Confronting hate and violence against the LGBT community

Article Type
Changed

 

It may be unusual for an LGBT health columnist to mention the horrendous events that occurred in Charlottesville, Va., in August 2017. It clearly was a demonstration of hate and violence against racial and ethnic minorities. Unfortunately, the LGBT community – especially LGBT communities of color – are often a target of that kind of hate and violence. This has a detrimental effect on the health of the LGBT community, and I believe that health care providers have a responsibility to address this hate and violence to promote the well-being of this marginalized community.

It cannot be overstated that LGBT individuals frequently experience anti-gay and anti-trans violence. According to the 2015 Federal Bureau of Investigation Hate Crime Statistics, about a fifth of hate crimes reported were based on sexual orientation or gender identity.1 In addition, LGBT youth are eight times as likely to experience bullying at school because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.2 Furthermore, on many surveys on anti-LGBT violence, people of color comprise more than half of the victims.3 There is a strong association between exposure to this violence and the health outcomes of LGBT youth. A study by Russell et al. showed that LGBT youth who were victims of physical violence at school are more likely to be depressed and suicidal and more likely to be diagnosed with an STD,4 and another study showed that LGBT youth who experienced anti-LGBT violence are more likely to engage in substance use.5 The health outcomes from anti-LGBT violence are not limited to the adolescent period – adolescents who experienced this kind of violence are more likely to report higher levels of depression as adults.6 Although researchers still are trying to determine the exact mechanism for these relationships, the most cited (and sensible) explanation is that exposure to anti-LGBT stigma, discrimination, and violence leads to a toxic environment, which in turn increases the risk for mental health problems and maladaptive coping mechanisms (such as substance use) as a response to such an environment.7

Dr. Gerald Montano talks with a patient.
Although the above statistics may easily motivate some health care providers to stand up against hate and violence toward the LGBT community, others may be hesitant to do so, feeling that their realm of influence is within the confines of the clinic or hospital walls. However, health care providers should not underestimate their influence on the communities they serve. A Gallup poll has found that more than two-thirds of U.S. citizens believe that health care professionals (that is, nurses, pharmacists, and medical doctors) have very high or high ratings in honesty and ethical standards.8 Health care professionals in this survey ranked higher than did governors or members of Congress – the usual power brokers in this country. This means that communities view us as leaders. Many people come to us for guidance. Health care providers often are the first professional many victims of violence – whether it is from child abuse, intimate partner violence, or street violence – interact with when seeking help for problems related to their trauma. Finally, it’s our calling. The modern Hippocratic Oath states: “I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm,” and “I will prevent disease whenever I can, but I will always look for a path to a cure for all diseases.”9 The link between anti-gay and anti-trans violence and poor health among LGBT youth is clear. As an influential pillar of society, we are obligated to prevent these diseases by confronting the hate and violence that adversely affect this community.

What can we do to stand up to the hate and violence against marginalized groups, such as the LGBT community? First, make your office a safe space. With the recent brazen display of hate and violence going around, members the LGBT community are desperate to feel protected. A good place to start is a guide by Advocates for Youth. Second, educate yourself and others. The title physician means “teacher,” and I feel it is your responsibility to teach your peers, colleagues, and the public about how anti-LGBT violence affects the health of LGBT individuals. To be an effective teacher, you need to be up to date on the research on how hatred and intolerance affects the health of the LGBT community. A good place to start is the Human Rights Campaign, which has accurate statistics on anti-LGBT violence and resources to address this problem. Finally, be an advocate. You don’t need to be in the streets with picket signs, nor do you necessarily need to lead the charge against anti-LGBT hate and violence – others will be at the front lines. What you can do is to call for your local, state, and federal government to institute policies that address anti-LGBT violence. Many medical organizations have resources that help health care providers engage with policy makers (check out the American Academy of Pediatrics advocacy page for these resources). Many of our elected officials take our professional opinions seriously.

Anti-gay and anti-trans violence is all too common in the LGBT community, especially violence against LGBT people of color, and this violence can adversely affect their health. Health care providers have a responsibility and the influence to confront these nexuses of hate and intolerance. You don’t need to do something heroic to accomplish this. You are members of a privileged and respected group of professionals, so small actions can coalesce into something that has a large impact on the health and well-being of the communities you serve.
 
 

 

Dr. Gerald Montano
Dr. Montano is clinical instructor of pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh and an adolescent medicine physician at Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC. Email him at [email protected].

Resources

• Advocates for Youth. Creating Safe Space for GLBTQ Youth: A Toolkit

• Human Rights Campaign. www.hrc.org/resources/

• American Academy of Pediatrics advocacy page: www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-policy/



References

1. U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation. Uniform Crime Report Hate Crime Statistics, 2015.

2. J Interpers Violence. 2017. doi: 10.1177/0886260517718830.

3. National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP). Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and HIV-Affected Hate Violence in 2016.

4. J Sch Health. 2011 May;81(5):223-30.

5. Prev Sci. 2015 Jul;16(5):734-43.

6. Dev Psychol. 2010 Nov;46(6):1580-9.

7. Psychol Bull. 2003 Sep;129(5):674-97.

8. Gallup. Americans Rate Healthcare Providers High on Honesty, Ethics. 2016.

9. The Hippocratic Oath Today. 2001 or Do. No. Harm.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

It may be unusual for an LGBT health columnist to mention the horrendous events that occurred in Charlottesville, Va., in August 2017. It clearly was a demonstration of hate and violence against racial and ethnic minorities. Unfortunately, the LGBT community – especially LGBT communities of color – are often a target of that kind of hate and violence. This has a detrimental effect on the health of the LGBT community, and I believe that health care providers have a responsibility to address this hate and violence to promote the well-being of this marginalized community.

It cannot be overstated that LGBT individuals frequently experience anti-gay and anti-trans violence. According to the 2015 Federal Bureau of Investigation Hate Crime Statistics, about a fifth of hate crimes reported were based on sexual orientation or gender identity.1 In addition, LGBT youth are eight times as likely to experience bullying at school because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.2 Furthermore, on many surveys on anti-LGBT violence, people of color comprise more than half of the victims.3 There is a strong association between exposure to this violence and the health outcomes of LGBT youth. A study by Russell et al. showed that LGBT youth who were victims of physical violence at school are more likely to be depressed and suicidal and more likely to be diagnosed with an STD,4 and another study showed that LGBT youth who experienced anti-LGBT violence are more likely to engage in substance use.5 The health outcomes from anti-LGBT violence are not limited to the adolescent period – adolescents who experienced this kind of violence are more likely to report higher levels of depression as adults.6 Although researchers still are trying to determine the exact mechanism for these relationships, the most cited (and sensible) explanation is that exposure to anti-LGBT stigma, discrimination, and violence leads to a toxic environment, which in turn increases the risk for mental health problems and maladaptive coping mechanisms (such as substance use) as a response to such an environment.7

Dr. Gerald Montano talks with a patient.
Although the above statistics may easily motivate some health care providers to stand up against hate and violence toward the LGBT community, others may be hesitant to do so, feeling that their realm of influence is within the confines of the clinic or hospital walls. However, health care providers should not underestimate their influence on the communities they serve. A Gallup poll has found that more than two-thirds of U.S. citizens believe that health care professionals (that is, nurses, pharmacists, and medical doctors) have very high or high ratings in honesty and ethical standards.8 Health care professionals in this survey ranked higher than did governors or members of Congress – the usual power brokers in this country. This means that communities view us as leaders. Many people come to us for guidance. Health care providers often are the first professional many victims of violence – whether it is from child abuse, intimate partner violence, or street violence – interact with when seeking help for problems related to their trauma. Finally, it’s our calling. The modern Hippocratic Oath states: “I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm,” and “I will prevent disease whenever I can, but I will always look for a path to a cure for all diseases.”9 The link between anti-gay and anti-trans violence and poor health among LGBT youth is clear. As an influential pillar of society, we are obligated to prevent these diseases by confronting the hate and violence that adversely affect this community.

What can we do to stand up to the hate and violence against marginalized groups, such as the LGBT community? First, make your office a safe space. With the recent brazen display of hate and violence going around, members the LGBT community are desperate to feel protected. A good place to start is a guide by Advocates for Youth. Second, educate yourself and others. The title physician means “teacher,” and I feel it is your responsibility to teach your peers, colleagues, and the public about how anti-LGBT violence affects the health of LGBT individuals. To be an effective teacher, you need to be up to date on the research on how hatred and intolerance affects the health of the LGBT community. A good place to start is the Human Rights Campaign, which has accurate statistics on anti-LGBT violence and resources to address this problem. Finally, be an advocate. You don’t need to be in the streets with picket signs, nor do you necessarily need to lead the charge against anti-LGBT hate and violence – others will be at the front lines. What you can do is to call for your local, state, and federal government to institute policies that address anti-LGBT violence. Many medical organizations have resources that help health care providers engage with policy makers (check out the American Academy of Pediatrics advocacy page for these resources). Many of our elected officials take our professional opinions seriously.

Anti-gay and anti-trans violence is all too common in the LGBT community, especially violence against LGBT people of color, and this violence can adversely affect their health. Health care providers have a responsibility and the influence to confront these nexuses of hate and intolerance. You don’t need to do something heroic to accomplish this. You are members of a privileged and respected group of professionals, so small actions can coalesce into something that has a large impact on the health and well-being of the communities you serve.
 
 

 

Dr. Gerald Montano
Dr. Montano is clinical instructor of pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh and an adolescent medicine physician at Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC. Email him at [email protected].

Resources

• Advocates for Youth. Creating Safe Space for GLBTQ Youth: A Toolkit

• Human Rights Campaign. www.hrc.org/resources/

• American Academy of Pediatrics advocacy page: www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-policy/



References

1. U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation. Uniform Crime Report Hate Crime Statistics, 2015.

2. J Interpers Violence. 2017. doi: 10.1177/0886260517718830.

3. National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP). Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and HIV-Affected Hate Violence in 2016.

4. J Sch Health. 2011 May;81(5):223-30.

5. Prev Sci. 2015 Jul;16(5):734-43.

6. Dev Psychol. 2010 Nov;46(6):1580-9.

7. Psychol Bull. 2003 Sep;129(5):674-97.

8. Gallup. Americans Rate Healthcare Providers High on Honesty, Ethics. 2016.

9. The Hippocratic Oath Today. 2001 or Do. No. Harm.

 

It may be unusual for an LGBT health columnist to mention the horrendous events that occurred in Charlottesville, Va., in August 2017. It clearly was a demonstration of hate and violence against racial and ethnic minorities. Unfortunately, the LGBT community – especially LGBT communities of color – are often a target of that kind of hate and violence. This has a detrimental effect on the health of the LGBT community, and I believe that health care providers have a responsibility to address this hate and violence to promote the well-being of this marginalized community.

It cannot be overstated that LGBT individuals frequently experience anti-gay and anti-trans violence. According to the 2015 Federal Bureau of Investigation Hate Crime Statistics, about a fifth of hate crimes reported were based on sexual orientation or gender identity.1 In addition, LGBT youth are eight times as likely to experience bullying at school because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.2 Furthermore, on many surveys on anti-LGBT violence, people of color comprise more than half of the victims.3 There is a strong association between exposure to this violence and the health outcomes of LGBT youth. A study by Russell et al. showed that LGBT youth who were victims of physical violence at school are more likely to be depressed and suicidal and more likely to be diagnosed with an STD,4 and another study showed that LGBT youth who experienced anti-LGBT violence are more likely to engage in substance use.5 The health outcomes from anti-LGBT violence are not limited to the adolescent period – adolescents who experienced this kind of violence are more likely to report higher levels of depression as adults.6 Although researchers still are trying to determine the exact mechanism for these relationships, the most cited (and sensible) explanation is that exposure to anti-LGBT stigma, discrimination, and violence leads to a toxic environment, which in turn increases the risk for mental health problems and maladaptive coping mechanisms (such as substance use) as a response to such an environment.7

Dr. Gerald Montano talks with a patient.
Although the above statistics may easily motivate some health care providers to stand up against hate and violence toward the LGBT community, others may be hesitant to do so, feeling that their realm of influence is within the confines of the clinic or hospital walls. However, health care providers should not underestimate their influence on the communities they serve. A Gallup poll has found that more than two-thirds of U.S. citizens believe that health care professionals (that is, nurses, pharmacists, and medical doctors) have very high or high ratings in honesty and ethical standards.8 Health care professionals in this survey ranked higher than did governors or members of Congress – the usual power brokers in this country. This means that communities view us as leaders. Many people come to us for guidance. Health care providers often are the first professional many victims of violence – whether it is from child abuse, intimate partner violence, or street violence – interact with when seeking help for problems related to their trauma. Finally, it’s our calling. The modern Hippocratic Oath states: “I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm,” and “I will prevent disease whenever I can, but I will always look for a path to a cure for all diseases.”9 The link between anti-gay and anti-trans violence and poor health among LGBT youth is clear. As an influential pillar of society, we are obligated to prevent these diseases by confronting the hate and violence that adversely affect this community.

What can we do to stand up to the hate and violence against marginalized groups, such as the LGBT community? First, make your office a safe space. With the recent brazen display of hate and violence going around, members the LGBT community are desperate to feel protected. A good place to start is a guide by Advocates for Youth. Second, educate yourself and others. The title physician means “teacher,” and I feel it is your responsibility to teach your peers, colleagues, and the public about how anti-LGBT violence affects the health of LGBT individuals. To be an effective teacher, you need to be up to date on the research on how hatred and intolerance affects the health of the LGBT community. A good place to start is the Human Rights Campaign, which has accurate statistics on anti-LGBT violence and resources to address this problem. Finally, be an advocate. You don’t need to be in the streets with picket signs, nor do you necessarily need to lead the charge against anti-LGBT hate and violence – others will be at the front lines. What you can do is to call for your local, state, and federal government to institute policies that address anti-LGBT violence. Many medical organizations have resources that help health care providers engage with policy makers (check out the American Academy of Pediatrics advocacy page for these resources). Many of our elected officials take our professional opinions seriously.

Anti-gay and anti-trans violence is all too common in the LGBT community, especially violence against LGBT people of color, and this violence can adversely affect their health. Health care providers have a responsibility and the influence to confront these nexuses of hate and intolerance. You don’t need to do something heroic to accomplish this. You are members of a privileged and respected group of professionals, so small actions can coalesce into something that has a large impact on the health and well-being of the communities you serve.
 
 

 

Dr. Gerald Montano
Dr. Montano is clinical instructor of pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh and an adolescent medicine physician at Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC. Email him at [email protected].

Resources

• Advocates for Youth. Creating Safe Space for GLBTQ Youth: A Toolkit

• Human Rights Campaign. www.hrc.org/resources/

• American Academy of Pediatrics advocacy page: www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-policy/



References

1. U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation. Uniform Crime Report Hate Crime Statistics, 2015.

2. J Interpers Violence. 2017. doi: 10.1177/0886260517718830.

3. National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP). Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and HIV-Affected Hate Violence in 2016.

