advance-Care-Planning.pdf.

CORRESPONDENCE
John Liantonio, MD, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Department of Family and Community Medicine, 1015 Walnut Street, Suite 401, Philadelphia, PA 19107; [email protected]

With the number of aging Americans projected to grow dramatically in the next several years, the need for primary palliative care and advance care planning (ACP) is more important than ever. Patients and their families want and expect palliative care when needed, but initial conversations about ACP can be difficult for them. Appropriate timing in raising this subject and clear communication can give patients the opportunity, while they are still independent, to set their goals for medical care.

For the past several decades, political decisions and judicial cases have shaped palliative care as we know it today. And its shape is still evolving. In support of ACP, advocacy groups at a national level are developing models that practitioners can use to engage patients in setting goals. And Medicare is now reimbursing primary care providers for this work that they have been doing for years (although many still may not be billing for the service).

Finally, the busy primary care office may have its own set of challenges in addressing ACP. Our aim in this review is to identify the barriers we face and the solutions we can implement to make a difference in our patients’ end-of-life care planning.

[polldaddy:9795119]

Landmark events have defined advance care planning today

In 1969, Luis Kutner, an Illinois attorney, proposed the idea of a “living will,” envisioned as a document specifying the types of treatment a person would be willing to receive were they unable at a later time to participate in making a decision.¹ In 1976, California became the first state to give living wills the power of the law through the Natural Death Act.²

Throughout the 1970s and '80s, several high-profile court cases brought this idea into the national spotlight. In 1975, the New Jersey Supreme Court granted the parents of 21-year-old Karen Ann Quinlan the right to discontinue the treatment sustaining her in a persistent vegetative state. Ms. Quinlan was removed from the ventilator and lived 9 more months before dying in a nursing home.

A few years later, Nancy Cruzan, a 32-year-old woman involved in a 1983 motor vehicle accident, was also in a persistent vegetative state and remained so until 1988 when her parents asked that her feeding tube be removed. The hospital refused, indicating that it would lead to her death. The family sued and the case eventually went to the US Supreme Court in 1989.

In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that a state was legally able to require “clear and convincing evidence” of a patient’s wish for removal of life-sustaining therapies. Cruzan’s family was able to provide such evidence and her artificial nutrition was withheld. She died 12 days later.

Among all individuals older than 18 years, only 26% have an advance directive.

The Cruzan case was instrumental in furthering ACP, leading to the passage of the Patient Self Determination Act (PSDA) by Congress in 1990. All federally funded health care facilities were now required to educate patients of their rights in determining their medical care and to ask about advance directives.³ The ACP movement gained additional momentum from the landmark SUPPORT study that documented shortcomings in communication between physicians and patients/families about treatment preferences and end-of-life care in US hospitals.⁴

In the Terri Schiavo case, the patient’s husband disagreed with the life-sustaining decisions of his wife’s parents given her persistent vegetative state and the fact that she had no chance of meaningful recovery. After a prolonged national debate, it was ultimately decided that the husband could elect to withhold artificial nutrition. (She died in 2005.) The Schiavo case, as well as the Institute of Medicine’s report on “Dying in America,”⁵ influenced Congress in 2016 to pass legislation funding ACP conversations.

The demonstrated benefits of advance care planning

When done comprehensively, ACP yields many benefits for patients and families and for the health care system. A systematic review demonstrated that, despite the few studies examining the economic cost of ACP, the process may lead to decreased health care costs in certain populations (nursing home residents, community dwelling adults with dementia, and those living in high health care spending regions) and at the very least does not increase health care costs.⁶ ACP has increased the number of do-not-resuscitate orders⁷ and has decreased hospitalizations,⁸ admissions to intensive care units,^7,8 and rates of cardiopulmonary resuscitation,^7,8 mechanical ventilation,^7,8 and use of tube feeding.⁸

More noteworthy than the decrease in resource utilization and potential cost savings is the impact that ACP can have on a patient’s quality of life. Patients who receive aggressive care at the end of life tend to experience decreased quality of life compared with those receiving hospice care.⁷ Quality-of-life scores for patients in hospice improved with the length of enrollment in that care.⁷ When ACP discussions have taken place, the care patients receive at the end of life tends to conform more closely to their wishes and to increase family satisfaction.^9-11

One reason that practitioners often give for not completing ACP is the fear of increasing patient or family anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, studies have shown this concern to be unfounded.^7,12 While ACP studies have not shown a decrease in rates of anxiety or PTSD, no study has shown an increase in these psychological morbidities.⁸

Caveats to keep in mind. Not all studies have shown unambiguous benefits related to ACP. Among the systematic reviews previously noted, there was significant variability in quality of data. Additionally, some experts argue that the traditional view of ACP (ie, completion of a single advance directive/living will) is outdated and should be replaced with a method that prepares patients and families to anticipate “in-the-moment decision making.”¹³ While we still believe that completion of an advance directive is useful, the experts’ point is well taken, especially since many patients change their preferences over time (and typically towards more aggressive care).^14,15 While the advance directive serves a role, it is more important to help patients recognize their goals and preferences and to facilitate ongoing discussions between the patient and their families/surrogate decision maker and providers.

