User login
The far-reaching implications of weight gain in pregnancy
It is not surprising that a pregnant woman’s actions heavily influence her developing baby. Ob.gyns. advise patients to stop smoking or to stop using illicit drugs, and limit their alcohol consumption during pregnancy because we know that these substances can cause serious, even fatal, consequences for the fetus. Although we routinely provide nutrition information and guidelines on healthy weight gain in pregnancy, we may not stress the importance of healthy eating to the same degree as we may emphasize the need to eliminate tobacco use. But should we?
In 2011, a study by researchers at Yale University, the University of Texas, and Arizona State University suggested that food can have effects on the brain similar to those of addictive substances (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011 Aug;68[8]:808-16). Using MRI, the investigators examined which areas of the brain became active in response to the consumption of a chocolate milkshake, and compared these results to brain scans of people addicted to opioids. The study enrolled 48 women who were lean to obese, based on body mass index. The researchers found that people who were obese had brain activity patterns in response to food that were similar to patterns that people with drug addiction had in response to opioids. Although the sample size was small, the investigators showed, in essence, that food is a “drug.”
Ob.gyns. working with patients who are overweight or obese typically encourage weight loss prior to pregnancy, or suggest limited weight gain during gestation, because obesity increases complications for both the pregnant mother and her unborn baby. If, as the 2011 study suggests, we were to think of food addiction as we do any other drug addiction – tobacco, opioids, alcohol – that should be curbed out of concern for the developing baby, ob.gyns. might tell our patients to reduce or completely eliminate their “trans-fat food habit” before and during pregnancy.
Importantly, a mother’s nutrition, or lack thereof, may exert harmful effects on her child’s long-term health. This idea was intimated decades ago when Dr. David Barker proposed that a person’s future risk for disease began during pregnancy. Exactly how this type of early programming may occur remains to be determined. Therefore, this month we examine the fetal origins of obesity, and have invited Dr. Michael G. Ross, professor of obstetrics and gynecology, and Mina Desai, Ph.D., assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology, at the University of California, Los Angeles, to discuss this important topic.
Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at [email protected].
It is not surprising that a pregnant woman’s actions heavily influence her developing baby. Ob.gyns. advise patients to stop smoking or to stop using illicit drugs, and limit their alcohol consumption during pregnancy because we know that these substances can cause serious, even fatal, consequences for the fetus. Although we routinely provide nutrition information and guidelines on healthy weight gain in pregnancy, we may not stress the importance of healthy eating to the same degree as we may emphasize the need to eliminate tobacco use. But should we?
In 2011, a study by researchers at Yale University, the University of Texas, and Arizona State University suggested that food can have effects on the brain similar to those of addictive substances (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011 Aug;68[8]:808-16). Using MRI, the investigators examined which areas of the brain became active in response to the consumption of a chocolate milkshake, and compared these results to brain scans of people addicted to opioids. The study enrolled 48 women who were lean to obese, based on body mass index. The researchers found that people who were obese had brain activity patterns in response to food that were similar to patterns that people with drug addiction had in response to opioids. Although the sample size was small, the investigators showed, in essence, that food is a “drug.”
Ob.gyns. working with patients who are overweight or obese typically encourage weight loss prior to pregnancy, or suggest limited weight gain during gestation, because obesity increases complications for both the pregnant mother and her unborn baby. If, as the 2011 study suggests, we were to think of food addiction as we do any other drug addiction – tobacco, opioids, alcohol – that should be curbed out of concern for the developing baby, ob.gyns. might tell our patients to reduce or completely eliminate their “trans-fat food habit” before and during pregnancy.
Importantly, a mother’s nutrition, or lack thereof, may exert harmful effects on her child’s long-term health. This idea was intimated decades ago when Dr. David Barker proposed that a person’s future risk for disease began during pregnancy. Exactly how this type of early programming may occur remains to be determined. Therefore, this month we examine the fetal origins of obesity, and have invited Dr. Michael G. Ross, professor of obstetrics and gynecology, and Mina Desai, Ph.D., assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology, at the University of California, Los Angeles, to discuss this important topic.
Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at [email protected].
It is not surprising that a pregnant woman’s actions heavily influence her developing baby. Ob.gyns. advise patients to stop smoking or to stop using illicit drugs, and limit their alcohol consumption during pregnancy because we know that these substances can cause serious, even fatal, consequences for the fetus. Although we routinely provide nutrition information and guidelines on healthy weight gain in pregnancy, we may not stress the importance of healthy eating to the same degree as we may emphasize the need to eliminate tobacco use. But should we?
In 2011, a study by researchers at Yale University, the University of Texas, and Arizona State University suggested that food can have effects on the brain similar to those of addictive substances (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011 Aug;68[8]:808-16). Using MRI, the investigators examined which areas of the brain became active in response to the consumption of a chocolate milkshake, and compared these results to brain scans of people addicted to opioids. The study enrolled 48 women who were lean to obese, based on body mass index. The researchers found that people who were obese had brain activity patterns in response to food that were similar to patterns that people with drug addiction had in response to opioids. Although the sample size was small, the investigators showed, in essence, that food is a “drug.”
Ob.gyns. working with patients who are overweight or obese typically encourage weight loss prior to pregnancy, or suggest limited weight gain during gestation, because obesity increases complications for both the pregnant mother and her unborn baby. If, as the 2011 study suggests, we were to think of food addiction as we do any other drug addiction – tobacco, opioids, alcohol – that should be curbed out of concern for the developing baby, ob.gyns. might tell our patients to reduce or completely eliminate their “trans-fat food habit” before and during pregnancy.
Importantly, a mother’s nutrition, or lack thereof, may exert harmful effects on her child’s long-term health. This idea was intimated decades ago when Dr. David Barker proposed that a person’s future risk for disease began during pregnancy. Exactly how this type of early programming may occur remains to be determined. Therefore, this month we examine the fetal origins of obesity, and have invited Dr. Michael G. Ross, professor of obstetrics and gynecology, and Mina Desai, Ph.D., assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology, at the University of California, Los Angeles, to discuss this important topic.
Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at [email protected].
Understanding ovarian germ cell neoplasms
Germ cell neoplasms arise from primordial germ cells of the gonad that differentiate to embryonic and extraembryonic tissues. Approximately 20%-25% of ovarian neoplasms are germ cell in origin but they account for only 3%-5% of ovarian malignancies. Importantly, germ cell neoplasms encompass 70% of the ovarian neoplasms among girls and young women aged 10-30 years, of which approximately one-third are malignant.
Unlike epithelial ovarian cancers, malignant germ cell neoplasms are typically diagnosed at early stages. They can present as a palpable mass or cause acute abdominal pain secondary to their rapid growth, penchant for necrosis, torsion, hemorrhage, infection, or rupture. Since malignant germ cell neoplasms can excrete hormonally-active tumor markers, such as human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG), many women present with menstrual irregularities.

Management of malignant germ cell neoplasms generally includes fertility-sparing surgery – with or without neoadjuvant combination bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) – and is typically associated with a favorable prognosis (Cancer Treat Rev. 2008 Aug;34[5]:427-41).
Teratomas
Benign teratomas represent about a quarter of all ovarian neoplasms. Benign teratomas can be solid or cystic, and contain components representing all three cell layers: endoderm, mesoderm, and ectoderm. Due to the presence of differentiated adult tissues, benign teratomas have a characteristic radiographic appearance. They can appear as cystic echogenic masses with intense acoustic shadowing, homogenous nodules or bands, and rounded protuberances called “Rokitansky nodules.”
Treatment of benign teratomas in reproductive-age women includes ovarian cystectomy and careful inspection of the contralateral ovary as 10%-15% may be bilateral. In postmenopausal women, there is less than a 2% risk for malignant transformation of the associated cell lines, most commonly a squamous cell carcinoma. In these cases, spread beyond the ovarian capsule is associated with a poor prognosis and chemotherapy and/or radiation are indicated (Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006 Jan-Feb;16[1]:140-4). Malignant monodermal teratomas are composed of single cell lines with malignant transformations of that tissue type; struma ovarii composed of thyroid tissue, for example, is exceedingly rare.
Dysgerminoma
Dysgerminomas are the most common malignant germ cell neoplasms, accounting for about one-third of cases. They typically present in girls and young women between 10 and 30 years of age, and rarely occur after 50 years of age. As a result, a quarter of cases are identified during pregnancy and another 5% are found in patients presenting with amenorrhea secondary to gonadal dysgenesis, such as is associated with Turner’s syndrome.
At diagnosis, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) may be elevated and 10% may have an elevation of HCG. Ultrasound findings include a solid, mostly echoic, but heterogeneous mass with apparent lobulations. About two-thirds are stage I at the time of diagnosis, and 10%-15% are bilateral, making dysgerminomas the only malignant germ cell neoplasm with significant risk for bilaterality.
Treatment for early stage dysgerminoma is surgical; young women should have at least unilateral oophorectomy performed; if the contralateral ovary is spared there’s a 10% risk for recurrence over the next 2 years. Comprehensive fertility-sparing surgery is recommended with pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Women with gonadal dysgenesis should have a bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and those beyond childbearing should undergo a total hysterectomy, with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and appropriate staging. BEP should be added for patients with advanced disease.
Other malignant germ cell neoplasms
Uncommon malignant germ cell neoplasms include immature teratomas and endodermal sinus tumors. Though uncommon, the majority of immature teratomas present between the ages of 10 and 20 years and account for nearly 30% of the ovarian cancer deaths in this age group. Immature teratomas usually have negative serum markers, though about one-third will excrete HCG. Immature teratomas are graded by the proportion of neuro-epithelium. Treatment includes unilateral oophorectomy, and surgical staging with adjuvant chemotherapy (BEP) for patients with greater than stage 1A grade 1 disease.
Endodermal sinus tumors are derived from the primitive yolk sac, are unilateral, and most will secrete alpha-fetoprotein (AFP). The median age of diagnosis of an endodermal sinus tumor is 18 years, thus treatment includes unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and comprehensive fertility-sparing surgical staging followed by BEP.
Embryonal and nongestational choriocarcinomas are rare malignant germ cell neoplasms found in prepubertal girls to young women. Embryonal carcinomas can secrete estrogens, HCG and/or AFP, so patients may present with precocious puberty. Treatment is similar to that of endodermal sinus tumors. Nongestational choriocarcinomas, like the gestational forms, have a poor prognosis and are monitored and treated similarly.
Understanding presentation and treatments for malignant germ cell neoplasms is important in the evaluation of a young patient with a pelvic mass and should prompt the practicing gynecologist to test for AFP and HCG, with or without LDH and CA-125. If encountered inadvertently, every attempt should be made to preserve fertility in these young patients and expedient referral to a gynecologic oncologist, pediatric gynecologist, and/or a reproductive endocrinologist is warranted. Rarely, a second look laparotomy is indicated without obvious intraperitoneal spread and reproductive potential is preserved even in those requiring BEP. If managed appropriately, the overall prognosis remains good for these young women.
Dr. Gehrig is professor and director of gynecologic oncology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Dr. Castellano is a resident physician in the obstetrics and gynecology program at the university. They reported having no relevant financial disclosures. To comment, email them at [email protected].
Germ cell neoplasms arise from primordial germ cells of the gonad that differentiate to embryonic and extraembryonic tissues. Approximately 20%-25% of ovarian neoplasms are germ cell in origin but they account for only 3%-5% of ovarian malignancies. Importantly, germ cell neoplasms encompass 70% of the ovarian neoplasms among girls and young women aged 10-30 years, of which approximately one-third are malignant.
Unlike epithelial ovarian cancers, malignant germ cell neoplasms are typically diagnosed at early stages. They can present as a palpable mass or cause acute abdominal pain secondary to their rapid growth, penchant for necrosis, torsion, hemorrhage, infection, or rupture. Since malignant germ cell neoplasms can excrete hormonally-active tumor markers, such as human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG), many women present with menstrual irregularities.

Management of malignant germ cell neoplasms generally includes fertility-sparing surgery – with or without neoadjuvant combination bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) – and is typically associated with a favorable prognosis (Cancer Treat Rev. 2008 Aug;34[5]:427-41).
Teratomas
Benign teratomas represent about a quarter of all ovarian neoplasms. Benign teratomas can be solid or cystic, and contain components representing all three cell layers: endoderm, mesoderm, and ectoderm. Due to the presence of differentiated adult tissues, benign teratomas have a characteristic radiographic appearance. They can appear as cystic echogenic masses with intense acoustic shadowing, homogenous nodules or bands, and rounded protuberances called “Rokitansky nodules.”
Treatment of benign teratomas in reproductive-age women includes ovarian cystectomy and careful inspection of the contralateral ovary as 10%-15% may be bilateral. In postmenopausal women, there is less than a 2% risk for malignant transformation of the associated cell lines, most commonly a squamous cell carcinoma. In these cases, spread beyond the ovarian capsule is associated with a poor prognosis and chemotherapy and/or radiation are indicated (Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006 Jan-Feb;16[1]:140-4). Malignant monodermal teratomas are composed of single cell lines with malignant transformations of that tissue type; struma ovarii composed of thyroid tissue, for example, is exceedingly rare.
Dysgerminoma
Dysgerminomas are the most common malignant germ cell neoplasms, accounting for about one-third of cases. They typically present in girls and young women between 10 and 30 years of age, and rarely occur after 50 years of age. As a result, a quarter of cases are identified during pregnancy and another 5% are found in patients presenting with amenorrhea secondary to gonadal dysgenesis, such as is associated with Turner’s syndrome.
At diagnosis, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) may be elevated and 10% may have an elevation of HCG. Ultrasound findings include a solid, mostly echoic, but heterogeneous mass with apparent lobulations. About two-thirds are stage I at the time of diagnosis, and 10%-15% are bilateral, making dysgerminomas the only malignant germ cell neoplasm with significant risk for bilaterality.
Treatment for early stage dysgerminoma is surgical; young women should have at least unilateral oophorectomy performed; if the contralateral ovary is spared there’s a 10% risk for recurrence over the next 2 years. Comprehensive fertility-sparing surgery is recommended with pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Women with gonadal dysgenesis should have a bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and those beyond childbearing should undergo a total hysterectomy, with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and appropriate staging. BEP should be added for patients with advanced disease.
Other malignant germ cell neoplasms
Uncommon malignant germ cell neoplasms include immature teratomas and endodermal sinus tumors. Though uncommon, the majority of immature teratomas present between the ages of 10 and 20 years and account for nearly 30% of the ovarian cancer deaths in this age group. Immature teratomas usually have negative serum markers, though about one-third will excrete HCG. Immature teratomas are graded by the proportion of neuro-epithelium. Treatment includes unilateral oophorectomy, and surgical staging with adjuvant chemotherapy (BEP) for patients with greater than stage 1A grade 1 disease.
Endodermal sinus tumors are derived from the primitive yolk sac, are unilateral, and most will secrete alpha-fetoprotein (AFP). The median age of diagnosis of an endodermal sinus tumor is 18 years, thus treatment includes unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and comprehensive fertility-sparing surgical staging followed by BEP.
Embryonal and nongestational choriocarcinomas are rare malignant germ cell neoplasms found in prepubertal girls to young women. Embryonal carcinomas can secrete estrogens, HCG and/or AFP, so patients may present with precocious puberty. Treatment is similar to that of endodermal sinus tumors. Nongestational choriocarcinomas, like the gestational forms, have a poor prognosis and are monitored and treated similarly.
Understanding presentation and treatments for malignant germ cell neoplasms is important in the evaluation of a young patient with a pelvic mass and should prompt the practicing gynecologist to test for AFP and HCG, with or without LDH and CA-125. If encountered inadvertently, every attempt should be made to preserve fertility in these young patients and expedient referral to a gynecologic oncologist, pediatric gynecologist, and/or a reproductive endocrinologist is warranted. Rarely, a second look laparotomy is indicated without obvious intraperitoneal spread and reproductive potential is preserved even in those requiring BEP. If managed appropriately, the overall prognosis remains good for these young women.
Dr. Gehrig is professor and director of gynecologic oncology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Dr. Castellano is a resident physician in the obstetrics and gynecology program at the university. They reported having no relevant financial disclosures. To comment, email them at [email protected].
Germ cell neoplasms arise from primordial germ cells of the gonad that differentiate to embryonic and extraembryonic tissues. Approximately 20%-25% of ovarian neoplasms are germ cell in origin but they account for only 3%-5% of ovarian malignancies. Importantly, germ cell neoplasms encompass 70% of the ovarian neoplasms among girls and young women aged 10-30 years, of which approximately one-third are malignant.
Unlike epithelial ovarian cancers, malignant germ cell neoplasms are typically diagnosed at early stages. They can present as a palpable mass or cause acute abdominal pain secondary to their rapid growth, penchant for necrosis, torsion, hemorrhage, infection, or rupture. Since malignant germ cell neoplasms can excrete hormonally-active tumor markers, such as human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG), many women present with menstrual irregularities.

Management of malignant germ cell neoplasms generally includes fertility-sparing surgery – with or without neoadjuvant combination bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) – and is typically associated with a favorable prognosis (Cancer Treat Rev. 2008 Aug;34[5]:427-41).
Teratomas
Benign teratomas represent about a quarter of all ovarian neoplasms. Benign teratomas can be solid or cystic, and contain components representing all three cell layers: endoderm, mesoderm, and ectoderm. Due to the presence of differentiated adult tissues, benign teratomas have a characteristic radiographic appearance. They can appear as cystic echogenic masses with intense acoustic shadowing, homogenous nodules or bands, and rounded protuberances called “Rokitansky nodules.”
Treatment of benign teratomas in reproductive-age women includes ovarian cystectomy and careful inspection of the contralateral ovary as 10%-15% may be bilateral. In postmenopausal women, there is less than a 2% risk for malignant transformation of the associated cell lines, most commonly a squamous cell carcinoma. In these cases, spread beyond the ovarian capsule is associated with a poor prognosis and chemotherapy and/or radiation are indicated (Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006 Jan-Feb;16[1]:140-4). Malignant monodermal teratomas are composed of single cell lines with malignant transformations of that tissue type; struma ovarii composed of thyroid tissue, for example, is exceedingly rare.
Dysgerminoma
Dysgerminomas are the most common malignant germ cell neoplasms, accounting for about one-third of cases. They typically present in girls and young women between 10 and 30 years of age, and rarely occur after 50 years of age. As a result, a quarter of cases are identified during pregnancy and another 5% are found in patients presenting with amenorrhea secondary to gonadal dysgenesis, such as is associated with Turner’s syndrome.
At diagnosis, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) may be elevated and 10% may have an elevation of HCG. Ultrasound findings include a solid, mostly echoic, but heterogeneous mass with apparent lobulations. About two-thirds are stage I at the time of diagnosis, and 10%-15% are bilateral, making dysgerminomas the only malignant germ cell neoplasm with significant risk for bilaterality.
Treatment for early stage dysgerminoma is surgical; young women should have at least unilateral oophorectomy performed; if the contralateral ovary is spared there’s a 10% risk for recurrence over the next 2 years. Comprehensive fertility-sparing surgery is recommended with pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Women with gonadal dysgenesis should have a bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and those beyond childbearing should undergo a total hysterectomy, with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and appropriate staging. BEP should be added for patients with advanced disease.
Other malignant germ cell neoplasms
Uncommon malignant germ cell neoplasms include immature teratomas and endodermal sinus tumors. Though uncommon, the majority of immature teratomas present between the ages of 10 and 20 years and account for nearly 30% of the ovarian cancer deaths in this age group. Immature teratomas usually have negative serum markers, though about one-third will excrete HCG. Immature teratomas are graded by the proportion of neuro-epithelium. Treatment includes unilateral oophorectomy, and surgical staging with adjuvant chemotherapy (BEP) for patients with greater than stage 1A grade 1 disease.
Endodermal sinus tumors are derived from the primitive yolk sac, are unilateral, and most will secrete alpha-fetoprotein (AFP). The median age of diagnosis of an endodermal sinus tumor is 18 years, thus treatment includes unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and comprehensive fertility-sparing surgical staging followed by BEP.
Embryonal and nongestational choriocarcinomas are rare malignant germ cell neoplasms found in prepubertal girls to young women. Embryonal carcinomas can secrete estrogens, HCG and/or AFP, so patients may present with precocious puberty. Treatment is similar to that of endodermal sinus tumors. Nongestational choriocarcinomas, like the gestational forms, have a poor prognosis and are monitored and treated similarly.
Understanding presentation and treatments for malignant germ cell neoplasms is important in the evaluation of a young patient with a pelvic mass and should prompt the practicing gynecologist to test for AFP and HCG, with or without LDH and CA-125. If encountered inadvertently, every attempt should be made to preserve fertility in these young patients and expedient referral to a gynecologic oncologist, pediatric gynecologist, and/or a reproductive endocrinologist is warranted. Rarely, a second look laparotomy is indicated without obvious intraperitoneal spread and reproductive potential is preserved even in those requiring BEP. If managed appropriately, the overall prognosis remains good for these young women.
Dr. Gehrig is professor and director of gynecologic oncology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Dr. Castellano is a resident physician in the obstetrics and gynecology program at the university. They reported having no relevant financial disclosures. To comment, email them at [email protected].
FIRST reflections: Impact of ACGME duty hours on CT practitioners
Several months ago, Dr. Bilimoria and his colleagues published the long awaited study in NEJM essentially contradicting adverse effects of strict duty hours on patient outcomes (N Engl J Med. 2016 374:713-2). The study, known as the FIRST trial, was published in the March issue of Thoracic Surgery News. Although the study enrolled general surgery residents, its conclusion impacts no specialty more than cardiothoracic surgery, where frequent handoffs complicate tedious perioperative care of sick patients stall learning opportunities for young trainees.