4. J Sch Health. 2011 May;81(5):223-30.

5. Prev Sci. 2015 Jul;16(5):734-43.

6. Dev Psychol. 2010 Nov;46(6):1580-9.

7. Psychol Bull. 2003 Sep;129(5):674-97.

8. Gallup. Americans Rate Healthcare Providers High on Honesty, Ethics. 2016.

9. The Hippocratic Oath Today. 2001 or Do. No. Harm.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Key steps to preventing patient injury

Article Type
Changed

 

Physicians often encounter a “black box” in terms of where to focus their patient safety efforts. Obstetricians care for two patients – mothers and babies – simultaneously, which presents significant challenges. Safe obstetric care requires a multidisciplinary team with good communication skills. At the same time, gynecologic procedures are becoming more complex, and caring for a patient with complications can be quite challenging.

Breakdowns in communication often lead to adverse outcomes. Using closed obstetric malpractice claims allows practicing clinicians to understand where to focus their improvement efforts. The Doctors Company recently performed an analysis of 944 closed obstetric-gynecologic claims using a lexicon that is common to many other insurers. The study found that across patient claims, communication-related issues were common to nearly all allegations of ob.gyn.-related patient injury. The claims data revealed that key communication failures were in two major areas: communications with our patients and communication among team members, including the physician.

Dr. Susan Mann

 

Physician-patient communication

Consider this example: Dr. S. is caring for a patient at term. At delivery, the infant has no heart rate and no respiratory effort and undergoes a full code and has APGAR scores of 0,0, and 3. While the indication for cesarean delivery was a nonreassuring fetal status, this was a surprising outcome. The team sent the placenta to the pathologist and there was an unusual finding of an amniotic web and the umbilical cord showed venous necrosis. A family meeting was held with the pathologist to explain the findings and the relationship to the baby’s need for support. While the presentation of the information did not change the outcome for the infant, it helped the patients and family to understand how the neonatal outcome occurred and that it was remote from delivery.

Common factors contributing to communication issues between physicians and patients/families include inadequate consent for treatment options; poor patient rapport, including unsympathetic responses to the patient; and language barriers, according to The Doctors Company’s clinical guide to improving patient safety and managing risks.

A fundamental step to address these factors is early education for patients and families about the risks and benefits of treatment, which is essential to reinforce understanding of potential interventions. Informed consent is a critical element of early education, but is often done in a rush, in a busy office setting – making it a critical risk factor. Having the informed consent conversation when the decision is made to go to surgery is important, but encouraging patients to bring forward questions and allowing their loved ones to have a clear understanding of their recovery process is also very helpful. When an unexpected complication occurs, having had a complete discussion about risks can help to mitigate an otherwise difficult situation.

We are often busy and stressed when complications arise, and the reflex is to withdraw from the patient who has suffered the complication. Demonstrating genuine empathy toward these patients allows the human side of physician-patient interaction to become apparent, which not only can reduce the patient’s and the family’s anger and frustration at a complicated situation but also can reduce the legal risk for the physician.
 

Provider communication

Consider another example: Ms. G is a 36-year old G1P0 who presented to the labor and delivery unit with severe preeclampsia. Failure to communicate a clear plan of action for management of her severe hypertension to all team members led to undertreated hypertension, a major stroke, and maternal death.

Both obstetrics and gynecology are specialties that require multidisciplinary teams, including nursing, anesthesia colleagues, consultants, and if at a teaching hospital, residents and medical and nursing students. Teamwork training initiatives can encourage providers to move out of their individual silos, practice more collaboratively, and share information across disciplines in a succinct and timely fashion. Understanding patients’ plans of care and competing resource demands allows a team to manage risk together.

Having a shared mental model and situation awareness across the team also creates a safety net for patients. This type of shared information is something highly reliable teams train on and communicate across disciplines, as this is not often taught in medical or nursing schools. Having clear roles and responsibilities allows professionals to create and understand expectations, especially around sharing safety concerns.

In situ simulations of high-risk situations both in labor and delivery and in the operating rooms are wonderful and instructive ways to practice teamwork behaviors. This type of exercise allows staff to practice skills together while discovering system failures in a nonthreatening environment. Later debriefing these activities allows staff to reflect on their own behavior and learn from one another, as well as to identify systems that need additional work.

Addressing patient safety risks effectively means focusing our energy and efforts toward underlying vulnerabilities that place patients at risk and increase liability for doctors. Sharing the results of lessons learned, through the evaluation of malpractice claims, helps to identify areas of vulnerabilities. Working to improve our communication with patients, families, and other providers, we can systematically lower risk to the patient and lower the risk of litigation to physicians.
 

 

 

Dr. Mann, an ob.gyn., is an assistant professor, part-time, at Harvard Medical School in Boston, and is a national consultant in patient safety and quality improvement in the field of obstetrics. She is a member of the Obstetrics Advisory Board of The Doctors Company. She is also a consultant at Harvard’s Risk Management Foundation, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and many institutions across the United States.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Physicians often encounter a “black box” in terms of where to focus their patient safety efforts. Obstetricians care for two patients – mothers and babies – simultaneously, which presents significant challenges. Safe obstetric care requires a multidisciplinary team with good communication skills. At the same time, gynecologic procedures are becoming more complex, and caring for a patient with complications can be quite challenging.

Breakdowns in communication often lead to adverse outcomes. Using closed obstetric malpractice claims allows practicing clinicians to understand where to focus their improvement efforts. The Doctors Company recently performed an analysis of 944 closed obstetric-gynecologic claims using a lexicon that is common to many other insurers. The study found that across patient claims, communication-related issues were common to nearly all allegations of ob.gyn.-related patient injury. The claims data revealed that key communication failures were in two major areas: communications with our patients and communication among team members, including the physician.

Dr. Susan Mann

 

Physician-patient communication

Consider this example: Dr. S. is caring for a patient at term. At delivery, the infant has no heart rate and no respiratory effort and undergoes a full code and has APGAR scores of 0,0, and 3. While the indication for cesarean delivery was a nonreassuring fetal status, this was a surprising outcome. The team sent the placenta to the pathologist and there was an unusual finding of an amniotic web and the umbilical cord showed venous necrosis. A family meeting was held with the pathologist to explain the findings and the relationship to the baby’s need for support. While the presentation of the information did not change the outcome for the infant, it helped the patients and family to understand how the neonatal outcome occurred and that it was remote from delivery.

Common factors contributing to communication issues between physicians and patients/families include inadequate consent for treatment options; poor patient rapport, including unsympathetic responses to the patient; and language barriers, according to The Doctors Company’s clinical guide to improving patient safety and managing risks.

A fundamental step to address these factors is early education for patients and families about the risks and benefits of treatment, which is essential to reinforce understanding of potential interventions. Informed consent is a critical element of early education, but is often done in a rush, in a busy office setting – making it a critical risk factor. Having the informed consent conversation when the decision is made to go to surgery is important, but encouraging patients to bring forward questions and allowing their loved ones to have a clear understanding of their recovery process is also very helpful. When an unexpected complication occurs, having had a complete discussion about risks can help to mitigate an otherwise difficult situation.

We are often busy and stressed when complications arise, and the reflex is to withdraw from the patient who has suffered the complication. Demonstrating genuine empathy toward these patients allows the human side of physician-patient interaction to become apparent, which not only can reduce the patient’s and the family’s anger and frustration at a complicated situation but also can reduce the legal risk for the physician.
 

Provider communication

Consider another example: Ms. G is a 36-year old G1P0 who presented to the labor and delivery unit with severe preeclampsia. Failure to communicate a clear plan of action for management of her severe hypertension to all team members led to undertreated hypertension, a major stroke, and maternal death.

Both obstetrics and gynecology are specialties that require multidisciplinary teams, including nursing, anesthesia colleagues, consultants, and if at a teaching hospital, residents and medical and nursing students. Teamwork training initiatives can encourage providers to move out of their individual silos, practice more collaboratively, and share information across disciplines in a succinct and timely fashion. Understanding patients’ plans of care and competing resource demands allows a team to manage risk together.

Having a shared mental model and situation awareness across the team also creates a safety net for patients. This type of shared information is something highly reliable teams train on and communicate across disciplines, as this is not often taught in medical or nursing schools. Having clear roles and responsibilities allows professionals to create and understand expectations, especially around sharing safety concerns.

In situ simulations of high-risk situations both in labor and delivery and in the operating rooms are wonderful and instructive ways to practice teamwork behaviors. This type of exercise allows staff to practice skills together while discovering system failures in a nonthreatening environment. Later debriefing these activities allows staff to reflect on their own behavior and learn from one another, as well as to identify systems that need additional work.

Addressing patient safety risks effectively means focusing our energy and efforts toward underlying vulnerabilities that place patients at risk and increase liability for doctors. Sharing the results of lessons learned, through the evaluation of malpractice claims, helps to identify areas of vulnerabilities. Working to improve our communication with patients, families, and other providers, we can systematically lower risk to the patient and lower the risk of litigation to physicians.
 

 

 

Dr. Mann, an ob.gyn., is an assistant professor, part-time, at Harvard Medical School in Boston, and is a national consultant in patient safety and quality improvement in the field of obstetrics. She is a member of the Obstetrics Advisory Board of The Doctors Company. She is also a consultant at Harvard’s Risk Management Foundation, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and many institutions across the United States.

 

Physicians often encounter a “black box” in terms of where to focus their patient safety efforts. Obstetricians care for two patients – mothers and babies – simultaneously, which presents significant challenges. Safe obstetric care requires a multidisciplinary team with good communication skills. At the same time, gynecologic procedures are becoming more complex, and caring for a patient with complications can be quite challenging.

Breakdowns in communication often lead to adverse outcomes. Using closed obstetric malpractice claims allows practicing clinicians to understand where to focus their improvement efforts. The Doctors Company recently performed an analysis of 944 closed obstetric-gynecologic claims using a lexicon that is common to many other insurers. The study found that across patient claims, communication-related issues were common to nearly all allegations of ob.gyn.-related patient injury. The claims data revealed that key communication failures were in two major areas: communications with our patients and communication among team members, including the physician.

Dr. Susan Mann

 

Physician-patient communication

Consider this example: Dr. S. is caring for a patient at term. At delivery, the infant has no heart rate and no respiratory effort and undergoes a full code and has APGAR scores of 0,0, and 3. While the indication for cesarean delivery was a nonreassuring fetal status, this was a surprising outcome. The team sent the placenta to the pathologist and there was an unusual finding of an amniotic web and the umbilical cord showed venous necrosis. A family meeting was held with the pathologist to explain the findings and the relationship to the baby’s need for support. While the presentation of the information did not change the outcome for the infant, it helped the patients and family to understand how the neonatal outcome occurred and that it was remote from delivery.

Common factors contributing to communication issues between physicians and patients/families include inadequate consent for treatment options; poor patient rapport, including unsympathetic responses to the patient; and language barriers, according to The Doctors Company’s clinical guide to improving patient safety and managing risks.

A fundamental step to address these factors is early education for patients and families about the risks and benefits of treatment, which is essential to reinforce understanding of potential interventions. Informed consent is a critical element of early education, but is often done in a rush, in a busy office setting – making it a critical risk factor. Having the informed consent conversation when the decision is made to go to surgery is important, but encouraging patients to bring forward questions and allowing their loved ones to have a clear understanding of their recovery process is also very helpful. When an unexpected complication occurs, having had a complete discussion about risks can help to mitigate an otherwise difficult situation.

We are often busy and stressed when complications arise, and the reflex is to withdraw from the patient who has suffered the complication. Demonstrating genuine empathy toward these patients allows the human side of physician-patient interaction to become apparent, which not only can reduce the patient’s and the family’s anger and frustration at a complicated situation but also can reduce the legal risk for the physician.
 

Provider communication

Consider another example: Ms. G is a 36-year old G1P0 who presented to the labor and delivery unit with severe preeclampsia. Failure to communicate a clear plan of action for management of her severe hypertension to all team members led to undertreated hypertension, a major stroke, and maternal death.

Both obstetrics and gynecology are specialties that require multidisciplinary teams, including nursing, anesthesia colleagues, consultants, and if at a teaching hospital, residents and medical and nursing students. Teamwork training initiatives can encourage providers to move out of their individual silos, practice more collaboratively, and share information across disciplines in a succinct and timely fashion. Understanding patients’ plans of care and competing resource demands allows a team to manage risk together.

Having a shared mental model and situation awareness across the team also creates a safety net for patients. This type of shared information is something highly reliable teams train on and communicate across disciplines, as this is not often taught in medical or nursing schools. Having clear roles and responsibilities allows professionals to create and understand expectations, especially around sharing safety concerns.

In situ simulations of high-risk situations both in labor and delivery and in the operating rooms are wonderful and instructive ways to practice teamwork behaviors. This type of exercise allows staff to practice skills together while discovering system failures in a nonthreatening environment. Later debriefing these activities allows staff to reflect on their own behavior and learn from one another, as well as to identify systems that need additional work.

Addressing patient safety risks effectively means focusing our energy and efforts toward underlying vulnerabilities that place patients at risk and increase liability for doctors. Sharing the results of lessons learned, through the evaluation of malpractice claims, helps to identify areas of vulnerabilities. Working to improve our communication with patients, families, and other providers, we can systematically lower risk to the patient and lower the risk of litigation to physicians.
 

 

 

Dr. Mann, an ob.gyn., is an assistant professor, part-time, at Harvard Medical School in Boston, and is a national consultant in patient safety and quality improvement in the field of obstetrics. She is a member of the Obstetrics Advisory Board of The Doctors Company. She is also a consultant at Harvard’s Risk Management Foundation, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and many institutions across the United States.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Why you should use sunscreens indoors

Article Type
Changed

 

It may be surprising that there are dermatologic risks of UV exposure from lamps and other indoor light sources that we use daily. Is long-term daily exposure to presumably low-irradiance lights of clinical significance to photodermatoses? Recent findings suggest that skin protection must be practiced indoors to adequately protect the skin against UV rays.

Photodermatoses, such as lupus, actinic prurigo, and xeroderma pigmentosum, are only a few of the skin diseases that are triggered by UV exposure; however, chronic low-dose exposures to UV light, such as those associated with indoor lighting, may also be triggers of such conditions. Melasma, for example, can be triggered by heat or UV light. Chronic exposure to ambient light may darken the skin, necessitating daily UV protection in both indoor and outdoor settings.

level17/thinkstock
Dermatologists can attest to the number of patients that confess that they only sometimes wear sunscreen “when outside.” If UV exposure to inside lighting has more significant effects on the skin, however, more precautions must be taken to prevent skin cancer, melasma, and other skin damage from exposure through window glass, and from fluorescent bulbs, halogen lamps, and tablet and computer screens.

A study examining light sources in the environment of a child with xeroderma pigmentosum suggested that indoor lights emit unexpected amounts of UV light as measured by a spectral radiometer. This finding illustrated that cumulative, chronic doses of indoor lighting may be of clinical significance.

Interior lighting is also implicated in worsening of melasma and other photosensitive dermatoses. Incandescent bulbs have little to no UV irradiance. However, fluorescent lighting has been shown to increase lifetime UV exposure by 3% based on the distance the lamp is from the skin. If the lamp is close – particularly desk lamps, bed lamps, and overhead lamps – the light and heat emitted can worsen photoexacerbated dermatitidis. Avoiding close contact with the light or adding acrylic or plastic diffusers to the light can help reduce exposure.