A snapshot of participation in advance care planning

Despite the ACP movement and the likely benefits associated with it, most individuals have not participated. Rates of completion do seem to be rising, but there is still room for improvement. Among all individuals older than 18 years, only 26.3% have an advance directive.¹⁶ In a cohort of older patients seen in an emergency department, only 40% had a living will, while nearly 54% had a designated health care power of attorney.¹⁷ Perhaps more alarming is the lack of ACP for those patients almost all physicians would agree need it—the long-term care population. The National Center for Health Statistics has reported that only 28% of home health care patients, 65% of nursing home residents, and 88% of hospice patients have an advance directive on file.¹⁸

Physician and patient barriers to advance care planning

If ACP can decrease resource utilization and improve caregiver compliance with a patient’s wishes for end of life, the obvious question is: Why isn’t it done more often? A longstanding barrier for physicians has been that these types of discussions are time intensive and have not been billable. However, since January 1, 2016, we are now able to bill for these discussions. (More on this in a bit.) Physicians do cite other barriers, though.

A recent systematic review showed that ACP is hindered by time constraints imposed by other clinical and administrative tasks that are heavily monitored.¹⁹ Barriers to engaging in ACP reported by patients include a reluctance to think about dying, a belief that family or physicians will know what to do, difficulty understanding ACP forms, and the absence of a person who can serve as a surrogate decision-maker.^20,21

There are national models to help with implementation

The percentage of individuals with an advance directive in the United States has not increased significantly over the past decade.²² The lack of traction in completion and use of advance directives has lead several authors to question the utility of this older model of ACP.²² Several experts in the field believe that more robust, ongoing goals-of-care conversations between patients, families, and providers are equally, or even more, important than the completion of actual advance directive documents.^23,24

Explore recognized models for advance care planning, such as the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) paradigm and the Respecting Choices program.

National models such as the POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) paradigm have become popular in several states (http://www.polst.org). Intended for those with estimated life expectancy of less than one year, POLST is not an advance directive but a physician order for these seriously ill patients. Emergency medical service workers are legally able to follow a POLST document but not a living will or advance directive—a significant reason for those with end-stage illness to consider completing a POLST document with their health care provider. Programs such as, “Respecting Choices,” have incorporated POLST documentation as part of ongoing goals-of-care conversations between patients and health care providers (http://www.gundersenhealth.org/respecting-choices).

Many groups have developed products to encourage patients and their families to initiate conversations at home. An example is the Conversation Project, a free online resource available in multiple languages that can help break the ice for patients and get them talking about their wishes for end-of-life care (http://www.theconversationproject.org). It poses simple stimulating questions such as: “What kind of role do you want to have in the decision-making process?” and “What are your concerns about treatment?”

How-to tips for advance care planning in the outpatient setting

When approaching the topic of ACP with patients, it’s important to do so over time, starting as soon as possible with older patients and those with chronic illness conferring a high risk of significant morbidity or mortality. Assess each patient’s understanding of ACP and readiness to discuss the topic. Many patients think of ACP in the context of a document (eg, living will), so asking about the existence of a living will may help to start the conversation. Alternatively, consider inquiring about whether the patient has had experience with family or friends at the end of life or during a difficult medical situation, and whether the patient has thought about making personal plans for such a situation.²⁵

When a patient is ready to have this conversation, your goal should be three-fold: ²⁶

1. Help the patient articulate personal values, goals, and preferences.
2. Ask the patient to formally assign health care power of attorney (POA) to a trusted individual or to name a surrogate decision-maker. Document this decision in the medical record.
3. Help the patient translate expressed values into specific medical care plans, if applicable.

Because ACP conversations are often time consuming, it’s a good idea to schedule separate appointments to focus on this alone. If, however, a patient is unable to return for a dedicated ACP visit, a first step that can be completed in a reasonably short period would be choosing a surrogate decision-maker.

Helping a patient articulate personal values may be eased by asking, "Have you ever thought about what kind of care you would want if you could not make your own decisions?"

Helping a patient articulate personal values may be eased by asking such questions as: “Have you ever thought about what kind of care you would want if the time came when you could not make your own decisions?” or “What worries you the most about possibly not being able to make your own decisions?”²⁷ If the patient is able to identify a surrogate decision maker before the ACP appointment, ask that this person attend. A family member or close friend may remember instances in which the patient expressed health care preferences, and their presence can help to minimize gaps in communication.

Once the patient’s preferences are clear, document them in the medical record. Some preferences may be suitable for translation into POLST orders or an advance directive, but this is less important than the overall discussion. ACP should be an ongoing conversation, since a patient’s goals may change over time. And encourage the patient to share any desired change in plans with their surrogate decision-maker or update the POA document.

Be sure to bill for advance care planning services

To encourage office-based providers to conduct ACP, CMS implemented payment for CPT codes 99497 and 99498.

CPT code 99497 covers the first 30 minutes of face-to-face time with patients or their family members or medical decision-makers. This time can be used to discuss living wills or advance directives.

CPT code 99498 can be applied to each additional 30 minutes of ACP services. Typically, this billing code would be used as an add-on for a particular diagnosis such as heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or pancreatic cancer.

CPT Code 99497 equates to 2.40 relative-value units (RVU) with an estimated payment of $85.99, while CPT code 99498 equates to 2.09 RVU with an estimated payment of $74.88.²⁸

According to CMS, there is no annual limit to the number of times the ACP codes can be billed for a particular patient. And there are no restrictions regarding location of service, meaning a provider could perform this in an outpatient setting, an inpatient setting, or a long-term care facility. Both physicians and non-physician practitioners are allowed to bill with this code. Also worth noting: You don’t need to complete any particular documentation for a visit to be billed as an ACP service. CMS provides a helpful Q & A at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/PhysicianFeeSched/Downloads/FAQ-Advance-Care-Planning.pdf.