As Dr. Shari Meyerson eloquently noted in her perspective piece for Thoracic Surgery News (March 2016, page 4), surgery training needs to adapt to meet the modern day needs of trainees to rest and spend time with family and friends, with those of exposure to complex clinical scenarios in a short residency period. Arguably, CT surgery trainees are some of the most motivated and driven; to limit their experience on a national level may be shortsighted. On the other hand, appropriate incorporation of advanced practice providers (APPs) may help allay some patient care challenges, free valuable family time, and allow thoracic residents to function well in a more flexible ACGME duty-hour paradigm. To add thoracic relevance to the findings of Dr. Bilimoria and his colleagues, the debate is brought to Thoracic Surgery News by our colleagues from different training pathways below:
Dr. Antonoff: “Due to the timing of my medical school matriculation, I completed my surgical clerkships in the preregulated duty-hour era. I had expectations of what my life would be like as a surgeon when I applied for the general surgery match, and frankly, my expectations prepared me for a life that would revolve around my education, my technical training, and my commitment to patient care. During my years as a junior resident, my surgical training program gradually adapted in recognition of the new guidelines, but it took time. I spent 3 years in the research lab, and, after I came out as a senior resident, I discovered that the rules of the game had totally changed. While duty hours for me, as a senior trainee, were still fairly open, I found that my interns and junior residents had to play by completely new rules. In some ways, on rare occasions, I felt frustrated and resentful of the fact that my duties as a chief resident and thoracic fellow included many of the tasks that I’d done as an intern, because my interns would ‘expire’ after 16 hours. However, much more often, I felt bad for those who came after me.
They seemed desperate to operate, eager to see their patients’ problems through to resolution, and embarrassed to have to end their days earlier than the more senior members of the team. I feel fortunate that I had years of frequent in-house call after long days in the operating room and followed by post-call days of more operating. I finished my junior years without fear of any sick patient in the hospital, I finished my general surgery training without fear of any emergent operation, and I finished my fellowship with confidence that I could get a patient through just about anything if I had access to a cannula.
My early experiences as an attending have certainly kept me humble, and I’ve spent many a night worried about my patients, rethinking choices that I’ve made and stitches that I’ve thrown. But I thank my lucky stars that I was exposed to phenomenal training, and that I had the privilege and opportunity to work the hours needed to reach a reasonable level of safety! I can only imagine that if I’d have spent fewer nights in the hospital, that I’d feel even more anxiety and nausea at this early stage of my surgical career.
As elaborated in the editorial by Dr. Birkmeyer (N Engl J Med. 2016;374:783-4), it is not surprising that patient outcomes did not immediately depend on whether the programs had adhered strictly to the ACGME duty-hour rules. Limited numbers of patients experience critical events during shift change, and hospitals are evolving to function with greater reliance on midlevel practitioners and attending physicians. I would not expect the short-term results of duty-hour flexibility to demonstrate any impact on patient care. However, I do fear that there will be a mid-term impact on trainee accountability and autonomy, which will ultimately impact the competence of the attending surgeons of the future, and downstream potential long-term impact on day-to-day patient outcomes.
As a wife and mother of 3, I recognize that we, as a specialty, need to find ways to support our trainees and their families and to help them live happy lives conducive to functioning outside the hospital. I believe that we can do this with support, mentorship, and advocacy; I do not believe that it requires cutting back on the training that we are all, in the end, so incredibly grateful to receive.”
Dr. Mara Antonoff is an assistant professor of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery at UT MD Anderson Cancer Center. She performed her General Surgery training at the University of Minnesota, 2004-2012, and her Thoracic Surgery Training at Washington University, as a traditional 2-year resident, 2012-2014.
Dr. Stephens: “There is nothing that replaces being bedside. Whether it be a postoperative patient struggling with low cardiac output syndrome overnight, or a patient with a high pressor requirement the etiology of which you are trying to uncover, or a patient you have been following who suddenly arrests, the value of seeing a patient’s trajectory longitudinally is critical to developing clinical acumen. When as an attending I will get called in the middle of the night about a postoperative patient not “doing well,” I will be drawing on my years of being on call and being bedside with my patients.
Patient care is the ultimate goal, and it is clear that overworked residents are at higher risk for making mistakes that jeopardize patient care, which nobody wants. However, the restrictions that duty hours place don’t allow the flexibility necessary for a specialty such as ours, and in fact strict adherence to such regulations inhibits opportunities for our learning. Also concerning is the “shift-work” mentality that seems to be increasingly pervasive with the implementation of duty hours. As has been well documented, and as I have seen personally, the constant patient handoffs that are requisite to implementation of duty hours pose their own perils in terms of patient safety.
Ultimately, these are our patients and we are responsible. Once we are attendings, those responsibilities will not be turned off after we have reached some prespecified hour limit.
The question then remains how best to implement a system across a wide variety of programs that ensures both patient safety and adequate clinical experience in the context of a culture of patient responsibility for the residents. As the NEJM study (N Engl J Med. 2016 374:713-2) shows, flexibility in implementation of duty hours did not result in increased complications, but resulted in improved resident satisfaction in continuity of care and handoffs. In my opinion, this study then encourages specialties such as ours to be more flexible in work hours, to encourage residents when there is a learning opportunity that previously they would be prohibited from taking part in to take hold of that opportunity, and to use this flexibility in implementation of duty hours to combat the invading “shift-work” mentality that will only jeopardize patient care.”
Dr. Elizabeth H. Stephens, MD, PhD is a Cardiothoracic Surgery, resident, PGY4, at Columbia University, New York, as an Integrated I-6 Resident.
Dr. Brown: “I took the traditional 5-year of General Surgery + 2 years of Cardiothoracic Surgery training route to becoming a General Thoracic Surgeon. My General Surgery experience was invaluable to my development as a surgeon. However, after all of those years of General Surgery cases and minimal exposure to Cardiothoracic Surgery cases, coupled with minimal overlap between the two specialties with regard to patient care, I found the learning curve in fellowship to be very steep. I was fortunate to train in a program with phenomenal physician extender support [APPs] in addition to top-notch colleagues in other specialties and excellent nursing, which allowed me to spend the majority of those 2 years in the operating room and completely focused on patient care. During that final phase of training, I welcomed flexibility with regard to the work-hour restrictions to ensure that I was acquiring the experience I needed prior to starting my own practice.”
Lisa M. Brown, MD, MAS, Assistant Professor of Thoracic Surgery, UC Davis Health System, Calif.; Training Institution: Washington University
Dr. Lee: “I started my surgical training in 2005, 2 years after the implementation of the 80-hour workweek restriction. Fortunately for my personal life, my training program took the restriction very seriously and strictly enforced it. As a result, I had scheduled periods off from work, and rarely worked more than 80 hours per week over the course of general surgery. On those occasions that I did, the next weeks, or preceding weeks would be shorter, to compensate. As a product of a 4+3 Thoracic Surgery residency in this environment, the 80-hour workweek extended to my subspecialty training. Our cardiac surgery time strictly enforced the go-home post-call policy. As a result, I believe my duty hours during Thoracic Surgery are likely shorter overall than many other programs.
Everyone hears the rumors of other programs lying about their duty hours. Fortunately, mine was not one of these. Despite this, or because of this, I received top-notch training. At the same time and more importantly, I started a family. I married my wife a week before my internship started, and am still married to the same person. We had two precious daughters during my Thoracic Surgery years. I don’t believe this would have been possible without duty-hours restrictions.
To create an environment where such a task was possible, my program hired an army of mid-level practitioners to deal with the day-to-day tasks of providing cardiothoracic surgical care to the patients, both in the intensive care unit and on the ward.
I rarely had to write a history and physical during Thoracic Surgery training. I consented fewer patients than I have fingers on my hands. I pulled even fewer chest tubes. I can now no longer remember having pulled a central line. I learned these tasks when I was a junior resident. What I did instead as a senior resident was perform over 900 cardiothoracic procedures as the primary surgeon. Now, as an attending surgeon, I still don’t write full histories and physicals by myself. I certainly don’t pull chest tubes and central lines. I consent patients by having a conversation with them, which I did as a resident, but I don’t bring a piece of paper with me in to the clinic room. I have a physician assistant who helps me fill in the gaps.
In 8 months of practice, I have performed over 15 thoracic organ transplants, repaired over 15 aortic dissections, half of whom required root replacements, performed more double-valve surgeries than straightforward single-valve replacements, started a minimally invasive atrial fibrillation surgical program, and applied almost every shred of knowledge and experience gained in 3 years of Thoracic Surgery Residency to a busy clinical practice. Most importantly, I continue to come home and watch my two daughters grow up.
With that perspective, I don’t believe the question should be whether or not programs should have the flexibility to enforce or not enforce duty-hours restrictions. It should be, how could every program find a way to effectively train residents to be good physicians and still allow them a personal life?”
Dr. Anson Lee is an Assistant Professor of Cardiac Surgery, Stanford University, Calif.; Training: 4+3 CT Residency, at Washington University, St. Louis.
Ms. Bohlman: “As a physician assistant in cardiac surgery, I represent the reality that physicians with a critical patient population appreciate consistency in their patient management. However, working in a university hospital setting also requires that surgical residents receive appropriate training. With the recently implemented duty restriction hours on resident training programs, advanced practice providers (APPs) have been utilized as an excellent solution for scheduling conflicts without compromising patient care. An example to this point is evident in my own place of work.
Approximately 1 year ago, our surgical intensive care unit transitioned from resident care to a combination of residents and APPs. At that time, the APPs were tasked with the complete care of all cardiac surgery patients. This change reduced the quantity and acuity of patients for which the residents were responsible and therefore allowed for more flexible hours along with a more manageable patient load. These changes, among others, have contributed to improved patient outcomes in the cardiac surgery patient population within our institution. With the increase in APPs that have training in various specialties, there comes an increasing ability to not only fill the gaps in scheduling but to do so with an extension of the providing physician. Although the NEJM article demonstrated no difference in patient outcomes between resident programs with restricted duty hours versus more flexible duty-hour policies, I foresee the future of medicine focusing on trained APPs as a complement to the care that the residents provide.”
Allison Bohlman is a Physician Assistant at Rush University Medical Center in the Integrated cardiovascular thoracic intensive care unit.
Several months ago, Dr. Bilimoria and his colleagues published the long awaited study in NEJM essentially contradicting adverse effects of strict duty hours on patient outcomes (N Engl J Med. 2016 374:713-2). The study, known as the FIRST trial, was published in the March issue of Thoracic Surgery News. Although the study enrolled general surgery residents, its conclusion impacts no specialty more than cardiothoracic surgery, where frequent handoffs complicate tedious perioperative care of sick patients stall learning opportunities for young trainees.
As Dr. Shari Meyerson eloquently noted in her perspective piece for Thoracic Surgery News (March 2016, page 4), surgery training needs to adapt to meet the modern day needs of trainees to rest and spend time with family and friends, with those of exposure to complex clinical scenarios in a short residency period. Arguably, CT surgery trainees are some of the most motivated and driven; to limit their experience on a national level may be shortsighted. On the other hand, appropriate incorporation of advanced practice providers (APPs) may help allay some patient care challenges, free valuable family time, and allow thoracic residents to function well in a more flexible ACGME duty-hour paradigm. To add thoracic relevance to the findings of Dr. Bilimoria and his colleagues, the debate is brought to Thoracic Surgery News by our colleagues from different training pathways below:
Dr. Antonoff: “Due to the timing of my medical school matriculation, I completed my surgical clerkships in the preregulated duty-hour era. I had expectations of what my life would be like as a surgeon when I applied for the general surgery match, and frankly, my expectations prepared me for a life that would revolve around my education, my technical training, and my commitment to patient care. During my years as a junior resident, my surgical training program gradually adapted in recognition of the new guidelines, but it took time. I spent 3 years in the research lab, and, after I came out as a senior resident, I discovered that the rules of the game had totally changed. While duty hours for me, as a senior trainee, were still fairly open, I found that my interns and junior residents had to play by completely new rules. In some ways, on rare occasions, I felt frustrated and resentful of the fact that my duties as a chief resident and thoracic fellow included many of the tasks that I’d done as an intern, because my interns would ‘expire’ after 16 hours. However, much more often, I felt bad for those who came after me.
They seemed desperate to operate, eager to see their patients’ problems through to resolution, and embarrassed to have to end their days earlier than the more senior members of the team. I feel fortunate that I had years of frequent in-house call after long days in the operating room and followed by post-call days of more operating. I finished my junior years without fear of any sick patient in the hospital, I finished my general surgery training without fear of any emergent operation, and I finished my fellowship with confidence that I could get a patient through just about anything if I had access to a cannula.
My early experiences as an attending have certainly kept me humble, and I’ve spent many a night worried about my patients, rethinking choices that I’ve made and stitches that I’ve thrown. But I thank my lucky stars that I was exposed to phenomenal training, and that I had the privilege and opportunity to work the hours needed to reach a reasonable level of safety! I can only imagine that if I’d have spent fewer nights in the hospital, that I’d feel even more anxiety and nausea at this early stage of my surgical career.
As elaborated in the editorial by Dr. Birkmeyer (N Engl J Med. 2016;374:783-4), it is not surprising that patient outcomes did not immediately depend on whether the programs had adhered strictly to the ACGME duty-hour rules. Limited numbers of patients experience critical events during shift change, and hospitals are evolving to function with greater reliance on midlevel practitioners and attending physicians. I would not expect the short-term results of duty-hour flexibility to demonstrate any impact on patient care. However, I do fear that there will be a mid-term impact on trainee accountability and autonomy, which will ultimately impact the competence of the attending surgeons of the future, and downstream potential long-term impact on day-to-day patient outcomes.
As a wife and mother of 3, I recognize that we, as a specialty, need to find ways to support our trainees and their families and to help them live happy lives conducive to functioning outside the hospital. I believe that we can do this with support, mentorship, and advocacy; I do not believe that it requires cutting back on the training that we are all, in the end, so incredibly grateful to receive.”
Dr. Mara Antonoff is an assistant professor of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery at UT MD Anderson Cancer Center. She performed her General Surgery training at the University of Minnesota, 2004-2012, and her Thoracic Surgery Training at Washington University, as a traditional 2-year resident, 2012-2014.
Dr. Stephens: “There is nothing that replaces being bedside. Whether it be a postoperative patient struggling with low cardiac output syndrome overnight, or a patient with a high pressor requirement the etiology of which you are trying to uncover, or a patient you have been following who suddenly arrests, the value of seeing a patient’s trajectory longitudinally is critical to developing clinical acumen. When as an attending I will get called in the middle of the night about a postoperative patient not “doing well,” I will be drawing on my years of being on call and being bedside with my patients.
Patient care is the ultimate goal, and it is clear that overworked residents are at higher risk for making mistakes that jeopardize patient care, which nobody wants. However, the restrictions that duty hours place don’t allow the flexibility necessary for a specialty such as ours, and in fact strict adherence to such regulations inhibits opportunities for our learning. Also concerning is the “shift-work” mentality that seems to be increasingly pervasive with the implementation of duty hours. As has been well documented, and as I have seen personally, the constant patient handoffs that are requisite to implementation of duty hours pose their own perils in terms of patient safety.
Ultimately, these are our patients and we are responsible. Once we are attendings, those responsibilities will not be turned off after we have reached some prespecified hour limit.
The question then remains how best to implement a system across a wide variety of programs that ensures both patient safety and adequate clinical experience in the context of a culture of patient responsibility for the residents. As the NEJM study (N Engl J Med. 2016 374:713-2) shows, flexibility in implementation of duty hours did not result in increased complications, but resulted in improved resident satisfaction in continuity of care and handoffs. In my opinion, this study then encourages specialties such as ours to be more flexible in work hours, to encourage residents when there is a learning opportunity that previously they would be prohibited from taking part in to take hold of that opportunity, and to use this flexibility in implementation of duty hours to combat the invading “shift-work” mentality that will only jeopardize patient care.”
Dr. Elizabeth H. Stephens, MD, PhD is a Cardiothoracic Surgery, resident, PGY4, at Columbia University, New York, as an Integrated I-6 Resident.
Dr. Brown: “I took the traditional 5-year of General Surgery + 2 years of Cardiothoracic Surgery training route to becoming a General Thoracic Surgeon. My General Surgery experience was invaluable to my development as a surgeon. However, after all of those years of General Surgery cases and minimal exposure to Cardiothoracic Surgery cases, coupled with minimal overlap between the two specialties with regard to patient care, I found the learning curve in fellowship to be very steep. I was fortunate to train in a program with phenomenal physician extender support [APPs] in addition to top-notch colleagues in other specialties and excellent nursing, which allowed me to spend the majority of those 2 years in the operating room and completely focused on patient care. During that final phase of training, I welcomed flexibility with regard to the work-hour restrictions to ensure that I was acquiring the experience I needed prior to starting my own practice.”
Lisa M. Brown, MD, MAS, Assistant Professor of Thoracic Surgery, UC Davis Health System, Calif.; Training Institution: Washington University
Dr. Lee: “I started my surgical training in 2005, 2 years after the implementation of the 80-hour workweek restriction. Fortunately for my personal life, my training program took the restriction very seriously and strictly enforced it. As a result, I had scheduled periods off from work, and rarely worked more than 80 hours per week over the course of general surgery. On those occasions that I did, the next weeks, or preceding weeks would be shorter, to compensate. As a product of a 4+3 Thoracic Surgery residency in this environment, the 80-hour workweek extended to my subspecialty training. Our cardiac surgery time strictly enforced the go-home post-call policy. As a result, I believe my duty hours during Thoracic Surgery are likely shorter overall than many other programs.
Everyone hears the rumors of other programs lying about their duty hours. Fortunately, mine was not one of these. Despite this, or because of this, I received top-notch training. At the same time and more importantly, I started a family. I married my wife a week before my internship started, and am still married to the same person. We had two precious daughters during my Thoracic Surgery years. I don’t believe this would have been possible without duty-hours restrictions.
To create an environment where such a task was possible, my program hired an army of mid-level practitioners to deal with the day-to-day tasks of providing cardiothoracic surgical care to the patients, both in the intensive care unit and on the ward.
I rarely had to write a history and physical during Thoracic Surgery training. I consented fewer patients than I have fingers on my hands. I pulled even fewer chest tubes. I can now no longer remember having pulled a central line. I learned these tasks when I was a junior resident. What I did instead as a senior resident was perform over 900 cardiothoracic procedures as the primary surgeon. Now, as an attending surgeon, I still don’t write full histories and physicals by myself. I certainly don’t pull chest tubes and central lines. I consent patients by having a conversation with them, which I did as a resident, but I don’t bring a piece of paper with me in to the clinic room. I have a physician assistant who helps me fill in the gaps.
In 8 months of practice, I have performed over 15 thoracic organ transplants, repaired over 15 aortic dissections, half of whom required root replacements, performed more double-valve surgeries than straightforward single-valve replacements, started a minimally invasive atrial fibrillation surgical program, and applied almost every shred of knowledge and experience gained in 3 years of Thoracic Surgery Residency to a busy clinical practice. Most importantly, I continue to come home and watch my two daughters grow up.
With that perspective, I don’t believe the question should be whether or not programs should have the flexibility to enforce or not enforce duty-hours restrictions. It should be, how could every program find a way to effectively train residents to be good physicians and still allow them a personal life?”
Dr. Anson Lee is an Assistant Professor of Cardiac Surgery, Stanford University, Calif.; Training: 4+3 CT Residency, at Washington University, St. Louis.
Ms. Bohlman: “As a physician assistant in cardiac surgery, I represent the reality that physicians with a critical patient population appreciate consistency in their patient management. However, working in a university hospital setting also requires that surgical residents receive appropriate training. With the recently implemented duty restriction hours on resident training programs, advanced practice providers (APPs) have been utilized as an excellent solution for scheduling conflicts without compromising patient care. An example to this point is evident in my own place of work.
Approximately 1 year ago, our surgical intensive care unit transitioned from resident care to a combination of residents and APPs. At that time, the APPs were tasked with the complete care of all cardiac surgery patients. This change reduced the quantity and acuity of patients for which the residents were responsible and therefore allowed for more flexible hours along with a more manageable patient load. These changes, among others, have contributed to improved patient outcomes in the cardiac surgery patient population within our institution. With the increase in APPs that have training in various specialties, there comes an increasing ability to not only fill the gaps in scheduling but to do so with an extension of the providing physician. Although the NEJM article demonstrated no difference in patient outcomes between resident programs with restricted duty hours versus more flexible duty-hour policies, I foresee the future of medicine focusing on trained APPs as a complement to the care that the residents provide.”
Allison Bohlman is a Physician Assistant at Rush University Medical Center in the Integrated cardiovascular thoracic intensive care unit.
Several months ago, Dr. Bilimoria and his colleagues published the long awaited study in NEJM essentially contradicting adverse effects of strict duty hours on patient outcomes (N Engl J Med. 2016 374:713-2). The study, known as the FIRST trial, was published in the March issue of Thoracic Surgery News. Although the study enrolled general surgery residents, its conclusion impacts no specialty more than cardiothoracic surgery, where frequent handoffs complicate tedious perioperative care of sick patients stall learning opportunities for young trainees.