Halogen bulbs are filled with an inert gas and a halogen, such as iodine. These bulbs are usually made of quartz because quartz is more resistant to the high heat emitted by these bulbs. But the quartz, however, does not block UV radiation, which is why manufacturers add UV-blocking agents and heat-resistant glass to block the UV; however, the amount blocked is usually unknown. As with fluorescent bulbs, the distance from the bulb is essential to protect against both the UV and heat emitted. Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) generate a light from a semiconductor material that converts blue light into white light with the use of phosphorus; LEDs do not emit UV rays and, therefore, are a safer light source for the skin.

Dr. Lily Talakoub
Lamps that are not used for lighting also must be considered. The Food and Drug Administration recently released a consumer alert regarding the use of UV-curing lamps at nail salons because of the UV radiation emitted. Since daily use of such lamps is not common, the risk of such an exposure is low; but precautions against UV exposure have, nonetheless, been recommended. UV-protectant gloves and application of a broad spectrum sunscreen on the hands prior to use is recommended to decrease the risks of UV exposure to the hands.

In addition to the use of lamps, the light that passes through glass is easy to underestimate. Unlike UVB rays, UVA rays pass through glass and affect the skin. The percentage of UVA rays that pass through glass depends on the type of glass and the coating on the glass. There are three types of window glass: clear, reflective, and tinted. Clear glass allows 75% of UVA through,while reflective and tinted glass allow only 25%-50% of UVA rays to pass through. Low-emissivity glass (Low-E) is made to reduce heat transfer and is similar to clear glass. The most protective glass is laminated or UV-coated glass that filters out 95%-99% of all UVA rays. Unfortunately, most residential and commercial buildings do not have UVA protection. The use of blinds, shades, and tinted glass, and increasing the distance from windows and doors are the best methods of protection from chronic daily UVA exposures.

In most cars, windshield is made of laminated glass (two layers of glass with a layer of plastic in between), which blocks all UVB and approximately 50% of UVA rays. However, side and rear windows are often clear glass, which does not prevent UVA rays from penetrating through. Patients with photosensitive dermatoses and all melasma patients are encouraged to tint the side windows of their vehicles to reduce UVA exposures to 15%-30%. Tinting, however, must be in compliance with federally mandated standard of 70% minimum visible light transmittance. In my practice, daily UV protection is recommended for all patients, even within an automobile or in an office. Daily cumulative exposure can cause chronic skin damage and early signs of photoaging.

Other sources of indoor exposures include TV monitors, computers, tablets, and UV sterilization devices in the workplace. Older cathode ray tube screens emit UV radiation; however, newer liquid crystal display (LCD) or flat panel monitors most commonly on laptops, desktops, and mobile devices do not emit UV radiation. They do emit blue light – although a small fraction compared to that emitted by the sun. The amount of time spent in front of these screens and their proximity can pose a problem as blue light can increase reactive oxygen species, which is the most common contributor to premature aging. These devices also emit heat, which can exacerbate erythema ab igne and other heat-sensitive skin conditions.

Dr. Naissan O. Wesley
Blue light has a very short wavelength with high energy. Studies have shown that permanent eye damage, including macular degeneration, from extended exposure to close-range blue light from computers and tablets is possible. Close-range blue light has been associated with increased skin melanogenesis. Skin hyperpigmentation, such as in lichen planus pigmentosus and melasma, also can be exacerbated by blue light; to prevent the worsening of such conditions, discretion is advised with regard to the use of these devices in close proximity to the skin.

The risks of indoor UV and blue light exposures are commonly overlooked. Skin protection with broad-spectrum sunscreen both inside and outside should be used daily for maximum protection. Care should also be taken to limit exposure times and increase distance of these objects from the skin and eyes.
 
 

 

Dr. Talakoub and Dr. Wesley are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to them at [email protected]. They had no relevant disclosures.

References

Autoimmun Rev. 2009;8(4):320-4.

Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia. 2015;90(4):595-7.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

It may be surprising that there are dermatologic risks of UV exposure from lamps and other indoor light sources that we use daily. Is long-term daily exposure to presumably low-irradiance lights of clinical significance to photodermatoses? Recent findings suggest that skin protection must be practiced indoors to adequately protect the skin against UV rays.

Photodermatoses, such as lupus, actinic prurigo, and xeroderma pigmentosum, are only a few of the skin diseases that are triggered by UV exposure; however, chronic low-dose exposures to UV light, such as those associated with indoor lighting, may also be triggers of such conditions. Melasma, for example, can be triggered by heat or UV light. Chronic exposure to ambient light may darken the skin, necessitating daily UV protection in both indoor and outdoor settings.

level17/thinkstock
Dermatologists can attest to the number of patients that confess that they only sometimes wear sunscreen “when outside.” If UV exposure to inside lighting has more significant effects on the skin, however, more precautions must be taken to prevent skin cancer, melasma, and other skin damage from exposure through window glass, and from fluorescent bulbs, halogen lamps, and tablet and computer screens.

A study examining light sources in the environment of a child with xeroderma pigmentosum suggested that indoor lights emit unexpected amounts of UV light as measured by a spectral radiometer. This finding illustrated that cumulative, chronic doses of indoor lighting may be of clinical significance.

Interior lighting is also implicated in worsening of melasma and other photosensitive dermatoses. Incandescent bulbs have little to no UV irradiance. However, fluorescent lighting has been shown to increase lifetime UV exposure by 3% based on the distance the lamp is from the skin. If the lamp is close – particularly desk lamps, bed lamps, and overhead lamps – the light and heat emitted can worsen photoexacerbated dermatitidis. Avoiding close contact with the light or adding acrylic or plastic diffusers to the light can help reduce exposure.

Halogen bulbs are filled with an inert gas and a halogen, such as iodine. These bulbs are usually made of quartz because quartz is more resistant to the high heat emitted by these bulbs. But the quartz, however, does not block UV radiation, which is why manufacturers add UV-blocking agents and heat-resistant glass to block the UV; however, the amount blocked is usually unknown. As with fluorescent bulbs, the distance from the bulb is essential to protect against both the UV and heat emitted. Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) generate a light from a semiconductor material that converts blue light into white light with the use of phosphorus; LEDs do not emit UV rays and, therefore, are a safer light source for the skin.

Dr. Lily Talakoub
Lamps that are not used for lighting also must be considered. The Food and Drug Administration recently released a consumer alert regarding the use of UV-curing lamps at nail salons because of the UV radiation emitted. Since daily use of such lamps is not common, the risk of such an exposure is low; but precautions against UV exposure have, nonetheless, been recommended. UV-protectant gloves and application of a broad spectrum sunscreen on the hands prior to use is recommended to decrease the risks of UV exposure to the hands.

In addition to the use of lamps, the light that passes through glass is easy to underestimate. Unlike UVB rays, UVA rays pass through glass and affect the skin. The percentage of UVA rays that pass through glass depends on the type of glass and the coating on the glass. There are three types of window glass: clear, reflective, and tinted. Clear glass allows 75% of UVA through,while reflective and tinted glass allow only 25%-50% of UVA rays to pass through. Low-emissivity glass (Low-E) is made to reduce heat transfer and is similar to clear glass. The most protective glass is laminated or UV-coated glass that filters out 95%-99% of all UVA rays. Unfortunately, most residential and commercial buildings do not have UVA protection. The use of blinds, shades, and tinted glass, and increasing the distance from windows and doors are the best methods of protection from chronic daily UVA exposures.

In most cars, windshield is made of laminated glass (two layers of glass with a layer of plastic in between), which blocks all UVB and approximately 50% of UVA rays. However, side and rear windows are often clear glass, which does not prevent UVA rays from penetrating through. Patients with photosensitive dermatoses and all melasma patients are encouraged to tint the side windows of their vehicles to reduce UVA exposures to 15%-30%. Tinting, however, must be in compliance with federally mandated standard of 70% minimum visible light transmittance. In my practice, daily UV protection is recommended for all patients, even within an automobile or in an office. Daily cumulative exposure can cause chronic skin damage and early signs of photoaging.

Other sources of indoor exposures include TV monitors, computers, tablets, and UV sterilization devices in the workplace. Older cathode ray tube screens emit UV radiation; however, newer liquid crystal display (LCD) or flat panel monitors most commonly on laptops, desktops, and mobile devices do not emit UV radiation. They do emit blue light – although a small fraction compared to that emitted by the sun. The amount of time spent in front of these screens and their proximity can pose a problem as blue light can increase reactive oxygen species, which is the most common contributor to premature aging. These devices also emit heat, which can exacerbate erythema ab igne and other heat-sensitive skin conditions.

Dr. Naissan O. Wesley
Blue light has a very short wavelength with high energy. Studies have shown that permanent eye damage, including macular degeneration, from extended exposure to close-range blue light from computers and tablets is possible. Close-range blue light has been associated with increased skin melanogenesis. Skin hyperpigmentation, such as in lichen planus pigmentosus and melasma, also can be exacerbated by blue light; to prevent the worsening of such conditions, discretion is advised with regard to the use of these devices in close proximity to the skin.

The risks of indoor UV and blue light exposures are commonly overlooked. Skin protection with broad-spectrum sunscreen both inside and outside should be used daily for maximum protection. Care should also be taken to limit exposure times and increase distance of these objects from the skin and eyes.
 
 

 

Dr. Talakoub and Dr. Wesley are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to them at [email protected]. They had no relevant disclosures.

References

Autoimmun Rev. 2009;8(4):320-4.

Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia. 2015;90(4):595-7.

 

It may be surprising that there are dermatologic risks of UV exposure from lamps and other indoor light sources that we use daily. Is long-term daily exposure to presumably low-irradiance lights of clinical significance to photodermatoses? Recent findings suggest that skin protection must be practiced indoors to adequately protect the skin against UV rays.

Photodermatoses, such as lupus, actinic prurigo, and xeroderma pigmentosum, are only a few of the skin diseases that are triggered by UV exposure; however, chronic low-dose exposures to UV light, such as those associated with indoor lighting, may also be triggers of such conditions. Melasma, for example, can be triggered by heat or UV light. Chronic exposure to ambient light may darken the skin, necessitating daily UV protection in both indoor and outdoor settings.

level17/thinkstock
Dermatologists can attest to the number of patients that confess that they only sometimes wear sunscreen “when outside.” If UV exposure to inside lighting has more significant effects on the skin, however, more precautions must be taken to prevent skin cancer, melasma, and other skin damage from exposure through window glass, and from fluorescent bulbs, halogen lamps, and tablet and computer screens.

A study examining light sources in the environment of a child with xeroderma pigmentosum suggested that indoor lights emit unexpected amounts of UV light as measured by a spectral radiometer. This finding illustrated that cumulative, chronic doses of indoor lighting may be of clinical significance.

Interior lighting is also implicated in worsening of melasma and other photosensitive dermatoses. Incandescent bulbs have little to no UV irradiance. However, fluorescent lighting has been shown to increase lifetime UV exposure by 3% based on the distance the lamp is from the skin. If the lamp is close – particularly desk lamps, bed lamps, and overhead lamps – the light and heat emitted can worsen photoexacerbated dermatitidis. Avoiding close contact with the light or adding acrylic or plastic diffusers to the light can help reduce exposure.

Halogen bulbs are filled with an inert gas and a halogen, such as iodine. These bulbs are usually made of quartz because quartz is more resistant to the high heat emitted by these bulbs. But the quartz, however, does not block UV radiation, which is why manufacturers add UV-blocking agents and heat-resistant glass to block the UV; however, the amount blocked is usually unknown. As with fluorescent bulbs, the distance from the bulb is essential to protect against both the UV and heat emitted. Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) generate a light from a semiconductor material that converts blue light into white light with the use of phosphorus; LEDs do not emit UV rays and, therefore, are a safer light source for the skin.

Dr. Lily Talakoub
Lamps that are not used for lighting also must be considered. The Food and Drug Administration recently released a consumer alert regarding the use of UV-curing lamps at nail salons because of the UV radiation emitted. Since daily use of such lamps is not common, the risk of such an exposure is low; but precautions against UV exposure have, nonetheless, been recommended. UV-protectant gloves and application of a broad spectrum sunscreen on the hands prior to use is recommended to decrease the risks of UV exposure to the hands.

In addition to the use of lamps, the light that passes through glass is easy to underestimate. Unlike UVB rays, UVA rays pass through glass and affect the skin. The percentage of UVA rays that pass through glass depends on the type of glass and the coating on the glass. There are three types of window glass: clear, reflective, and tinted. Clear glass allows 75% of UVA through,while reflective and tinted glass allow only 25%-50% of UVA rays to pass through. Low-emissivity glass (Low-E) is made to reduce heat transfer and is similar to clear glass. The most protective glass is laminated or UV-coated glass that filters out 95%-99% of all UVA rays. Unfortunately, most residential and commercial buildings do not have UVA protection. The use of blinds, shades, and tinted glass, and increasing the distance from windows and doors are the best methods of protection from chronic daily UVA exposures.

In most cars, windshield is made of laminated glass (two layers of glass with a layer of plastic in between), which blocks all UVB and approximately 50% of UVA rays. However, side and rear windows are often clear glass, which does not prevent UVA rays from penetrating through. Patients with photosensitive dermatoses and all melasma patients are encouraged to tint the side windows of their vehicles to reduce UVA exposures to 15%-30%. Tinting, however, must be in compliance with federally mandated standard of 70% minimum visible light transmittance. In my practice, daily UV protection is recommended for all patients, even within an automobile or in an office. Daily cumulative exposure can cause chronic skin damage and early signs of photoaging.

Other sources of indoor exposures include TV monitors, computers, tablets, and UV sterilization devices in the workplace. Older cathode ray tube screens emit UV radiation; however, newer liquid crystal display (LCD) or flat panel monitors most commonly on laptops, desktops, and mobile devices do not emit UV radiation. They do emit blue light – although a small fraction compared to that emitted by the sun. The amount of time spent in front of these screens and their proximity can pose a problem as blue light can increase reactive oxygen species, which is the most common contributor to premature aging. These devices also emit heat, which can exacerbate erythema ab igne and other heat-sensitive skin conditions.

Dr. Naissan O. Wesley
Blue light has a very short wavelength with high energy. Studies have shown that permanent eye damage, including macular degeneration, from extended exposure to close-range blue light from computers and tablets is possible. Close-range blue light has been associated with increased skin melanogenesis. Skin hyperpigmentation, such as in lichen planus pigmentosus and melasma, also can be exacerbated by blue light; to prevent the worsening of such conditions, discretion is advised with regard to the use of these devices in close proximity to the skin.

The risks of indoor UV and blue light exposures are commonly overlooked. Skin protection with broad-spectrum sunscreen both inside and outside should be used daily for maximum protection. Care should also be taken to limit exposure times and increase distance of these objects from the skin and eyes.
 
 

 

Dr. Talakoub and Dr. Wesley are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to them at [email protected]. They had no relevant disclosures.

References

Autoimmun Rev. 2009;8(4):320-4.

Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia. 2015;90(4):595-7.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Potential pitfalls of social media

Article Type
Changed

 

Cassandra presents to the office anxious because of social media posts her peers have made regarding current events that she feels are inflammatory.

Jenna expresses suicidal thoughts in response to comments made by peers from several schools in the area about the nature of her friendship with a boy.