CORRESPONDENCE
John Liantonio, MD, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Department of Family and Community Medicine, 1015 Walnut Street, Suite 401, Philadelphia, PA 19107; [email protected]

The staff are the ones who answer patient questions the most. The more we can educate them on how to answer the questions, the more effective they will be in helping us be more efficient with our time. I asked my staff to put together a list of the most common patient skin care questions. This column can be used as a guide for your staff when answering questions about skin care.

Q: Should my sunscreen be applied first or last?

A: The best way to remember is that medications should be applied closest to the skin and sunscreen should be applied closest to the sun. I recommend that morning skin care be applied in the following order:

Step 1. Facial cleanser

Step 2. Eye products (protect the delicate eye area from the medication)

Step 3. Treatment product (medications, or the most important active ingredients)

Step 4. Moisturizer (if needed)

Step 5. Sunscreen

Q: When can I restart my normal skin care regimen after receiving dermal fillers?

A: The morning after receiving dermal fillers, you can resume your normal facial skin care regimen.

masterzphotois/Thinkstock

Q: How do I treat my skin after receiving cosmetic injections such as Botox?

A: After you are injected with dermal fillers, keep the Arnica gel, Arnica pads, or post procedure product on your face until bedtime. Prior to bed, wash your face with a gentle cleanser and lukewarm water. Do not use any scrubs, facial brushes, or hydroxy acids. Apply a soothing gel or soothing moisturizer. Do not use hot water on the face for 48 hours. Avoid hot showers, saunas, facial steaming, facial massage, and exercise for 48 hours. If you must exercise, try to keep the face cool with an ice filled bottle of water. Heat makes you more likely to bruise.

Q: Will retinol make my skin sun sensitive?

A: Retinol breaks down upon sun exposure so it should only be used at night. It is a myth that retinol makes your skin sun sensitive. Retinol is a form of vitamin A that helps protect your skin from sun damage by reducing levels of an enzyme called collagenase that is produced after sun exposure. For this and other reasons, retinol can help protect your skin from sun damage. However, if your skin gets irritated from the retinol and you go into the sun, you can develop postinflammatory hyperpigmentation – or dark patches on the skin. It is a good idea to always wear sunscreen in the morning every day whether you are using retinol or not.

Q: What do I do to treat the dark circles under my eyes?

A: Dark circles can be caused by sluggish blood flow around the eyes leading to deposition of a pigment found in blood called hemosiderin. Dark circles around the eyes also can be caused by an increased amount of the pigment melanin that occurs from sun exposure, heat, estrogen, and stress. Treatments include lifestyle habits that increase blood circulation, such as smoking cessation and exercise. Supplements such as horse chestnut may help improve circulation. Ingredients such as the tyrosinase inhibitors ascorbic acid, kojic acid, arbutin, and hydroquinone will help decrease melanin production, and may improve dark circles caused by increased melanin. Wearing a daily sunscreen around the eyes is a very important part of improving the appearance of dark circles under the eyes.

Q: Do I need an eye cream?

A: Most people need an eye product whether it is a serum, gel, or cream. Eye treatment products are usually one of the first skin care products that male patients purchase. The most common indications for eye treatment products are dark circles under the eyes, puffy eyes, dryness, fine lines, or redness. Each one of these indications requires very different ingredients; therefore, most people need more than one eye product depending on what eye issues they are experiencing. Eye treatment products can protect the delicate eye area from medications such as tretinoin that gets on the pillowcase and is transferred to the eye area at night. Eye products that have humectants, such as heparan sulfate or hyaluronic acid, should be used to treat fines lines and dryness, but these may make eyes puffy. For those with dry and puffy eyes, a second eye product with vasoconstrictive ingredients should be used in the daytime while the hydrating one is used at night. Antiaging eye products with retinol and hydroxy acids may irritate sensitive skin types so they can be paired with a soothing eye product. Consider using different eye products for the morning and evening depending on what eye issues need to be treated.

Q: Will moisturizer make my acne worse?

A: Noncomedogenic moisturizers can help improve acne and speed recovery. Using the proper cleanser and moisturizer will make acne medications more tolerable. Many patients cannot tolerate their acne medications every day. The bacteria that cause acne reproduce every 12 hours. For this reason, acne medications must be used consistently twice a day. Using the proper cleanser and moisturizer makes this possible in most patients. Avoid moisturizers with coconut oil, isopropyl myristate, and other ingredients known to cause acne.

Q: Why does my face get so red after washing it?

A: Rosacea-prone skin types get red from the friction of washing the face – even if just using water. If this occurs, use skin care products with anti-inflammatory ingredients such as argan oil, green tea, fever few, chamomile, caffeine, resveratrol, and niacinamide to sooth the skin. These can be paired with prescription rosacea medications such as Rhofade (oxymetazoline hydrochloride) to reduce facial redness. People with rosacea-prone skin types should avoid facial brushes, scrubs, and vigorous exfoliation.

Q: Why is my melasma not getting better on skin lighteners?