As Dr. Shari Meyerson eloquently noted in her perspective piece for Thoracic Surgery News (March 2016, page 4), surgery training needs to adapt to meet the modern day needs of trainees to rest and spend time with family and friends, with those of exposure to complex clinical scenarios in a short residency period. Arguably, CT surgery trainees are some of the most motivated and driven; to limit their experience on a national level may be shortsighted. On the other hand, appropriate incorporation of advanced practice providers (APPs) may help allay some patient care challenges, free valuable family time, and allow thoracic residents to function well in a more flexible ACGME duty-hour paradigm. To add thoracic relevance to the findings of Dr. Bilimoria and his colleagues, the debate is brought to Thoracic Surgery News by our colleagues from different training pathways below:
Dr. Antonoff: “Due to the timing of my medical school matriculation, I completed my surgical clerkships in the preregulated duty-hour era. I had expectations of what my life would be like as a surgeon when I applied for the general surgery match, and frankly, my expectations prepared me for a life that would revolve around my education, my technical training, and my commitment to patient care. During my years as a junior resident, my surgical training program gradually adapted in recognition of the new guidelines, but it took time. I spent 3 years in the research lab, and, after I came out as a senior resident, I discovered that the rules of the game had totally changed. While duty hours for me, as a senior trainee, were still fairly open, I found that my interns and junior residents had to play by completely new rules. In some ways, on rare occasions, I felt frustrated and resentful of the fact that my duties as a chief resident and thoracic fellow included many of the tasks that I’d done as an intern, because my interns would ‘expire’ after 16 hours. However, much more often, I felt bad for those who came after me.
They seemed desperate to operate, eager to see their patients’ problems through to resolution, and embarrassed to have to end their days earlier than the more senior members of the team. I feel fortunate that I had years of frequent in-house call after long days in the operating room and followed by post-call days of more operating. I finished my junior years without fear of any sick patient in the hospital, I finished my general surgery training without fear of any emergent operation, and I finished my fellowship with confidence that I could get a patient through just about anything if I had access to a cannula.
My early experiences as an attending have certainly kept me humble, and I’ve spent many a night worried about my patients, rethinking choices that I’ve made and stitches that I’ve thrown. But I thank my lucky stars that I was exposed to phenomenal training, and that I had the privilege and opportunity to work the hours needed to reach a reasonable level of safety! I can only imagine that if I’d have spent fewer nights in the hospital, that I’d feel even more anxiety and nausea at this early stage of my surgical career.
As elaborated in the editorial by Dr. Birkmeyer (N Engl J Med. 2016;374:783-4), it is not surprising that patient outcomes did not immediately depend on whether the programs had adhered strictly to the ACGME duty-hour rules. Limited numbers of patients experience critical events during shift change, and hospitals are evolving to function with greater reliance on midlevel practitioners and attending physicians. I would not expect the short-term results of duty-hour flexibility to demonstrate any impact on patient care. However, I do fear that there will be a mid-term impact on trainee accountability and autonomy, which will ultimately impact the competence of the attending surgeons of the future, and downstream potential long-term impact on day-to-day patient outcomes.
As a wife and mother of 3, I recognize that we, as a specialty, need to find ways to support our trainees and their families and to help them live happy lives conducive to functioning outside the hospital. I believe that we can do this with support, mentorship, and advocacy; I do not believe that it requires cutting back on the training that we are all, in the end, so incredibly grateful to receive.”
Dr. Mara Antonoff is an assistant professor of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery at UT MD Anderson Cancer Center. She performed her General Surgery training at the University of Minnesota, 2004-2012, and her Thoracic Surgery Training at Washington University, as a traditional 2-year resident, 2012-2014.
Dr. Stephens: “There is nothing that replaces being bedside. Whether it be a postoperative patient struggling with low cardiac output syndrome overnight, or a patient with a high pressor requirement the etiology of which you are trying to uncover, or a patient you have been following who suddenly arrests, the value of seeing a patient’s trajectory longitudinally is critical to developing clinical acumen. When as an attending I will get called in the middle of the night about a postoperative patient not “doing well,” I will be drawing on my years of being on call and being bedside with my patients.
Patient care is the ultimate goal, and it is clear that overworked residents are at higher risk for making mistakes that jeopardize patient care, which nobody wants. However, the restrictions that duty hours place don’t allow the flexibility necessary for a specialty such as ours, and in fact strict adherence to such regulations inhibits opportunities for our learning. Also concerning is the “shift-work” mentality that seems to be increasingly pervasive with the implementation of duty hours. As has been well documented, and as I have seen personally, the constant patient handoffs that are requisite to implementation of duty hours pose their own perils in terms of patient safety.
Ultimately, these are our patients and we are responsible. Once we are attendings, those responsibilities will not be turned off after we have reached some prespecified hour limit.
The question then remains how best to implement a system across a wide variety of programs that ensures both patient safety and adequate clinical experience in the context of a culture of patient responsibility for the residents. As the NEJM study (N Engl J Med. 2016 374:713-2) shows, flexibility in implementation of duty hours did not result in increased complications, but resulted in improved resident satisfaction in continuity of care and handoffs. In my opinion, this study then encourages specialties such as ours to be more flexible in work hours, to encourage residents when there is a learning opportunity that previously they would be prohibited from taking part in to take hold of that opportunity, and to use this flexibility in implementation of duty hours to combat the invading “shift-work” mentality that will only jeopardize patient care.”
Dr. Elizabeth H. Stephens, MD, PhD is a Cardiothoracic Surgery, resident, PGY4, at Columbia University, New York, as an Integrated I-6 Resident.
Dr. Brown: “I took the traditional 5-year of General Surgery + 2 years of Cardiothoracic Surgery training route to becoming a General Thoracic Surgeon. My General Surgery experience was invaluable to my development as a surgeon. However, after all of those years of General Surgery cases and minimal exposure to Cardiothoracic Surgery cases, coupled with minimal overlap between the two specialties with regard to patient care, I found the learning curve in fellowship to be very steep. I was fortunate to train in a program with phenomenal physician extender support [APPs] in addition to top-notch colleagues in other specialties and excellent nursing, which allowed me to spend the majority of those 2 years in the operating room and completely focused on patient care. During that final phase of training, I welcomed flexibility with regard to the work-hour restrictions to ensure that I was acquiring the experience I needed prior to starting my own practice.”
Lisa M. Brown, MD, MAS, Assistant Professor of Thoracic Surgery, UC Davis Health System, Calif.; Training Institution: Washington University
Dr. Lee: “I started my surgical training in 2005, 2 years after the implementation of the 80-hour workweek restriction. Fortunately for my personal life, my training program took the restriction very seriously and strictly enforced it. As a result, I had scheduled periods off from work, and rarely worked more than 80 hours per week over the course of general surgery. On those occasions that I did, the next weeks, or preceding weeks would be shorter, to compensate. As a product of a 4+3 Thoracic Surgery residency in this environment, the 80-hour workweek extended to my subspecialty training. Our cardiac surgery time strictly enforced the go-home post-call policy. As a result, I believe my duty hours during Thoracic Surgery are likely shorter overall than many other programs.
Everyone hears the rumors of other programs lying about their duty hours. Fortunately, mine was not one of these. Despite this, or because of this, I received top-notch training. At the same time and more importantly, I started a family. I married my wife a week before my internship started, and am still married to the same person. We had two precious daughters during my Thoracic Surgery years. I don’t believe this would have been possible without duty-hours restrictions.
To create an environment where such a task was possible, my program hired an army of mid-level practitioners to deal with the day-to-day tasks of providing cardiothoracic surgical care to the patients, both in the intensive care unit and on the ward.
I rarely had to write a history and physical during Thoracic Surgery training. I consented fewer patients than I have fingers on my hands. I pulled even fewer chest tubes. I can now no longer remember having pulled a central line. I learned these tasks when I was a junior resident. What I did instead as a senior resident was perform over 900 cardiothoracic procedures as the primary surgeon. Now, as an attending surgeon, I still don’t write full histories and physicals by myself. I certainly don’t pull chest tubes and central lines. I consent patients by having a conversation with them, which I did as a resident, but I don’t bring a piece of paper with me in to the clinic room. I have a physician assistant who helps me fill in the gaps.
In 8 months of practice, I have performed over 15 thoracic organ transplants, repaired over 15 aortic dissections, half of whom required root replacements, performed more double-valve surgeries than straightforward single-valve replacements, started a minimally invasive atrial fibrillation surgical program, and applied almost every shred of knowledge and experience gained in 3 years of Thoracic Surgery Residency to a busy clinical practice. Most importantly, I continue to come home and watch my two daughters grow up.
With that perspective, I don’t believe the question should be whether or not programs should have the flexibility to enforce or not enforce duty-hours restrictions. It should be, how could every program find a way to effectively train residents to be good physicians and still allow them a personal life?”
Dr. Anson Lee is an Assistant Professor of Cardiac Surgery, Stanford University, Calif.; Training: 4+3 CT Residency, at Washington University, St. Louis.
Ms. Bohlman: “As a physician assistant in cardiac surgery, I represent the reality that physicians with a critical patient population appreciate consistency in their patient management. However, working in a university hospital setting also requires that surgical residents receive appropriate training. With the recently implemented duty restriction hours on resident training programs, advanced practice providers (APPs) have been utilized as an excellent solution for scheduling conflicts without compromising patient care. An example to this point is evident in my own place of work.
Approximately 1 year ago, our surgical intensive care unit transitioned from resident care to a combination of residents and APPs. At that time, the APPs were tasked with the complete care of all cardiac surgery patients. This change reduced the quantity and acuity of patients for which the residents were responsible and therefore allowed for more flexible hours along with a more manageable patient load. These changes, among others, have contributed to improved patient outcomes in the cardiac surgery patient population within our institution. With the increase in APPs that have training in various specialties, there comes an increasing ability to not only fill the gaps in scheduling but to do so with an extension of the providing physician. Although the NEJM article demonstrated no difference in patient outcomes between resident programs with restricted duty hours versus more flexible duty-hour policies, I foresee the future of medicine focusing on trained APPs as a complement to the care that the residents provide.”
Allison Bohlman is a Physician Assistant at Rush University Medical Center in the Integrated cardiovascular thoracic intensive care unit.
Vitamin C
Vitamin C (ascorbic acid) is one of the four most important ingredients in skin care products.
• It is proven to increase collagen production when applied topically to skin.
• It inhibits tyrosinase to even skin tone and has a strong antioxidant activity.
• It is absorbed well orally, but not enough gets to the skin.
• It is best absorbed at a pH of 2.0.
• It is unstable when exposed to light and air. Instruct patients to discard 6 months after opening.
In addition, the proper formulation is patented and expensive. Stick with brands you trust. Use vitamin C on skin prior to procedures to speed healing. It will sting when used on inflamed skin because of the low pH.
In my opinion, all patients need to be on the proper skin care regimen for their skin type. This includes a daily sun protection factor (SPF), a cleanser, a retinoid, and an antioxidant. Ascorbic acid is one of my favorite antioxidants because it is the only one shown to increase the production of collagen by fibroblasts and inhibit tyrosinase while scavenging free radicals. Sure it is expensive – but that is because formulating and packaging it properly is expensive. Unfortunately, many subpar brands have entered the market. Ask to see the company’s research data on its formulation before choosing to recommend or sell ascorbic acid/vitamin C in your practice.
An essential water-soluble nutrient for the development of bone and connective tissue, vitamin C is found in citrus fruits and green leafy vegetables. It is produced in most plants and animals, but a mutated gene in humans has resulted in a deficiency of L-gulono-gamma-lactone oxidase, the enzyme required for its production.1,2 Although ascorbic acid cannot be synthesized by the human body, dietary consumption renders it the most abundant antioxidant in human skin and blood, and vitamin C plays an important role in endogenous collagen production and the inhibition of collagen degradation.3-6 Ascorbic acid also is known to regenerate alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E) levels and, therefore, is thought to protect against diseases related to oxidative stress.7
Epidermal vitamin C can be depleted by sunlight and environmental pollution, such as ozone in urban pollution.8,9 Known to exhibit a wide range of biologic activities, ascorbic acid has been shown to deliver rejuvenating effects on skin wrinkles, texture, strength, and evenness of tone through its antioxidant, tyrosinase-inhibiting, and collagen production-promoting activities.10 Indeed, as a topical agent, vitamin C has been used to prevent photodamage, and to treat melasma, striae alba, and postoperative erythema in laser patients.11,12 It is regularly used to treat aging skin, and as a depigmenting agent.2,10,13 This column will discuss the antioxidant, antiaging, and depigmenting activity of vitamin C in the context of recent human studies.
Antioxidant and anti-aging activity
Vitamin C is unique among antioxidants because of its ability to increase collagen production in addition to its free radical scavenging antioxidant activity. Due to its capacity to interfere with the UV-induced generation of reactive oxygen species by reacting with the superoxide anion or the hydroxyl radical, vitamin C has become a popular addition to “after-sun” products,14,15 and been shown to be effective in mitigating the effects of UVB, such as erythema and signs of photoaging, on porcine and human skin.2,16-17
A 2001 study in 10 postmenopausal women by Nusgens et al. found that daily topical application of 5% L-ascorbic acid enhanced the levels of procollagen types I and III, their posttranslational maturation enzymes, and tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase.18 This led to increased levels of collagen in the skin.
In 2003, Humbert et al. conducted a 6-month, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trial with 20 healthy female volunteers showing that patients treated with 5% vitamin C cream experienced significant improvements in deep furrows on the neck and forearms.19
In a small study of nine adults with Fitzpatrick skin types II or III in 2008, Murray et al. studied whether a stable topical preparation of 15% L-ascorbic acid, 1% alpha-tocopherol, and 0.5% ferulic acid could protect human skin in vivo from UV-induced damage. They found that the antioxidant formulation supplemented the antioxidant pool of the skin and conferred significant photoprotection, guarding the skin against erythema and apoptosis as well as effectively suppressing p53 activation and reducing thymine dimer mutations known to be associated with skin cancer.13
In 2012, Xu et al. evaluated the efficacy and safety of topical 23.8% L-ascorbic acid on photoaged skin in a split-face study of 20 Chinese women. Significant improvements in fine lines, dyspigmentation, and surface roughness were observed, without adverse side effects.20
In a 2015 study of 60 healthy female subjects, Crisan et al. used high-frequency ultrasound to determine that the use of a topical vitamin C formulation yielded significant increases in collagen synthesis, revealing the solution to be an effective rejuvenation therapy.21
Skin lightening activity
Melasma
In 2004, Espinal-Perez et al. conducted a double-blind randomized trial of 5% ascorbic acid, compared with 4% hydroquinone (HQ) water–oil emulsion in 16 female patients with melasma, aged 23-43 years (mean 36 years). Of those treated with vitamin C, 62.5% exhibited good or excellent subjectively assessed skin lightening. There was no statistically significant difference in depigmenting activity in the HQ group, of which 68.7% experienced irritation whereas vitamin C was well tolerated.22
In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, researchers used iontophoresis to enhance the penetration of vitamin C into the skin and significantly reduce pigmentation, compared with placebo.23
Although ascorbic acid is viewed by many as ineffective as a depigmenting agent alone, particularly in 5%-10% concentrations, when used in combination with other ingredients such as HQ, it is considered effective.24 In the magnesium-L-ascorbyl-2-phosphate esterified form, however, vitamin C is among the most popular prescribed depigmenting agents around the world, especially in countries where HQ and its derivatives are prohibited.25 In a 2009 16-week open-label study by Hwang et al. of 25% L-ascorbic acid and a chemical penetration enhancer for treating melasma in 40 patients, researchers observed significant reductions in pigmentation.26
In a small split-face study early in 2015, Lee et al. showed that the combination of 1,064-nm Q-switched neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (QS-Nd:YAG) laser and ultrasonic application of vitamin C was more effective than was the laser treatment alone in achieving a cosmetically acceptable treatment for melasma.27
PIPA
Vitamin C can be used to diminish or prevent post-inflammatory pigment alteration (PIPA) after procedures because it inhibits tyrosinase, lowers inflammation, and quenches free radicals. In a study of 10 patients, the application of topical vitamin C 2 or more weeks after surgery reduced the duration and degree of erythema after skin resurfacing with a carbon dioxide laser.28
Stretch marks
The depigmenting effects of vitamin C can lighten the pigmentation associated with stretch marks and its anti-inflammatory activity can contribute to blunting related redness.12
Conclusion
Although orally administered ascorbic acid is readily bioavailable, ascorbic acid in the skin is quickly depleted and oral supplementation alone does not yield optimal skin levels. Therefore, topical use of vitamin C is desirable. In fact, I tell my patients to use it topically in the morning and add a vitamin C supplement to their diet. Numerous formulation considerations (e.g., packaging, exposure to air or light during use, skin sensitivity, and user preference) are involved in the stabilization and effective penetration of ascorbic acid into the skin, and the process of developing, manufacturing, and packaging of effective, stable vitamin C products is expensive.
Vitamin C, particularly when combined with other ingredients, has been shown to be an integral constituent in topical antioxidant, antiaging, and depigmenting formulations that show promise in the dermatologic armamentarium. It is a great choice for use in a prep-procedure skin care regimen to speed healing. Use after a procedure is prohibited by the stinging associated with the low pH of properly formulated products.
References
1. J Biol Chem. 1994 May 6;269(18):13685-8.
2. Dermatol Surg. 2001 Feb;27(2):137-42.
3. J Invest Dermatol. 1994 Jan;102(1):122-4.
4. Dermatol Surg. 2005 Jul;31(7 Pt 2):814-7.
5. Annu Rev Nutr. 1994;14:371-91.
6. J Drugs Dermatol. 2008 Jul;7(7 Suppl):s2-6.
7. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003 Jun;48(6):866-74.
8. J Invest Dermatol. 1994 Apr;102(4):470-5.
9. Free Radic Biol Med. 1997;23:85-91.
10. J Drugs Dermatol. 2014 Oct;13(10):1208-13.
11. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1996 Jan;34(1):29-33.
12. Dermatol Surg. 1998 Aug;24(8):849-56.
13. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008 Sep;59(3):418-25.
14. J Biol Chem. 1983 Jun 10;258(11):6695-7.
15. J Phys Chem. 1983;87:1809-12.
16. Br J Dermatol. 1992 Sep;127(3):247-53.
17. J Invest Dermatol. 1991;96:587.
18. J Invest Dermatol. 2001 Jun;116(6):853-9.
19. Exp Dermatol. 2003 Jun;12(3):237-44.
20. J Drugs Dermatol. 2012 Jan;11(1):51-6.
21. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2015 Sep 2;8:463-70
22. Int J Dermatol. 2004 Aug;43(8):604-7.
23. Dermatology. 2003;206(4):316-20.
24. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2011 Apr 1;12(2):87-99.
25. Phytother Res. 2006 Nov;20(11):921-34.
26. J Cutan Med Surg. 2009 Mar-Apr;13(2):74-81.
27. Lasers Med Sci. 2015 Jan;30(1):159-63.
28. Dermatol Surg. 1998 Mar;24(3):331-4.
Dr. Baumann is chief executive officer of the Baumann Cosmetic & Research Institute in the Design District in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote the textbook “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and a book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Her latest book, “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” was published in November 2014. Dr. Baumann has received funding for clinical grants from Allergan, Aveeno, Avon Products, Evolus, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Kythera Biopharmaceuticals, Mary Kay, Medicis Pharmaceuticals, Neutrogena, Philosophy, Topix Pharmaceuticals, and Unilever.
Vitamin C (ascorbic acid) is one of the four most important ingredients in skin care products.
• It is proven to increase collagen production when applied topically to skin.
• It inhibits tyrosinase to even skin tone and has a strong antioxidant activity.
• It is absorbed well orally, but not enough gets to the skin.
• It is best absorbed at a pH of 2.0.
• It is unstable when exposed to light and air. Instruct patients to discard 6 months after opening.
In addition, the proper formulation is patented and expensive. Stick with brands you trust. Use vitamin C on skin prior to procedures to speed healing. It will sting when used on inflamed skin because of the low pH.
In my opinion, all patients need to be on the proper skin care regimen for their skin type. This includes a daily sun protection factor (SPF), a cleanser, a retinoid, and an antioxidant. Ascorbic acid is one of my favorite antioxidants because it is the only one shown to increase the production of collagen by fibroblasts and inhibit tyrosinase while scavenging free radicals. Sure it is expensive – but that is because formulating and packaging it properly is expensive. Unfortunately, many subpar brands have entered the market. Ask to see the company’s research data on its formulation before choosing to recommend or sell ascorbic acid/vitamin C in your practice.
An essential water-soluble nutrient for the development of bone and connective tissue, vitamin C is found in citrus fruits and green leafy vegetables. It is produced in most plants and animals, but a mutated gene in humans has resulted in a deficiency of L-gulono-gamma-lactone oxidase, the enzyme required for its production.1,2 Although ascorbic acid cannot be synthesized by the human body, dietary consumption renders it the most abundant antioxidant in human skin and blood, and vitamin C plays an important role in endogenous collagen production and the inhibition of collagen degradation.3-6 Ascorbic acid also is known to regenerate alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E) levels and, therefore, is thought to protect against diseases related to oxidative stress.7
Epidermal vitamin C can be depleted by sunlight and environmental pollution, such as ozone in urban pollution.8,9 Known to exhibit a wide range of biologic activities, ascorbic acid has been shown to deliver rejuvenating effects on skin wrinkles, texture, strength, and evenness of tone through its antioxidant, tyrosinase-inhibiting, and collagen production-promoting activities.10 Indeed, as a topical agent, vitamin C has been used to prevent photodamage, and to treat melasma, striae alba, and postoperative erythema in laser patients.11,12 It is regularly used to treat aging skin, and as a depigmenting agent.2,10,13 This column will discuss the antioxidant, antiaging, and depigmenting activity of vitamin C in the context of recent human studies.