Social media was developed to increase connections between people, even despite geographic distances. It has helped create communities of people with similar interests or beliefs, as well as to help reconnect us with people. It can provide educational opportunities and enhance technical skills. These are all potential benefits, but risks exist as well.

maewjpho/Thinkstock
Whereas television formerly was the primary concern with regard to media exposure, social media poses additional risks. Media exposure as a whole can become quite encompassing, with one study indicating that the average 8- to 10-year-old spends almost 8 hours per day on media, while preteens and teenagers spend more than 11 hours per day.1 This can have a negative impact on sleep, as well as engagement in other activities. A Pew Center study from 2015 indicated that 92% of teens state that they go online daily, 24% report being online “almost constantly,” 56% use social media several times per day, and 12% use it daily.2 This column will explore some of the risks of social media exposure.

Cyberbullying and harassment

Cyberbullying is defined as “willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, or other electronic devices,” and can include sending denigrating messages or images.3 Studies have shown varying rates of victimization from cyberbullying, ranging from 6% to 72%, and perpetration ranging from 3% to 44%.4 Bullying in general has been associated with increased school drop-out rates, suicidal ideation, bringing weapons to school, and aggression. The sizable audience that social media can reach can amplify bullying’s impact.

Privacy concerns

Determining the appropriate amount of information to share and knowing that it is truly being shared with the person identified on the other end also can be a challenge. In addition, the digital footprint left by navigating different social media sites may have unforeseen effects on youth regarding inappropriate posts. They also may be particularly vulnerable to other predatory individuals. Other privacy concerns involve what information parents, guardians, or other family members may share online.

Addiction

While social media has the possible benefit of creating a broader social network, particularly for someone who may be anxious in more traditional settings, it also can reinforce isolation from “real-world” experiences and the sense that no one else “gets” him or her. Without knowing who is on the other end of the keyboard, tablet, or smartphone, it can be difficult to ascertain if others in the community are reinforcing maladaptive behaviors and further withdrawal.

Self esteem

Images promulgated online often are highly idealized and edited, and are meant to exhibit a specific point of view. Exposure to these images can have a negative impact on self-esteem.

Another study of preteen girls (10- to 12-year-olds) indicated that increased time spent on social media sites such as MySpace and Facebook led to greater internalization of a thin ideal, increased body image concerns, and decreased self-esteem.5 Further data suggest that youth who are in need of more mental health support may engage in increased amounts of social media use. In a Canadian study, daily use of more than 2 hours per day was associated with increased reports of emotional distress as well as suicidal ideation.6

So, given all of this information, how to address this in an appointment?

Dr. Maya P. Strange
First, it is important to screen about social media use, both the time spent and types of sites visited. Encourage parents to actively monitor usage and set limits on time used (such as maximum time allowed during the day, or shutting off/removing electronics from rooms after a certain time). It is important to encourage youth and their families to maintain an open dialogue about what one may encounter online, as well as openly discussing values and clear expectations about what types of sites are and are not considered acceptable. Families should model healthy social media usage, being mindful of what they share about the youth online and what they may choose to post as well. Limiting total screen time to less than 1-2 hours per day and encouraging families to not allow electronics in children’s rooms also is recommended.
 
 

 

Dr. Strange is an assistant professor in the department of psychiatry at the University of Vermont Medical Center and University of Vermont Robert Larner College of Medicine, both in Burlington. She works with children and adolescents. She has no relevant financial disclosures.

Resources:

1. The Kaiser Family Foundation: Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds

2. The Pew Research Center: Internet & Technology, “Teens, Social Media and Technology Overview 2015.”

3. The Cyberbullying Research Center. Cyberbullying Fact Sheet 2009.

4. Cyberbullying: An Update and Synthesis of the Research, in “Cyberbullying Prevention and Response: Expert Perspectives,” (New York: Routledge, 2012, pp. 13-35).

5. J. Early Adolesc. 2014. Vol 34(5) 606-20.

6. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2015 Jul;18(7):380-5.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Cassandra presents to the office anxious because of social media posts her peers have made regarding current events that she feels are inflammatory.

Jenna expresses suicidal thoughts in response to comments made by peers from several schools in the area about the nature of her friendship with a boy.

Social media was developed to increase connections between people, even despite geographic distances. It has helped create communities of people with similar interests or beliefs, as well as to help reconnect us with people. It can provide educational opportunities and enhance technical skills. These are all potential benefits, but risks exist as well.

maewjpho/Thinkstock
Whereas television formerly was the primary concern with regard to media exposure, social media poses additional risks. Media exposure as a whole can become quite encompassing, with one study indicating that the average 8- to 10-year-old spends almost 8 hours per day on media, while preteens and teenagers spend more than 11 hours per day.1 This can have a negative impact on sleep, as well as engagement in other activities. A Pew Center study from 2015 indicated that 92% of teens state that they go online daily, 24% report being online “almost constantly,” 56% use social media several times per day, and 12% use it daily.2 This column will explore some of the risks of social media exposure.

Cyberbullying and harassment

Cyberbullying is defined as “willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, or other electronic devices,” and can include sending denigrating messages or images.3 Studies have shown varying rates of victimization from cyberbullying, ranging from 6% to 72%, and perpetration ranging from 3% to 44%.4 Bullying in general has been associated with increased school drop-out rates, suicidal ideation, bringing weapons to school, and aggression. The sizable audience that social media can reach can amplify bullying’s impact.

Privacy concerns

Determining the appropriate amount of information to share and knowing that it is truly being shared with the person identified on the other end also can be a challenge. In addition, the digital footprint left by navigating different social media sites may have unforeseen effects on youth regarding inappropriate posts. They also may be particularly vulnerable to other predatory individuals. Other privacy concerns involve what information parents, guardians, or other family members may share online.

Addiction

While social media has the possible benefit of creating a broader social network, particularly for someone who may be anxious in more traditional settings, it also can reinforce isolation from “real-world” experiences and the sense that no one else “gets” him or her. Without knowing who is on the other end of the keyboard, tablet, or smartphone, it can be difficult to ascertain if others in the community are reinforcing maladaptive behaviors and further withdrawal.

Self esteem

Images promulgated online often are highly idealized and edited, and are meant to exhibit a specific point of view. Exposure to these images can have a negative impact on self-esteem.

Another study of preteen girls (10- to 12-year-olds) indicated that increased time spent on social media sites such as MySpace and Facebook led to greater internalization of a thin ideal, increased body image concerns, and decreased self-esteem.5 Further data suggest that youth who are in need of more mental health support may engage in increased amounts of social media use. In a Canadian study, daily use of more than 2 hours per day was associated with increased reports of emotional distress as well as suicidal ideation.6

So, given all of this information, how to address this in an appointment?

Dr. Maya P. Strange
First, it is important to screen about social media use, both the time spent and types of sites visited. Encourage parents to actively monitor usage and set limits on time used (such as maximum time allowed during the day, or shutting off/removing electronics from rooms after a certain time). It is important to encourage youth and their families to maintain an open dialogue about what one may encounter online, as well as openly discussing values and clear expectations about what types of sites are and are not considered acceptable. Families should model healthy social media usage, being mindful of what they share about the youth online and what they may choose to post as well. Limiting total screen time to less than 1-2 hours per day and encouraging families to not allow electronics in children’s rooms also is recommended.
 
 

 

Dr. Strange is an assistant professor in the department of psychiatry at the University of Vermont Medical Center and University of Vermont Robert Larner College of Medicine, both in Burlington. She works with children and adolescents. She has no relevant financial disclosures.

Resources:

1. The Kaiser Family Foundation: Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds

2. The Pew Research Center: Internet & Technology, “Teens, Social Media and Technology Overview 2015.”

3. The Cyberbullying Research Center. Cyberbullying Fact Sheet 2009.

4. Cyberbullying: An Update and Synthesis of the Research, in “Cyberbullying Prevention and Response: Expert Perspectives,” (New York: Routledge, 2012, pp. 13-35).

5. J. Early Adolesc. 2014. Vol 34(5) 606-20.

6. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2015 Jul;18(7):380-5.

 

Cassandra presents to the office anxious because of social media posts her peers have made regarding current events that she feels are inflammatory.

Jenna expresses suicidal thoughts in response to comments made by peers from several schools in the area about the nature of her friendship with a boy.

Social media was developed to increase connections between people, even despite geographic distances. It has helped create communities of people with similar interests or beliefs, as well as to help reconnect us with people. It can provide educational opportunities and enhance technical skills. These are all potential benefits, but risks exist as well.

maewjpho/Thinkstock
Whereas television formerly was the primary concern with regard to media exposure, social media poses additional risks. Media exposure as a whole can become quite encompassing, with one study indicating that the average 8- to 10-year-old spends almost 8 hours per day on media, while preteens and teenagers spend more than 11 hours per day.1 This can have a negative impact on sleep, as well as engagement in other activities. A Pew Center study from 2015 indicated that 92% of teens state that they go online daily, 24% report being online “almost constantly,” 56% use social media several times per day, and 12% use it daily.2 This column will explore some of the risks of social media exposure.

Cyberbullying and harassment

Cyberbullying is defined as “willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, or other electronic devices,” and can include sending denigrating messages or images.3 Studies have shown varying rates of victimization from cyberbullying, ranging from 6% to 72%, and perpetration ranging from 3% to 44%.4 Bullying in general has been associated with increased school drop-out rates, suicidal ideation, bringing weapons to school, and aggression. The sizable audience that social media can reach can amplify bullying’s impact.

Privacy concerns

Determining the appropriate amount of information to share and knowing that it is truly being shared with the person identified on the other end also can be a challenge. In addition, the digital footprint left by navigating different social media sites may have unforeseen effects on youth regarding inappropriate posts. They also may be particularly vulnerable to other predatory individuals. Other privacy concerns involve what information parents, guardians, or other family members may share online.

Addiction

While social media has the possible benefit of creating a broader social network, particularly for someone who may be anxious in more traditional settings, it also can reinforce isolation from “real-world” experiences and the sense that no one else “gets” him or her. Without knowing who is on the other end of the keyboard, tablet, or smartphone, it can be difficult to ascertain if others in the community are reinforcing maladaptive behaviors and further withdrawal.

Self esteem

Images promulgated online often are highly idealized and edited, and are meant to exhibit a specific point of view. Exposure to these images can have a negative impact on self-esteem.

Another study of preteen girls (10- to 12-year-olds) indicated that increased time spent on social media sites such as MySpace and Facebook led to greater internalization of a thin ideal, increased body image concerns, and decreased self-esteem.5 Further data suggest that youth who are in need of more mental health support may engage in increased amounts of social media use. In a Canadian study, daily use of more than 2 hours per day was associated with increased reports of emotional distress as well as suicidal ideation.6

So, given all of this information, how to address this in an appointment?

Dr. Maya P. Strange
First, it is important to screen about social media use, both the time spent and types of sites visited. Encourage parents to actively monitor usage and set limits on time used (such as maximum time allowed during the day, or shutting off/removing electronics from rooms after a certain time). It is important to encourage youth and their families to maintain an open dialogue about what one may encounter online, as well as openly discussing values and clear expectations about what types of sites are and are not considered acceptable. Families should model healthy social media usage, being mindful of what they share about the youth online and what they may choose to post as well. Limiting total screen time to less than 1-2 hours per day and encouraging families to not allow electronics in children’s rooms also is recommended.
 
 

 

Dr. Strange is an assistant professor in the department of psychiatry at the University of Vermont Medical Center and University of Vermont Robert Larner College of Medicine, both in Burlington. She works with children and adolescents. She has no relevant financial disclosures.

Resources:

1. The Kaiser Family Foundation: Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds

2. The Pew Research Center: Internet & Technology, “Teens, Social Media and Technology Overview 2015.”

3. The Cyberbullying Research Center. Cyberbullying Fact Sheet 2009.

4. Cyberbullying: An Update and Synthesis of the Research, in “Cyberbullying Prevention and Response: Expert Perspectives,” (New York: Routledge, 2012, pp. 13-35).

5. J. Early Adolesc. 2014. Vol 34(5) 606-20.

6. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2015 Jul;18(7):380-5.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Mindfulness and child health

Article Type
Changed

 

If you are struggling to figure out how you, as an individual pediatrician, can make a significant impact on the most common current issues in child health of anxiety, depression, sleep problems, stress, and even adverse childhood experiences, you are not alone. Many of the problems we see in the office appear to stem so much from the culture in which we live that the medical interventions we have to offer seem paltry. Yet we strive to identify and attempt to ameliorate the child’s and family’s distress.

Real physical danger aside, a lot of personal distress is due to negative thoughts about one’s past or fears for one’s future. These thoughts are very important in restraining us from repeating mistakes and preparing us for action to prevent future harm. But the thoughts themselves can be stressful; they may paralyze us with anxiety, take away pleasure, interrupt our sleep, stimulate physiologic stress responses, and have adverse impacts on health. All these effects can occur without actually changing the course of events! How can we advise our patients and their parents to work to balance the protective function of our thoughts against the cost to our well-being?

One promising method you can confidently recommend to both children and their parents to manage stressful thinking is to learn and practice mindfulness. Mindfulness refers to a state of nonreactivity, awareness, focus, attention, and nonjudgment. Noticing thoughts and feelings passing through us with a neutral mind, as if we were watching a movie, rather than taking them personally, is the goal. Jon Kabat-Zinn, PhD, learned from Buddhists, then developed and disseminated a formal program to teach this skill called mindfulness-based stress reduction; it has yielded significant benefits to the emotions and health of adult participants. While everyone can be mindful at times, the ability to enter this state at will and maintain it for a few minutes can be learned, even by preschool children.

Jupiterimages/Thinkstock
Structured mindfulness programs for children have been shown to help reduce symptoms of depression, PTSD, anxiety, and negative affect; change maladaptive ways of coping with stress; improve sleep and self-confidence; and improve classroom behavior as well as social and academic performance in school. Some effect on improving attention, even at the EEG level, also has been found. Mindfulness in high-risk populations even has been shown to reduce some of the negative effects of exposure to adverse childhood experiences. Significant increases in telomerase in white blood cells thought to have an impact on immune function and aging also have been reported in preliminary studies. Mindfulness training usually involves 4-20 days of instruction and practice, but as little as 5 minutes per day has been found helpful.

How am I going to refer my patients to mindfulness programs, I can hear you saying, when I can’t even get them to standard therapies? Mindfulness in a less-structured format is often part of yoga or Tai Chi, meditation, art therapy, group therapy, or even religious services. Fortunately, parents and educators also can teach children mindfulness. But the first way you can start making this life skill available to your patients is by recommending it to their parents (“The Family ADHD Solution” by Mark Bertin [New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2011]).

You know that child emotional or behavior problems can cause adult stress. But adult stress also can cause or exacerbate a child’s emotional or behavior problems. Adult caregivers modeling meltdowns are shaping the minds of their children. Studies of teaching mindfulness to parents of children with developmental disabilities, autism, and ADHD, without touching the underlying disorder, show significant reductions in both adult stress and child behavior problems. Parents who can suspend emotion, take some deep breaths, and be thoughtful about the response they want to make instead of reacting impulsively act more reasonably, appear warmer and more compassionate to their children, and are often rewarded with better behavior. Such parents may feel better about themselves and their parenting, may experience less stress, and may themselves sleep better at night!