Educating our staff on the basics of skin care can make our office much more efficient. If you liked the format of this column or have questions that you hear often from patients, please email me at [email protected].
 

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote two textbooks: “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014), and a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Evolus, Galderma, Aclaris, and Revance. She is the founder and CEO of Skin Type Solutions Franchise Systems LLC.

The staff are the ones who answer patient questions the most. The more we can educate them on how to answer the questions, the more effective they will be in helping us be more efficient with our time. I asked my staff to put together a list of the most common patient skin care questions. This column can be used as a guide for your staff when answering questions about skin care.

Q: Should my sunscreen be applied first or last?

A: The best way to remember is that medications should be applied closest to the skin and sunscreen should be applied closest to the sun. I recommend that morning skin care be applied in the following order:

Step 1. Facial cleanser

Step 2. Eye products (protect the delicate eye area from the medication)

Step 3. Treatment product (medications, or the most important active ingredients)

Step 4. Moisturizer (if needed)

Step 5. Sunscreen

Q: When can I restart my normal skin care regimen after receiving dermal fillers?

A: The morning after receiving dermal fillers, you can resume your normal facial skin care regimen.

masterzphotois/Thinkstock

Q: How do I treat my skin after receiving cosmetic injections such as Botox?

A: After you are injected with dermal fillers, keep the Arnica gel, Arnica pads, or post procedure product on your face until bedtime. Prior to bed, wash your face with a gentle cleanser and lukewarm water. Do not use any scrubs, facial brushes, or hydroxy acids. Apply a soothing gel or soothing moisturizer. Do not use hot water on the face for 48 hours. Avoid hot showers, saunas, facial steaming, facial massage, and exercise for 48 hours. If you must exercise, try to keep the face cool with an ice filled bottle of water. Heat makes you more likely to bruise.

Q: Will retinol make my skin sun sensitive?

A: Retinol breaks down upon sun exposure so it should only be used at night. It is a myth that retinol makes your skin sun sensitive. Retinol is a form of vitamin A that helps protect your skin from sun damage by reducing levels of an enzyme called collagenase that is produced after sun exposure. For this and other reasons, retinol can help protect your skin from sun damage. However, if your skin gets irritated from the retinol and you go into the sun, you can develop postinflammatory hyperpigmentation – or dark patches on the skin. It is a good idea to always wear sunscreen in the morning every day whether you are using retinol or not.

Q: What do I do to treat the dark circles under my eyes?

A: Dark circles can be caused by sluggish blood flow around the eyes leading to deposition of a pigment found in blood called hemosiderin. Dark circles around the eyes also can be caused by an increased amount of the pigment melanin that occurs from sun exposure, heat, estrogen, and stress. Treatments include lifestyle habits that increase blood circulation, such as smoking cessation and exercise. Supplements such as horse chestnut may help improve circulation. Ingredients such as the tyrosinase inhibitors ascorbic acid, kojic acid, arbutin, and hydroquinone will help decrease melanin production, and may improve dark circles caused by increased melanin. Wearing a daily sunscreen around the eyes is a very important part of improving the appearance of dark circles under the eyes.

Q: Do I need an eye cream?

A: Most people need an eye product whether it is a serum, gel, or cream. Eye treatment products are usually one of the first skin care products that male patients purchase. The most common indications for eye treatment products are dark circles under the eyes, puffy eyes, dryness, fine lines, or redness. Each one of these indications requires very different ingredients; therefore, most people need more than one eye product depending on what eye issues they are experiencing. Eye treatment products can protect the delicate eye area from medications such as tretinoin that gets on the pillowcase and is transferred to the eye area at night. Eye products that have humectants, such as heparan sulfate or hyaluronic acid, should be used to treat fines lines and dryness, but these may make eyes puffy. For those with dry and puffy eyes, a second eye product with vasoconstrictive ingredients should be used in the daytime while the hydrating one is used at night. Antiaging eye products with retinol and hydroxy acids may irritate sensitive skin types so they can be paired with a soothing eye product. Consider using different eye products for the morning and evening depending on what eye issues need to be treated.

Q: Will moisturizer make my acne worse?

A: Noncomedogenic moisturizers can help improve acne and speed recovery. Using the proper cleanser and moisturizer will make acne medications more tolerable. Many patients cannot tolerate their acne medications every day. The bacteria that cause acne reproduce every 12 hours. For this reason, acne medications must be used consistently twice a day. Using the proper cleanser and moisturizer makes this possible in most patients. Avoid moisturizers with coconut oil, isopropyl myristate, and other ingredients known to cause acne.

Q: Why does my face get so red after washing it?

A: Rosacea-prone skin types get red from the friction of washing the face – even if just using water. If this occurs, use skin care products with anti-inflammatory ingredients such as argan oil, green tea, fever few, chamomile, caffeine, resveratrol, and niacinamide to sooth the skin. These can be paired with prescription rosacea medications such as Rhofade (oxymetazoline hydrochloride) to reduce facial redness. People with rosacea-prone skin types should avoid facial brushes, scrubs, and vigorous exfoliation.

Q: Why is my melasma not getting better on skin lighteners?

Educating our staff on the basics of skin care can make our office much more efficient. If you liked the format of this column or have questions that you hear often from patients, please email me at [email protected].
 

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote two textbooks: “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014), and a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Evolus, Galderma, Aclaris, and Revance. She is the founder and CEO of Skin Type Solutions Franchise Systems LLC.