Antioxidant and anti-aging activity
Vitamin C is unique among antioxidants because of its ability to increase collagen production in addition to its free radical scavenging antioxidant activity. Due to its capacity to interfere with the UV-induced generation of reactive oxygen species by reacting with the superoxide anion or the hydroxyl radical, vitamin C has become a popular addition to “after-sun” products,14,15 and been shown to be effective in mitigating the effects of UVB, such as erythema and signs of photoaging, on porcine and human skin.2,16-17
A 2001 study in 10 postmenopausal women by Nusgens et al. found that daily topical application of 5% L-ascorbic acid enhanced the levels of procollagen types I and III, their posttranslational maturation enzymes, and tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase.18 This led to increased levels of collagen in the skin.
In 2003, Humbert et al. conducted a 6-month, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trial with 20 healthy female volunteers showing that patients treated with 5% vitamin C cream experienced significant improvements in deep furrows on the neck and forearms.19
In a small study of nine adults with Fitzpatrick skin types II or III in 2008, Murray et al. studied whether a stable topical preparation of 15% L-ascorbic acid, 1% alpha-tocopherol, and 0.5% ferulic acid could protect human skin in vivo from UV-induced damage. They found that the antioxidant formulation supplemented the antioxidant pool of the skin and conferred significant photoprotection, guarding the skin against erythema and apoptosis as well as effectively suppressing p53 activation and reducing thymine dimer mutations known to be associated with skin cancer.13
In 2012, Xu et al. evaluated the efficacy and safety of topical 23.8% L-ascorbic acid on photoaged skin in a split-face study of 20 Chinese women. Significant improvements in fine lines, dyspigmentation, and surface roughness were observed, without adverse side effects.20
In a 2015 study of 60 healthy female subjects, Crisan et al. used high-frequency ultrasound to determine that the use of a topical vitamin C formulation yielded significant increases in collagen synthesis, revealing the solution to be an effective rejuvenation therapy.21
Skin lightening activity
Melasma
In 2004, Espinal-Perez et al. conducted a double-blind randomized trial of 5% ascorbic acid, compared with 4% hydroquinone (HQ) water–oil emulsion in 16 female patients with melasma, aged 23-43 years (mean 36 years). Of those treated with vitamin C, 62.5% exhibited good or excellent subjectively assessed skin lightening. There was no statistically significant difference in depigmenting activity in the HQ group, of which 68.7% experienced irritation whereas vitamin C was well tolerated.22
In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, researchers used iontophoresis to enhance the penetration of vitamin C into the skin and significantly reduce pigmentation, compared with placebo.23
Although ascorbic acid is viewed by many as ineffective as a depigmenting agent alone, particularly in 5%-10% concentrations, when used in combination with other ingredients such as HQ, it is considered effective.24 In the magnesium-L-ascorbyl-2-phosphate esterified form, however, vitamin C is among the most popular prescribed depigmenting agents around the world, especially in countries where HQ and its derivatives are prohibited.25 In a 2009 16-week open-label study by Hwang et al. of 25% L-ascorbic acid and a chemical penetration enhancer for treating melasma in 40 patients, researchers observed significant reductions in pigmentation.26
In a small split-face study early in 2015, Lee et al. showed that the combination of 1,064-nm Q-switched neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (QS-Nd:YAG) laser and ultrasonic application of vitamin C was more effective than was the laser treatment alone in achieving a cosmetically acceptable treatment for melasma.27
PIPA
Vitamin C can be used to diminish or prevent post-inflammatory pigment alteration (PIPA) after procedures because it inhibits tyrosinase, lowers inflammation, and quenches free radicals. In a study of 10 patients, the application of topical vitamin C 2 or more weeks after surgery reduced the duration and degree of erythema after skin resurfacing with a carbon dioxide laser.28
Stretch marks
The depigmenting effects of vitamin C can lighten the pigmentation associated with stretch marks and its anti-inflammatory activity can contribute to blunting related redness.12
Conclusion
Although orally administered ascorbic acid is readily bioavailable, ascorbic acid in the skin is quickly depleted and oral supplementation alone does not yield optimal skin levels. Therefore, topical use of vitamin C is desirable. In fact, I tell my patients to use it topically in the morning and add a vitamin C supplement to their diet. Numerous formulation considerations (e.g., packaging, exposure to air or light during use, skin sensitivity, and user preference) are involved in the stabilization and effective penetration of ascorbic acid into the skin, and the process of developing, manufacturing, and packaging of effective, stable vitamin C products is expensive.
Vitamin C, particularly when combined with other ingredients, has been shown to be an integral constituent in topical antioxidant, antiaging, and depigmenting formulations that show promise in the dermatologic armamentarium. It is a great choice for use in a prep-procedure skin care regimen to speed healing. Use after a procedure is prohibited by the stinging associated with the low pH of properly formulated products.
References
1. J Biol Chem. 1994 May 6;269(18):13685-8.
2. Dermatol Surg. 2001 Feb;27(2):137-42.
3. J Invest Dermatol. 1994 Jan;102(1):122-4.
4. Dermatol Surg. 2005 Jul;31(7 Pt 2):814-7.
5. Annu Rev Nutr. 1994;14:371-91.
6. J Drugs Dermatol. 2008 Jul;7(7 Suppl):s2-6.
7. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003 Jun;48(6):866-74.
8. J Invest Dermatol. 1994 Apr;102(4):470-5.
9. Free Radic Biol Med. 1997;23:85-91.
10. J Drugs Dermatol. 2014 Oct;13(10):1208-13.
11. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1996 Jan;34(1):29-33.
12. Dermatol Surg. 1998 Aug;24(8):849-56.
13. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008 Sep;59(3):418-25.
14. J Biol Chem. 1983 Jun 10;258(11):6695-7.
15. J Phys Chem. 1983;87:1809-12.
16. Br J Dermatol. 1992 Sep;127(3):247-53.
17. J Invest Dermatol. 1991;96:587.
18. J Invest Dermatol. 2001 Jun;116(6):853-9.
19. Exp Dermatol. 2003 Jun;12(3):237-44.
20. J Drugs Dermatol. 2012 Jan;11(1):51-6.
21. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2015 Sep 2;8:463-70
22. Int J Dermatol. 2004 Aug;43(8):604-7.
23. Dermatology. 2003;206(4):316-20.
24. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2011 Apr 1;12(2):87-99.
25. Phytother Res. 2006 Nov;20(11):921-34.
26. J Cutan Med Surg. 2009 Mar-Apr;13(2):74-81.
27. Lasers Med Sci. 2015 Jan;30(1):159-63.
28. Dermatol Surg. 1998 Mar;24(3):331-4.
Dr. Baumann is chief executive officer of the Baumann Cosmetic & Research Institute in the Design District in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote the textbook “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and a book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Her latest book, “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” was published in November 2014. Dr. Baumann has received funding for clinical grants from Allergan, Aveeno, Avon Products, Evolus, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Kythera Biopharmaceuticals, Mary Kay, Medicis Pharmaceuticals, Neutrogena, Philosophy, Topix Pharmaceuticals, and Unilever.
Vitamin C (ascorbic acid) is one of the four most important ingredients in skin care products.
• It is proven to increase collagen production when applied topically to skin.
• It inhibits tyrosinase to even skin tone and has a strong antioxidant activity.
• It is absorbed well orally, but not enough gets to the skin.
• It is best absorbed at a pH of 2.0.
• It is unstable when exposed to light and air. Instruct patients to discard 6 months after opening.
In addition, the proper formulation is patented and expensive. Stick with brands you trust. Use vitamin C on skin prior to procedures to speed healing. It will sting when used on inflamed skin because of the low pH.
In my opinion, all patients need to be on the proper skin care regimen for their skin type. This includes a daily sun protection factor (SPF), a cleanser, a retinoid, and an antioxidant. Ascorbic acid is one of my favorite antioxidants because it is the only one shown to increase the production of collagen by fibroblasts and inhibit tyrosinase while scavenging free radicals. Sure it is expensive – but that is because formulating and packaging it properly is expensive. Unfortunately, many subpar brands have entered the market. Ask to see the company’s research data on its formulation before choosing to recommend or sell ascorbic acid/vitamin C in your practice.
An essential water-soluble nutrient for the development of bone and connective tissue, vitamin C is found in citrus fruits and green leafy vegetables. It is produced in most plants and animals, but a mutated gene in humans has resulted in a deficiency of L-gulono-gamma-lactone oxidase, the enzyme required for its production.1,2 Although ascorbic acid cannot be synthesized by the human body, dietary consumption renders it the most abundant antioxidant in human skin and blood, and vitamin C plays an important role in endogenous collagen production and the inhibition of collagen degradation.3-6 Ascorbic acid also is known to regenerate alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E) levels and, therefore, is thought to protect against diseases related to oxidative stress.7
Epidermal vitamin C can be depleted by sunlight and environmental pollution, such as ozone in urban pollution.8,9 Known to exhibit a wide range of biologic activities, ascorbic acid has been shown to deliver rejuvenating effects on skin wrinkles, texture, strength, and evenness of tone through its antioxidant, tyrosinase-inhibiting, and collagen production-promoting activities.10 Indeed, as a topical agent, vitamin C has been used to prevent photodamage, and to treat melasma, striae alba, and postoperative erythema in laser patients.11,12 It is regularly used to treat aging skin, and as a depigmenting agent.2,10,13 This column will discuss the antioxidant, antiaging, and depigmenting activity of vitamin C in the context of recent human studies.
Antioxidant and anti-aging activity
Vitamin C is unique among antioxidants because of its ability to increase collagen production in addition to its free radical scavenging antioxidant activity. Due to its capacity to interfere with the UV-induced generation of reactive oxygen species by reacting with the superoxide anion or the hydroxyl radical, vitamin C has become a popular addition to “after-sun” products,14,15 and been shown to be effective in mitigating the effects of UVB, such as erythema and signs of photoaging, on porcine and human skin.2,16-17
A 2001 study in 10 postmenopausal women by Nusgens et al. found that daily topical application of 5% L-ascorbic acid enhanced the levels of procollagen types I and III, their posttranslational maturation enzymes, and tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase.18 This led to increased levels of collagen in the skin.
In 2003, Humbert et al. conducted a 6-month, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trial with 20 healthy female volunteers showing that patients treated with 5% vitamin C cream experienced significant improvements in deep furrows on the neck and forearms.19
In a small study of nine adults with Fitzpatrick skin types II or III in 2008, Murray et al. studied whether a stable topical preparation of 15% L-ascorbic acid, 1% alpha-tocopherol, and 0.5% ferulic acid could protect human skin in vivo from UV-induced damage. They found that the antioxidant formulation supplemented the antioxidant pool of the skin and conferred significant photoprotection, guarding the skin against erythema and apoptosis as well as effectively suppressing p53 activation and reducing thymine dimer mutations known to be associated with skin cancer.13
In 2012, Xu et al. evaluated the efficacy and safety of topical 23.8% L-ascorbic acid on photoaged skin in a split-face study of 20 Chinese women. Significant improvements in fine lines, dyspigmentation, and surface roughness were observed, without adverse side effects.20
In a 2015 study of 60 healthy female subjects, Crisan et al. used high-frequency ultrasound to determine that the use of a topical vitamin C formulation yielded significant increases in collagen synthesis, revealing the solution to be an effective rejuvenation therapy.21
Skin lightening activity
Melasma
In 2004, Espinal-Perez et al. conducted a double-blind randomized trial of 5% ascorbic acid, compared with 4% hydroquinone (HQ) water–oil emulsion in 16 female patients with melasma, aged 23-43 years (mean 36 years). Of those treated with vitamin C, 62.5% exhibited good or excellent subjectively assessed skin lightening. There was no statistically significant difference in depigmenting activity in the HQ group, of which 68.7% experienced irritation whereas vitamin C was well tolerated.22
In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, researchers used iontophoresis to enhance the penetration of vitamin C into the skin and significantly reduce pigmentation, compared with placebo.23
Although ascorbic acid is viewed by many as ineffective as a depigmenting agent alone, particularly in 5%-10% concentrations, when used in combination with other ingredients such as HQ, it is considered effective.24 In the magnesium-L-ascorbyl-2-phosphate esterified form, however, vitamin C is among the most popular prescribed depigmenting agents around the world, especially in countries where HQ and its derivatives are prohibited.25 In a 2009 16-week open-label study by Hwang et al. of 25% L-ascorbic acid and a chemical penetration enhancer for treating melasma in 40 patients, researchers observed significant reductions in pigmentation.26
In a small split-face study early in 2015, Lee et al. showed that the combination of 1,064-nm Q-switched neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (QS-Nd:YAG) laser and ultrasonic application of vitamin C was more effective than was the laser treatment alone in achieving a cosmetically acceptable treatment for melasma.27
PIPA
Vitamin C can be used to diminish or prevent post-inflammatory pigment alteration (PIPA) after procedures because it inhibits tyrosinase, lowers inflammation, and quenches free radicals. In a study of 10 patients, the application of topical vitamin C 2 or more weeks after surgery reduced the duration and degree of erythema after skin resurfacing with a carbon dioxide laser.28
Stretch marks
The depigmenting effects of vitamin C can lighten the pigmentation associated with stretch marks and its anti-inflammatory activity can contribute to blunting related redness.12
Conclusion
Although orally administered ascorbic acid is readily bioavailable, ascorbic acid in the skin is quickly depleted and oral supplementation alone does not yield optimal skin levels. Therefore, topical use of vitamin C is desirable. In fact, I tell my patients to use it topically in the morning and add a vitamin C supplement to their diet. Numerous formulation considerations (e.g., packaging, exposure to air or light during use, skin sensitivity, and user preference) are involved in the stabilization and effective penetration of ascorbic acid into the skin, and the process of developing, manufacturing, and packaging of effective, stable vitamin C products is expensive.
Vitamin C, particularly when combined with other ingredients, has been shown to be an integral constituent in topical antioxidant, antiaging, and depigmenting formulations that show promise in the dermatologic armamentarium. It is a great choice for use in a prep-procedure skin care regimen to speed healing. Use after a procedure is prohibited by the stinging associated with the low pH of properly formulated products.
References
1. J Biol Chem. 1994 May 6;269(18):13685-8.
2. Dermatol Surg. 2001 Feb;27(2):137-42.
3. J Invest Dermatol. 1994 Jan;102(1):122-4.
4. Dermatol Surg. 2005 Jul;31(7 Pt 2):814-7.
5. Annu Rev Nutr. 1994;14:371-91.
6. J Drugs Dermatol. 2008 Jul;7(7 Suppl):s2-6.
7. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003 Jun;48(6):866-74.
8. J Invest Dermatol. 1994 Apr;102(4):470-5.
9. Free Radic Biol Med. 1997;23:85-91.
10. J Drugs Dermatol. 2014 Oct;13(10):1208-13.
11. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1996 Jan;34(1):29-33.
12. Dermatol Surg. 1998 Aug;24(8):849-56.
13. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008 Sep;59(3):418-25.
14. J Biol Chem. 1983 Jun 10;258(11):6695-7.
15. J Phys Chem. 1983;87:1809-12.
16. Br J Dermatol. 1992 Sep;127(3):247-53.
17. J Invest Dermatol. 1991;96:587.
18. J Invest Dermatol. 2001 Jun;116(6):853-9.
19. Exp Dermatol. 2003 Jun;12(3):237-44.
20. J Drugs Dermatol. 2012 Jan;11(1):51-6.
21. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2015 Sep 2;8:463-70
22. Int J Dermatol. 2004 Aug;43(8):604-7.
23. Dermatology. 2003;206(4):316-20.
24. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2011 Apr 1;12(2):87-99.
25. Phytother Res. 2006 Nov;20(11):921-34.
26. J Cutan Med Surg. 2009 Mar-Apr;13(2):74-81.
27. Lasers Med Sci. 2015 Jan;30(1):159-63.
28. Dermatol Surg. 1998 Mar;24(3):331-4.
Dr. Baumann is chief executive officer of the Baumann Cosmetic & Research Institute in the Design District in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote the textbook “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and a book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Her latest book, “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” was published in November 2014. Dr. Baumann has received funding for clinical grants from Allergan, Aveeno, Avon Products, Evolus, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Kythera Biopharmaceuticals, Mary Kay, Medicis Pharmaceuticals, Neutrogena, Philosophy, Topix Pharmaceuticals, and Unilever.
Arboviral and other vector-borne diseases
May has arrived, and for the majority of your patients it signals the end of the school year and the beginning of summer vacation. Zika virus is on the minds of most people since its arrival to the Western Hemisphere in March 2015. With the fluidity of this outbreak and almost daily news updates and recommendations, many parents have voiced or will be voicing concerns regarding summer travel destinations.
Many concerns about Zika virus have been previously addressed in this column (“Zika virus: More questions than answers?” by Dr. Kristina Bryant). However, if the decision is to avoid international travel because of the ongoing Zika outbreak, it doesn’t mean your patients get a free pass and will not have to be concerned about acquiring any infectious diseases. They still need to be vigilant about avoiding those pesky vectors that transmit arboviruses and other vector-borne diseases that occur in the United States.
Arboviruses are transmitted by mosquitoes, ticks, or fleas. Most infections are subclinical. If symptoms develop, they are manifested by a generalized febrile illness including fever, headache, myalgia, arthralgia, and rash. Hemorrhagic fever (dengue) or neuroinvasive disease can include aseptic meningitis, encephalitis, or acute flaccid paralysis. Neuroinvasive disease rarely occurs with dengue, Colorado tick fever, and chikungunya infections.
While more than 100 arboviruses can cause infection, some of the more common arboviruses associated with human disease include West Nile, first detected in the United States in 1999 and chikungunya, first reported in the Americas in 2013 with local transmission documented in Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands in 2014. It is estimated that dengue causes over 100 million cases worldwide annually. Almost 40% of the world’s inhabitants live in endemic areas. The majority of cases on the U.S. mainland are imported. However, it is endemic in all U.S. territories including Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico. Between September 2015 and March 2016, Hawaii experienced a dengue outbreak involving 264 individuals including 46 children. As of April 16, 2016, there were no infectious individuals on the island.
Other domestic arboviruses causing disease include St. Louis, Eastern, and Western Equine encephalitis, La Crosse encephalitis, Colorado tick fever, and Powassan virus. All are transmitted by mosquitoes with the exception of Powassan and Colorado tick fever, which are transmitted by ticks. The numbers of cases nationally are much lower for these diseases, compared with West Nile, dengue, and chikungunya. National and state-specific information is available for domestic arboviruses at diseasemaps.usgs.gov/mapviewer. Data is compiled by ArboNET, a national arboviral surveillance system that is managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in conjunction with state health departments. Not only is human disease monitored, but it also maintains data on viremic blood donors, dead birds, mosquitoes, veterinary disease cases, and sentinel animals.
Spring and summer are the most active seasons for ticks. Bacterial and spirochetal diseases transmitted by them include rickettsial diseases such as Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, ehrlichiosis, and anaplasmosis. Tularemia in addition to Lyme and tick-borne relapsing fever are also transmitted by ticks. Babesiosis, which is due to a parasite, and southern tick-associated rash illness (STARI), whose causative agent is yet to be determined, are two additional tick-related diagnoses.
Of note, dengue, chikungunya, and Zika are all transmitted by infected Aedes mosquitoes. There is no enzootic cycle. Just human-mosquito-human transmission. In contrast, West Nile virus is transmitted by Culex mosquitoes in an enzootic cycle between an avian reservoir and humans.
Treatment
There is no specific treatment for arboviral infections. The primary goal is relief of symptoms with fluids, bed rest, and analgesics. For bacterial vector-borne diseases, antibiotic therapy is indicated and is based on the specific pathogen. Doxycycline is the drug of choice for treatment of suspected and confirmed Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, ehrlichiosis, and anaplasmosis even in children less than 8 years of age. Delay in initiation of antimicrobial therapy pending definitive diagnosis may lead to an adverse outcome. It is also the drug of choice for tick-borne relapsing fever.
Lyme disease is also responsive to antibiotic treatment. Therapy is based on the disease category. (Lyme disease in “Red Book: 2015 Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases,” [Elk Grove Village, Ill.: American Academy of Pediatrics, 2015, pp. 516-25]).
STARI clinically presents with a lesion that resembles erythema migrans in southern and southeastern states. However, it has not been associated with any of the complications reported with disseminated Lyme disease. Treatment is not recommended.
Tularemia and babesiosis are both responsive to antimicrobial therapy and would best be managed in consultation with an infectious disease physician.
A handy, concise, up to date reference guide about all of the tick-borne diseases including photographs is available at the App Store. The Tickborne Diseases App was developed by the CDC and it is free!
Prevention
The cornerstone of disease prevention is avoidance of mosquito and tick bites, in addition to eliminating mosquito breeding sites. Ticks are generally found near the ground, in brushy or wooded areas. They usually wait for a potential host to brush against them. When this happens, they climb onto the host and find a site to attach.
Is there a role for antimicrobial prophylaxis once a tick has been discovered? There is no data to support antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent Rocky Mountain spotted fever, ehrlichiosis, and anaplasmosis. Prophylaxis with doxycycline or ciprofloxacin is recommended for children and adults after exposure to an intentional release of tularemia and for laboratory workers after inadvertent exposure. For prevention of Lyme disease, a single dose of doxycycline (4 mg/kg, max dose 200 mg) may be offered under limited conditions: The patient is at least 8 years of age, resides in an area where Lyme is highly endemic, the tick removed was engorged, therapy can be initiated within 72 hours after tick removal, and the estimated time of attachment was at least 36 hours. There is inadequate data on the use of amoxicillin.