For children, having an adult simply declare moments to stop, take deep breaths, and notice the sounds, sights, feelings, and smells around them is a good start. Making a routine of taking an “awareness walk” around the block can be another lesson. Eating a food, such as a strawberry, mindfully – observing and savoring every bite – is another natural opportunity to practice increased awareness. One of my favorite tools, having a child shake a glitter globe (like a snow globe that can be made at home) and silently wait for the chaos to subside, “just like their feelings inside,” is soothing and a great metaphor! Abdominal breathing, part of many relaxation exercises, may be hard for young children to master. A parent might try having the child lie down with a stuffed animal on his or her belly and focus on watching it rise and fall while breathing as a way to learn this. For older children, keeping a “gratitude journal” helps focus on the positive, and also has some proven efficacy in relieving depression. Using the “1 Second Everyday” app to video a special moment daily may have a similar effect on sharpening awareness.

Dr. Barbara J. Howard
The goal of mindfulness is to listen to one’s own feelings and thoughts as “just thoughts.” Being aware that feelings, both pleasant and unpleasant, tend to rise and subside like the weather beyond your control is a form of “emotion education,” teaching you to wait them out rather than scream, panic, freeze up, or act out. One theory of how mindfulness helps with resilience to trauma is by helping individuals learn to tolerate unpleasant feelings without “dissociating” (going blank) so that processes such as memory can be maintained, and the traumatic events can become cognitively understood. This skill may allow teens or adults to avoid methods they might otherwise use to dull strong feelings such as excessive eating, drinking, smoking, sex, or drugs. These maladaptive methods of coping are perhaps the main way in which adverse childhood experiences produce long-term morbidity. Recommending mindfulness as one path to healthier coping strategies is one way you can make a difference in your patients’ lives (and your own)!
 
 

 

Dr. Howard is assistant professor of pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and creator of CHADIS (www.CHADIS.com). She had no other relevant disclosures. Dr. Howard’s contribution to this publication was as a paid expert to Frontline Medical News.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

If you are struggling to figure out how you, as an individual pediatrician, can make a significant impact on the most common current issues in child health of anxiety, depression, sleep problems, stress, and even adverse childhood experiences, you are not alone. Many of the problems we see in the office appear to stem so much from the culture in which we live that the medical interventions we have to offer seem paltry. Yet we strive to identify and attempt to ameliorate the child’s and family’s distress.

Real physical danger aside, a lot of personal distress is due to negative thoughts about one’s past or fears for one’s future. These thoughts are very important in restraining us from repeating mistakes and preparing us for action to prevent future harm. But the thoughts themselves can be stressful; they may paralyze us with anxiety, take away pleasure, interrupt our sleep, stimulate physiologic stress responses, and have adverse impacts on health. All these effects can occur without actually changing the course of events! How can we advise our patients and their parents to work to balance the protective function of our thoughts against the cost to our well-being?

One promising method you can confidently recommend to both children and their parents to manage stressful thinking is to learn and practice mindfulness. Mindfulness refers to a state of nonreactivity, awareness, focus, attention, and nonjudgment. Noticing thoughts and feelings passing through us with a neutral mind, as if we were watching a movie, rather than taking them personally, is the goal. Jon Kabat-Zinn, PhD, learned from Buddhists, then developed and disseminated a formal program to teach this skill called mindfulness-based stress reduction; it has yielded significant benefits to the emotions and health of adult participants. While everyone can be mindful at times, the ability to enter this state at will and maintain it for a few minutes can be learned, even by preschool children.

Jupiterimages/Thinkstock
Structured mindfulness programs for children have been shown to help reduce symptoms of depression, PTSD, anxiety, and negative affect; change maladaptive ways of coping with stress; improve sleep and self-confidence; and improve classroom behavior as well as social and academic performance in school. Some effect on improving attention, even at the EEG level, also has been found. Mindfulness in high-risk populations even has been shown to reduce some of the negative effects of exposure to adverse childhood experiences. Significant increases in telomerase in white blood cells thought to have an impact on immune function and aging also have been reported in preliminary studies. Mindfulness training usually involves 4-20 days of instruction and practice, but as little as 5 minutes per day has been found helpful.

How am I going to refer my patients to mindfulness programs, I can hear you saying, when I can’t even get them to standard therapies? Mindfulness in a less-structured format is often part of yoga or Tai Chi, meditation, art therapy, group therapy, or even religious services. Fortunately, parents and educators also can teach children mindfulness. But the first way you can start making this life skill available to your patients is by recommending it to their parents (“The Family ADHD Solution” by Mark Bertin [New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2011]).

You know that child emotional or behavior problems can cause adult stress. But adult stress also can cause or exacerbate a child’s emotional or behavior problems. Adult caregivers modeling meltdowns are shaping the minds of their children. Studies of teaching mindfulness to parents of children with developmental disabilities, autism, and ADHD, without touching the underlying disorder, show significant reductions in both adult stress and child behavior problems. Parents who can suspend emotion, take some deep breaths, and be thoughtful about the response they want to make instead of reacting impulsively act more reasonably, appear warmer and more compassionate to their children, and are often rewarded with better behavior. Such parents may feel better about themselves and their parenting, may experience less stress, and may themselves sleep better at night!

For children, having an adult simply declare moments to stop, take deep breaths, and notice the sounds, sights, feelings, and smells around them is a good start. Making a routine of taking an “awareness walk” around the block can be another lesson. Eating a food, such as a strawberry, mindfully – observing and savoring every bite – is another natural opportunity to practice increased awareness. One of my favorite tools, having a child shake a glitter globe (like a snow globe that can be made at home) and silently wait for the chaos to subside, “just like their feelings inside,” is soothing and a great metaphor! Abdominal breathing, part of many relaxation exercises, may be hard for young children to master. A parent might try having the child lie down with a stuffed animal on his or her belly and focus on watching it rise and fall while breathing as a way to learn this. For older children, keeping a “gratitude journal” helps focus on the positive, and also has some proven efficacy in relieving depression. Using the “1 Second Everyday” app to video a special moment daily may have a similar effect on sharpening awareness.

Dr. Barbara J. Howard
The goal of mindfulness is to listen to one’s own feelings and thoughts as “just thoughts.” Being aware that feelings, both pleasant and unpleasant, tend to rise and subside like the weather beyond your control is a form of “emotion education,” teaching you to wait them out rather than scream, panic, freeze up, or act out. One theory of how mindfulness helps with resilience to trauma is by helping individuals learn to tolerate unpleasant feelings without “dissociating” (going blank) so that processes such as memory can be maintained, and the traumatic events can become cognitively understood. This skill may allow teens or adults to avoid methods they might otherwise use to dull strong feelings such as excessive eating, drinking, smoking, sex, or drugs. These maladaptive methods of coping are perhaps the main way in which adverse childhood experiences produce long-term morbidity. Recommending mindfulness as one path to healthier coping strategies is one way you can make a difference in your patients’ lives (and your own)!
 
 

 

Dr. Howard is assistant professor of pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and creator of CHADIS (www.CHADIS.com). She had no other relevant disclosures. Dr. Howard’s contribution to this publication was as a paid expert to Frontline Medical News.

 

If you are struggling to figure out how you, as an individual pediatrician, can make a significant impact on the most common current issues in child health of anxiety, depression, sleep problems, stress, and even adverse childhood experiences, you are not alone. Many of the problems we see in the office appear to stem so much from the culture in which we live that the medical interventions we have to offer seem paltry. Yet we strive to identify and attempt to ameliorate the child’s and family’s distress.

Real physical danger aside, a lot of personal distress is due to negative thoughts about one’s past or fears for one’s future. These thoughts are very important in restraining us from repeating mistakes and preparing us for action to prevent future harm. But the thoughts themselves can be stressful; they may paralyze us with anxiety, take away pleasure, interrupt our sleep, stimulate physiologic stress responses, and have adverse impacts on health. All these effects can occur without actually changing the course of events! How can we advise our patients and their parents to work to balance the protective function of our thoughts against the cost to our well-being?

One promising method you can confidently recommend to both children and their parents to manage stressful thinking is to learn and practice mindfulness. Mindfulness refers to a state of nonreactivity, awareness, focus, attention, and nonjudgment. Noticing thoughts and feelings passing through us with a neutral mind, as if we were watching a movie, rather than taking them personally, is the goal. Jon Kabat-Zinn, PhD, learned from Buddhists, then developed and disseminated a formal program to teach this skill called mindfulness-based stress reduction; it has yielded significant benefits to the emotions and health of adult participants. While everyone can be mindful at times, the ability to enter this state at will and maintain it for a few minutes can be learned, even by preschool children.

Jupiterimages/Thinkstock
Structured mindfulness programs for children have been shown to help reduce symptoms of depression, PTSD, anxiety, and negative affect; change maladaptive ways of coping with stress; improve sleep and self-confidence; and improve classroom behavior as well as social and academic performance in school. Some effect on improving attention, even at the EEG level, also has been found. Mindfulness in high-risk populations even has been shown to reduce some of the negative effects of exposure to adverse childhood experiences. Significant increases in telomerase in white blood cells thought to have an impact on immune function and aging also have been reported in preliminary studies. Mindfulness training usually involves 4-20 days of instruction and practice, but as little as 5 minutes per day has been found helpful.

How am I going to refer my patients to mindfulness programs, I can hear you saying, when I can’t even get them to standard therapies? Mindfulness in a less-structured format is often part of yoga or Tai Chi, meditation, art therapy, group therapy, or even religious services. Fortunately, parents and educators also can teach children mindfulness. But the first way you can start making this life skill available to your patients is by recommending it to their parents (“The Family ADHD Solution” by Mark Bertin [New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2011]).

You know that child emotional or behavior problems can cause adult stress. But adult stress also can cause or exacerbate a child’s emotional or behavior problems. Adult caregivers modeling meltdowns are shaping the minds of their children. Studies of teaching mindfulness to parents of children with developmental disabilities, autism, and ADHD, without touching the underlying disorder, show significant reductions in both adult stress and child behavior problems. Parents who can suspend emotion, take some deep breaths, and be thoughtful about the response they want to make instead of reacting impulsively act more reasonably, appear warmer and more compassionate to their children, and are often rewarded with better behavior. Such parents may feel better about themselves and their parenting, may experience less stress, and may themselves sleep better at night!

For children, having an adult simply declare moments to stop, take deep breaths, and notice the sounds, sights, feelings, and smells around them is a good start. Making a routine of taking an “awareness walk” around the block can be another lesson. Eating a food, such as a strawberry, mindfully – observing and savoring every bite – is another natural opportunity to practice increased awareness. One of my favorite tools, having a child shake a glitter globe (like a snow globe that can be made at home) and silently wait for the chaos to subside, “just like their feelings inside,” is soothing and a great metaphor! Abdominal breathing, part of many relaxation exercises, may be hard for young children to master. A parent might try having the child lie down with a stuffed animal on his or her belly and focus on watching it rise and fall while breathing as a way to learn this. For older children, keeping a “gratitude journal” helps focus on the positive, and also has some proven efficacy in relieving depression. Using the “1 Second Everyday” app to video a special moment daily may have a similar effect on sharpening awareness.

Dr. Barbara J. Howard
The goal of mindfulness is to listen to one’s own feelings and thoughts as “just thoughts.” Being aware that feelings, both pleasant and unpleasant, tend to rise and subside like the weather beyond your control is a form of “emotion education,” teaching you to wait them out rather than scream, panic, freeze up, or act out. One theory of how mindfulness helps with resilience to trauma is by helping individuals learn to tolerate unpleasant feelings without “dissociating” (going blank) so that processes such as memory can be maintained, and the traumatic events can become cognitively understood. This skill may allow teens or adults to avoid methods they might otherwise use to dull strong feelings such as excessive eating, drinking, smoking, sex, or drugs. These maladaptive methods of coping are perhaps the main way in which adverse childhood experiences produce long-term morbidity. Recommending mindfulness as one path to healthier coping strategies is one way you can make a difference in your patients’ lives (and your own)!
 
 

 

Dr. Howard is assistant professor of pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and creator of CHADIS (www.CHADIS.com). She had no other relevant disclosures. Dr. Howard’s contribution to this publication was as a paid expert to Frontline Medical News.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

AMA’s stance on choline, prenatal vitamins could bring ‘staggering’ results

Article Type
Changed

 

For quite some time now, I’ve been urging my colleagues to follow the science on the powerful impact of choline on the brain.

In May 2017, based on studies using genetically altered mice that show the developmental changes of Down syndrome and Alzheimer’s disease at 6 months, I raised the question of whether prenatal choline could lead to the prevention of Alzheimer’s.

Antonio_Diaz/Thinkstock
Prior to that, in December 2016, I coauthored an article about our findings revealing the content of choline in the 25 top prenatal vitamins (J Fam Med Dis Prev. 2016;2[6]:1-3). None of them contained the 450-mg daily recommended dose of choline advised by the Institute of Medicine in 1998. In fact, only two contain 50 mg; six others contained less than 30 mg; and the other 17 had no choline whatsoever. In that same article, we highlighted the work by researchers at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, proposing that a form of choline may prevent the development of autism, ADHD, and schizophrenia by an epigenetic mechanism involving a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (Am J Psychiatry. 2016 May 1;173[5]:509-16). In our article, we suggested that we advocate for a position that the prenatal vitamin manufacturers include at least the daily-recommended dose of choline (450 mg/day) that pregnant women need according to the findings of the Institute of Medicine’s Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of Dietary Reference Intakes and its Panel on Folate, Other B Vitamins, and Choline, published in 1998.

Thanks to the leadership of Niva Lubin-Johnson, MD, now president-elect of the National Medical Association, while a member and immediate past chair of the American Medical Association’s minority affairs section governing council*, the AMA ’s delegates passed a resolution to support an increase in choline in prenatal vitamins.

If the prenatal vitamin companies take the AMA’s resolution to heart and put more choline in their prenatal vitamins or if physicians in the United States pay attention to the AMA’s action and recommend pregnant women ensure they get adequate choline in their diets, the benefit to Americans’ public health could be staggering. Currently, it is known that choline deficiency – usually brought about by fetal alcohol exposure – is a public health problem, and choline deficiency is the leading preventable cause of intellectual disability. Public health efforts aimed at preventing intellectual disabilities from fetal alcohol exposure are designed to warn women about the risks of drinking during pregnancy; while this effort is commendable, it does not solve a very common problem – namely, women’s engaging in social drinking before they realize they are pregnant. (Psychiatric Serv. 2015 66[5]:539-42).

The late Julius B. Richmond, MD, former director of the Institute for Juvenile Research, surgeon general under former President Jimmy Carter, and one of the founders of Head Start under former President Lyndon B. Johnson, used to say that, in order to institutionalize a public policy, you need a solid scientific basis for the policy, a mechanism to actualize the policy, and the “political will” to do so. The AMA’s recommendation has the Institute of Medicine’s science behind it, so putting choline in prenatal vitamins or having physicians recommend that pregnant women get adequate doses of choline should be pretty easy to actualize. The political will to do this extremely important, biotechnical preventive intervention should be a no-brainer.

Should this AMA recommendation gain the traction it deserves, the American people might see a substantial decrease in the prevalence of premature and low-birth-weight infants, intellectual disability, ADHD, speech and language difficulties, epilepsy, heart defects, schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s disease, depression, school failure, juvenile delinquency, violence, and suicide – all of which seem to be tied to choline deficiency.

Dr. Carl C. Bell
Dr. Bell is a staff psychiatrist at Jackson Park Hospital Family Medicine Clinic in Chicago, clinical psychiatrist emeritus in the department of psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago, former president/CEO of Community Mental Health Council, and former director of the Institute for Juvenile Research (birthplace of child psychiatry), also in Chicago.

*This story was updated August 17, 2017.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

For quite some time now, I’ve been urging my colleagues to follow the science on the powerful impact of choline on the brain.

In May 2017, based on studies using genetically altered mice that show the developmental changes of Down syndrome and Alzheimer’s disease at 6 months, I raised the question of whether prenatal choline could lead to the prevention of Alzheimer’s.

Antonio_Diaz/Thinkstock
Prior to that, in December 2016, I coauthored an article about our findings revealing the content of choline in the 25 top prenatal vitamins (J Fam Med Dis Prev. 2016;2[6]:1-3). None of them contained the 450-mg daily recommended dose of choline advised by the Institute of Medicine in 1998. In fact, only two contain 50 mg; six others contained less than 30 mg; and the other 17 had no choline whatsoever. In that same article, we highlighted the work by researchers at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, proposing that a form of choline may prevent the development of autism, ADHD, and schizophrenia by an epigenetic mechanism involving a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (Am J Psychiatry. 2016 May 1;173[5]:509-16). In our article, we suggested that we advocate for a position that the prenatal vitamin manufacturers include at least the daily-recommended dose of choline (450 mg/day) that pregnant women need according to the findings of the Institute of Medicine’s Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of Dietary Reference Intakes and its Panel on Folate, Other B Vitamins, and Choline, published in 1998.

Thanks to the leadership of Niva Lubin-Johnson, MD, now president-elect of the National Medical Association, while a member and immediate past chair of the American Medical Association’s minority affairs section governing council*, the AMA ’s delegates passed a resolution to support an increase in choline in prenatal vitamins.

If the prenatal vitamin companies take the AMA’s resolution to heart and put more choline in their prenatal vitamins or if physicians in the United States pay attention to the AMA’s action and recommend pregnant women ensure they get adequate choline in their diets, the benefit to Americans’ public health could be staggering. Currently, it is known that choline deficiency – usually brought about by fetal alcohol exposure – is a public health problem, and choline deficiency is the leading preventable cause of intellectual disability. Public health efforts aimed at preventing intellectual disabilities from fetal alcohol exposure are designed to warn women about the risks of drinking during pregnancy; while this effort is commendable, it does not solve a very common problem – namely, women’s engaging in social drinking before they realize they are pregnant. (Psychiatric Serv. 2015 66[5]:539-42).

The late Julius B. Richmond, MD, former director of the Institute for Juvenile Research, surgeon general under former President Jimmy Carter, and one of the founders of Head Start under former President Lyndon B. Johnson, used to say that, in order to institutionalize a public policy, you need a solid scientific basis for the policy, a mechanism to actualize the policy, and the “political will” to do so. The AMA’s recommendation has the Institute of Medicine’s science behind it, so putting choline in prenatal vitamins or having physicians recommend that pregnant women get adequate doses of choline should be pretty easy to actualize. The political will to do this extremely important, biotechnical preventive intervention should be a no-brainer.

Should this AMA recommendation gain the traction it deserves, the American people might see a substantial decrease in the prevalence of premature and low-birth-weight infants, intellectual disability, ADHD, speech and language difficulties, epilepsy, heart defects, schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s disease, depression, school failure, juvenile delinquency, violence, and suicide – all of which seem to be tied to choline deficiency.

Dr. Carl C. Bell
Dr. Bell is a staff psychiatrist at Jackson Park Hospital Family Medicine Clinic in Chicago, clinical psychiatrist emeritus in the department of psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago, former president/CEO of Community Mental Health Council, and former director of the Institute for Juvenile Research (birthplace of child psychiatry), also in Chicago.

*This story was updated August 17, 2017.

 

For quite some time now, I’ve been urging my colleagues to follow the science on the powerful impact of choline on the brain.

In May 2017, based on studies using genetically altered mice that show the developmental changes of Down syndrome and Alzheimer’s disease at 6 months, I raised the question of whether prenatal choline could lead to the prevention of Alzheimer’s.

Antonio_Diaz/Thinkstock
Prior to that, in December 2016, I coauthored an article about our findings revealing the content of choline in the 25 top prenatal vitamins (J Fam Med Dis Prev. 2016;2[6]:1-3). None of them contained the 450-mg daily recommended dose of choline advised by the Institute of Medicine in 1998. In fact, only two contain 50 mg; six others contained less than 30 mg; and the other 17 had no choline whatsoever. In that same article, we highlighted the work by researchers at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, proposing that a form of choline may prevent the development of autism, ADHD, and schizophrenia by an epigenetic mechanism involving a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (Am J Psychiatry. 2016 May 1;173[5]:509-16). In our article, we suggested that we advocate for a position that the prenatal vitamin manufacturers include at least the daily-recommended dose of choline (450 mg/day) that pregnant women need according to the findings of the Institute of Medicine’s Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of Dietary Reference Intakes and its Panel on Folate, Other B Vitamins, and Choline, published in 1998.

Thanks to the leadership of Niva Lubin-Johnson, MD, now president-elect of the National Medical Association, while a member and immediate past chair of the American Medical Association’s minority affairs section governing council*, the AMA ’s delegates passed a resolution to support an increase in choline in prenatal vitamins.

If the prenatal vitamin companies take the AMA’s resolution to heart and put more choline in their prenatal vitamins or if physicians in the United States pay attention to the AMA’s action and recommend pregnant women ensure they get adequate choline in their diets, the benefit to Americans’ public health could be staggering. Currently, it is known that choline deficiency – usually brought about by fetal alcohol exposure – is a public health problem, and choline deficiency is the leading preventable cause of intellectual disability. Public health efforts aimed at preventing intellectual disabilities from fetal alcohol exposure are designed to warn women about the risks of drinking during pregnancy; while this effort is commendable, it does not solve a very common problem – namely, women’s engaging in social drinking before they realize they are pregnant. (Psychiatric Serv. 2015 66[5]:539-42).

The late Julius B. Richmond, MD, former director of the Institute for Juvenile Research, surgeon general under former President Jimmy Carter, and one of the founders of Head Start under former President Lyndon B. Johnson, used to say that, in order to institutionalize a public policy, you need a solid scientific basis for the policy, a mechanism to actualize the policy, and the “political will” to do so. The AMA’s recommendation has the Institute of Medicine’s science behind it, so putting choline in prenatal vitamins or having physicians recommend that pregnant women get adequate doses of choline should be pretty easy to actualize. The political will to do this extremely important, biotechnical preventive intervention should be a no-brainer.

Should this AMA recommendation gain the traction it deserves, the American people might see a substantial decrease in the prevalence of premature and low-birth-weight infants, intellectual disability, ADHD, speech and language difficulties, epilepsy, heart defects, schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s disease, depression, school failure, juvenile delinquency, violence, and suicide – all of which seem to be tied to choline deficiency.

Dr. Carl C. Bell
Dr. Bell is a staff psychiatrist at Jackson Park Hospital Family Medicine Clinic in Chicago, clinical psychiatrist emeritus in the department of psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago, former president/CEO of Community Mental Health Council, and former director of the Institute for Juvenile Research (birthplace of child psychiatry), also in Chicago.

*This story was updated August 17, 2017.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

How many strikes?

Article Type
Changed

 



The title caught my eye as I skimmed through my daughter’s copy of the New Yorker. “When should a child be taken from his parents?” (Larissa MacFarquar, Aug. 7 & 14, 2017). It is a very complex question, and one for which there has never been an easy answer, certainly not an answer that can be applied universally. However, my reflex response was “sooner rather than later!”

What prompted my hasty from-the-hip answer is 40-plus years of watching the legal system grind along at a pace that too often fails to take into account the emotional needs of a child’s developing personality. While lawyers file for extensions and wait for slots in dockets bloated with less time-sensitive cases, children float in limbo waiting to hear where their home will be and who will constitute their family.

Courtesy Dr. William G. Wilkoff
Dr. William G. Wilkoff
If a child is lucky, he may pass the time with a single caring family who eventually may adopt him. Or he may be housed with a family member who can offer more stability than his troubled parent(s). More likely he will bounce from foster home to foster home that may be adequate in terms of the basics of food, shelter, and temporary comfort but offer no hope of a lasting relationship.

Even if he is lucky enough to be housed with a single foster home, the odds are that his stays there will be punctuated with returns to his parent as the parent is given one more chance to beat back the demons that have stood in the way of at least an adequate, if not a model, parenthood. The New Yorker article chronicles one such odyssey that spans a mother’s four pregnancies with several fathers.

In the crudest terms, here is the question: “How many strikes does one get before one loses his or her parental rights?” It is a bit easier to make the call when there have been incidents in which a parent’s action or inaction has put the child’s physical health in jeopardy. However, the social workers, physicians, and law enforcement officials who must shoulder the burden of these decisions involving the abusive parent often find themselves in no-win situations. Giving the parent who is suspected of physical abuse having been “just a little heavy handed” one more chance could result in death or life-long impairment.

fiorigianluigi/Thinkstock
Foster care father and son embrace on bus
The more difficult decisions and one that seems to take much longer come when the parent is struggling with addiction or a mental health illness that has been resistant to therapy. In some cases, the failure is because the parent hasn’t adhered to the therapeutic plan. However, often the relapses are simply part of the expected course of the parent’s illness or addiction. But how many chances should the parent be given? How long do we let a 3-year-old’s or a 13-year-old’s emotions yo-yo up and down before someone says, “Enough is enough – your child is at increasing risk for lifelong mental health problems because of your inconsistent parenting?” In my experience, the decision makers have erred too often in giving the parent one more chance.

I suspect the rationale for giving the parent another chance is based on the belief that the biologic family should always be the preferred option; an assumption that can be called into question. While I don’t think these decisions should be made with the strict application of an algorithm, I believe there is more room for evidence-based decision-making. That evidence may not be currently available, but I think we should be asking questions to get that information. For example, for an individual with a specific substance addiction or mental illness with a certain diagnosis, what are the chances of a remedy that will allow that individual to become a functional parent? And how long will it take?

Information like this may be helpful for those folks with the difficult job of deciding when a parent should lose his parental rights in a time course that takes into account the emotional needs of his children.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

Publications
Topics
Sections

 



The title caught my eye as I skimmed through my daughter’s copy of the New Yorker. “When should a child be taken from his parents?” (Larissa MacFarquar, Aug. 7 & 14, 2017). It is a very complex question, and one for which there has never been an easy answer, certainly not an answer that can be applied universally. However, my reflex response was “sooner rather than later!”

What prompted my hasty from-the-hip answer is 40-plus years of watching the legal system grind along at a pace that too often fails to take into account the emotional needs of a child’s developing personality. While lawyers file for extensions and wait for slots in dockets bloated with less time-sensitive cases, children float in limbo waiting to hear where their home will be and who will constitute their family.

Courtesy Dr. William G. Wilkoff
Dr. William G. Wilkoff
If a child is lucky, he may pass the time with a single caring family who eventually may adopt him. Or he may be housed with a family member who can offer more stability than his troubled parent(s). More likely he will bounce from foster home to foster home that may be adequate in terms of the basics of food, shelter, and temporary comfort but offer no hope of a lasting relationship.

Even if he is lucky enough to be housed with a single foster home, the odds are that his stays there will be punctuated with returns to his parent as the parent is given one more chance to beat back the demons that have stood in the way of at least an adequate, if not a model, parenthood. The New Yorker article chronicles one such odyssey that spans a mother’s four pregnancies with several fathers.

In the crudest terms, here is the question: “How many strikes does one get before one loses his or her parental rights?” It is a bit easier to make the call when there have been incidents in which a parent’s action or inaction has put the child’s physical health in jeopardy. However, the social workers, physicians, and law enforcement officials who must shoulder the burden of these decisions involving the abusive parent often find themselves in no-win situations. Giving the parent who is suspected of physical abuse having been “just a little heavy handed” one more chance could result in death or life-long impairment.

fiorigianluigi/Thinkstock
Foster care father and son embrace on bus
The more difficult decisions and one that seems to take much longer come when the parent is struggling with addiction or a mental health illness that has been resistant to therapy. In some cases, the failure is because the parent hasn’t adhered to the therapeutic plan. However, often the relapses are simply part of the expected course of the parent’s illness or addiction. But how many chances should the parent be given? How long do we let a 3-year-old’s or a 13-year-old’s emotions yo-yo up and down before someone says, “Enough is enough – your child is at increasing risk for lifelong mental health problems because of your inconsistent parenting?” In my experience, the decision makers have erred too often in giving the parent one more chance.

I suspect the rationale for giving the parent another chance is based on the belief that the biologic family should always be the preferred option; an assumption that can be called into question. While I don’t think these decisions should be made with the strict application of an algorithm, I believe there is more room for evidence-based decision-making. That evidence may not be currently available, but I think we should be asking questions to get that information. For example, for an individual with a specific substance addiction or mental illness with a certain diagnosis, what are the chances of a remedy that will allow that individual to become a functional parent? And how long will it take?

Information like this may be helpful for those folks with the difficult job of deciding when a parent should lose his parental rights in a time course that takes into account the emotional needs of his children.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

 



The title caught my eye as I skimmed through my daughter’s copy of the New Yorker. “When should a child be taken from his parents?” (Larissa MacFarquar, Aug. 7 & 14, 2017). It is a very complex question, and one for which there has never been an easy answer, certainly not an answer that can be applied universally. However, my reflex response was “sooner rather than later!”

What prompted my hasty from-the-hip answer is 40-plus years of watching the legal system grind along at a pace that too often fails to take into account the emotional needs of a child’s developing personality. While lawyers file for extensions and wait for slots in dockets bloated with less time-sensitive cases, children float in limbo waiting to hear where their home will be and who will constitute their family.

Courtesy Dr. William G. Wilkoff
Dr. William G. Wilkoff
If a child is lucky, he may pass the time with a single caring family who eventually may adopt him. Or he may be housed with a family member who can offer more stability than his troubled parent(s). More likely he will bounce from foster home to foster home that may be adequate in terms of the basics of food, shelter, and temporary comfort but offer no hope of a lasting relationship.

Even if he is lucky enough to be housed with a single foster home, the odds are that his stays there will be punctuated with returns to his parent as the parent is given one more chance to beat back the demons that have stood in the way of at least an adequate, if not a model, parenthood. The New Yorker article chronicles one such odyssey that spans a mother’s four pregnancies with several fathers.

In the crudest terms, here is the question: “How many strikes does one get before one loses his or her parental rights?” It is a bit easier to make the call when there have been incidents in which a parent’s action or inaction has put the child’s physical health in jeopardy. However, the social workers, physicians, and law enforcement officials who must shoulder the burden of these decisions involving the abusive parent often find themselves in no-win situations. Giving the parent who is suspected of physical abuse having been “just a little heavy handed” one more chance could result in death or life-long impairment.

fiorigianluigi/Thinkstock
Foster care father and son embrace on bus
The more difficult decisions and one that seems to take much longer come when the parent is struggling with addiction or a mental health illness that has been resistant to therapy. In some cases, the failure is because the parent hasn’t adhered to the therapeutic plan. However, often the relapses are simply part of the expected course of the parent’s illness or addiction. But how many chances should the parent be given? How long do we let a 3-year-old’s or a 13-year-old’s emotions yo-yo up and down before someone says, “Enough is enough – your child is at increasing risk for lifelong mental health problems because of your inconsistent parenting?” In my experience, the decision makers have erred too often in giving the parent one more chance.

I suspect the rationale for giving the parent another chance is based on the belief that the biologic family should always be the preferred option; an assumption that can be called into question. While I don’t think these decisions should be made with the strict application of an algorithm, I believe there is more room for evidence-based decision-making. That evidence may not be currently available, but I think we should be asking questions to get that information. For example, for an individual with a specific substance addiction or mental illness with a certain diagnosis, what are the chances of a remedy that will allow that individual to become a functional parent? And how long will it take?

Information like this may be helpful for those folks with the difficult job of deciding when a parent should lose his parental rights in a time course that takes into account the emotional needs of his children.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Beating your wandering attention

Article Type
Changed

 

Like many adults, I suspect that I may have been living under the cloud of an undiagnosed case of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). What else could explain why my mind wanders during the second hole of my wife’s narrative of her morning golf outing with her friends? Why have I never been in a class or lecture in which after 20 minutes I began wishing I were somewhere else? In my student days, I felt compelled to leave my studies and go to the refrigerator every 15 minutes – even though I wasn’t hungry. Sounds like ADHD to me.

But I know what you are thinking. This guy graduated from medical school, and has been married to the same woman for nearly 50 years. He has no criminal record and has held the same job for more than 40 years. I will admit that my life trajectory is atypical for someone even with a mild case of adult ADHD.

Actually, I don’t really believe that I have an undiagnosed case of ADHD. But I do feel that my attention span is at the short end of the normal spectrum. And I think that by good fortune I stumbled on several strategies that helped me thrive in an academic environment despite my relative attention deficit.

Most noteworthy among those strategies was my habit of listening to heavy metal music with a throbbing beat while I was studying. At my recent college reunion, former classmates whom I hadn’t seen in 50 years reminded me of how often I drove them to quieter study oases with the driving rhythms of the Rolling Stones’ misogynistic anthem “Under My Thumb.”My wife still recalls her amazement the first (and last) time she offered to keep me company while I studied for a pathophysiology exam. She found me hunched over my notes spread out on a coffee table, my knees bouncing to the beat of Joe Cocker crowing the Beatles’ classic “She Came in Through the Bathroom Window” (still one of my all-time favorites). Earbuds hadn’t been invented, and I considered earphones the size of chili bowls too dorky.

I always have assumed that my study habits were just a little weird. But recently I discovered an article describing the work of Alexander Pantelyat, MD, assistant professor of neurology and cofounder of the Johns Hopkins Center for Music and Medicine (“Does Listening to Music Improve Your Focus?” by Heidi Mitchell, Wall Street Journal, July 26, 2017). Dr. Pantelyat notes that the early enthusiasm for playing Mozart to newborns has faded with the understanding that any improvement in learning skills was short-lived. However, he sees some evidence that hearing music of a genre you enjoy may help you focus better than listening to music that you don’t like. He says, “If you enjoy heavy metal, you might be more focused when you listen to it.”

monkeybusinessimages/Thinkstock
Dr. Pantelyat goes on to discuss his theory about how music affects various parts of the brain, the names of which I have long forgotten. I prefer to explain my rhythm-fueled study strategy as simply another example of how stimulants, in my case loud music, can keep a sleep-deprived normal individual awake long enough to pay attention to the task at hand.

As Dr. Pantelyat cautions, the response to music is highly individual. I generally have not recommended my peculiar study habits to my patients. However, my experience has left me more open-minded when trying to help young people struggling to find a study strategy that works. You may not share my affinity for the Rolling Stones and Joe Cocker, but you have to admit you would rather have your patients listen to their music than take drugs they may not need.
 

Dr. William G. Wilkoff
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].
Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Like many adults, I suspect that I may have been living under the cloud of an undiagnosed case of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). What else could explain why my mind wanders during the second hole of my wife’s narrative of her morning golf outing with her friends? Why have I never been in a class or lecture in which after 20 minutes I began wishing I were somewhere else? In my student days, I felt compelled to leave my studies and go to the refrigerator every 15 minutes – even though I wasn’t hungry. Sounds like ADHD to me.

But I know what you are thinking. This guy graduated from medical school, and has been married to the same woman for nearly 50 years. He has no criminal record and has held the same job for more than 40 years. I will admit that my life trajectory is atypical for someone even with a mild case of adult ADHD.

Actually, I don’t really believe that I have an undiagnosed case of ADHD. But I do feel that my attention span is at the short end of the normal spectrum. And I think that by good fortune I stumbled on several strategies that helped me thrive in an academic environment despite my relative attention deficit.

Most noteworthy among those strategies was my habit of listening to heavy metal music with a throbbing beat while I was studying. At my recent college reunion, former classmates whom I hadn’t seen in 50 years reminded me of how often I drove them to quieter study oases with the driving rhythms of the Rolling Stones’ misogynistic anthem “Under My Thumb.”My wife still recalls her amazement the first (and last) time she offered to keep me company while I studied for a pathophysiology exam. She found me hunched over my notes spread out on a coffee table, my knees bouncing to the beat of Joe Cocker crowing the Beatles’ classic “She Came in Through the Bathroom Window” (still one of my all-time favorites). Earbuds hadn’t been invented, and I considered earphones the size of chili bowls too dorky.

I always have assumed that my study habits were just a little weird. But recently I discovered an article describing the work of Alexander Pantelyat, MD, assistant professor of neurology and cofounder of the Johns Hopkins Center for Music and Medicine (“Does Listening to Music Improve Your Focus?” by Heidi Mitchell, Wall Street Journal, July 26, 2017). Dr. Pantelyat notes that the early enthusiasm for playing Mozart to newborns has faded with the understanding that any improvement in learning skills was short-lived. However, he sees some evidence that hearing music of a genre you enjoy may help you focus better than listening to music that you don’t like. He says, “If you enjoy heavy metal, you might be more focused when you listen to it.”

monkeybusinessimages/Thinkstock
Dr. Pantelyat goes on to discuss his theory about how music affects various parts of the brain, the names of which I have long forgotten. I prefer to explain my rhythm-fueled study strategy as simply another example of how stimulants, in my case loud music, can keep a sleep-deprived normal individual awake long enough to pay attention to the task at hand.

As Dr. Pantelyat cautions, the response to music is highly individual. I generally have not recommended my peculiar study habits to my patients. However, my experience has left me more open-minded when trying to help young people struggling to find a study strategy that works. You may not share my affinity for the Rolling Stones and Joe Cocker, but you have to admit you would rather have your patients listen to their music than take drugs they may not need.
 

Dr. William G. Wilkoff
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

 

Like many adults, I suspect that I may have been living under the cloud of an undiagnosed case of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). What else could explain why my mind wanders during the second hole of my wife’s narrative of her morning golf outing with her friends? Why have I never been in a class or lecture in which after 20 minutes I began wishing I were somewhere else? In my student days, I felt compelled to leave my studies and go to the refrigerator every 15 minutes – even though I wasn’t hungry. Sounds like ADHD to me.

But I know what you are thinking. This guy graduated from medical school, and has been married to the same woman for nearly 50 years. He has no criminal record and has held the same job for more than 40 years. I will admit that my life trajectory is atypical for someone even with a mild case of adult ADHD.

Actually, I don’t really believe that I have an undiagnosed case of ADHD. But I do feel that my attention span is at the short end of the normal spectrum. And I think that by good fortune I stumbled on several strategies that helped me thrive in an academic environment despite my relative attention deficit.

Most noteworthy among those strategies was my habit of listening to heavy metal music with a throbbing beat while I was studying. At my recent college reunion, former classmates whom I hadn’t seen in 50 years reminded me of how often I drove them to quieter study oases with the driving rhythms of the Rolling Stones’ misogynistic anthem “Under My Thumb.”My wife still recalls her amazement the first (and last) time she offered to keep me company while I studied for a pathophysiology exam. She found me hunched over my notes spread out on a coffee table, my knees bouncing to the beat of Joe Cocker crowing the Beatles’ classic “She Came in Through the Bathroom Window” (still one of my all-time favorites). Earbuds hadn’t been invented, and I considered earphones the size of chili bowls too dorky.

I always have assumed that my study habits were just a little weird. But recently I discovered an article describing the work of Alexander Pantelyat, MD, assistant professor of neurology and cofounder of the Johns Hopkins Center for Music and Medicine (“Does Listening to Music Improve Your Focus?” by Heidi Mitchell, Wall Street Journal, July 26, 2017). Dr. Pantelyat notes that the early enthusiasm for playing Mozart to newborns has faded with the understanding that any improvement in learning skills was short-lived. However, he sees some evidence that hearing music of a genre you enjoy may help you focus better than listening to music that you don’t like. He says, “If you enjoy heavy metal, you might be more focused when you listen to it.”

monkeybusinessimages/Thinkstock
Dr. Pantelyat goes on to discuss his theory about how music affects various parts of the brain, the names of which I have long forgotten. I prefer to explain my rhythm-fueled study strategy as simply another example of how stimulants, in my case loud music, can keep a sleep-deprived normal individual awake long enough to pay attention to the task at hand.

As Dr. Pantelyat cautions, the response to music is highly individual. I generally have not recommended my peculiar study habits to my patients. However, my experience has left me more open-minded when trying to help young people struggling to find a study strategy that works. You may not share my affinity for the Rolling Stones and Joe Cocker, but you have to admit you would rather have your patients listen to their music than take drugs they may not need.
 

Dr. William G. Wilkoff
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Paying it forward

Article Type
Changed

 



I was 14 when my grandmother fell and broke her hip. She went to the emergency department by ambulance from the restaurant we were at, and Dad took me to the hospital with him. He was an only child, and not a medical person. He was very worried.

There, Grandma looked older and more frail than usual. She and my dad were both anxious when told she’d need surgery.

Then the orthopedic surgeon came in. Tall and confident, he was initially quite imposing. But he was polite and had a great bedside manner. He calmed my dad and grandmother down, explained what needed to be done, and was reassuring. After surgery, he came to the waiting room to let us know things had gone well. I remember how impressed Dad and I both were.

Dean Mitchell/Thinkstock


Now, here was that surgeon again, on the other side of my desk. Arthritis had taken away some of his height. But he still carried himself with a proud dignity.

His family had brought him to me for worsening memory problems. He thought he was still in practice, although he had retired years ago. He didn’t remember his address, what city we were in, or what a clock looked like.

You hear families talk about how much Alzheimer’s disease takes away from a loved one, but you rarely have the opportunity in a practice to see for yourself. But the impression he’d made on me over 35 years ago was still strong, and I remembered every detail in comparison to the person across from me today.

In his field, he fixed things. With screws, rods, and casts he could restore broken bones, returning them to strength and use – like he had with my grandmother.

Sadly, I can’t return the favor now. I can only offer his family comfort, and answer questions, the way he once did with mine.

I started donepezil and gave them the most optimistic talk I have for these cases. But I know we’re still far away from fixing broken brains.

After he left, I found myself looking in the mirror, thinking of how I saw him then, wondering if his family saw me the same way now, and realizing that someday my children and I may be in the same situation.

Dr. Allan M. Block

 

Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 



I was 14 when my grandmother fell and broke her hip. She went to the emergency department by ambulance from the restaurant we were at, and Dad took me to the hospital with him. He was an only child, and not a medical person. He was very worried.

There, Grandma looked older and more frail than usual. She and my dad were both anxious when told she’d need surgery.

Then the orthopedic surgeon came in. Tall and confident, he was initially quite imposing. But he was polite and had a great bedside manner. He calmed my dad and grandmother down, explained what needed to be done, and was reassuring. After surgery, he came to the waiting room to let us know things had gone well. I remember how impressed Dad and I both were.

Dean Mitchell/Thinkstock


Now, here was that surgeon again, on the other side of my desk. Arthritis had taken away some of his height. But he still carried himself with a proud dignity.

His family had brought him to me for worsening memory problems. He thought he was still in practice, although he had retired years ago. He didn’t remember his address, what city we were in, or what a clock looked like.

You hear families talk about how much Alzheimer’s disease takes away from a loved one, but you rarely have the opportunity in a practice to see for yourself. But the impression he’d made on me over 35 years ago was still strong, and I remembered every detail in comparison to the person across from me today.

In his field, he fixed things. With screws, rods, and casts he could restore broken bones, returning them to strength and use – like he had with my grandmother.

Sadly, I can’t return the favor now. I can only offer his family comfort, and answer questions, the way he once did with mine.

I started donepezil and gave them the most optimistic talk I have for these cases. But I know we’re still far away from fixing broken brains.

After he left, I found myself looking in the mirror, thinking of how I saw him then, wondering if his family saw me the same way now, and realizing that someday my children and I may be in the same situation.

Dr. Allan M. Block

 

Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.

 



I was 14 when my grandmother fell and broke her hip. She went to the emergency department by ambulance from the restaurant we were at, and Dad took me to the hospital with him. He was an only child, and not a medical person. He was very worried.

There, Grandma looked older and more frail than usual. She and my dad were both anxious when told she’d need surgery.

Then the orthopedic surgeon came in. Tall and confident, he was initially quite imposing. But he was polite and had a great bedside manner. He calmed my dad and grandmother down, explained what needed to be done, and was reassuring. After surgery, he came to the waiting room to let us know things had gone well. I remember how impressed Dad and I both were.

Dean Mitchell/Thinkstock


Now, here was that surgeon again, on the other side of my desk. Arthritis had taken away some of his height. But he still carried himself with a proud dignity.

His family had brought him to me for worsening memory problems. He thought he was still in practice, although he had retired years ago. He didn’t remember his address, what city we were in, or what a clock looked like.

You hear families talk about how much Alzheimer’s disease takes away from a loved one, but you rarely have the opportunity in a practice to see for yourself. But the impression he’d made on me over 35 years ago was still strong, and I remembered every detail in comparison to the person across from me today.

In his field, he fixed things. With screws, rods, and casts he could restore broken bones, returning them to strength and use – like he had with my grandmother.

Sadly, I can’t return the favor now. I can only offer his family comfort, and answer questions, the way he once did with mine.

I started donepezil and gave them the most optimistic talk I have for these cases. But I know we’re still far away from fixing broken brains.

After he left, I found myself looking in the mirror, thinking of how I saw him then, wondering if his family saw me the same way now, and realizing that someday my children and I may be in the same situation.

Dr. Allan M. Block

 

Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Alternative birthing practices increase risk of infection

Article Type
Changed


Alternative birthing practices, such as water births, placentophagia, and lotus births, are making news and gaining popularity. All three have been associated with sporadic, serious neonatal infections.

The U.S. prevalence of water births – delivering a baby underwater – is currently unknown, but in the United Kingdom the practice is common. According to a 2015 National Health Service maternity survey, approximately 9% of women who underwent vaginal delivery opted for water birth (Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2016 Jul;101[4]:F357-65). Both the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives endorse this practice for healthy women with uncomplicated term pregnancies. According to a 2009 Cochrane Review, immersion during the first phase of labor reduces the use of epidural/spinal analgesia (Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000111.pub3). The maternal benefits of delivery under water, though, have not been clearly defined.

JBrownInTheLight/Thinkstock
Another recent systematic review and meta-analysis that included 29 studies of water birth did not identify definitive evidence of neonatal harm, but benefits also were uncertain (Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2016 Jul;101[4]:F357-65). Investigators acknowledged that most of the studies of neonatal outcomes were small, observational, and included only low-risk mothers. Case reports document rare but potentially fatal complications in babies, including drowning, respiratory compromise from aspiration, cord rupture, and infection. One study showed increased rates of admission to a neonatal unit without difference in Apgar scores or infection rates (BMJ. 2004;328[7435]:314).

Legionella pneumophila is an uncommon pathogen in children, but cases of neonatal Legionnaires’ disease have been reported after water birth. Two affected babies born in Arizona in 2016 were successfully treated and survived (MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6622a4). A baby born in Texas in 2014 died of sepsis and respiratory failure (Emerg Infect Dis. 2015. doi: 10.3201/eid2101.140846). Canadian investigators have reported fatal disseminated herpes simplex virus infection in an infant after water birth; the mother had herpetic whitlow and a recent blister concerning for HSV on her thigh (J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc. 2017 May 16. doi: 10.1093/jpids/pix035).

Admittedly, each of these cases might have been prevented by adherence to recommended infection control practices, and the absolute risk of infection after water birth is unknown and likely to be small. Still, neither the American Academy of Pediatrics nor the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists currently recommend the practice. ACOG suggests that “births occur on land, not in water” and has called for well-designed, prospective studies of the maternal and perinatal benefits and risks associated with immersion during labor and delivery (Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128:1198-9).

Placentophagia – consuming the placenta after birth – has been promoted by celebrity moms, including Katherine Heigl and Kourtney Kardashian. Placenta can be cooked, blended raw into a smoothie, or dehydrated and encapsulated.

Proponents of placentophagia claim health benefits of this practice, including improved mood and energy, and increased breast milk production. There are few published data to support these claims. A recent case report suggests the practice has the potential to harm the baby. In June 2017, Oregon public health authorities described a neonate with recurrent episodes of group B streptococcal (GBS) bacteremia. An identical strain of GBS was cultured from capsules containing the mother’s dehydrated placenta – she had consumed six of the capsules daily beginning a few days after the baby’s birth. According to the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report communication, “no standards exist for processing placenta for consumption” and the “placenta encapsulation process does not eradicate infectious pathogens per se. … Placenta capsule ingestion should be avoided”(MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66:677-8. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6625a4).

Finally, the ritual practice of umbilical cord nonseverance or lotus birth deserves a mention. In a lotus birth, the umbilical cord is left uncut, allowing the placenta to remain attached to the baby until the cord dries and naturally separates, generally 3-10 days after delivery. Describing a spiritual connection between the baby and the placenta, proponents claim lotus birth promotes bonding and allows for a gentler transition between intra- and extrauterine life.

A review of PubMed turned up no formal studies of this practice, but case reports describe complications such as neonatal idiopathic hepatitis and neonatal sepsis. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has issued a warning about lotus births, advising that babies be monitored closely for infection. RCOG spokesperson Dr. Patrick O’Brien said in a 2008 statement, “If left for a period of time after the birth, there is a risk of infection in the placenta which can consequently spread to the baby. The placenta is particularly prone to infection as it contains blood. Within a short time after birth, once the umbilical cord has stopped pulsating, the placenta has no circulation and is essentially dead tissue.”

Interestingly, a quick scan of Etsy, the popular e-commerce website, turned up a number of lotus birth kits for sale. These generally contain a decorative cloth bag as well as an herb mix containing lavender and eucalyptus to promote drying and mask the smell of the decomposing placenta.

Dr. Kristina A. Bryant
A friend of mine who recently delivered a baby did not choose any of these alternative birthing practices, but she told me that she understood why some women might. “Peer pressure,” she said. “There’s so much information on social media and on ‘mommy blogs.’ Some of the women posting have really strong opinions. … They can make you feel like a bad mom for not choosing what they call the most ‘natural’ option.”

In contrast, many pediatricians, me included, are not well informed about these practices and don’t routinely ask expectant moms about their plans. I propose that we can advocate for our patients-to-be by learning about these practices so that we can engage in an honest, respectful discussion about potential risks and benefits. For me, for now, the risks outweigh the benefits.
 

 

Dr. Bryant is a pediatrician specializing in infectious diseases at the University of Louisville (Ky.) and Norton Children’s Hospital, also in Louisville. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures. Email her at [email protected].

Publications
Topics
Sections


Alternative birthing practices, such as water births, placentophagia, and lotus births, are making news and gaining popularity. All three have been associated with sporadic, serious neonatal infections.

The U.S. prevalence of water births – delivering a baby underwater – is currently unknown, but in the United Kingdom the practice is common. According to a 2015 National Health Service maternity survey, approximately 9% of women who underwent vaginal delivery opted for water birth (Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2016 Jul;101[4]:F357-65). Both the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives endorse this practice for healthy women with uncomplicated term pregnancies. According to a 2009 Cochrane Review, immersion during the first phase of labor reduces the use of epidural/spinal analgesia (Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000111.pub3). The maternal benefits of delivery under water, though, have not been clearly defined.

JBrownInTheLight/Thinkstock
Another recent systematic review and meta-analysis that included 29 studies of water birth did not identify definitive evidence of neonatal harm, but benefits also were uncertain (Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2016 Jul;101[4]:F357-65). Investigators acknowledged that most of the studies of neonatal outcomes were small, observational, and included only low-risk mothers. Case reports document rare but potentially fatal complications in babies, including drowning, respiratory compromise from aspiration, cord rupture, and infection. One study showed increased rates of admission to a neonatal unit without difference in Apgar scores or infection rates (BMJ. 2004;328[7435]:314).

Legionella pneumophila is an uncommon pathogen in children, but cases of neonatal Legionnaires’ disease have been reported after water birth. Two affected babies born in Arizona in 2016 were successfully treated and survived (MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6622a4). A baby born in Texas in 2014 died of sepsis and respiratory failure (Emerg Infect Dis. 2015. doi: 10.3201/eid2101.140846). Canadian investigators have reported fatal disseminated herpes simplex virus infection in an infant after water birth; the mother had herpetic whitlow and a recent blister concerning for HSV on her thigh (J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc. 2017 May 16. doi: 10.1093/jpids/pix035).

Admittedly, each of these cases might have been prevented by adherence to recommended infection control practices, and the absolute risk of infection after water birth is unknown and likely to be small. Still, neither the American Academy of Pediatrics nor the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists currently recommend the practice. ACOG suggests that “births occur on land, not in water” and has called for well-designed, prospective studies of the maternal and perinatal benefits and risks associated with immersion during labor and delivery (Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128:1198-9).

Placentophagia – consuming the placenta after birth – has been promoted by celebrity moms, including Katherine Heigl and Kourtney Kardashian. Placenta can be cooked, blended raw into a smoothie, or dehydrated and encapsulated.

Proponents of placentophagia claim health benefits of this practice, including improved mood and energy, and increased breast milk production. There are few published data to support these claims. A recent case report suggests the practice has the potential to harm the baby. In June 2017, Oregon public health authorities described a neonate with recurrent episodes of group B streptococcal (GBS) bacteremia. An identical strain of GBS was cultured from capsules containing the mother’s dehydrated placenta – she had consumed six of the capsules daily beginning a few days after the baby’s birth. According to the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report communication, “no standards exist for processing placenta for consumption” and the “placenta encapsulation process does not eradicate infectious pathogens per se. … Placenta capsule ingestion should be avoided”(MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66:677-8. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6625a4).

Finally, the ritual practice of umbilical cord nonseverance or lotus birth deserves a mention. In a lotus birth, the umbilical cord is left uncut, allowing the placenta to remain attached to the baby until the cord dries and naturally separates, generally 3-10 days after delivery. Describing a spiritual connection between the baby and the placenta, proponents claim lotus birth promotes bonding and allows for a gentler transition between intra- and extrauterine life.

A review of PubMed turned up no formal studies of this practice, but case reports describe complications such as neonatal idiopathic hepatitis and neonatal sepsis. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has issued a warning about lotus births, advising that babies be monitored closely for infection. RCOG spokesperson Dr. Patrick O’Brien said in a 2008 statement, “If left for a period of time after the birth, there is a risk of infection in the placenta which can consequently spread to the baby. The placenta is particularly prone to infection as it contains blood. Within a short time after birth, once the umbilical cord has stopped pulsating, the placenta has no circulation and is essentially dead tissue.”

Interestingly, a quick scan of Etsy, the popular e-commerce website, turned up a number of lotus birth kits for sale. These generally contain a decorative cloth bag as well as an herb mix containing lavender and eucalyptus to promote drying and mask the smell of the decomposing placenta.

Dr. Kristina A. Bryant
A friend of mine who recently delivered a baby did not choose any of these alternative birthing practices, but she told me that she understood why some women might. “Peer pressure,” she said. “There’s so much information on social media and on ‘mommy blogs.’ Some of the women posting have really strong opinions. … They can make you feel like a bad mom for not choosing what they call the most ‘natural’ option.”

In contrast, many pediatricians, me included, are not well informed about these practices and don’t routinely ask expectant moms about their plans. I propose that we can advocate for our patients-to-be by learning about these practices so that we can engage in an honest, respectful discussion about potential risks and benefits. For me, for now, the risks outweigh the benefits.
 

 

Dr. Bryant is a pediatrician specializing in infectious diseases at the University of Louisville (Ky.) and Norton Children’s Hospital, also in Louisville. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures. Email her at [email protected].


Alternative birthing practices, such as water births, placentophagia, and lotus births, are making news and gaining popularity. All three have been associated with sporadic, serious neonatal infections.

The U.S. prevalence of water births – delivering a baby underwater – is currently unknown, but in the United Kingdom the practice is common. According to a 2015 National Health Service maternity survey, approximately 9% of women who underwent vaginal delivery opted for water birth (Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2016 Jul;101[4]:F357-65). Both the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives endorse this practice for healthy women with uncomplicated term pregnancies. According to a 2009 Cochrane Review, immersion during the first phase of labor reduces the use of epidural/spinal analgesia (Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000111.pub3). The maternal benefits of delivery under water, though, have not been clearly defined.

JBrownInTheLight/Thinkstock
Another recent systematic review and meta-analysis that included 29 studies of water birth did not identify definitive evidence of neonatal harm, but benefits also were uncertain (Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2016 Jul;101[4]:F357-65). Investigators acknowledged that most of the studies of neonatal outcomes were small, observational, and included only low-risk mothers. Case reports document rare but potentially fatal complications in babies, including drowning, respiratory compromise from aspiration, cord rupture, and infection. One study showed increased rates of admission to a neonatal unit without difference in Apgar scores or infection rates (BMJ. 2004;328[7435]:314).

Legionella pneumophila is an uncommon pathogen in children, but cases of neonatal Legionnaires’ disease have been reported after water birth. Two affected babies born in Arizona in 2016 were successfully treated and survived (MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6622a4). A baby born in Texas in 2014 died of sepsis and respiratory failure (Emerg Infect Dis. 2015. doi: 10.3201/eid2101.140846). Canadian investigators have reported fatal disseminated herpes simplex virus infection in an infant after water birth; the mother had herpetic whitlow and a recent blister concerning for HSV on her thigh (J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc. 2017 May 16. doi: 10.1093/jpids/pix035).

Admittedly, each of these cases might have been prevented by adherence to recommended infection control practices, and the absolute risk of infection after water birth is unknown and likely to be small. Still, neither the American Academy of Pediatrics nor the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists currently recommend the practice. ACOG suggests that “births occur on land, not in water” and has called for well-designed, prospective studies of the maternal and perinatal benefits and risks associated with immersion during labor and delivery (Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128:1198-9).

Placentophagia – consuming the placenta after birth – has been promoted by celebrity moms, including Katherine Heigl and Kourtney Kardashian. Placenta can be cooked, blended raw into a smoothie, or dehydrated and encapsulated.

Proponents of placentophagia claim health benefits of this practice, including improved mood and energy, and increased breast milk production. There are few published data to support these claims. A recent case report suggests the practice has the potential to harm the baby. In June 2017, Oregon public health authorities described a neonate with recurrent episodes of group B streptococcal (GBS) bacteremia. An identical strain of GBS was cultured from capsules containing the mother’s dehydrated placenta – she had consumed six of the capsules daily beginning a few days after the baby’s birth. According to the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report communication, “no standards exist for processing placenta for consumption” and the “placenta encapsulation process does not eradicate infectious pathogens per se. … Placenta capsule ingestion should be avoided”(MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66:677-8. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6625a4).

Finally, the ritual practice of umbilical cord nonseverance or lotus birth deserves a mention. In a lotus birth, the umbilical cord is left uncut, allowing the placenta to remain attached to the baby until the cord dries and naturally separates, generally 3-10 days after delivery. Describing a spiritual connection between the baby and the placenta, proponents claim lotus birth promotes bonding and allows for a gentler transition between intra- and extrauterine life.

A review of PubMed turned up no formal studies of this practice, but case reports describe complications such as neonatal idiopathic hepatitis and neonatal sepsis. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has issued a warning about lotus births, advising that babies be monitored closely for infection. RCOG spokesperson Dr. Patrick O’Brien said in a 2008 statement, “If left for a period of time after the birth, there is a risk of infection in the placenta which can consequently spread to the baby. The placenta is particularly prone to infection as it contains blood. Within a short time after birth, once the umbilical cord has stopped pulsating, the placenta has no circulation and is essentially dead tissue.”

Interestingly, a quick scan of Etsy, the popular e-commerce website, turned up a number of lotus birth kits for sale. These generally contain a decorative cloth bag as well as an herb mix containing lavender and eucalyptus to promote drying and mask the smell of the decomposing placenta.

Dr. Kristina A. Bryant
A friend of mine who recently delivered a baby did not choose any of these alternative birthing practices, but she told me that she understood why some women might. “Peer pressure,” she said. “There’s so much information on social media and on ‘mommy blogs.’ Some of the women posting have really strong opinions. … They can make you feel like a bad mom for not choosing what they call the most ‘natural’ option.”

In contrast, many pediatricians, me included, are not well informed about these practices and don’t routinely ask expectant moms about their plans. I propose that we can advocate for our patients-to-be by learning about these practices so that we can engage in an honest, respectful discussion about potential risks and benefits. For me, for now, the risks outweigh the benefits.
 

 

Dr. Bryant is a pediatrician specializing in infectious diseases at the University of Louisville (Ky.) and Norton Children’s Hospital, also in Louisville. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures. Email her at [email protected].

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default