The staff are the ones who answer patient questions the most. The more we can educate them on how to answer the questions, the more effective they will be in helping us be more efficient with our time. I asked my staff to put together a list of the most common patient skin care questions. This column can be used as a guide for your staff when answering questions about skin care.

Q: Should my sunscreen be applied first or last?

A: The best way to remember is that medications should be applied closest to the skin and sunscreen should be applied closest to the sun. I recommend that morning skin care be applied in the following order:

Step 1. Facial cleanser

Step 2. Eye products (protect the delicate eye area from the medication)

Step 3. Treatment product (medications, or the most important active ingredients)

Step 4. Moisturizer (if needed)

Step 5. Sunscreen

Q: When can I restart my normal skin care regimen after receiving dermal fillers?

A: The morning after receiving dermal fillers, you can resume your normal facial skin care regimen.

masterzphotois/Thinkstock

Q: How do I treat my skin after receiving cosmetic injections such as Botox?

A: After you are injected with dermal fillers, keep the Arnica gel, Arnica pads, or post procedure product on your face until bedtime. Prior to bed, wash your face with a gentle cleanser and lukewarm water. Do not use any scrubs, facial brushes, or hydroxy acids. Apply a soothing gel or soothing moisturizer. Do not use hot water on the face for 48 hours. Avoid hot showers, saunas, facial steaming, facial massage, and exercise for 48 hours. If you must exercise, try to keep the face cool with an ice filled bottle of water. Heat makes you more likely to bruise.

Q: Will retinol make my skin sun sensitive?

A: Retinol breaks down upon sun exposure so it should only be used at night. It is a myth that retinol makes your skin sun sensitive. Retinol is a form of vitamin A that helps protect your skin from sun damage by reducing levels of an enzyme called collagenase that is produced after sun exposure. For this and other reasons, retinol can help protect your skin from sun damage. However, if your skin gets irritated from the retinol and you go into the sun, you can develop postinflammatory hyperpigmentation – or dark patches on the skin. It is a good idea to always wear sunscreen in the morning every day whether you are using retinol or not.

Q: What do I do to treat the dark circles under my eyes?

A: Dark circles can be caused by sluggish blood flow around the eyes leading to deposition of a pigment found in blood called hemosiderin. Dark circles around the eyes also can be caused by an increased amount of the pigment melanin that occurs from sun exposure, heat, estrogen, and stress. Treatments include lifestyle habits that increase blood circulation, such as smoking cessation and exercise. Supplements such as horse chestnut may help improve circulation. Ingredients such as the tyrosinase inhibitors ascorbic acid, kojic acid, arbutin, and hydroquinone will help decrease melanin production, and may improve dark circles caused by increased melanin. Wearing a daily sunscreen around the eyes is a very important part of improving the appearance of dark circles under the eyes.

Q: Do I need an eye cream?

A: Most people need an eye product whether it is a serum, gel, or cream. Eye treatment products are usually one of the first skin care products that male patients purchase. The most common indications for eye treatment products are dark circles under the eyes, puffy eyes, dryness, fine lines, or redness. Each one of these indications requires very different ingredients; therefore, most people need more than one eye product depending on what eye issues they are experiencing. Eye treatment products can protect the delicate eye area from medications such as tretinoin that gets on the pillowcase and is transferred to the eye area at night. Eye products that have humectants, such as heparan sulfate or hyaluronic acid, should be used to treat fines lines and dryness, but these may make eyes puffy. For those with dry and puffy eyes, a second eye product with vasoconstrictive ingredients should be used in the daytime while the hydrating one is used at night. Antiaging eye products with retinol and hydroxy acids may irritate sensitive skin types so they can be paired with a soothing eye product. Consider using different eye products for the morning and evening depending on what eye issues need to be treated.

Q: Will moisturizer make my acne worse?

A: Noncomedogenic moisturizers can help improve acne and speed recovery. Using the proper cleanser and moisturizer will make acne medications more tolerable. Many patients cannot tolerate their acne medications every day. The bacteria that cause acne reproduce every 12 hours. For this reason, acne medications must be used consistently twice a day. Using the proper cleanser and moisturizer makes this possible in most patients. Avoid moisturizers with coconut oil, isopropyl myristate, and other ingredients known to cause acne.

Q: Why does my face get so red after washing it?

A: Rosacea-prone skin types get red from the friction of washing the face – even if just using water. If this occurs, use skin care products with anti-inflammatory ingredients such as argan oil, green tea, fever few, chamomile, caffeine, resveratrol, and niacinamide to sooth the skin. These can be paired with prescription rosacea medications such as Rhofade (oxymetazoline hydrochloride) to reduce facial redness. People with rosacea-prone skin types should avoid facial brushes, scrubs, and vigorous exfoliation.

Q: Why is my melasma not getting better on skin lighteners?

Educating our staff on the basics of skin care can make our office much more efficient. If you liked the format of this column or have questions that you hear often from patients, please email me at [email protected].
 

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote two textbooks: “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014), and a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Evolus, Galderma, Aclaris, and Revance. She is the founder and CEO of Skin Type Solutions Franchise Systems LLC.