Remember, not all mosquitoes are alike. Those that transmit chikungunya, dengue, and Zika (Aedes mosquitoes) are primarily daytime mosquitoes, but also can bite at night. West Nile is transmitted by Culex mosquitoes, which feed from dusk to dawn.
Here are some tips to share with your patients that should decrease their chances of acquiring a mosquito or tick-borne disease:
• Apply mosquito repellent only to intact exposed skin when outdoors. Most repellents can be safely used on children at least 2 months of age and older. Avoid applying repellent directly on the child’s hand. Use at least a 20% DEET (N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide) containing product. Other Environmental Protection Agency–registered repellents are an alternative (Additional information is available at http://www2.epa.gov/insect-repellents). Products containing oil of lemon eucalyptus (OLE) or p-Menthane-3,8-diol (PMD) should not be used on children under 3 years of age.
• Apply permethrin to clothing, hats, boots, and so on. It is designed to repel mosquitoes and ticks. It can last for several washings. It is ideal to spray over nets covering carriers in children younger than 2 months of age.
• Wear long-sleeved shirts and long pants tucked inside of socks when hiking.
• Check for ticks daily, especially under the arms, behind the ears, around the waist, behind the knees, and inside belly buttons after outdoor activities.
• Have your patients learn how to effectively remove a tick. With a fine tipped tweezer, grasp the tick as close to the skin as possible and pull straight up with even pressure. Do not twist or jerk the tick. Do not squash the tick. Place it in a bag and dispose of it. Clean the site after removal with alcohol, iodine, or soap and water.
• Encourage families to mosquito proof their home by using screens on windows and doors, and using air conditioning when available.
• Empty and scrub all items that contain water such as birdbaths, planters, or wading pools around the outside of the home at least weekly because mosquitoes lay eggs in or near free standing water.
• Dogs and cats should be treated for ticks as recommended by the veterinarian.
The impact of the ongoing Zika virus outbreak is uncertain. While it may have an impact on those planning international travel now and in the near future, several arboviral and vector-borne diseases currently exist in the United States. Encouraging our patients to practice interventions to prevent mosquito and tick bites now will also serve to protect them if Zika virus becomes established in the Aedes mosquitoes here in the future and/or if they have plans for international travel. For up to date information on Zika virus for yourself and your patients, visit www.cdc.gov/zika.
Bonnie M. Word, M.D., is a pediatric infectious disease specialist and director of the Houston Travel Medicine Clinic. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures. Email Dr. Word at [email protected].
May has arrived, and for the majority of your patients it signals the end of the school year and the beginning of summer vacation. Zika virus is on the minds of most people since its arrival to the Western Hemisphere in March 2015. With the fluidity of this outbreak and almost daily news updates and recommendations, many parents have voiced or will be voicing concerns regarding summer travel destinations.
Many concerns about Zika virus have been previously addressed in this column (“Zika virus: More questions than answers?” by Dr. Kristina Bryant). However, if the decision is to avoid international travel because of the ongoing Zika outbreak, it doesn’t mean your patients get a free pass and will not have to be concerned about acquiring any infectious diseases. They still need to be vigilant about avoiding those pesky vectors that transmit arboviruses and other vector-borne diseases that occur in the United States.
Arboviruses are transmitted by mosquitoes, ticks, or fleas. Most infections are subclinical. If symptoms develop, they are manifested by a generalized febrile illness including fever, headache, myalgia, arthralgia, and rash. Hemorrhagic fever (dengue) or neuroinvasive disease can include aseptic meningitis, encephalitis, or acute flaccid paralysis. Neuroinvasive disease rarely occurs with dengue, Colorado tick fever, and chikungunya infections.
While more than 100 arboviruses can cause infection, some of the more common arboviruses associated with human disease include West Nile, first detected in the United States in 1999 and chikungunya, first reported in the Americas in 2013 with local transmission documented in Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands in 2014. It is estimated that dengue causes over 100 million cases worldwide annually. Almost 40% of the world’s inhabitants live in endemic areas. The majority of cases on the U.S. mainland are imported. However, it is endemic in all U.S. territories including Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico. Between September 2015 and March 2016, Hawaii experienced a dengue outbreak involving 264 individuals including 46 children. As of April 16, 2016, there were no infectious individuals on the island.
Other domestic arboviruses causing disease include St. Louis, Eastern, and Western Equine encephalitis, La Crosse encephalitis, Colorado tick fever, and Powassan virus. All are transmitted by mosquitoes with the exception of Powassan and Colorado tick fever, which are transmitted by ticks. The numbers of cases nationally are much lower for these diseases, compared with West Nile, dengue, and chikungunya. National and state-specific information is available for domestic arboviruses at diseasemaps.usgs.gov/mapviewer. Data is compiled by ArboNET, a national arboviral surveillance system that is managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in conjunction with state health departments. Not only is human disease monitored, but it also maintains data on viremic blood donors, dead birds, mosquitoes, veterinary disease cases, and sentinel animals.
Spring and summer are the most active seasons for ticks. Bacterial and spirochetal diseases transmitted by them include rickettsial diseases such as Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, ehrlichiosis, and anaplasmosis. Tularemia in addition to Lyme and tick-borne relapsing fever are also transmitted by ticks. Babesiosis, which is due to a parasite, and southern tick-associated rash illness (STARI), whose causative agent is yet to be determined, are two additional tick-related diagnoses.
Of note, dengue, chikungunya, and Zika are all transmitted by infected Aedes mosquitoes. There is no enzootic cycle. Just human-mosquito-human transmission. In contrast, West Nile virus is transmitted by Culex mosquitoes in an enzootic cycle between an avian reservoir and humans.
Treatment
There is no specific treatment for arboviral infections. The primary goal is relief of symptoms with fluids, bed rest, and analgesics. For bacterial vector-borne diseases, antibiotic therapy is indicated and is based on the specific pathogen. Doxycycline is the drug of choice for treatment of suspected and confirmed Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, ehrlichiosis, and anaplasmosis even in children less than 8 years of age. Delay in initiation of antimicrobial therapy pending definitive diagnosis may lead to an adverse outcome. It is also the drug of choice for tick-borne relapsing fever.
Lyme disease is also responsive to antibiotic treatment. Therapy is based on the disease category. (Lyme disease in “Red Book: 2015 Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases,” [Elk Grove Village, Ill.: American Academy of Pediatrics, 2015, pp. 516-25]).
STARI clinically presents with a lesion that resembles erythema migrans in southern and southeastern states. However, it has not been associated with any of the complications reported with disseminated Lyme disease. Treatment is not recommended.
Tularemia and babesiosis are both responsive to antimicrobial therapy and would best be managed in consultation with an infectious disease physician.
A handy, concise, up to date reference guide about all of the tick-borne diseases including photographs is available at the App Store. The Tickborne Diseases App was developed by the CDC and it is free!
Prevention
The cornerstone of disease prevention is avoidance of mosquito and tick bites, in addition to eliminating mosquito breeding sites. Ticks are generally found near the ground, in brushy or wooded areas. They usually wait for a potential host to brush against them. When this happens, they climb onto the host and find a site to attach.
Is there a role for antimicrobial prophylaxis once a tick has been discovered? There is no data to support antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent Rocky Mountain spotted fever, ehrlichiosis, and anaplasmosis. Prophylaxis with doxycycline or ciprofloxacin is recommended for children and adults after exposure to an intentional release of tularemia and for laboratory workers after inadvertent exposure. For prevention of Lyme disease, a single dose of doxycycline (4 mg/kg, max dose 200 mg) may be offered under limited conditions: The patient is at least 8 years of age, resides in an area where Lyme is highly endemic, the tick removed was engorged, therapy can be initiated within 72 hours after tick removal, and the estimated time of attachment was at least 36 hours. There is inadequate data on the use of amoxicillin.
Remember, not all mosquitoes are alike. Those that transmit chikungunya, dengue, and Zika (Aedes mosquitoes) are primarily daytime mosquitoes, but also can bite at night. West Nile is transmitted by Culex mosquitoes, which feed from dusk to dawn.
Here are some tips to share with your patients that should decrease their chances of acquiring a mosquito or tick-borne disease:
• Apply mosquito repellent only to intact exposed skin when outdoors. Most repellents can be safely used on children at least 2 months of age and older. Avoid applying repellent directly on the child’s hand. Use at least a 20% DEET (N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide) containing product. Other Environmental Protection Agency–registered repellents are an alternative (Additional information is available at http://www2.epa.gov/insect-repellents). Products containing oil of lemon eucalyptus (OLE) or p-Menthane-3,8-diol (PMD) should not be used on children under 3 years of age.
• Apply permethrin to clothing, hats, boots, and so on. It is designed to repel mosquitoes and ticks. It can last for several washings. It is ideal to spray over nets covering carriers in children younger than 2 months of age.
• Wear long-sleeved shirts and long pants tucked inside of socks when hiking.
• Check for ticks daily, especially under the arms, behind the ears, around the waist, behind the knees, and inside belly buttons after outdoor activities.
• Have your patients learn how to effectively remove a tick. With a fine tipped tweezer, grasp the tick as close to the skin as possible and pull straight up with even pressure. Do not twist or jerk the tick. Do not squash the tick. Place it in a bag and dispose of it. Clean the site after removal with alcohol, iodine, or soap and water.
• Encourage families to mosquito proof their home by using screens on windows and doors, and using air conditioning when available.
• Empty and scrub all items that contain water such as birdbaths, planters, or wading pools around the outside of the home at least weekly because mosquitoes lay eggs in or near free standing water.
• Dogs and cats should be treated for ticks as recommended by the veterinarian.
The impact of the ongoing Zika virus outbreak is uncertain. While it may have an impact on those planning international travel now and in the near future, several arboviral and vector-borne diseases currently exist in the United States. Encouraging our patients to practice interventions to prevent mosquito and tick bites now will also serve to protect them if Zika virus becomes established in the Aedes mosquitoes here in the future and/or if they have plans for international travel. For up to date information on Zika virus for yourself and your patients, visit www.cdc.gov/zika.
Bonnie M. Word, M.D., is a pediatric infectious disease specialist and director of the Houston Travel Medicine Clinic. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures. Email Dr. Word at [email protected].
May has arrived, and for the majority of your patients it signals the end of the school year and the beginning of summer vacation. Zika virus is on the minds of most people since its arrival to the Western Hemisphere in March 2015. With the fluidity of this outbreak and almost daily news updates and recommendations, many parents have voiced or will be voicing concerns regarding summer travel destinations.
Many concerns about Zika virus have been previously addressed in this column (“Zika virus: More questions than answers?” by Dr. Kristina Bryant). However, if the decision is to avoid international travel because of the ongoing Zika outbreak, it doesn’t mean your patients get a free pass and will not have to be concerned about acquiring any infectious diseases. They still need to be vigilant about avoiding those pesky vectors that transmit arboviruses and other vector-borne diseases that occur in the United States.
Arboviruses are transmitted by mosquitoes, ticks, or fleas. Most infections are subclinical. If symptoms develop, they are manifested by a generalized febrile illness including fever, headache, myalgia, arthralgia, and rash. Hemorrhagic fever (dengue) or neuroinvasive disease can include aseptic meningitis, encephalitis, or acute flaccid paralysis. Neuroinvasive disease rarely occurs with dengue, Colorado tick fever, and chikungunya infections.
While more than 100 arboviruses can cause infection, some of the more common arboviruses associated with human disease include West Nile, first detected in the United States in 1999 and chikungunya, first reported in the Americas in 2013 with local transmission documented in Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands in 2014. It is estimated that dengue causes over 100 million cases worldwide annually. Almost 40% of the world’s inhabitants live in endemic areas. The majority of cases on the U.S. mainland are imported. However, it is endemic in all U.S. territories including Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico. Between September 2015 and March 2016, Hawaii experienced a dengue outbreak involving 264 individuals including 46 children. As of April 16, 2016, there were no infectious individuals on the island.
Other domestic arboviruses causing disease include St. Louis, Eastern, and Western Equine encephalitis, La Crosse encephalitis, Colorado tick fever, and Powassan virus. All are transmitted by mosquitoes with the exception of Powassan and Colorado tick fever, which are transmitted by ticks. The numbers of cases nationally are much lower for these diseases, compared with West Nile, dengue, and chikungunya. National and state-specific information is available for domestic arboviruses at diseasemaps.usgs.gov/mapviewer. Data is compiled by ArboNET, a national arboviral surveillance system that is managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in conjunction with state health departments. Not only is human disease monitored, but it also maintains data on viremic blood donors, dead birds, mosquitoes, veterinary disease cases, and sentinel animals.
Spring and summer are the most active seasons for ticks. Bacterial and spirochetal diseases transmitted by them include rickettsial diseases such as Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, ehrlichiosis, and anaplasmosis. Tularemia in addition to Lyme and tick-borne relapsing fever are also transmitted by ticks. Babesiosis, which is due to a parasite, and southern tick-associated rash illness (STARI), whose causative agent is yet to be determined, are two additional tick-related diagnoses.
Of note, dengue, chikungunya, and Zika are all transmitted by infected Aedes mosquitoes. There is no enzootic cycle. Just human-mosquito-human transmission. In contrast, West Nile virus is transmitted by Culex mosquitoes in an enzootic cycle between an avian reservoir and humans.
Treatment
There is no specific treatment for arboviral infections. The primary goal is relief of symptoms with fluids, bed rest, and analgesics. For bacterial vector-borne diseases, antibiotic therapy is indicated and is based on the specific pathogen. Doxycycline is the drug of choice for treatment of suspected and confirmed Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, ehrlichiosis, and anaplasmosis even in children less than 8 years of age. Delay in initiation of antimicrobial therapy pending definitive diagnosis may lead to an adverse outcome. It is also the drug of choice for tick-borne relapsing fever.
Lyme disease is also responsive to antibiotic treatment. Therapy is based on the disease category. (Lyme disease in “Red Book: 2015 Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases,” [Elk Grove Village, Ill.: American Academy of Pediatrics, 2015, pp. 516-25]).
STARI clinically presents with a lesion that resembles erythema migrans in southern and southeastern states. However, it has not been associated with any of the complications reported with disseminated Lyme disease. Treatment is not recommended.
Tularemia and babesiosis are both responsive to antimicrobial therapy and would best be managed in consultation with an infectious disease physician.
A handy, concise, up to date reference guide about all of the tick-borne diseases including photographs is available at the App Store. The Tickborne Diseases App was developed by the CDC and it is free!
Prevention
The cornerstone of disease prevention is avoidance of mosquito and tick bites, in addition to eliminating mosquito breeding sites. Ticks are generally found near the ground, in brushy or wooded areas. They usually wait for a potential host to brush against them. When this happens, they climb onto the host and find a site to attach.
Is there a role for antimicrobial prophylaxis once a tick has been discovered? There is no data to support antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent Rocky Mountain spotted fever, ehrlichiosis, and anaplasmosis. Prophylaxis with doxycycline or ciprofloxacin is recommended for children and adults after exposure to an intentional release of tularemia and for laboratory workers after inadvertent exposure. For prevention of Lyme disease, a single dose of doxycycline (4 mg/kg, max dose 200 mg) may be offered under limited conditions: The patient is at least 8 years of age, resides in an area where Lyme is highly endemic, the tick removed was engorged, therapy can be initiated within 72 hours after tick removal, and the estimated time of attachment was at least 36 hours. There is inadequate data on the use of amoxicillin.
Remember, not all mosquitoes are alike. Those that transmit chikungunya, dengue, and Zika (Aedes mosquitoes) are primarily daytime mosquitoes, but also can bite at night. West Nile is transmitted by Culex mosquitoes, which feed from dusk to dawn.
Here are some tips to share with your patients that should decrease their chances of acquiring a mosquito or tick-borne disease:
• Apply mosquito repellent only to intact exposed skin when outdoors. Most repellents can be safely used on children at least 2 months of age and older. Avoid applying repellent directly on the child’s hand. Use at least a 20% DEET (N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide) containing product. Other Environmental Protection Agency–registered repellents are an alternative (Additional information is available at http://www2.epa.gov/insect-repellents). Products containing oil of lemon eucalyptus (OLE) or p-Menthane-3,8-diol (PMD) should not be used on children under 3 years of age.
• Apply permethrin to clothing, hats, boots, and so on. It is designed to repel mosquitoes and ticks. It can last for several washings. It is ideal to spray over nets covering carriers in children younger than 2 months of age.
• Wear long-sleeved shirts and long pants tucked inside of socks when hiking.
• Check for ticks daily, especially under the arms, behind the ears, around the waist, behind the knees, and inside belly buttons after outdoor activities.
• Have your patients learn how to effectively remove a tick. With a fine tipped tweezer, grasp the tick as close to the skin as possible and pull straight up with even pressure. Do not twist or jerk the tick. Do not squash the tick. Place it in a bag and dispose of it. Clean the site after removal with alcohol, iodine, or soap and water.
• Encourage families to mosquito proof their home by using screens on windows and doors, and using air conditioning when available.
• Empty and scrub all items that contain water such as birdbaths, planters, or wading pools around the outside of the home at least weekly because mosquitoes lay eggs in or near free standing water.
• Dogs and cats should be treated for ticks as recommended by the veterinarian.
The impact of the ongoing Zika virus outbreak is uncertain. While it may have an impact on those planning international travel now and in the near future, several arboviral and vector-borne diseases currently exist in the United States. Encouraging our patients to practice interventions to prevent mosquito and tick bites now will also serve to protect them if Zika virus becomes established in the Aedes mosquitoes here in the future and/or if they have plans for international travel. For up to date information on Zika virus for yourself and your patients, visit www.cdc.gov/zika.
Bonnie M. Word, M.D., is a pediatric infectious disease specialist and director of the Houston Travel Medicine Clinic. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures. Email Dr. Word at [email protected].
Slaying the dragon of false research
John Ioannidis was introduced as a rock star. To the congregation at the 2016 Lown Institute Conference in Chicago, that is what he is. The Stanford University professor is most famous for the heavily cited (over 2,000 citations so far) paper in PLoS Medicine, titled, “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.”1 The cheering audience of clinicians, researchers, community organizers, and patient advocates were obviously familiar with the work. His message about the poor state of medical research and the inaccurate application of evidence-based medicine resonated with this audience. The conference’s emphasis was on Right Care, a balance between the many benefits of modern medical care and the harms of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. There are many similar initiatives in medicine. For instance, in 2012 the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation launched Choosing Wisely “with a goal of advancing a national dialogue on avoiding wasteful or unnecessary medical tests, treatments, and procedures.”2 The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has been issuing many recommendations recently. Several of those have counseled reducing screening and treatment rather than touting medical advances.
Pediatric hospital medicine (PHM) is a leader in this value medicine movement. Pediatricians are aware of the emotional trauma of procedures and hospitalizations, of the harm caused by radiation exposure, and of the phobia and dread of needle pokes. Primum non nocere.
The medical care system has contributed to the improvement in life expectancy over the last 50 years. The life expectancy for U.S. adults has increased about 3-4 years during that interval, although it is unclear what fraction of that is attributable to medical care. The per capita cost of the U.S. health care system is far greater than in other democratic developed countries, so we probably spend most of those extra 3-4 years working to pay for it. Government health care contributes heavily to the national debt. That is important because, despite all the technological advances in medicine, the socioeconomic determinants of health are far more important.3 So if we are wasting money on ineffective care, we can improve health by safely doing less.
A recently released article documents a salient example of inaccurate research leading to ineffective treatment. For over five winters, the pediatric hospitalist community has been debating whether nebulized hypertonic saline is beneficial for infants hospitalized with bronchiolitis. At a pro/con SmackDown debate at the 2011 PHM conference, both of the speakers were cautious in presenting their side of the debate. Nebulized hypertonic saline is effective for improving pulmonary clearance of the thick mucus of older children with cystic fibrosis. A few initial studies had shown conflicting but promising responses for infants with bronchiolitis, but the studies were underpowered and used disparate methods.
Since then, the accumulated evidence has been disappointing. Many additional small, underpowered studies were published in 2013-2014. A total of 18 studies were included in the latest meta-analysis by Brooks, Harrison, and Ralston, published online as “Association Between Hypertonic Saline and Hospital Length of Stay in Acute Viral Bronchiolitis: A Reanalysis of 2 Meta-analyses” in JAMA Pediatrics.4
Meta-analyses often obscure important differences among the studies they are combining, resulting in comparing apples and oranges, or worse creating fruit salad. But in a tour de force analysis, this article did not hand wave away all the typical statistical assumptions made by the average published meta-analysis. The intrepid authors examined the differences among the publications and calculated that those studies were too heterogeneous to be combined simply. When studied in more depth, two publications from one study population in China were outliers. The average length of stay was much longer in that study. Among the remaining papers, there was a residual correlation in which the studies leaning toward showing benefit had admitted the treatment population later in the course of the illness.
After adjustment for these anomalies, the conclusion was that the nebulized hypertonic saline treatment did not produce a clinically significant benefit. After years of debate on the hospitalist Listserv, this new article had one commentator pronouncing the end of using nebulized hypertonic saline for hospitalized infants with bronchiolitis and asserting that the issue could now rest in peace.
References
1. PLoS Med. 2005. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124.
4. JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Apr 18. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.0079.
Dr. Powell is a pediatric hospitalist and clinical ethics consultant living in St. Louis. Dr. Powell said he had no relevant financial disclosures. E-mail him at [email protected].
John Ioannidis was introduced as a rock star. To the congregation at the 2016 Lown Institute Conference in Chicago, that is what he is. The Stanford University professor is most famous for the heavily cited (over 2,000 citations so far) paper in PLoS Medicine, titled, “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.”1 The cheering audience of clinicians, researchers, community organizers, and patient advocates were obviously familiar with the work. His message about the poor state of medical research and the inaccurate application of evidence-based medicine resonated with this audience. The conference’s emphasis was on Right Care, a balance between the many benefits of modern medical care and the harms of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. There are many similar initiatives in medicine. For instance, in 2012 the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation launched Choosing Wisely “with a goal of advancing a national dialogue on avoiding wasteful or unnecessary medical tests, treatments, and procedures.”2 The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has been issuing many recommendations recently. Several of those have counseled reducing screening and treatment rather than touting medical advances.
Pediatric hospital medicine (PHM) is a leader in this value medicine movement. Pediatricians are aware of the emotional trauma of procedures and hospitalizations, of the harm caused by radiation exposure, and of the phobia and dread of needle pokes. Primum non nocere.
The medical care system has contributed to the improvement in life expectancy over the last 50 years. The life expectancy for U.S. adults has increased about 3-4 years during that interval, although it is unclear what fraction of that is attributable to medical care. The per capita cost of the U.S. health care system is far greater than in other democratic developed countries, so we probably spend most of those extra 3-4 years working to pay for it. Government health care contributes heavily to the national debt. That is important because, despite all the technological advances in medicine, the socioeconomic determinants of health are far more important.3 So if we are wasting money on ineffective care, we can improve health by safely doing less.
A recently released article documents a salient example of inaccurate research leading to ineffective treatment. For over five winters, the pediatric hospitalist community has been debating whether nebulized hypertonic saline is beneficial for infants hospitalized with bronchiolitis. At a pro/con SmackDown debate at the 2011 PHM conference, both of the speakers were cautious in presenting their side of the debate. Nebulized hypertonic saline is effective for improving pulmonary clearance of the thick mucus of older children with cystic fibrosis. A few initial studies had shown conflicting but promising responses for infants with bronchiolitis, but the studies were underpowered and used disparate methods.
Since then, the accumulated evidence has been disappointing. Many additional small, underpowered studies were published in 2013-2014. A total of 18 studies were included in the latest meta-analysis by Brooks, Harrison, and Ralston, published online as “Association Between Hypertonic Saline and Hospital Length of Stay in Acute Viral Bronchiolitis: A Reanalysis of 2 Meta-analyses” in JAMA Pediatrics.4
Meta-analyses often obscure important differences among the studies they are combining, resulting in comparing apples and oranges, or worse creating fruit salad. But in a tour de force analysis, this article did not hand wave away all the typical statistical assumptions made by the average published meta-analysis. The intrepid authors examined the differences among the publications and calculated that those studies were too heterogeneous to be combined simply. When studied in more depth, two publications from one study population in China were outliers. The average length of stay was much longer in that study. Among the remaining papers, there was a residual correlation in which the studies leaning toward showing benefit had admitted the treatment population later in the course of the illness.
After adjustment for these anomalies, the conclusion was that the nebulized hypertonic saline treatment did not produce a clinically significant benefit. After years of debate on the hospitalist Listserv, this new article had one commentator pronouncing the end of using nebulized hypertonic saline for hospitalized infants with bronchiolitis and asserting that the issue could now rest in peace.
References
1. PLoS Med. 2005. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124.
4. JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Apr 18. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.0079.
Dr. Powell is a pediatric hospitalist and clinical ethics consultant living in St. Louis. Dr. Powell said he had no relevant financial disclosures. E-mail him at [email protected].
John Ioannidis was introduced as a rock star. To the congregation at the 2016 Lown Institute Conference in Chicago, that is what he is. The Stanford University professor is most famous for the heavily cited (over 2,000 citations so far) paper in PLoS Medicine, titled, “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.”1 The cheering audience of clinicians, researchers, community organizers, and patient advocates were obviously familiar with the work. His message about the poor state of medical research and the inaccurate application of evidence-based medicine resonated with this audience. The conference’s emphasis was on Right Care, a balance between the many benefits of modern medical care and the harms of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. There are many similar initiatives in medicine. For instance, in 2012 the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation launched Choosing Wisely “with a goal of advancing a national dialogue on avoiding wasteful or unnecessary medical tests, treatments, and procedures.”2 The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has been issuing many recommendations recently. Several of those have counseled reducing screening and treatment rather than touting medical advances.
Pediatric hospital medicine (PHM) is a leader in this value medicine movement. Pediatricians are aware of the emotional trauma of procedures and hospitalizations, of the harm caused by radiation exposure, and of the phobia and dread of needle pokes. Primum non nocere.
The medical care system has contributed to the improvement in life expectancy over the last 50 years. The life expectancy for U.S. adults has increased about 3-4 years during that interval, although it is unclear what fraction of that is attributable to medical care. The per capita cost of the U.S. health care system is far greater than in other democratic developed countries, so we probably spend most of those extra 3-4 years working to pay for it. Government health care contributes heavily to the national debt. That is important because, despite all the technological advances in medicine, the socioeconomic determinants of health are far more important.3 So if we are wasting money on ineffective care, we can improve health by safely doing less.
A recently released article documents a salient example of inaccurate research leading to ineffective treatment. For over five winters, the pediatric hospitalist community has been debating whether nebulized hypertonic saline is beneficial for infants hospitalized with bronchiolitis. At a pro/con SmackDown debate at the 2011 PHM conference, both of the speakers were cautious in presenting their side of the debate. Nebulized hypertonic saline is effective for improving pulmonary clearance of the thick mucus of older children with cystic fibrosis. A few initial studies had shown conflicting but promising responses for infants with bronchiolitis, but the studies were underpowered and used disparate methods.
Since then, the accumulated evidence has been disappointing. Many additional small, underpowered studies were published in 2013-2014. A total of 18 studies were included in the latest meta-analysis by Brooks, Harrison, and Ralston, published online as “Association Between Hypertonic Saline and Hospital Length of Stay in Acute Viral Bronchiolitis: A Reanalysis of 2 Meta-analyses” in JAMA Pediatrics.4
Meta-analyses often obscure important differences among the studies they are combining, resulting in comparing apples and oranges, or worse creating fruit salad. But in a tour de force analysis, this article did not hand wave away all the typical statistical assumptions made by the average published meta-analysis. The intrepid authors examined the differences among the publications and calculated that those studies were too heterogeneous to be combined simply. When studied in more depth, two publications from one study population in China were outliers. The average length of stay was much longer in that study. Among the remaining papers, there was a residual correlation in which the studies leaning toward showing benefit had admitted the treatment population later in the course of the illness.
After adjustment for these anomalies, the conclusion was that the nebulized hypertonic saline treatment did not produce a clinically significant benefit. After years of debate on the hospitalist Listserv, this new article had one commentator pronouncing the end of using nebulized hypertonic saline for hospitalized infants with bronchiolitis and asserting that the issue could now rest in peace.
References
1. PLoS Med. 2005. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124.
4. JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Apr 18. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.0079.
Dr. Powell is a pediatric hospitalist and clinical ethics consultant living in St. Louis. Dr. Powell said he had no relevant financial disclosures. E-mail him at [email protected].
Smartphones, smart parents
In the age of technology, parents denying their teens a smartphone is blatant child abuse, at least in the eyes of the teen. Between Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat, a teen’s entire life revolves around minute-to-minute check-ins. Smartphones have opened the door for sexual predators, bullying, and complete withdrawal from the world that surrounds them. But, with every bad there is a good and it’s knowing how to make the technology takeover work for you.
The smartphone is the best bargaining chip ever created. A teen would sooner die than lose his or her phone. Parents need to use this upper hand to get just about anything done: “You will get your phone back when XYZ is done.” Teens should understand that a phone is a privilege and not a right, so if they don’t want to cooperate, then there is a consequence.
Second, there is no greater source of information than a teen’s phone. From information in text, to locations, to the dreaded selfies, teens cannot help themselves when it comes to sharing every aspect of their lives. There are countless stories of teens getting busted because they posted a picture on Instagram with the person they were not supposed to be with or from a place they were not supposed to be. There are several great apps that allow parents to see deleted texts, and track locations and websites visited. These same apps allow parents to add controls that block X-rated websites, and notify them when the teen leaves a location or signs up for social media apps.
Accidents are the leading cause of death among teens and smartphones have only increased that. A recent study showed that 34% admitted to texting and driving. Another study reported that 11 teens die per day* because of distracted driver accidents. Not only are teens distracted, they also are inexperienced and are increasing their risk of injury. Teens are 23 times more likely to be in an accident as a result of distracted driving.
Now, there are apps that will alert parents when the teen is driving above the speed limit or has left the restricted area designated by the parent. These apps can silence incoming texts and prevent texts from being sent if the teen is in motion. Some of the apps will read the text out loud and respond with an automated response, letting the caller know that they are unavailable. Canary, My Mobile Watchdog, and Drivesafe.ly are examples, but both Sprint and Verizon have similar apps available. This is an excellent way for parents to monitor teen driving habits. The cost varies from $7.99/month to $99/month but the information provided is priceless.
Whether we like it or not, smartphones are here and have totally changed how teens interact and give them limitless exposure. Many parents, even if they own a smartphone, only use it for its basic functions and may have no idea these types of controls exist. Educating parents that they can use the phone as a tool to monitor and protect their teens is an important part of the well visit, and could very well save a life.
Dr. Pearce is a pediatrician in Frankfort, Ill. Email her at [email protected].
*Correction, 6/1/2016: The frequency of teen deaths due to distracted driver accidents was misquoted.
In the age of technology, parents denying their teens a smartphone is blatant child abuse, at least in the eyes of the teen. Between Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat, a teen’s entire life revolves around minute-to-minute check-ins. Smartphones have opened the door for sexual predators, bullying, and complete withdrawal from the world that surrounds them. But, with every bad there is a good and it’s knowing how to make the technology takeover work for you.
The smartphone is the best bargaining chip ever created. A teen would sooner die than lose his or her phone. Parents need to use this upper hand to get just about anything done: “You will get your phone back when XYZ is done.” Teens should understand that a phone is a privilege and not a right, so if they don’t want to cooperate, then there is a consequence.
Second, there is no greater source of information than a teen’s phone. From information in text, to locations, to the dreaded selfies, teens cannot help themselves when it comes to sharing every aspect of their lives. There are countless stories of teens getting busted because they posted a picture on Instagram with the person they were not supposed to be with or from a place they were not supposed to be. There are several great apps that allow parents to see deleted texts, and track locations and websites visited. These same apps allow parents to add controls that block X-rated websites, and notify them when the teen leaves a location or signs up for social media apps.
Accidents are the leading cause of death among teens and smartphones have only increased that. A recent study showed that 34% admitted to texting and driving. Another study reported that 11 teens die per day* because of distracted driver accidents. Not only are teens distracted, they also are inexperienced and are increasing their risk of injury. Teens are 23 times more likely to be in an accident as a result of distracted driving.
Now, there are apps that will alert parents when the teen is driving above the speed limit or has left the restricted area designated by the parent. These apps can silence incoming texts and prevent texts from being sent if the teen is in motion. Some of the apps will read the text out loud and respond with an automated response, letting the caller know that they are unavailable. Canary, My Mobile Watchdog, and Drivesafe.ly are examples, but both Sprint and Verizon have similar apps available. This is an excellent way for parents to monitor teen driving habits. The cost varies from $7.99/month to $99/month but the information provided is priceless.
Whether we like it or not, smartphones are here and have totally changed how teens interact and give them limitless exposure. Many parents, even if they own a smartphone, only use it for its basic functions and may have no idea these types of controls exist. Educating parents that they can use the phone as a tool to monitor and protect their teens is an important part of the well visit, and could very well save a life.
Dr. Pearce is a pediatrician in Frankfort, Ill. Email her at [email protected].
*Correction, 6/1/2016: The frequency of teen deaths due to distracted driver accidents was misquoted.
In the age of technology, parents denying their teens a smartphone is blatant child abuse, at least in the eyes of the teen. Between Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat, a teen’s entire life revolves around minute-to-minute check-ins. Smartphones have opened the door for sexual predators, bullying, and complete withdrawal from the world that surrounds them. But, with every bad there is a good and it’s knowing how to make the technology takeover work for you.
The smartphone is the best bargaining chip ever created. A teen would sooner die than lose his or her phone. Parents need to use this upper hand to get just about anything done: “You will get your phone back when XYZ is done.” Teens should understand that a phone is a privilege and not a right, so if they don’t want to cooperate, then there is a consequence.
Second, there is no greater source of information than a teen’s phone. From information in text, to locations, to the dreaded selfies, teens cannot help themselves when it comes to sharing every aspect of their lives. There are countless stories of teens getting busted because they posted a picture on Instagram with the person they were not supposed to be with or from a place they were not supposed to be. There are several great apps that allow parents to see deleted texts, and track locations and websites visited. These same apps allow parents to add controls that block X-rated websites, and notify them when the teen leaves a location or signs up for social media apps.
Accidents are the leading cause of death among teens and smartphones have only increased that. A recent study showed that 34% admitted to texting and driving. Another study reported that 11 teens die per day* because of distracted driver accidents. Not only are teens distracted, they also are inexperienced and are increasing their risk of injury. Teens are 23 times more likely to be in an accident as a result of distracted driving.
Now, there are apps that will alert parents when the teen is driving above the speed limit or has left the restricted area designated by the parent. These apps can silence incoming texts and prevent texts from being sent if the teen is in motion. Some of the apps will read the text out loud and respond with an automated response, letting the caller know that they are unavailable. Canary, My Mobile Watchdog, and Drivesafe.ly are examples, but both Sprint and Verizon have similar apps available. This is an excellent way for parents to monitor teen driving habits. The cost varies from $7.99/month to $99/month but the information provided is priceless.
Whether we like it or not, smartphones are here and have totally changed how teens interact and give them limitless exposure. Many parents, even if they own a smartphone, only use it for its basic functions and may have no idea these types of controls exist. Educating parents that they can use the phone as a tool to monitor and protect their teens is an important part of the well visit, and could very well save a life.
Dr. Pearce is a pediatrician in Frankfort, Ill. Email her at [email protected].
*Correction, 6/1/2016: The frequency of teen deaths due to distracted driver accidents was misquoted.
Disappearing Act
By now you must be tired of my rants about other specialties making inroads into our “turf.” But a brochure came across my desk that really gave me heartburn.
The glossy, multipage flier announced a meeting devoted to the treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI). The advertisement proudly claimed this 4-day event would be the largest medical conference dedicated to the treatment and prevention of CLI. It would usher in a “new era in limb salvage.” I was intrigued since a web announcement for the same meeting stated that it draws over 800 specialists including vascular surgeons, general surgeons, cardiologists, interventional cardiologists, general medicine/primary care physicians, interventional radiologists, podiatrists, wound care specialists, nurses, vascular technologists, and cardiac catheterization laboratory team members. I was taken aback! Are so many disparate specialists truly involved in the management of CLI?
Hmm, I thought. Maybe this is a meeting I should attend. I have spent most of my 36 years as a vascular surgeon trying to prevent amputations due to CLI, so I am always open to learning new things. I started to page through the calendar of events and talks. There really were some interesting presentations, including how to cross chronic occlusions, what wires to use, the controversy about drug eluting balloons, and many other endovascular techniques.
However, slowly it dawned on me that in the entire program there was not one presentation on surgery for CLI. It appeared that not a word was to be spoken about infrainguinal bypass in any form. Surgical treatment had been all but banished from the program. It was as if surgery for CLI had yet to be invented. DeBakey, Veith, Porter, Mannick, Leather, Dardik, Bergan and Yao … and all the other pioneers of modern vascular surgery, fictional characters in an Alice in Wonderland rabbit hole. Essentially, the entire program was devoted to endovascular therapies, medications for wound healing, hyperbaric oxygen, and other modalities that would not involve a trip to the operating room other than for a digit amputation or a debridement.
I could not understand how it was possible that a symposium dedicated to CLI would completely ignore arterial bypass. So I turned to the back of the program where there were listed approximately 75 authorities in the management of CLI. There were only 11 vascular surgeons listed out of the whole bunch. I scanned through the roster and was baffled to note that none of our thought leaders in vascular surgery were listed. Absent from the list were names like Joe Mills, Mike Conte, and Frank Veith, to name just a few. In fact, I recognized the name of only one, a young vascular surgeon who I know generally favors an endovascular approach. None of the six program course directors were vascular surgeons either.
I can only surmise that the organizers of this event regard surgical bypass as either an anachronism or possibly a procedure that should be listed in the same damning category as frontal lobotomy. No listed discussion of endovascular first or surgical bypass first for CLI. No mention of the BASIL trial and no presentation on the potential value of the BEST trial. Surgery seemed taboo – as if it were a dangerous treatment that causes, rather than prevents, major amputation due to CLI.
What has allowed this almost total denial of the benefits of surgical revascularization? How is it that vascular surgeons have been supplanted as leaders in the management of CLI and possibly all vascular disease processes? How is this going to impact vascular surgeons and, even more importantly, the vascular health of our patients?
In the past I have posited that it is because endovascular procedures can also be performed by specialists other than vascular surgeons. These physicians, facing decreased compensation for treating the conditions usually considered part of their bailiwick, look to vascular treatments to supplant their dwindling income. For example, cardiac surgeons have come to understand that ablating the saphenous vein is more cost-effective than using it for a life-saving CABG. Or dermatologists suddenly finding spider vein sclerotherapy to be the most exciting activity since pimple popping. Or invasive cardiologists discovering that there are a whole lot of arteries other than the coronaries just waiting to be dilated and stented whether they need to be or not. Then, once they become aware of the financial benefits of treating vascular patients they clamor for educational events that will teach them how to do even more – and, hopefully, do it better?
So that may be one reason that these non–vascular surgeon symposiums are starting to explode. But even more troubling is the role of industry, the suppliers of all the devices that allow physicians and surgeons to perform these endovascular procedures. Certainly, the major medical device manufacturers have been, and still are, very supportive of vascular surgery and vascular surgeons, but it is the endo world that is now their major playground. After all, how much profit will a company make when we bypass with a saphenous vein or use the cephalic vein for a fistula? It’s no wonder they want to exhibit at these endovascular meetings because it’s their stents, balloons, wires, catheters, lasers, and ablation devices that return a profit. And really, is it rational to expect industry to determine which specialist is most suited to use their product? One may hope that they would not sell a device to an untrained physician but, other than for insisting on some basic training, we cannot count on industry to credential its users.
However, the reasons for vascular surgeons becoming marginalized are even more complex. Further, I fear they may be insurmountable unless vascular surgeons admit that we are also partly responsible. First is the fact that, as a specialty, we were late to the party. Let’s face it, vascular surgeons did not invent endovascular procedures. It was Charles Dotter and cardiologists Gruentzig, Palmaz and Schatz who started the revolution. In fact, many of our earlier vascular leaders were so unimpressed that it took years before presentations about endovascular procedures made it into the SVS annual meeting or became part of vascular surgical training. Admittedly, since then many advances in these procedures have resulted from the genius of some vascular surgeons, especially in the treatment of aortic aneurysms, but which catheter or wire is named after a surgeon? Which surgeon invented the latest stent, ablation catheter, or saphenous venous ablation method? We have largely benefited from the inspirational work of interventional radiologists and cardiologists. They have invented the technologies and pushed the boundaries that have allowed us to access pedal and radial arteries, obliterate calcified arterial plaque, place medicated balloons and stents, and replace venous stripping with less invasive ablations. Moreover, they proved that these procedures can be done in outpatient centers where the remuneration exceeds that which we can earn when these procedures are performed in a hospital. So should we complain when cardiologists or interventional radiologists mount major symposiums dealing with vascular conditions? Yes, we may be correct that only vascular surgeons have been trained to understand all the ramifications of vascular disorders. However, this is changing as radiology and cardiology training programs increasingly add peripheral vascular disease to their curricula. Further, although vascular training programs now involve a great deal of endovascular training, many still do not offer significant exposure to some of the more “radical” therapies such as pedal access and advanced CTO techniques.
However, there is a more significant reason vascular surgeons are partly responsible for losing control over these symposia and vascular patients. That is, we have embraced endovascular therapies as being more financially remunerative, more “fun,” and less time consuming than open surgery. Why spend 4 hours bending over an operating table, harvesting veins from all over the body, staring through illuminated loupes and tediously sewing in a flimsy basilic vein into a tiny calcified tibial artery when, for a multiple of the payment that procedure would generate, one can spend an hour in the angio suite ballooning the responsible lesion. Better still, you get to do it all over again later and make the same amount of money twice! We probably have also brainwashed our referring physicians that this is best for the patient. After all, most internists still laughingly repeat the mantra “fem-pop, fem-stop, fem-chop.” Once convinced that endo is best, what’s to stop those doctors from allowing their favorite radiologist or cardiologist to treat their patient? That’s especially so since as a specialty we have not done a good job educating doctors and patients that vascular surgeons are also equally proficient in endovascular treatments. Vascular surgeons have been given an opportunity to prove one way or another whether surgical bypass plays a significant role in the management of CLI. That is by enrolling patients in the BEST trial, the first large NHLBI-supported RCT comparing endovascular to open surgical therapies. However, enrollment has been lagging to the point that the study may be prematurely terminated. Why is it that we have been so reluctant to enter patients? Is it ennui or is it that we lose income every time a patient is randomized to bypass rather than a lucrative outpatient atherectomy?
So now we are in an era where conferences and symposia on vascular issues are devoid of vascular surgical input. This may have serious consequences for patients. Physicians, including young vascular surgeons, unaware of the benefit of surgical bypass, will continue to attack the leg arteries until all the target vessels are beyond salvage. Finally, the vascular surgeon will be consulted to remove the leg and the amputation prevention symposium will have achieved the exact opposite of its goals.
Dr. Russell H. Samson is a physician in the practice of Samson, Showalter, Lepore, Nair, and Dorsay and clinical professor of surgery, Florida State University, Tallahassee. He is also the medical editor of Vascular Specialist.
By now you must be tired of my rants about other specialties making inroads into our “turf.” But a brochure came across my desk that really gave me heartburn.
The glossy, multipage flier announced a meeting devoted to the treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI). The advertisement proudly claimed this 4-day event would be the largest medical conference dedicated to the treatment and prevention of CLI. It would usher in a “new era in limb salvage.” I was intrigued since a web announcement for the same meeting stated that it draws over 800 specialists including vascular surgeons, general surgeons, cardiologists, interventional cardiologists, general medicine/primary care physicians, interventional radiologists, podiatrists, wound care specialists, nurses, vascular technologists, and cardiac catheterization laboratory team members. I was taken aback! Are so many disparate specialists truly involved in the management of CLI?
Hmm, I thought. Maybe this is a meeting I should attend. I have spent most of my 36 years as a vascular surgeon trying to prevent amputations due to CLI, so I am always open to learning new things. I started to page through the calendar of events and talks. There really were some interesting presentations, including how to cross chronic occlusions, what wires to use, the controversy about drug eluting balloons, and many other endovascular techniques.
However, slowly it dawned on me that in the entire program there was not one presentation on surgery for CLI. It appeared that not a word was to be spoken about infrainguinal bypass in any form. Surgical treatment had been all but banished from the program. It was as if surgery for CLI had yet to be invented. DeBakey, Veith, Porter, Mannick, Leather, Dardik, Bergan and Yao … and all the other pioneers of modern vascular surgery, fictional characters in an Alice in Wonderland rabbit hole. Essentially, the entire program was devoted to endovascular therapies, medications for wound healing, hyperbaric oxygen, and other modalities that would not involve a trip to the operating room other than for a digit amputation or a debridement.
I could not understand how it was possible that a symposium dedicated to CLI would completely ignore arterial bypass. So I turned to the back of the program where there were listed approximately 75 authorities in the management of CLI. There were only 11 vascular surgeons listed out of the whole bunch. I scanned through the roster and was baffled to note that none of our thought leaders in vascular surgery were listed. Absent from the list were names like Joe Mills, Mike Conte, and Frank Veith, to name just a few. In fact, I recognized the name of only one, a young vascular surgeon who I know generally favors an endovascular approach. None of the six program course directors were vascular surgeons either.
I can only surmise that the organizers of this event regard surgical bypass as either an anachronism or possibly a procedure that should be listed in the same damning category as frontal lobotomy. No listed discussion of endovascular first or surgical bypass first for CLI. No mention of the BASIL trial and no presentation on the potential value of the BEST trial. Surgery seemed taboo – as if it were a dangerous treatment that causes, rather than prevents, major amputation due to CLI.
What has allowed this almost total denial of the benefits of surgical revascularization? How is it that vascular surgeons have been supplanted as leaders in the management of CLI and possibly all vascular disease processes? How is this going to impact vascular surgeons and, even more importantly, the vascular health of our patients?
In the past I have posited that it is because endovascular procedures can also be performed by specialists other than vascular surgeons. These physicians, facing decreased compensation for treating the conditions usually considered part of their bailiwick, look to vascular treatments to supplant their dwindling income. For example, cardiac surgeons have come to understand that ablating the saphenous vein is more cost-effective than using it for a life-saving CABG. Or dermatologists suddenly finding spider vein sclerotherapy to be the most exciting activity since pimple popping. Or invasive cardiologists discovering that there are a whole lot of arteries other than the coronaries just waiting to be dilated and stented whether they need to be or not. Then, once they become aware of the financial benefits of treating vascular patients they clamor for educational events that will teach them how to do even more – and, hopefully, do it better?
So that may be one reason that these non–vascular surgeon symposiums are starting to explode. But even more troubling is the role of industry, the suppliers of all the devices that allow physicians and surgeons to perform these endovascular procedures. Certainly, the major medical device manufacturers have been, and still are, very supportive of vascular surgery and vascular surgeons, but it is the endo world that is now their major playground. After all, how much profit will a company make when we bypass with a saphenous vein or use the cephalic vein for a fistula? It’s no wonder they want to exhibit at these endovascular meetings because it’s their stents, balloons, wires, catheters, lasers, and ablation devices that return a profit. And really, is it rational to expect industry to determine which specialist is most suited to use their product? One may hope that they would not sell a device to an untrained physician but, other than for insisting on some basic training, we cannot count on industry to credential its users.
However, the reasons for vascular surgeons becoming marginalized are even more complex. Further, I fear they may be insurmountable unless vascular surgeons admit that we are also partly responsible. First is the fact that, as a specialty, we were late to the party. Let’s face it, vascular surgeons did not invent endovascular procedures. It was Charles Dotter and cardiologists Gruentzig, Palmaz and Schatz who started the revolution. In fact, many of our earlier vascular leaders were so unimpressed that it took years before presentations about endovascular procedures made it into the SVS annual meeting or became part of vascular surgical training. Admittedly, since then many advances in these procedures have resulted from the genius of some vascular surgeons, especially in the treatment of aortic aneurysms, but which catheter or wire is named after a surgeon? Which surgeon invented the latest stent, ablation catheter, or saphenous venous ablation method? We have largely benefited from the inspirational work of interventional radiologists and cardiologists. They have invented the technologies and pushed the boundaries that have allowed us to access pedal and radial arteries, obliterate calcified arterial plaque, place medicated balloons and stents, and replace venous stripping with less invasive ablations. Moreover, they proved that these procedures can be done in outpatient centers where the remuneration exceeds that which we can earn when these procedures are performed in a hospital. So should we complain when cardiologists or interventional radiologists mount major symposiums dealing with vascular conditions? Yes, we may be correct that only vascular surgeons have been trained to understand all the ramifications of vascular disorders. However, this is changing as radiology and cardiology training programs increasingly add peripheral vascular disease to their curricula. Further, although vascular training programs now involve a great deal of endovascular training, many still do not offer significant exposure to some of the more “radical” therapies such as pedal access and advanced CTO techniques.
However, there is a more significant reason vascular surgeons are partly responsible for losing control over these symposia and vascular patients. That is, we have embraced endovascular therapies as being more financially remunerative, more “fun,” and less time consuming than open surgery. Why spend 4 hours bending over an operating table, harvesting veins from all over the body, staring through illuminated loupes and tediously sewing in a flimsy basilic vein into a tiny calcified tibial artery when, for a multiple of the payment that procedure would generate, one can spend an hour in the angio suite ballooning the responsible lesion. Better still, you get to do it all over again later and make the same amount of money twice! We probably have also brainwashed our referring physicians that this is best for the patient. After all, most internists still laughingly repeat the mantra “fem-pop, fem-stop, fem-chop.” Once convinced that endo is best, what’s to stop those doctors from allowing their favorite radiologist or cardiologist to treat their patient? That’s especially so since as a specialty we have not done a good job educating doctors and patients that vascular surgeons are also equally proficient in endovascular treatments. Vascular surgeons have been given an opportunity to prove one way or another whether surgical bypass plays a significant role in the management of CLI. That is by enrolling patients in the BEST trial, the first large NHLBI-supported RCT comparing endovascular to open surgical therapies. However, enrollment has been lagging to the point that the study may be prematurely terminated. Why is it that we have been so reluctant to enter patients? Is it ennui or is it that we lose income every time a patient is randomized to bypass rather than a lucrative outpatient atherectomy?
So now we are in an era where conferences and symposia on vascular issues are devoid of vascular surgical input. This may have serious consequences for patients. Physicians, including young vascular surgeons, unaware of the benefit of surgical bypass, will continue to attack the leg arteries until all the target vessels are beyond salvage. Finally, the vascular surgeon will be consulted to remove the leg and the amputation prevention symposium will have achieved the exact opposite of its goals.
Dr. Russell H. Samson is a physician in the practice of Samson, Showalter, Lepore, Nair, and Dorsay and clinical professor of surgery, Florida State University, Tallahassee. He is also the medical editor of Vascular Specialist.
By now you must be tired of my rants about other specialties making inroads into our “turf.” But a brochure came across my desk that really gave me heartburn.
The glossy, multipage flier announced a meeting devoted to the treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI). The advertisement proudly claimed this 4-day event would be the largest medical conference dedicated to the treatment and prevention of CLI. It would usher in a “new era in limb salvage.” I was intrigued since a web announcement for the same meeting stated that it draws over 800 specialists including vascular surgeons, general surgeons, cardiologists, interventional cardiologists, general medicine/primary care physicians, interventional radiologists, podiatrists, wound care specialists, nurses, vascular technologists, and cardiac catheterization laboratory team members. I was taken aback! Are so many disparate specialists truly involved in the management of CLI?
Hmm, I thought. Maybe this is a meeting I should attend. I have spent most of my 36 years as a vascular surgeon trying to prevent amputations due to CLI, so I am always open to learning new things. I started to page through the calendar of events and talks. There really were some interesting presentations, including how to cross chronic occlusions, what wires to use, the controversy about drug eluting balloons, and many other endovascular techniques.
However, slowly it dawned on me that in the entire program there was not one presentation on surgery for CLI. It appeared that not a word was to be spoken about infrainguinal bypass in any form. Surgical treatment had been all but banished from the program. It was as if surgery for CLI had yet to be invented. DeBakey, Veith, Porter, Mannick, Leather, Dardik, Bergan and Yao … and all the other pioneers of modern vascular surgery, fictional characters in an Alice in Wonderland rabbit hole. Essentially, the entire program was devoted to endovascular therapies, medications for wound healing, hyperbaric oxygen, and other modalities that would not involve a trip to the operating room other than for a digit amputation or a debridement.
I could not understand how it was possible that a symposium dedicated to CLI would completely ignore arterial bypass. So I turned to the back of the program where there were listed approximately 75 authorities in the management of CLI. There were only 11 vascular surgeons listed out of the whole bunch. I scanned through the roster and was baffled to note that none of our thought leaders in vascular surgery were listed. Absent from the list were names like Joe Mills, Mike Conte, and Frank Veith, to name just a few. In fact, I recognized the name of only one, a young vascular surgeon who I know generally favors an endovascular approach. None of the six program course directors were vascular surgeons either.
I can only surmise that the organizers of this event regard surgical bypass as either an anachronism or possibly a procedure that should be listed in the same damning category as frontal lobotomy. No listed discussion of endovascular first or surgical bypass first for CLI. No mention of the BASIL trial and no presentation on the potential value of the BEST trial. Surgery seemed taboo – as if it were a dangerous treatment that causes, rather than prevents, major amputation due to CLI.
What has allowed this almost total denial of the benefits of surgical revascularization? How is it that vascular surgeons have been supplanted as leaders in the management of CLI and possibly all vascular disease processes? How is this going to impact vascular surgeons and, even more importantly, the vascular health of our patients?
In the past I have posited that it is because endovascular procedures can also be performed by specialists other than vascular surgeons. These physicians, facing decreased compensation for treating the conditions usually considered part of their bailiwick, look to vascular treatments to supplant their dwindling income. For example, cardiac surgeons have come to understand that ablating the saphenous vein is more cost-effective than using it for a life-saving CABG. Or dermatologists suddenly finding spider vein sclerotherapy to be the most exciting activity since pimple popping. Or invasive cardiologists discovering that there are a whole lot of arteries other than the coronaries just waiting to be dilated and stented whether they need to be or not. Then, once they become aware of the financial benefits of treating vascular patients they clamor for educational events that will teach them how to do even more – and, hopefully, do it better?
So that may be one reason that these non–vascular surgeon symposiums are starting to explode. But even more troubling is the role of industry, the suppliers of all the devices that allow physicians and surgeons to perform these endovascular procedures. Certainly, the major medical device manufacturers have been, and still are, very supportive of vascular surgery and vascular surgeons, but it is the endo world that is now their major playground. After all, how much profit will a company make when we bypass with a saphenous vein or use the cephalic vein for a fistula? It’s no wonder they want to exhibit at these endovascular meetings because it’s their stents, balloons, wires, catheters, lasers, and ablation devices that return a profit. And really, is it rational to expect industry to determine which specialist is most suited to use their product? One may hope that they would not sell a device to an untrained physician but, other than for insisting on some basic training, we cannot count on industry to credential its users.
However, the reasons for vascular surgeons becoming marginalized are even more complex. Further, I fear they may be insurmountable unless vascular surgeons admit that we are also partly responsible. First is the fact that, as a specialty, we were late to the party. Let’s face it, vascular surgeons did not invent endovascular procedures. It was Charles Dotter and cardiologists Gruentzig, Palmaz and Schatz who started the revolution. In fact, many of our earlier vascular leaders were so unimpressed that it took years before presentations about endovascular procedures made it into the SVS annual meeting or became part of vascular surgical training. Admittedly, since then many advances in these procedures have resulted from the genius of some vascular surgeons, especially in the treatment of aortic aneurysms, but which catheter or wire is named after a surgeon? Which surgeon invented the latest stent, ablation catheter, or saphenous venous ablation method? We have largely benefited from the inspirational work of interventional radiologists and cardiologists. They have invented the technologies and pushed the boundaries that have allowed us to access pedal and radial arteries, obliterate calcified arterial plaque, place medicated balloons and stents, and replace venous stripping with less invasive ablations. Moreover, they proved that these procedures can be done in outpatient centers where the remuneration exceeds that which we can earn when these procedures are performed in a hospital. So should we complain when cardiologists or interventional radiologists mount major symposiums dealing with vascular conditions? Yes, we may be correct that only vascular surgeons have been trained to understand all the ramifications of vascular disorders. However, this is changing as radiology and cardiology training programs increasingly add peripheral vascular disease to their curricula. Further, although vascular training programs now involve a great deal of endovascular training, many still do not offer significant exposure to some of the more “radical” therapies such as pedal access and advanced CTO techniques.
However, there is a more significant reason vascular surgeons are partly responsible for losing control over these symposia and vascular patients. That is, we have embraced endovascular therapies as being more financially remunerative, more “fun,” and less time consuming than open surgery. Why spend 4 hours bending over an operating table, harvesting veins from all over the body, staring through illuminated loupes and tediously sewing in a flimsy basilic vein into a tiny calcified tibial artery when, for a multiple of the payment that procedure would generate, one can spend an hour in the angio suite ballooning the responsible lesion. Better still, you get to do it all over again later and make the same amount of money twice! We probably have also brainwashed our referring physicians that this is best for the patient. After all, most internists still laughingly repeat the mantra “fem-pop, fem-stop, fem-chop.” Once convinced that endo is best, what’s to stop those doctors from allowing their favorite radiologist or cardiologist to treat their patient? That’s especially so since as a specialty we have not done a good job educating doctors and patients that vascular surgeons are also equally proficient in endovascular treatments. Vascular surgeons have been given an opportunity to prove one way or another whether surgical bypass plays a significant role in the management of CLI. That is by enrolling patients in the BEST trial, the first large NHLBI-supported RCT comparing endovascular to open surgical therapies. However, enrollment has been lagging to the point that the study may be prematurely terminated. Why is it that we have been so reluctant to enter patients? Is it ennui or is it that we lose income every time a patient is randomized to bypass rather than a lucrative outpatient atherectomy?
So now we are in an era where conferences and symposia on vascular issues are devoid of vascular surgical input. This may have serious consequences for patients. Physicians, including young vascular surgeons, unaware of the benefit of surgical bypass, will continue to attack the leg arteries until all the target vessels are beyond salvage. Finally, the vascular surgeon will be consulted to remove the leg and the amputation prevention symposium will have achieved the exact opposite of its goals.
Dr. Russell H. Samson is a physician in the practice of Samson, Showalter, Lepore, Nair, and Dorsay and clinical professor of surgery, Florida State University, Tallahassee. He is also the medical editor of Vascular Specialist.
New suicide data: Reason to panic or ponder?
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s new data on suicide have resulted in much interest and concern. Both are warranted, but panic is not.
The CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics reported a 63% increase in U.S. deaths by suicide for females and 43% for males, equating to a national rate of 13.5/100,000 (the highest rate since 1986, representing a 2% increase per year, compared with 1% per year before that). In actual numbers, rather than percentages, there were 29,199 suicidal deaths in 1994, compared with 42,773 such deaths in 2014.
The numbers reported for some subgroups were of particular concern. For example, girls aged 10-14 had a triple increase (50 deaths in 1999, compared with 150 in 2014). Native Americans had the sharpest increase (89% for females and 38% for males), and the only demographic group that had a decreased rate was black males older than age 65.
Another suicide concern relates to methodology. Twenty-five percent of completed suicides were by hanging or strangulation in 2014, compared with 20% in 1999. This trend is worrisome, because hanging/strangulation is such a readily available method. Interestingly, female suicide by guns fell from 37% to 31%, and male suicidal deaths from guns, from 62% to 55%.
Finally, a New York Times article about the CDC data addressed some theories of what could be responsible for these increases. The authors noted that marriage rates had decreased and divorce rates had increased over the period in question. Unmarried adult men are 3.5 times more likely to die by suicide than married ones, and unmarried adult women are 2.8 times more likely to do so than their married counterparts. Divorce rates have doubled for middle-aged and older adults since the 1990s as well.
History informs us that major cataclysms such as World War I and World War II resulted in markedly decreased U.S. suicide rates, and that major financial depressions such as the crash of 1929-1934 were associated with enormously increased rates. Such data indicate that our current increases in suicide may be at least partly explained by vulnerable individuals’ concerns about the state of the world, coupled with the enormous difficulties associated with rectifying these concerns. There seems to be a sense of constant threat from within and without, from perceived hostile countries to global warming, and our relative helplessness adds to the burdens perceived by all – but especially by the more vulnerable among us.
The new reported suicide data certainly are worrisome but, hopefully, will lead us to consider what can be done to ameliorate the situation. One certain way to diminish the problem is through means restriction. It is my belief that all gun possession (rifles, handguns, etc.) should be forbidden except among the military and the police. A civilized society should be civil. It doesn’t take a Nostradamus, however, to predict that such restrictions are unlikely to take place in the United States now or, perhaps, ever. Certainly, a less controversial, but more costly, approach would be through markedly improved identification and treatment programs for those at risk.
We need many more properly trained social workers, psychologists, and psychiatrists staffing our emergency departments. In typical busy hospitals, the ED staff is overloaded and overwhelmed, and apt to dismiss the concerns of suicidal patients because they don’t consider their psychic pain as “legitimate,” and as a result, keep staff from their “real and needy” patients. Thus, imminently suicidal patients may be seen in a cursory manner, receiving what amounts to a revolving door approach.
Compounding this is the substantial shortage of mental health personnel capable of treating suicidal patients if and when they finally do get referred for outpatient mental health care. Waits at such centers are considerable, and there is a shortage of properly trained individuals to prescribe and closely monitor the required pharmacologic and psychological treatments.
In addition, there is an egregious lack of properly trained individuals to provide and closely monitor the psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy required; thus, the patient receives substandard and ineffective treatment, if any. How can we possibly fund adequate systems?
Many other developed countries have built and can afford health care systems that appear more advanced and humane than ours. We need to speak out and demand more for our patients and ourselves.
Dr. Sudak was chairman of the department of psychiatry at Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia, and clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania from 1992 until 2002, when he retired. He continued to have a small private practice and was active in the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention until 2012. Currently, he continues to serve as an expert witness in suicide malpractice litigation. He is married to Dr. Donna Sudak and is grateful for her advice on this manuscript.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s new data on suicide have resulted in much interest and concern. Both are warranted, but panic is not.
The CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics reported a 63% increase in U.S. deaths by suicide for females and 43% for males, equating to a national rate of 13.5/100,000 (the highest rate since 1986, representing a 2% increase per year, compared with 1% per year before that). In actual numbers, rather than percentages, there were 29,199 suicidal deaths in 1994, compared with 42,773 such deaths in 2014.
The numbers reported for some subgroups were of particular concern. For example, girls aged 10-14 had a triple increase (50 deaths in 1999, compared with 150 in 2014). Native Americans had the sharpest increase (89% for females and 38% for males), and the only demographic group that had a decreased rate was black males older than age 65.
Another suicide concern relates to methodology. Twenty-five percent of completed suicides were by hanging or strangulation in 2014, compared with 20% in 1999. This trend is worrisome, because hanging/strangulation is such a readily available method. Interestingly, female suicide by guns fell from 37% to 31%, and male suicidal deaths from guns, from 62% to 55%.
Finally, a New York Times article about the CDC data addressed some theories of what could be responsible for these increases. The authors noted that marriage rates had decreased and divorce rates had increased over the period in question. Unmarried adult men are 3.5 times more likely to die by suicide than married ones, and unmarried adult women are 2.8 times more likely to do so than their married counterparts. Divorce rates have doubled for middle-aged and older adults since the 1990s as well.
History informs us that major cataclysms such as World War I and World War II resulted in markedly decreased U.S. suicide rates, and that major financial depressions such as the crash of 1929-1934 were associated with enormously increased rates. Such data indicate that our current increases in suicide may be at least partly explained by vulnerable individuals’ concerns about the state of the world, coupled with the enormous difficulties associated with rectifying these concerns. There seems to be a sense of constant threat from within and without, from perceived hostile countries to global warming, and our relative helplessness adds to the burdens perceived by all – but especially by the more vulnerable among us.
The new reported suicide data certainly are worrisome but, hopefully, will lead us to consider what can be done to ameliorate the situation. One certain way to diminish the problem is through means restriction. It is my belief that all gun possession (rifles, handguns, etc.) should be forbidden except among the military and the police. A civilized society should be civil. It doesn’t take a Nostradamus, however, to predict that such restrictions are unlikely to take place in the United States now or, perhaps, ever. Certainly, a less controversial, but more costly, approach would be through markedly improved identification and treatment programs for those at risk.
We need many more properly trained social workers, psychologists, and psychiatrists staffing our emergency departments. In typical busy hospitals, the ED staff is overloaded and overwhelmed, and apt to dismiss the concerns of suicidal patients because they don’t consider their psychic pain as “legitimate,” and as a result, keep staff from their “real and needy” patients. Thus, imminently suicidal patients may be seen in a cursory manner, receiving what amounts to a revolving door approach.
Compounding this is the substantial shortage of mental health personnel capable of treating suicidal patients if and when they finally do get referred for outpatient mental health care. Waits at such centers are considerable, and there is a shortage of properly trained individuals to prescribe and closely monitor the required pharmacologic and psychological treatments.
In addition, there is an egregious lack of properly trained individuals to provide and closely monitor the psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy required; thus, the patient receives substandard and ineffective treatment, if any. How can we possibly fund adequate systems?
Many other developed countries have built and can afford health care systems that appear more advanced and humane than ours. We need to speak out and demand more for our patients and ourselves.
Dr. Sudak was chairman of the department of psychiatry at Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia, and clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania from 1992 until 2002, when he retired. He continued to have a small private practice and was active in the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention until 2012. Currently, he continues to serve as an expert witness in suicide malpractice litigation. He is married to Dr. Donna Sudak and is grateful for her advice on this manuscript.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s new data on suicide have resulted in much interest and concern. Both are warranted, but panic is not.
The CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics reported a 63% increase in U.S. deaths by suicide for females and 43% for males, equating to a national rate of 13.5/100,000 (the highest rate since 1986, representing a 2% increase per year, compared with 1% per year before that). In actual numbers, rather than percentages, there were 29,199 suicidal deaths in 1994, compared with 42,773 such deaths in 2014.
The numbers reported for some subgroups were of particular concern. For example, girls aged 10-14 had a triple increase (50 deaths in 1999, compared with 150 in 2014). Native Americans had the sharpest increase (89% for females and 38% for males), and the only demographic group that had a decreased rate was black males older than age 65.
Another suicide concern relates to methodology. Twenty-five percent of completed suicides were by hanging or strangulation in 2014, compared with 20% in 1999. This trend is worrisome, because hanging/strangulation is such a readily available method. Interestingly, female suicide by guns fell from 37% to 31%, and male suicidal deaths from guns, from 62% to 55%.
Finally, a New York Times article about the CDC data addressed some theories of what could be responsible for these increases. The authors noted that marriage rates had decreased and divorce rates had increased over the period in question. Unmarried adult men are 3.5 times more likely to die by suicide than married ones, and unmarried adult women are 2.8 times more likely to do so than their married counterparts. Divorce rates have doubled for middle-aged and older adults since the 1990s as well.
History informs us that major cataclysms such as World War I and World War II resulted in markedly decreased U.S. suicide rates, and that major financial depressions such as the crash of 1929-1934 were associated with enormously increased rates. Such data indicate that our current increases in suicide may be at least partly explained by vulnerable individuals’ concerns about the state of the world, coupled with the enormous difficulties associated with rectifying these concerns. There seems to be a sense of constant threat from within and without, from perceived hostile countries to global warming, and our relative helplessness adds to the burdens perceived by all – but especially by the more vulnerable among us.
The new reported suicide data certainly are worrisome but, hopefully, will lead us to consider what can be done to ameliorate the situation. One certain way to diminish the problem is through means restriction. It is my belief that all gun possession (rifles, handguns, etc.) should be forbidden except among the military and the police. A civilized society should be civil. It doesn’t take a Nostradamus, however, to predict that such restrictions are unlikely to take place in the United States now or, perhaps, ever. Certainly, a less controversial, but more costly, approach would be through markedly improved identification and treatment programs for those at risk.
We need many more properly trained social workers, psychologists, and psychiatrists staffing our emergency departments. In typical busy hospitals, the ED staff is overloaded and overwhelmed, and apt to dismiss the concerns of suicidal patients because they don’t consider their psychic pain as “legitimate,” and as a result, keep staff from their “real and needy” patients. Thus, imminently suicidal patients may be seen in a cursory manner, receiving what amounts to a revolving door approach.
Compounding this is the substantial shortage of mental health personnel capable of treating suicidal patients if and when they finally do get referred for outpatient mental health care. Waits at such centers are considerable, and there is a shortage of properly trained individuals to prescribe and closely monitor the required pharmacologic and psychological treatments.
In addition, there is an egregious lack of properly trained individuals to provide and closely monitor the psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy required; thus, the patient receives substandard and ineffective treatment, if any. How can we possibly fund adequate systems?
Many other developed countries have built and can afford health care systems that appear more advanced and humane than ours. We need to speak out and demand more for our patients and ourselves.
Dr. Sudak was chairman of the department of psychiatry at Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia, and clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania from 1992 until 2002, when he retired. He continued to have a small private practice and was active in the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention until 2012. Currently, he continues to serve as an expert witness in suicide malpractice litigation. He is married to Dr. Donna Sudak and is grateful for her advice on this manuscript.
Why Should I Join My Specialty Societies?
I admit it. I am a professional association junkie. I belong to more than 20 professional societies that serve dermatologists in my home state and in my region, nationally and internationally, as well as 2 other societies encompassing the entire house of medicine. I have worked on the boards of 6 of them and I have been on committees or developed educational programs for 15 of them. Dermatologists tend to be joiners and I enjoy being with my colleagues. However, in terms of my daily job of taking care of patients with skin disease, what are the real benefits of joining these professional associations?
Common advice on the Internet is for professionals to join relevant associations. Anderson1 on college.monster.com recommends that undergraduates seek membership in professional organizations for job opportunities, mentoring, professional development, networking, and scholarships. Some associations offer exclusive resources and group buying power. Others are prestigious and membership is a capstone achievement. There is strength in numbers, making advocacy a mission of many professional associations.
The AAD is the largest, most diverse, and most multifaceted of the dermatology associations to which I belong. For the last 6 years I have been privileged to serve as one of the secretary-treasurers, and I have seen the time and effort spent by many of my fellow dermatologists for the good of dermatology. The AAD has 19,265 members, of which the largest subgroup is the category of active fellows (10,858); 90% of dermatologists certified by the American Board of Dermatology belong to the AAD and 96% of members renewed last year (Cindy Kuhn, personal communication, February 2016). In 2016, the AAD surveyed the satisfaction of members by administering an online questionnaire inviting responses from a randomly selected 5975 members (excluding internationals, retirees, or those older than 72 years). The respondents ranked the major activities of the AAD according to their importance. Most important were professional development and educational programs (70% said very important) and up-to-date information on dermatology (70%). Also ranked highly were advancing advocacy agenda (57%), increasing public awareness (54%), and increasing visibility in the house of medicine (55%). Of less importance were products and services to support practice (29%), networking within the profession (25%), reference directory of members (24%), member discounts (22%), opportunity to gain leadership experience (10%), and career and employment opportunities (14%). In general, the members were either very satisfied or satisfied with the activities corresponding with the ranked importance. Overall satisfaction with the AAD was 88%. When divided demographically, young women in academics and group practice were somewhat more satisfied with AAD services and benefits than men older than 60 years in solo practice, though even in the latter group more than 83% were either very satisfied or satisfied. More than 67% of the members supported the initiatives taken for enhanced online education and information resources; data collection and registry platforms; development of new models of payment; and education, training, and online resources for the dermatology care team. Members of the AAD also can attend the meetings (7992 members at the 73rd Annual Meeting in 2015; 1639 at the 2015 Summer Academy Meeting) and read the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology and Dermatology World. In 2015, 10,061 AAD members participated in CME activities (Cindy Kuhn, personal communication, February 2016). In addition, members work within the committee and task force structure; in the last few years, the Organization Structure Committee and the officers have worked hard to place almost everyone who applied for an assignment on a committee.
Do dermatologists reflect the association world? We are incredibly engaged and the AAD’s penetrance into the community and high renewal rate are unique. In 2014, John Wiley & Sons, Inc,2 surveyed 1.2 million research professionals across 75 disciplines to learn how research professionals view scholarly societies and associations. Similar to AAD members, these professionals indicated that they joined their societies to take advantage of peer-reviewed journals, learning opportunities, and publications on techniques and trends. There was little variation across age, geographic location, and member status. The primary reason members renewed was because they felt connected to the community and appreciated the mentorship and networking that was available.2
The future of dermatology and specialty societies is dependent on young dermatologists who are currently in residencies or in their first jobs. They need the professional development, educational opportunities, networking and mentoring, and other benefits of joining specialty societies. Although skilled at acquiring networks through social media, the best growth and leverage of their professional networks occur within professional associations. Because of my experience meeting other dermatologists in the association world, I can find expert physicians for my patients who have unique problems or who have moved out of my location. Colleagues who have met me in person also seek me out to take care of their patients. Much learning occurs online; however, the value of attending educational sessions can be found in the ability to ask questions in real time and in the face-to-face connection with the experts as well as other members with similar interests. I recently attended a session on interesting hospital consultations and we had an active discussion about drug eruptions with many questions from the audience. The next day I was called to my hospital to see a patient and I went with confidence that I could use my new knowledge to ensure a good outcome. Most importantly, in this era of rapid unprecedented technological advances, the data and the information it produces are transforming our culture. When members with similar interests, skill sets, and goals come together in an effective professional association, they have the strength in numbers to drive change in a way that facilitates growth and development in the specialty. In 2016 this may be the single best reason to join a professional society. We can insure patients with skin disease receive excellent dermatological care by working with other dermatologists in our state and national societies to keep our knowledge and skills current, push for new concepts and treatments, and advocate for our patients and our practices.
The most important reason I joined dermatology associations is the stimulation from learning new concepts and skills in the presence of others who are also passionate about dermatology. Finding jobs to do within these groups was a natural progression of my membership and my career and has insulated me against the lurking danger of professional burnout. I recommend the same prescription for you: Join local, regional, and national dermatology associations; attend meetings; and find interesting work furthering the specialty with other passionate dermatologists.
- Anderson LB. 5 Reasons professional organizations are worth joining. Monster College website. college.monster.com/training/articles/2131-5-reasons-professional-organizations-are-worth-joining. Published June 16, 2011. Accessed April 8, 2016.
- Membership matters: lessons from members and non-members. Wiley website. https://chm.memberclicks.net/assets/docs/membership%20matters%202014%20-%20findings.pdf. Published March 2015. Accessed April 25, 2016.
I admit it. I am a professional association junkie. I belong to more than 20 professional societies that serve dermatologists in my home state and in my region, nationally and internationally, as well as 2 other societies encompassing the entire house of medicine. I have worked on the boards of 6 of them and I have been on committees or developed educational programs for 15 of them. Dermatologists tend to be joiners and I enjoy being with my colleagues. However, in terms of my daily job of taking care of patients with skin disease, what are the real benefits of joining these professional associations?
Common advice on the Internet is for professionals to join relevant associations. Anderson1 on college.monster.com recommends that undergraduates seek membership in professional organizations for job opportunities, mentoring, professional development, networking, and scholarships. Some associations offer exclusive resources and group buying power. Others are prestigious and membership is a capstone achievement. There is strength in numbers, making advocacy a mission of many professional associations.
The AAD is the largest, most diverse, and most multifaceted of the dermatology associations to which I belong. For the last 6 years I have been privileged to serve as one of the secretary-treasurers, and I have seen the time and effort spent by many of my fellow dermatologists for the good of dermatology. The AAD has 19,265 members, of which the largest subgroup is the category of active fellows (10,858); 90% of dermatologists certified by the American Board of Dermatology belong to the AAD and 96% of members renewed last year (Cindy Kuhn, personal communication, February 2016). In 2016, the AAD surveyed the satisfaction of members by administering an online questionnaire inviting responses from a randomly selected 5975 members (excluding internationals, retirees, or those older than 72 years). The respondents ranked the major activities of the AAD according to their importance. Most important were professional development and educational programs (70% said very important) and up-to-date information on dermatology (70%). Also ranked highly were advancing advocacy agenda (57%), increasing public awareness (54%), and increasing visibility in the house of medicine (55%). Of less importance were products and services to support practice (29%), networking within the profession (25%), reference directory of members (24%), member discounts (22%), opportunity to gain leadership experience (10%), and career and employment opportunities (14%). In general, the members were either very satisfied or satisfied with the activities corresponding with the ranked importance. Overall satisfaction with the AAD was 88%. When divided demographically, young women in academics and group practice were somewhat more satisfied with AAD services and benefits than men older than 60 years in solo practice, though even in the latter group more than 83% were either very satisfied or satisfied. More than 67% of the members supported the initiatives taken for enhanced online education and information resources; data collection and registry platforms; development of new models of payment; and education, training, and online resources for the dermatology care team. Members of the AAD also can attend the meetings (7992 members at the 73rd Annual Meeting in 2015; 1639 at the 2015 Summer Academy Meeting) and read the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology and Dermatology World. In 2015, 10,061 AAD members participated in CME activities (Cindy Kuhn, personal communication, February 2016). In addition, members work within the committee and task force structure; in the last few years, the Organization Structure Committee and the officers have worked hard to place almost everyone who applied for an assignment on a committee.
Do dermatologists reflect the association world? We are incredibly engaged and the AAD’s penetrance into the community and high renewal rate are unique. In 2014, John Wiley & Sons, Inc,2 surveyed 1.2 million research professionals across 75 disciplines to learn how research professionals view scholarly societies and associations. Similar to AAD members, these professionals indicated that they joined their societies to take advantage of peer-reviewed journals, learning opportunities, and publications on techniques and trends. There was little variation across age, geographic location, and member status. The primary reason members renewed was because they felt connected to the community and appreciated the mentorship and networking that was available.2
The future of dermatology and specialty societies is dependent on young dermatologists who are currently in residencies or in their first jobs. They need the professional development, educational opportunities, networking and mentoring, and other benefits of joining specialty societies. Although skilled at acquiring networks through social media, the best growth and leverage of their professional networks occur within professional associations. Because of my experience meeting other dermatologists in the association world, I can find expert physicians for my patients who have unique problems or who have moved out of my location. Colleagues who have met me in person also seek me out to take care of their patients. Much learning occurs online; however, the value of attending educational sessions can be found in the ability to ask questions in real time and in the face-to-face connection with the experts as well as other members with similar interests. I recently attended a session on interesting hospital consultations and we had an active discussion about drug eruptions with many questions from the audience. The next day I was called to my hospital to see a patient and I went with confidence that I could use my new knowledge to ensure a good outcome. Most importantly, in this era of rapid unprecedented technological advances, the data and the information it produces are transforming our culture. When members with similar interests, skill sets, and goals come together in an effective professional association, they have the strength in numbers to drive change in a way that facilitates growth and development in the specialty. In 2016 this may be the single best reason to join a professional society. We can insure patients with skin disease receive excellent dermatological care by working with other dermatologists in our state and national societies to keep our knowledge and skills current, push for new concepts and treatments, and advocate for our patients and our practices.
The most important reason I joined dermatology associations is the stimulation from learning new concepts and skills in the presence of others who are also passionate about dermatology. Finding jobs to do within these groups was a natural progression of my membership and my career and has insulated me against the lurking danger of professional burnout. I recommend the same prescription for you: Join local, regional, and national dermatology associations; attend meetings; and find interesting work furthering the specialty with other passionate dermatologists.
I admit it. I am a professional association junkie. I belong to more than 20 professional societies that serve dermatologists in my home state and in my region, nationally and internationally, as well as 2 other societies encompassing the entire house of medicine. I have worked on the boards of 6 of them and I have been on committees or developed educational programs for 15 of them. Dermatologists tend to be joiners and I enjoy being with my colleagues. However, in terms of my daily job of taking care of patients with skin disease, what are the real benefits of joining these professional associations?
Common advice on the Internet is for professionals to join relevant associations. Anderson1 on college.monster.com recommends that undergraduates seek membership in professional organizations for job opportunities, mentoring, professional development, networking, and scholarships. Some associations offer exclusive resources and group buying power. Others are prestigious and membership is a capstone achievement. There is strength in numbers, making advocacy a mission of many professional associations.
The AAD is the largest, most diverse, and most multifaceted of the dermatology associations to which I belong. For the last 6 years I have been privileged to serve as one of the secretary-treasurers, and I have seen the time and effort spent by many of my fellow dermatologists for the good of dermatology. The AAD has 19,265 members, of which the largest subgroup is the category of active fellows (10,858); 90% of dermatologists certified by the American Board of Dermatology belong to the AAD and 96% of members renewed last year (Cindy Kuhn, personal communication, February 2016). In 2016, the AAD surveyed the satisfaction of members by administering an online questionnaire inviting responses from a randomly selected 5975 members (excluding internationals, retirees, or those older than 72 years). The respondents ranked the major activities of the AAD according to their importance. Most important were professional development and educational programs (70% said very important) and up-to-date information on dermatology (70%). Also ranked highly were advancing advocacy agenda (57%), increasing public awareness (54%), and increasing visibility in the house of medicine (55%). Of less importance were products and services to support practice (29%), networking within the profession (25%), reference directory of members (24%), member discounts (22%), opportunity to gain leadership experience (10%), and career and employment opportunities (14%). In general, the members were either very satisfied or satisfied with the activities corresponding with the ranked importance. Overall satisfaction with the AAD was 88%. When divided demographically, young women in academics and group practice were somewhat more satisfied with AAD services and benefits than men older than 60 years in solo practice, though even in the latter group more than 83% were either very satisfied or satisfied. More than 67% of the members supported the initiatives taken for enhanced online education and information resources; data collection and registry platforms; development of new models of payment; and education, training, and online resources for the dermatology care team. Members of the AAD also can attend the meetings (7992 members at the 73rd Annual Meeting in 2015; 1639 at the 2015 Summer Academy Meeting) and read the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology and Dermatology World. In 2015, 10,061 AAD members participated in CME activities (Cindy Kuhn, personal communication, February 2016). In addition, members work within the committee and task force structure; in the last few years, the Organization Structure Committee and the officers have worked hard to place almost everyone who applied for an assignment on a committee.
Do dermatologists reflect the association world? We are incredibly engaged and the AAD’s penetrance into the community and high renewal rate are unique. In 2014, John Wiley & Sons, Inc,2 surveyed 1.2 million research professionals across 75 disciplines to learn how research professionals view scholarly societies and associations. Similar to AAD members, these professionals indicated that they joined their societies to take advantage of peer-reviewed journals, learning opportunities, and publications on techniques and trends. There was little variation across age, geographic location, and member status. The primary reason members renewed was because they felt connected to the community and appreciated the mentorship and networking that was available.2
The future of dermatology and specialty societies is dependent on young dermatologists who are currently in residencies or in their first jobs. They need the professional development, educational opportunities, networking and mentoring, and other benefits of joining specialty societies. Although skilled at acquiring networks through social media, the best growth and leverage of their professional networks occur within professional associations. Because of my experience meeting other dermatologists in the association world, I can find expert physicians for my patients who have unique problems or who have moved out of my location. Colleagues who have met me in person also seek me out to take care of their patients. Much learning occurs online; however, the value of attending educational sessions can be found in the ability to ask questions in real time and in the face-to-face connection with the experts as well as other members with similar interests. I recently attended a session on interesting hospital consultations and we had an active discussion about drug eruptions with many questions from the audience. The next day I was called to my hospital to see a patient and I went with confidence that I could use my new knowledge to ensure a good outcome. Most importantly, in this era of rapid unprecedented technological advances, the data and the information it produces are transforming our culture. When members with similar interests, skill sets, and goals come together in an effective professional association, they have the strength in numbers to drive change in a way that facilitates growth and development in the specialty. In 2016 this may be the single best reason to join a professional society. We can insure patients with skin disease receive excellent dermatological care by working with other dermatologists in our state and national societies to keep our knowledge and skills current, push for new concepts and treatments, and advocate for our patients and our practices.
The most important reason I joined dermatology associations is the stimulation from learning new concepts and skills in the presence of others who are also passionate about dermatology. Finding jobs to do within these groups was a natural progression of my membership and my career and has insulated me against the lurking danger of professional burnout. I recommend the same prescription for you: Join local, regional, and national dermatology associations; attend meetings; and find interesting work furthering the specialty with other passionate dermatologists.
- Anderson LB. 5 Reasons professional organizations are worth joining. Monster College website. college.monster.com/training/articles/2131-5-reasons-professional-organizations-are-worth-joining. Published June 16, 2011. Accessed April 8, 2016.
- Membership matters: lessons from members and non-members. Wiley website. https://chm.memberclicks.net/assets/docs/membership%20matters%202014%20-%20findings.pdf. Published March 2015. Accessed April 25, 2016.
- Anderson LB. 5 Reasons professional organizations are worth joining. Monster College website. college.monster.com/training/articles/2131-5-reasons-professional-organizations-are-worth-joining. Published June 16, 2011. Accessed April 8, 2016.
- Membership matters: lessons from members and non-members. Wiley website. https://chm.memberclicks.net/assets/docs/membership%20matters%202014%20-%20findings.pdf. Published March 2015. Accessed April 25, 2016.