This week (July 13, 2017) the US Senate released the next iteration of Repeal and Replace. Most involved in health care delivery oppose Medicaid cuts, relaxation of insurance coverage regulations, making the essential benefit set optional, and other parts of this legislation. Although most Americans oppose this legislation, if I were a hedge fund manager, I would be shorting the ACA.

The Editors have gathered an eclectic group of articles for your education and reading pleasure. On the cover, you read about threats from cybercrime, research questioning the safety of long-term use of proton pump inhibitors (I am going on my 20th year of a PPI) and a story about physician burnout.

John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF

Editor in Chief

This week (July 13, 2017) the US Senate released the next iteration of Repeal and Replace. Most involved in health care delivery oppose Medicaid cuts, relaxation of insurance coverage regulations, making the essential benefit set optional, and other parts of this legislation. Although most Americans oppose this legislation, if I were a hedge fund manager, I would be shorting the ACA.

The Editors have gathered an eclectic group of articles for your education and reading pleasure. On the cover, you read about threats from cybercrime, research questioning the safety of long-term use of proton pump inhibitors (I am going on my 20th year of a PPI) and a story about physician burnout.

John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF

Editor in Chief

This week (July 13, 2017) the US Senate released the next iteration of Repeal and Replace. Most involved in health care delivery oppose Medicaid cuts, relaxation of insurance coverage regulations, making the essential benefit set optional, and other parts of this legislation. Although most Americans oppose this legislation, if I were a hedge fund manager, I would be shorting the ACA.

The Editors have gathered an eclectic group of articles for your education and reading pleasure. On the cover, you read about threats from cybercrime, research questioning the safety of long-term use of proton pump inhibitors (I am going on my 20th year of a PPI) and a story about physician burnout.

John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF

Editor in Chief

The development of therapies for chronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection has been a highlight of progress in hepatology and infectious disease over the last 25 years. From initial empiric approaches with interferon and ribavirin, to targeted and custom designed direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), there has been rapid improvement in efficacy and side effect profiles. Since we are dealing with a viral infection, loss of viremia after stopping therapy (sustained viral response, SVR) has been the marker of therapeutic success. SVR, however, is still a surrogate for clinical outcome and the analysis of 5-year follow-up in the December 2014 issue reported that in patients with SVR there was a reduction in risk of death, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver transplantation.

Observational studies have the potential for significant biases as decisions to treat are frequently based on the likelihood of a successful outcome. A randomized clinical trial for DAAs compared to control would of course be unethical at this stage. The scale of use of DAAs should allow a clear answer to this question within the next 2 years.

The development of therapies for chronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection has been a highlight of progress in hepatology and infectious disease over the last 25 years. From initial empiric approaches with interferon and ribavirin, to targeted and custom designed direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), there has been rapid improvement in efficacy and side effect profiles. Since we are dealing with a viral infection, loss of viremia after stopping therapy (sustained viral response, SVR) has been the marker of therapeutic success. SVR, however, is still a surrogate for clinical outcome and the analysis of 5-year follow-up in the December 2014 issue reported that in patients with SVR there was a reduction in risk of death, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver transplantation.

Observational studies have the potential for significant biases as decisions to treat are frequently based on the likelihood of a successful outcome. A randomized clinical trial for DAAs compared to control would of course be unethical at this stage. The scale of use of DAAs should allow a clear answer to this question within the next 2 years.

The development of therapies for chronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection has been a highlight of progress in hepatology and infectious disease over the last 25 years. From initial empiric approaches with interferon and ribavirin, to targeted and custom designed direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), there has been rapid improvement in efficacy and side effect profiles. Since we are dealing with a viral infection, loss of viremia after stopping therapy (sustained viral response, SVR) has been the marker of therapeutic success. SVR, however, is still a surrogate for clinical outcome and the analysis of 5-year follow-up in the December 2014 issue reported that in patients with SVR there was a reduction in risk of death, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver transplantation.

Observational studies have the potential for significant biases as decisions to treat are frequently based on the likelihood of a successful outcome. A randomized clinical trial for DAAs compared to control would of course be unethical at this stage. The scale of use of DAAs should allow a clear answer to this question within the next 2 years.

Early repair is the standard of care for patients with type A aortic dissection, but the presence of malperfusion rather than the timing of surgery may be a major determinant in patient survival both in the hospital and in the long term, according to an analysis of patients with acute type A aortic dissection over a 17-year period at the University of Bristol (England).

“Malperfusion at presentation rather than the timing of intervention is the major risk factor for death in both the short term and long term in patients undergoing surgical repair of type A aortic dissection,” Pradeep Narayan, FRCS, and his colleagues said in reporting their findings in the July issue of the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (154:81-6). Nonetheless, Dr. Narayan and his colleagues acknowledged that early operation prevents the development of malperfusion and is the best option for restoring normal perfusion for patients who already have malperfusion.

Their study analyzed results from two different groups of patients who had surgery for repair of acute type A aortic dissection over a 17-year period: 72 in the early surgery group that had operative repair within 12 hours of symptom onset; and 80 in the late-surgery group that had the operation 12 hours or more after symptoms first appeared. A total of 205 patients underwent surgical repair for acute type A aortic dissection in that period, but only 152 cases had recorded the timing of surgery from onset of symptoms. The median time between arrival at the center and surgery was 3 hours.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors reported that 39% (60) of the 152 patients had malperfusion. Organ malperfusion was actually more common in the early surgery group, although the difference was not significant: 48.6% vs. 31.3% in the late-surgery group (P = .29). Early mortality was also similar between the two groups: 19.4% in the early surgery group and 13.8% in the late surgery group (P = .8). In terms of late survival, the study found no difference between the two groups.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors reported that malperfusion and concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting were independent predictors of survival, with hazard ratios of 2.65 (P = .01) and 3.03 (P = .03), respectively. As a nonlinear variable, time to surgery showed an inverse relationship with late mortality (HR, 0.51; P = .26), but as a linear variable when adjusted for other covariates, including malperfusion, it did not affect survival (HR, 1.01; P = .09).

“The main finding of the present study is that almost 40% of patients undergoing repair of type A aortic dissection had evidence of malperfusion,” Dr. Narayan and his coauthors said. “The second important finding is that the presence of malperfusion was associated with significantly increased risk of death in both the short-term and long-term follow-up.” While a delayed operation was associated with a reduced risk of death, it was not significant when accounting for malperfusion.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors acknowledged limitations of their study, the most important of which was the including of different types of malperfusion as a single variable. Also, the small sample size may explain the lack of statistically significant differences between the two groups.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors had no financial relationships to disclose.
 

Early repair is the standard of care for patients with type A aortic dissection, but the presence of malperfusion rather than the timing of surgery may be a major determinant in patient survival both in the hospital and in the long term, according to an analysis of patients with acute type A aortic dissection over a 17-year period at the University of Bristol (England).

“Malperfusion at presentation rather than the timing of intervention is the major risk factor for death in both the short term and long term in patients undergoing surgical repair of type A aortic dissection,” Pradeep Narayan, FRCS, and his colleagues said in reporting their findings in the July issue of the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (154:81-6). Nonetheless, Dr. Narayan and his colleagues acknowledged that early operation prevents the development of malperfusion and is the best option for restoring normal perfusion for patients who already have malperfusion.

Their study analyzed results from two different groups of patients who had surgery for repair of acute type A aortic dissection over a 17-year period: 72 in the early surgery group that had operative repair within 12 hours of symptom onset; and 80 in the late-surgery group that had the operation 12 hours or more after symptoms first appeared. A total of 205 patients underwent surgical repair for acute type A aortic dissection in that period, but only 152 cases had recorded the timing of surgery from onset of symptoms. The median time between arrival at the center and surgery was 3 hours.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors reported that 39% (60) of the 152 patients had malperfusion. Organ malperfusion was actually more common in the early surgery group, although the difference was not significant: 48.6% vs. 31.3% in the late-surgery group (P = .29). Early mortality was also similar between the two groups: 19.4% in the early surgery group and 13.8% in the late surgery group (P = .8). In terms of late survival, the study found no difference between the two groups.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors reported that malperfusion and concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting were independent predictors of survival, with hazard ratios of 2.65 (P = .01) and 3.03 (P = .03), respectively. As a nonlinear variable, time to surgery showed an inverse relationship with late mortality (HR, 0.51; P = .26), but as a linear variable when adjusted for other covariates, including malperfusion, it did not affect survival (HR, 1.01; P = .09).

“The main finding of the present study is that almost 40% of patients undergoing repair of type A aortic dissection had evidence of malperfusion,” Dr. Narayan and his coauthors said. “The second important finding is that the presence of malperfusion was associated with significantly increased risk of death in both the short-term and long-term follow-up.” While a delayed operation was associated with a reduced risk of death, it was not significant when accounting for malperfusion.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors acknowledged limitations of their study, the most important of which was the including of different types of malperfusion as a single variable. Also, the small sample size may explain the lack of statistically significant differences between the two groups.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors had no financial relationships to disclose.
 

Early repair is the standard of care for patients with type A aortic dissection, but the presence of malperfusion rather than the timing of surgery may be a major determinant in patient survival both in the hospital and in the long term, according to an analysis of patients with acute type A aortic dissection over a 17-year period at the University of Bristol (England).

“Malperfusion at presentation rather than the timing of intervention is the major risk factor for death in both the short term and long term in patients undergoing surgical repair of type A aortic dissection,” Pradeep Narayan, FRCS, and his colleagues said in reporting their findings in the July issue of the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (154:81-6). Nonetheless, Dr. Narayan and his colleagues acknowledged that early operation prevents the development of malperfusion and is the best option for restoring normal perfusion for patients who already have malperfusion.

Their study analyzed results from two different groups of patients who had surgery for repair of acute type A aortic dissection over a 17-year period: 72 in the early surgery group that had operative repair within 12 hours of symptom onset; and 80 in the late-surgery group that had the operation 12 hours or more after symptoms first appeared. A total of 205 patients underwent surgical repair for acute type A aortic dissection in that period, but only 152 cases had recorded the timing of surgery from onset of symptoms. The median time between arrival at the center and surgery was 3 hours.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors reported that 39% (60) of the 152 patients had malperfusion. Organ malperfusion was actually more common in the early surgery group, although the difference was not significant: 48.6% vs. 31.3% in the late-surgery group (P = .29). Early mortality was also similar between the two groups: 19.4% in the early surgery group and 13.8% in the late surgery group (P = .8). In terms of late survival, the study found no difference between the two groups.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors reported that malperfusion and concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting were independent predictors of survival, with hazard ratios of 2.65 (P = .01) and 3.03 (P = .03), respectively. As a nonlinear variable, time to surgery showed an inverse relationship with late mortality (HR, 0.51; P = .26), but as a linear variable when adjusted for other covariates, including malperfusion, it did not affect survival (HR, 1.01; P = .09).

“The main finding of the present study is that almost 40% of patients undergoing repair of type A aortic dissection had evidence of malperfusion,” Dr. Narayan and his coauthors said. “The second important finding is that the presence of malperfusion was associated with significantly increased risk of death in both the short-term and long-term follow-up.” While a delayed operation was associated with a reduced risk of death, it was not significant when accounting for malperfusion.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors acknowledged limitations of their study, the most important of which was the including of different types of malperfusion as a single variable. Also, the small sample size may explain the lack of statistically significant differences between the two groups.

Dr. Narayan and his coauthors had no financial relationships to disclose.
 

Latent tuberculosis infection can be safely and effectively treated with 3- and 4-month medication regimens, including those using once-weekly dosing, according to results from a new meta-analysis.

The findings, published online July 31 in Annals of Internal Medicine, bolster evidence that shorter antibiotic regimens using rifamycins alone or in combination with other drugs are a viable alternative to the longer courses (Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:248-55).

Zerbor/Thinkstock

Latent tuberculosis infection can be safely and effectively treated with 3- and 4-month medication regimens, including those using once-weekly dosing, according to results from a new meta-analysis.

The findings, published online July 31 in Annals of Internal Medicine, bolster evidence that shorter antibiotic regimens using rifamycins alone or in combination with other drugs are a viable alternative to the longer courses (Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:248-55).

Zerbor/Thinkstock

Latent tuberculosis infection can be safely and effectively treated with 3- and 4-month medication regimens, including those using once-weekly dosing, according to results from a new meta-analysis.

The findings, published online July 31 in Annals of Internal Medicine, bolster evidence that shorter antibiotic regimens using rifamycins alone or in combination with other drugs are a viable alternative to the longer courses (Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:248-55).

Zerbor/Thinkstock

Use of prescription opioids is higher among adults with health conditions such as cirrhosis and diabetes, compared with those who do not have the conditions, according to an analysis of national survey data.

In 2015, reported use of opioids was 71.7% in adults with cirrhosis, compared with 37.8% for those who did not have cirrhosis. That is the largest difference among any of the various health conditions included in a report by Beth Han, MD, PhD, of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration in Rockville, Md., which conducts the ongoing survey, and her associates (Ann Intern Med. 2017 July 31. doi: 10.7326/M17-0865).

[email protected]

Use of prescription opioids is higher among adults with health conditions such as cirrhosis and diabetes, compared with those who do not have the conditions, according to an analysis of national survey data.

In 2015, reported use of opioids was 71.7% in adults with cirrhosis, compared with 37.8% for those who did not have cirrhosis. That is the largest difference among any of the various health conditions included in a report by Beth Han, MD, PhD, of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration in Rockville, Md., which conducts the ongoing survey, and her associates (Ann Intern Med. 2017 July 31. doi: 10.7326/M17-0865).

[email protected]

Use of prescription opioids is higher among adults with health conditions such as cirrhosis and diabetes, compared with those who do not have the conditions, according to an analysis of national survey data.

In 2015, reported use of opioids was 71.7% in adults with cirrhosis, compared with 37.8% for those who did not have cirrhosis. That is the largest difference among any of the various health conditions included in a report by Beth Han, MD, PhD, of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration in Rockville, Md., which conducts the ongoing survey, and her associates (Ann Intern Med. 2017 July 31. doi: 10.7326/M17-0865).

[email protected]

Click here to download the PDF.

Click here to download the PDF.

Click here to download the PDF.

BOSTON – Normalizing the serum thyroglobulin level by thyroid nodule size in patients surgically treated for a thyroid nodule produced a strongly significant link between the level of this marker and nodule malignancy in a review of nearly 200 patients treated at any of three Montreal centers.

After normalization, the serum thyroglobulin of patients with a malignant nodule averaged 51 mcg/L*cm, more than double the average 23 mcg/L*cm among patients with benign nodules, Neil Verma, MD, said at the World Congress on Thyroid Cancer.

Mitchel L. Zoler/Frontline Medical News

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

BOSTON – Normalizing the serum thyroglobulin level by thyroid nodule size in patients surgically treated for a thyroid nodule produced a strongly significant link between the level of this marker and nodule malignancy in a review of nearly 200 patients treated at any of three Montreal centers.

After normalization, the serum thyroglobulin of patients with a malignant nodule averaged 51 mcg/L*cm, more than double the average 23 mcg/L*cm among patients with benign nodules, Neil Verma, MD, said at the World Congress on Thyroid Cancer.

Mitchel L. Zoler/Frontline Medical News

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

BOSTON – Normalizing the serum thyroglobulin level by thyroid nodule size in patients surgically treated for a thyroid nodule produced a strongly significant link between the level of this marker and nodule malignancy in a review of nearly 200 patients treated at any of three Montreal centers.

After normalization, the serum thyroglobulin of patients with a malignant nodule averaged 51 mcg/L*cm, more than double the average 23 mcg/L*cm among patients with benign nodules, Neil Verma, MD, said at the World Congress on Thyroid Cancer.

Mitchel L. Zoler/Frontline Medical News

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler