User login
Sharpening the Saw
Few movies have universal appeal these days; but one that comes close is Bill Murray’s 1993 classic Groundhog Day in which Murray’s character is trapped in a time loop, living the same day over and over until he finally “gets it right.”
One reason that this film resonates with so many, I think, is that we are all, in essence, similarly trapped. Not in a same-day loop, of course; but each week seems eerily similar to the last, as does each month, each year – on and on, ad infinitum. That’s why it is so important, every so often, to step out of the “loop” and reassess the bigger picture.
I write this reminder every couple of years, because it’s so easy to lose sight of the overall landscape among the pressures of our daily routines. Sooner or later, no matter how dedicated we are, the grind gets to all of us, leading to fatigue, irritability, and a progressive decline in motivation. And we are too busy to sit down and think about what we might do to break that vicious cycle. This is detrimental to our own well-being, as well as that of our patients.
There are many ways to maintain your intellectual and emotional health, but here’s how I do it: I take individual days off (average of 1 a month) to catch up on journals or take a CME course; or to try something new – something I’ve been thinking about doing “someday, when there is time” – such as a guitar, bass, or sailing lesson; or get away a long weekend away with my wife. And we take longer vacations, without fail, each year.
I know how some of you feel about “wasting” a day – or, God forbid, a week. Patients might go elsewhere while you’re gone, and every day the office is idle, you “lose money.” That whole paradigm is wrong. You bring in a given amount of revenue per year – more on some days, less on other days, none on weekends and vacations; it all averages out in the end.
Besides, this is much more important than money. This is breaking the routine, clearing the cobwebs, living your life. And trust me, your practice will still be there when you return.
Six weeks ago, my wife and I packed our carry-ons, bought rail passes, and took off for Japan. As we whisked around the archipelago on those incredibly punctual Shinkansen bullet trains, I didn’t have the time – or the slightest inclination – to worry about the office. But I did accumulate some great ideas – practical, medical, and literary. Original thoughts are hard to chase down during the daily grind; but in a refreshing environment, they will seek you out.
When our whistle-stop trip was over, I returned ready to take on the world, and my practice, anew.
More than once I’ve recounted the story of K. Alexander Müller and J. Georg Bednorz, the Swiss Nobel Laureates whose superconductivity research ground to a halt in 1986. The harder they pressed, the more elusive progress became. So Müller decided to take a break to read a new book on ceramics – a subject that had always interested him.
Nothing could have been less relevant to his work, of course; ceramics are among the poorest conductors known. But, in that lower-pressure environment, Müller realized that a unique property of ceramics might apply to their project.
Back in the lab, the team created a ceramic compound that became the first successful “high-temperature” superconductor, which in turn triggered an explosion of research leading to breakthroughs in computing, electricity transmission, magnetically elevated trains, and many applications yet to be realized.
Sharpening your saw may not change the world, but it will change you; any nudge out of your comfort zone will give you fresh ideas and help you look at seemingly insoluble problems in completely new ways.
And to those who still can’t bear the thought of taking time off, remember the dying words that no one has spoken, ever: “I wish I had spent more time in my office!”
Dr. Eastern practices dermatology and dermatologic surgery in Belleville, N.J. He is the author of numerous articles and textbook chapters, and is a longtime monthly columnist for Dermatology News. Write to him at [email protected].
Few movies have universal appeal these days; but one that comes close is Bill Murray’s 1993 classic Groundhog Day in which Murray’s character is trapped in a time loop, living the same day over and over until he finally “gets it right.”
One reason that this film resonates with so many, I think, is that we are all, in essence, similarly trapped. Not in a same-day loop, of course; but each week seems eerily similar to the last, as does each month, each year – on and on, ad infinitum. That’s why it is so important, every so often, to step out of the “loop” and reassess the bigger picture.
I write this reminder every couple of years, because it’s so easy to lose sight of the overall landscape among the pressures of our daily routines. Sooner or later, no matter how dedicated we are, the grind gets to all of us, leading to fatigue, irritability, and a progressive decline in motivation. And we are too busy to sit down and think about what we might do to break that vicious cycle. This is detrimental to our own well-being, as well as that of our patients.
There are many ways to maintain your intellectual and emotional health, but here’s how I do it: I take individual days off (average of 1 a month) to catch up on journals or take a CME course; or to try something new – something I’ve been thinking about doing “someday, when there is time” – such as a guitar, bass, or sailing lesson; or get away a long weekend away with my wife. And we take longer vacations, without fail, each year.
I know how some of you feel about “wasting” a day – or, God forbid, a week. Patients might go elsewhere while you’re gone, and every day the office is idle, you “lose money.” That whole paradigm is wrong. You bring in a given amount of revenue per year – more on some days, less on other days, none on weekends and vacations; it all averages out in the end.
Besides, this is much more important than money. This is breaking the routine, clearing the cobwebs, living your life. And trust me, your practice will still be there when you return.
Six weeks ago, my wife and I packed our carry-ons, bought rail passes, and took off for Japan. As we whisked around the archipelago on those incredibly punctual Shinkansen bullet trains, I didn’t have the time – or the slightest inclination – to worry about the office. But I did accumulate some great ideas – practical, medical, and literary. Original thoughts are hard to chase down during the daily grind; but in a refreshing environment, they will seek you out.
When our whistle-stop trip was over, I returned ready to take on the world, and my practice, anew.
More than once I’ve recounted the story of K. Alexander Müller and J. Georg Bednorz, the Swiss Nobel Laureates whose superconductivity research ground to a halt in 1986. The harder they pressed, the more elusive progress became. So Müller decided to take a break to read a new book on ceramics – a subject that had always interested him.
Nothing could have been less relevant to his work, of course; ceramics are among the poorest conductors known. But, in that lower-pressure environment, Müller realized that a unique property of ceramics might apply to their project.
Back in the lab, the team created a ceramic compound that became the first successful “high-temperature” superconductor, which in turn triggered an explosion of research leading to breakthroughs in computing, electricity transmission, magnetically elevated trains, and many applications yet to be realized.
Sharpening your saw may not change the world, but it will change you; any nudge out of your comfort zone will give you fresh ideas and help you look at seemingly insoluble problems in completely new ways.
And to those who still can’t bear the thought of taking time off, remember the dying words that no one has spoken, ever: “I wish I had spent more time in my office!”
Dr. Eastern practices dermatology and dermatologic surgery in Belleville, N.J. He is the author of numerous articles and textbook chapters, and is a longtime monthly columnist for Dermatology News. Write to him at [email protected].
Few movies have universal appeal these days; but one that comes close is Bill Murray’s 1993 classic Groundhog Day in which Murray’s character is trapped in a time loop, living the same day over and over until he finally “gets it right.”
One reason that this film resonates with so many, I think, is that we are all, in essence, similarly trapped. Not in a same-day loop, of course; but each week seems eerily similar to the last, as does each month, each year – on and on, ad infinitum. That’s why it is so important, every so often, to step out of the “loop” and reassess the bigger picture.
I write this reminder every couple of years, because it’s so easy to lose sight of the overall landscape among the pressures of our daily routines. Sooner or later, no matter how dedicated we are, the grind gets to all of us, leading to fatigue, irritability, and a progressive decline in motivation. And we are too busy to sit down and think about what we might do to break that vicious cycle. This is detrimental to our own well-being, as well as that of our patients.
There are many ways to maintain your intellectual and emotional health, but here’s how I do it: I take individual days off (average of 1 a month) to catch up on journals or take a CME course; or to try something new – something I’ve been thinking about doing “someday, when there is time” – such as a guitar, bass, or sailing lesson; or get away a long weekend away with my wife. And we take longer vacations, without fail, each year.
I know how some of you feel about “wasting” a day – or, God forbid, a week. Patients might go elsewhere while you’re gone, and every day the office is idle, you “lose money.” That whole paradigm is wrong. You bring in a given amount of revenue per year – more on some days, less on other days, none on weekends and vacations; it all averages out in the end.
Besides, this is much more important than money. This is breaking the routine, clearing the cobwebs, living your life. And trust me, your practice will still be there when you return.
Six weeks ago, my wife and I packed our carry-ons, bought rail passes, and took off for Japan. As we whisked around the archipelago on those incredibly punctual Shinkansen bullet trains, I didn’t have the time – or the slightest inclination – to worry about the office. But I did accumulate some great ideas – practical, medical, and literary. Original thoughts are hard to chase down during the daily grind; but in a refreshing environment, they will seek you out.
When our whistle-stop trip was over, I returned ready to take on the world, and my practice, anew.
More than once I’ve recounted the story of K. Alexander Müller and J. Georg Bednorz, the Swiss Nobel Laureates whose superconductivity research ground to a halt in 1986. The harder they pressed, the more elusive progress became. So Müller decided to take a break to read a new book on ceramics – a subject that had always interested him.
Nothing could have been less relevant to his work, of course; ceramics are among the poorest conductors known. But, in that lower-pressure environment, Müller realized that a unique property of ceramics might apply to their project.
Back in the lab, the team created a ceramic compound that became the first successful “high-temperature” superconductor, which in turn triggered an explosion of research leading to breakthroughs in computing, electricity transmission, magnetically elevated trains, and many applications yet to be realized.
Sharpening your saw may not change the world, but it will change you; any nudge out of your comfort zone will give you fresh ideas and help you look at seemingly insoluble problems in completely new ways.
And to those who still can’t bear the thought of taking time off, remember the dying words that no one has spoken, ever: “I wish I had spent more time in my office!”
Dr. Eastern practices dermatology and dermatologic surgery in Belleville, N.J. He is the author of numerous articles and textbook chapters, and is a longtime monthly columnist for Dermatology News. Write to him at [email protected].
Drug interaction myths
A 72-year-old man with benign prostatic hypertrophy comes to clinic to discuss recent problems with erectile dysfunction. He has been treated with tamsulosin with good results for the past 3 years for his BPH. He is given a prescription for vardenafil 10 mg for his ED. The pharmacist calls and asks if you want the prescription filled despite a drug interaction. What do you recommend?
A. Fill the prescription as written.
B. Have the patient take half a tablet of vardenafil.
C. Have the patient not take vardenafil within 6 hours of taking tamsulosin.
A 22-year-old woman presents with a unilateral headache, pounding in nature, worse with exercise. She is diagnosed with migraine. She has a history of depression and is taking 40 mg of fluoxetine. She is given a prescription for sumatriptan 100 mg. The pharmacist calls you and asks if you want to make changes because of possible drug interaction. What do you recommend?
A. Fill the prescription as written.
B. Have the patient take 50 mg of sumatriptan.
C. Have her reduce her fluoxetine dose to 20 mg.
D. Do not take sumatriptan within 12 hours of taking fluoxetine.
The title of this article is drug interaction myths. These are not true myths, but in both these cases, I think the prescriptions should be filled as written, and it will be safe for the patient to take the medications despite a theoretical drug interaction.
I have received calls from the pharmacist multiple times when I have prescribed these drug combinations, and I will share with you the evidence of safety for using these medications despite potential interactions.
In 2006, the Food and Drug Administration released an alert on serotonin syndrome occurring with combined use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) with triptans.1 This alert was based on 29 cases that the FDA evaluated and felt justified an alert.
Dr. Randolph W. Evans did an analysis of all 29 cases to see if they met criteria for serotonin syndrome.2 He classified if the cases met two different criteria for serotonin syndrome: the Hunter criteria3 or the Sternbach criteria4.
Of the 29 case reports, 10 met the Sternbach criteria, and none of the reports met the Hunter criteria. Some of the cases included polypharmacy of other drugs that can cause serotonin syndrome. Two cases that met the Sternbach criteria were excluded because they were either not on an SSRI or had alternative compelling diagnoses.
Dr. Evans suggested the biologic implausibility of triptans causing serotonin syndrome, because serotonin syndrome is believed to be caused by activation of 5-HT1A and 5-HT2A receptors, whereas triptans act at the 5-HT1B/5-HT1D and 5-HT1F receptors.
In a prospective study of 12,339 patients with migraine who used subcutaneous sumatriptan for at least 1 year, 1,784 patients also received an SSRI.5 No episodes of serotonin syndrome were reported. David A. Sclar, Ph.D., and his colleagues estimated that in 2007-2008, 1.4 million patients were prescribed both a triptan and an SSRI or SNRI.6 That is a 36% increase from 2003-2004, despite a 50% reduction in coprescriptions from primary care physicians – suggesting neurologists were not affected by the FDA alert.7
The American Headache Society position paper on the FDA alert states, “The currently available evidence does not support limiting the use of triptans with SNRIs or SSRIs, or the use of triptan monotherapy, due to concerns for serotonin syndrome.”8
A warning will pop up on prescribing software when you prescribe a phosphodiesterase inhibitor in patients who are taking alpha-blockers. This is a common situation, because BPH and ED both become more common with age. The concern is that the combination of alpha-blocker plus phosphodiesterase inhibitor will increase the risk of hypotension.
Dr. Michel Guillaume and his colleagues studied the hemodynamic effect of doxazosin and tamsulosin in combination with tadalafil.9 A total of 45 healthy men aged 40-70 years were randomized to receive tadalafil and placebo for 28 days. Doxazosin was added after 7 days and continued for an additional 21 days. The second study included 39 men who received tadalafil and placebo for 7 days before adding tamsulosin for an additional 7 days.
There were no significant differences in change in standing systolic blood pressure with tadalafil with placebo, doxazosin, or tamsulosin.
Robert A. Kloner, M.D., Ph.D., and his colleagues reported on a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial of doxazosin 8 mg or placebo with tadalafil 20 mg and tamsulosin 0.4 mg or placebo with 10 mg or 20 mg of tadalafil.10 Tadalafil did augment the hypotensive effect of doxazosin, but it did not have any blood pressure effect on patients taking tamsulosin.
In a study of men taking both tamsulosin and vardenafil or tamsulosin and placebo for the treatment of BPH symptoms, Dr. Mauro Gacci and his colleagues found no significant difference in adverse effects in patients who received tamsulosin plus placebo, compared with men who received tamsulosin plus vardenafil.11
I think it is safe to prescribe triptans in patients who are on SSRIs and SNRIs. In patients who need both alpha-blockers and phosphodiesterase inhibitors, I think tamsulosin is the safest alpha-blocker option. It is best to not start a phosphodiesterase inhibitor at the same time as an alpha-blocker. The studies on coadministration of alpha-blockers and phosphodiesterase inhibitors have been done in either healthy volunteers, or in patients without severe systemic disease. So, the effect on blood pressure in patients taking multiple antihypertensive drugs or heart failure drugs is unknown.
References
1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Information for healthcare professionals: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonists (triptans), July 19, 2006.
2. MedGenMed. 2007 Sep 5;9(3):48.
3. QJM. 2003 Sep;96(9):635-42.
4. Am J Psychiatry. 1991 Jun;148(6):705-13.
5. Cephalalgia. 1999 Sep;19(7):668-75.
6. Headache. 2012 Feb;52(2):198-203.
7. Headache. 2012 Feb;52(2):195-7.
8. Headache. 2010 Jun;50(6):1089-99.
9. J Clin Pharmacol. 2007 Oct;47(10):1303-10.
10. J Urol. 2004 Nov;172(5 Pt 1):1935-40.
11. J Sex Med. 2012 Jun;9(6):1624-33.
Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and he serves as third-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. Contact Dr. Paauw at [email protected].
A 72-year-old man with benign prostatic hypertrophy comes to clinic to discuss recent problems with erectile dysfunction. He has been treated with tamsulosin with good results for the past 3 years for his BPH. He is given a prescription for vardenafil 10 mg for his ED. The pharmacist calls and asks if you want the prescription filled despite a drug interaction. What do you recommend?
A. Fill the prescription as written.
B. Have the patient take half a tablet of vardenafil.
C. Have the patient not take vardenafil within 6 hours of taking tamsulosin.
A 22-year-old woman presents with a unilateral headache, pounding in nature, worse with exercise. She is diagnosed with migraine. She has a history of depression and is taking 40 mg of fluoxetine. She is given a prescription for sumatriptan 100 mg. The pharmacist calls you and asks if you want to make changes because of possible drug interaction. What do you recommend?
A. Fill the prescription as written.
B. Have the patient take 50 mg of sumatriptan.
C. Have her reduce her fluoxetine dose to 20 mg.
D. Do not take sumatriptan within 12 hours of taking fluoxetine.
The title of this article is drug interaction myths. These are not true myths, but in both these cases, I think the prescriptions should be filled as written, and it will be safe for the patient to take the medications despite a theoretical drug interaction.
I have received calls from the pharmacist multiple times when I have prescribed these drug combinations, and I will share with you the evidence of safety for using these medications despite potential interactions.
In 2006, the Food and Drug Administration released an alert on serotonin syndrome occurring with combined use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) with triptans.1 This alert was based on 29 cases that the FDA evaluated and felt justified an alert.
Dr. Randolph W. Evans did an analysis of all 29 cases to see if they met criteria for serotonin syndrome.2 He classified if the cases met two different criteria for serotonin syndrome: the Hunter criteria3 or the Sternbach criteria4.
Of the 29 case reports, 10 met the Sternbach criteria, and none of the reports met the Hunter criteria. Some of the cases included polypharmacy of other drugs that can cause serotonin syndrome. Two cases that met the Sternbach criteria were excluded because they were either not on an SSRI or had alternative compelling diagnoses.
Dr. Evans suggested the biologic implausibility of triptans causing serotonin syndrome, because serotonin syndrome is believed to be caused by activation of 5-HT1A and 5-HT2A receptors, whereas triptans act at the 5-HT1B/5-HT1D and 5-HT1F receptors.
In a prospective study of 12,339 patients with migraine who used subcutaneous sumatriptan for at least 1 year, 1,784 patients also received an SSRI.5 No episodes of serotonin syndrome were reported. David A. Sclar, Ph.D., and his colleagues estimated that in 2007-2008, 1.4 million patients were prescribed both a triptan and an SSRI or SNRI.6 That is a 36% increase from 2003-2004, despite a 50% reduction in coprescriptions from primary care physicians – suggesting neurologists were not affected by the FDA alert.7
The American Headache Society position paper on the FDA alert states, “The currently available evidence does not support limiting the use of triptans with SNRIs or SSRIs, or the use of triptan monotherapy, due to concerns for serotonin syndrome.”8
A warning will pop up on prescribing software when you prescribe a phosphodiesterase inhibitor in patients who are taking alpha-blockers. This is a common situation, because BPH and ED both become more common with age. The concern is that the combination of alpha-blocker plus phosphodiesterase inhibitor will increase the risk of hypotension.
Dr. Michel Guillaume and his colleagues studied the hemodynamic effect of doxazosin and tamsulosin in combination with tadalafil.9 A total of 45 healthy men aged 40-70 years were randomized to receive tadalafil and placebo for 28 days. Doxazosin was added after 7 days and continued for an additional 21 days. The second study included 39 men who received tadalafil and placebo for 7 days before adding tamsulosin for an additional 7 days.
There were no significant differences in change in standing systolic blood pressure with tadalafil with placebo, doxazosin, or tamsulosin.
Robert A. Kloner, M.D., Ph.D., and his colleagues reported on a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial of doxazosin 8 mg or placebo with tadalafil 20 mg and tamsulosin 0.4 mg or placebo with 10 mg or 20 mg of tadalafil.10 Tadalafil did augment the hypotensive effect of doxazosin, but it did not have any blood pressure effect on patients taking tamsulosin.
In a study of men taking both tamsulosin and vardenafil or tamsulosin and placebo for the treatment of BPH symptoms, Dr. Mauro Gacci and his colleagues found no significant difference in adverse effects in patients who received tamsulosin plus placebo, compared with men who received tamsulosin plus vardenafil.11
I think it is safe to prescribe triptans in patients who are on SSRIs and SNRIs. In patients who need both alpha-blockers and phosphodiesterase inhibitors, I think tamsulosin is the safest alpha-blocker option. It is best to not start a phosphodiesterase inhibitor at the same time as an alpha-blocker. The studies on coadministration of alpha-blockers and phosphodiesterase inhibitors have been done in either healthy volunteers, or in patients without severe systemic disease. So, the effect on blood pressure in patients taking multiple antihypertensive drugs or heart failure drugs is unknown.
References
1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Information for healthcare professionals: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonists (triptans), July 19, 2006.
2. MedGenMed. 2007 Sep 5;9(3):48.
3. QJM. 2003 Sep;96(9):635-42.
4. Am J Psychiatry. 1991 Jun;148(6):705-13.
5. Cephalalgia. 1999 Sep;19(7):668-75.
6. Headache. 2012 Feb;52(2):198-203.
7. Headache. 2012 Feb;52(2):195-7.
8. Headache. 2010 Jun;50(6):1089-99.
9. J Clin Pharmacol. 2007 Oct;47(10):1303-10.
10. J Urol. 2004 Nov;172(5 Pt 1):1935-40.
11. J Sex Med. 2012 Jun;9(6):1624-33.
Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and he serves as third-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. Contact Dr. Paauw at [email protected].
A 72-year-old man with benign prostatic hypertrophy comes to clinic to discuss recent problems with erectile dysfunction. He has been treated with tamsulosin with good results for the past 3 years for his BPH. He is given a prescription for vardenafil 10 mg for his ED. The pharmacist calls and asks if you want the prescription filled despite a drug interaction. What do you recommend?
A. Fill the prescription as written.
B. Have the patient take half a tablet of vardenafil.
C. Have the patient not take vardenafil within 6 hours of taking tamsulosin.
A 22-year-old woman presents with a unilateral headache, pounding in nature, worse with exercise. She is diagnosed with migraine. She has a history of depression and is taking 40 mg of fluoxetine. She is given a prescription for sumatriptan 100 mg. The pharmacist calls you and asks if you want to make changes because of possible drug interaction. What do you recommend?
A. Fill the prescription as written.
B. Have the patient take 50 mg of sumatriptan.
C. Have her reduce her fluoxetine dose to 20 mg.
D. Do not take sumatriptan within 12 hours of taking fluoxetine.
The title of this article is drug interaction myths. These are not true myths, but in both these cases, I think the prescriptions should be filled as written, and it will be safe for the patient to take the medications despite a theoretical drug interaction.
I have received calls from the pharmacist multiple times when I have prescribed these drug combinations, and I will share with you the evidence of safety for using these medications despite potential interactions.
In 2006, the Food and Drug Administration released an alert on serotonin syndrome occurring with combined use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) with triptans.1 This alert was based on 29 cases that the FDA evaluated and felt justified an alert.
Dr. Randolph W. Evans did an analysis of all 29 cases to see if they met criteria for serotonin syndrome.2 He classified if the cases met two different criteria for serotonin syndrome: the Hunter criteria3 or the Sternbach criteria4.
Of the 29 case reports, 10 met the Sternbach criteria, and none of the reports met the Hunter criteria. Some of the cases included polypharmacy of other drugs that can cause serotonin syndrome. Two cases that met the Sternbach criteria were excluded because they were either not on an SSRI or had alternative compelling diagnoses.
Dr. Evans suggested the biologic implausibility of triptans causing serotonin syndrome, because serotonin syndrome is believed to be caused by activation of 5-HT1A and 5-HT2A receptors, whereas triptans act at the 5-HT1B/5-HT1D and 5-HT1F receptors.
In a prospective study of 12,339 patients with migraine who used subcutaneous sumatriptan for at least 1 year, 1,784 patients also received an SSRI.5 No episodes of serotonin syndrome were reported. David A. Sclar, Ph.D., and his colleagues estimated that in 2007-2008, 1.4 million patients were prescribed both a triptan and an SSRI or SNRI.6 That is a 36% increase from 2003-2004, despite a 50% reduction in coprescriptions from primary care physicians – suggesting neurologists were not affected by the FDA alert.7
The American Headache Society position paper on the FDA alert states, “The currently available evidence does not support limiting the use of triptans with SNRIs or SSRIs, or the use of triptan monotherapy, due to concerns for serotonin syndrome.”8
A warning will pop up on prescribing software when you prescribe a phosphodiesterase inhibitor in patients who are taking alpha-blockers. This is a common situation, because BPH and ED both become more common with age. The concern is that the combination of alpha-blocker plus phosphodiesterase inhibitor will increase the risk of hypotension.
Dr. Michel Guillaume and his colleagues studied the hemodynamic effect of doxazosin and tamsulosin in combination with tadalafil.9 A total of 45 healthy men aged 40-70 years were randomized to receive tadalafil and placebo for 28 days. Doxazosin was added after 7 days and continued for an additional 21 days. The second study included 39 men who received tadalafil and placebo for 7 days before adding tamsulosin for an additional 7 days.
There were no significant differences in change in standing systolic blood pressure with tadalafil with placebo, doxazosin, or tamsulosin.
Robert A. Kloner, M.D., Ph.D., and his colleagues reported on a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial of doxazosin 8 mg or placebo with tadalafil 20 mg and tamsulosin 0.4 mg or placebo with 10 mg or 20 mg of tadalafil.10 Tadalafil did augment the hypotensive effect of doxazosin, but it did not have any blood pressure effect on patients taking tamsulosin.
In a study of men taking both tamsulosin and vardenafil or tamsulosin and placebo for the treatment of BPH symptoms, Dr. Mauro Gacci and his colleagues found no significant difference in adverse effects in patients who received tamsulosin plus placebo, compared with men who received tamsulosin plus vardenafil.11
I think it is safe to prescribe triptans in patients who are on SSRIs and SNRIs. In patients who need both alpha-blockers and phosphodiesterase inhibitors, I think tamsulosin is the safest alpha-blocker option. It is best to not start a phosphodiesterase inhibitor at the same time as an alpha-blocker. The studies on coadministration of alpha-blockers and phosphodiesterase inhibitors have been done in either healthy volunteers, or in patients without severe systemic disease. So, the effect on blood pressure in patients taking multiple antihypertensive drugs or heart failure drugs is unknown.
References
1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Information for healthcare professionals: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonists (triptans), July 19, 2006.
2. MedGenMed. 2007 Sep 5;9(3):48.
3. QJM. 2003 Sep;96(9):635-42.
4. Am J Psychiatry. 1991 Jun;148(6):705-13.
5. Cephalalgia. 1999 Sep;19(7):668-75.
6. Headache. 2012 Feb;52(2):198-203.
7. Headache. 2012 Feb;52(2):195-7.
8. Headache. 2010 Jun;50(6):1089-99.
9. J Clin Pharmacol. 2007 Oct;47(10):1303-10.
10. J Urol. 2004 Nov;172(5 Pt 1):1935-40.
11. J Sex Med. 2012 Jun;9(6):1624-33.
Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and he serves as third-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. Contact Dr. Paauw at [email protected].
Those annoying EHR pop-up windows
In 1986, the United States and Canada mandated the adoption of a center brake light on all new cars. Studies had shown that this was better at getting attention than the two side lights alone, and reduced collisions.
Of course, as the years went by the safety benefit gradually faded. It never returned to the previous level, but clearly, as people got used to it, the new light faded into the background of their attention.
Today, we have electronic health record (EHR) systems that use all kinds of pop-up warnings to check INRs, to give flu shots, to consider COPD in the differential ... a million things. I’m sure the attorneys love them. (“Doctor, since the computer clearly warned you about this, why did you click ‘ignore’ and move on?”)
I don’t use one of those systems, but I talk to plenty of doctors who do. Initially, it was interesting and got their attention, then became annoying. Each pop-up window interrupted the chain of thought, distracting them from the task at hand: patient care. As time went on, they just began ignoring them. It’s easier to click “cancel” than it is have to think through something you’ve probably already considered.
So, like the center brake light, the well-intentioned pop-up window is ignored and pushed to the far side of your attention span.
Do these things improve quality of care? Probably no more than the center brake light reduces car accidents these days. They’re likely useful in training, to remind medical students and residents of things that are important, but beyond that would be a tough case to make.
I’m not saying attending physicians are infallible. We all make our share of mistakes in this world. But medicine is not a one-size-fits-all field. The EHRs, at least at present, can’t take into account as we do all the variables of each patient’s personality, social situation, compliance history, medication tolerance issues, and other factors.
Not only that, but the pop-up window saying, “Have you considered this?” is no less distracting than having to take a phone call during a visit. It’s intrusive, throws your train of thought temporarily onto another track, and requires a minute to refocus on the task at hand. In that time, you may have forgotten something equally, if not more important. Or missed some critical piece of information the patient mentioned.
Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.
In 1986, the United States and Canada mandated the adoption of a center brake light on all new cars. Studies had shown that this was better at getting attention than the two side lights alone, and reduced collisions.
Of course, as the years went by the safety benefit gradually faded. It never returned to the previous level, but clearly, as people got used to it, the new light faded into the background of their attention.
Today, we have electronic health record (EHR) systems that use all kinds of pop-up warnings to check INRs, to give flu shots, to consider COPD in the differential ... a million things. I’m sure the attorneys love them. (“Doctor, since the computer clearly warned you about this, why did you click ‘ignore’ and move on?”)
I don’t use one of those systems, but I talk to plenty of doctors who do. Initially, it was interesting and got their attention, then became annoying. Each pop-up window interrupted the chain of thought, distracting them from the task at hand: patient care. As time went on, they just began ignoring them. It’s easier to click “cancel” than it is have to think through something you’ve probably already considered.
So, like the center brake light, the well-intentioned pop-up window is ignored and pushed to the far side of your attention span.
Do these things improve quality of care? Probably no more than the center brake light reduces car accidents these days. They’re likely useful in training, to remind medical students and residents of things that are important, but beyond that would be a tough case to make.
I’m not saying attending physicians are infallible. We all make our share of mistakes in this world. But medicine is not a one-size-fits-all field. The EHRs, at least at present, can’t take into account as we do all the variables of each patient’s personality, social situation, compliance history, medication tolerance issues, and other factors.
Not only that, but the pop-up window saying, “Have you considered this?” is no less distracting than having to take a phone call during a visit. It’s intrusive, throws your train of thought temporarily onto another track, and requires a minute to refocus on the task at hand. In that time, you may have forgotten something equally, if not more important. Or missed some critical piece of information the patient mentioned.
Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.
In 1986, the United States and Canada mandated the adoption of a center brake light on all new cars. Studies had shown that this was better at getting attention than the two side lights alone, and reduced collisions.
Of course, as the years went by the safety benefit gradually faded. It never returned to the previous level, but clearly, as people got used to it, the new light faded into the background of their attention.
Today, we have electronic health record (EHR) systems that use all kinds of pop-up warnings to check INRs, to give flu shots, to consider COPD in the differential ... a million things. I’m sure the attorneys love them. (“Doctor, since the computer clearly warned you about this, why did you click ‘ignore’ and move on?”)
I don’t use one of those systems, but I talk to plenty of doctors who do. Initially, it was interesting and got their attention, then became annoying. Each pop-up window interrupted the chain of thought, distracting them from the task at hand: patient care. As time went on, they just began ignoring them. It’s easier to click “cancel” than it is have to think through something you’ve probably already considered.
So, like the center brake light, the well-intentioned pop-up window is ignored and pushed to the far side of your attention span.
Do these things improve quality of care? Probably no more than the center brake light reduces car accidents these days. They’re likely useful in training, to remind medical students and residents of things that are important, but beyond that would be a tough case to make.
I’m not saying attending physicians are infallible. We all make our share of mistakes in this world. But medicine is not a one-size-fits-all field. The EHRs, at least at present, can’t take into account as we do all the variables of each patient’s personality, social situation, compliance history, medication tolerance issues, and other factors.
Not only that, but the pop-up window saying, “Have you considered this?” is no less distracting than having to take a phone call during a visit. It’s intrusive, throws your train of thought temporarily onto another track, and requires a minute to refocus on the task at hand. In that time, you may have forgotten something equally, if not more important. Or missed some critical piece of information the patient mentioned.
Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.
Aesthetic Dermatology: Eyelash extensions
The obsession with longer, fuller, darker eyelashes has become a mainstay in our culture – initially with the ever growing options of mascaras and glue on eyelashes, and now with options that are longer lasting, including eyelash extensions (semipermanent eyelashes) and topical eyelash growth enhancers (such as bimatoprost).
Eyelash extensions are not the same as glue-on strip or individual lashes bought at the drug store or makeup counter that last 1-2 days. These are silk, mink, or poly nylon synthetic lashes that typically last for approximately four weeks, with refills often required at 2-4 week intervals as the natural eyelash sheds. They are adhered to the person’s natural eyelash via an adhesive bonding process that can take 1-2 hours for initial application. Generally, a single lash is applied to each natural lash.
When applied properly, neither the extension eyelash nor the glue should touch the eyelid. The bond is designed to last until the lashes naturally fall out, although the extensions may fall out faster if one uses oil-based eye makeup remover or rubs the eyes regularly, as oil weakens the bond between the glue and the lash. Eyelash extensions are waterproof and give the appearance of having mascara on without wearing it. In the United States, eyelash extension services can range from $100 to $500 for the initial application, with decreased cost for refills. Lash extensions are waterproof and popular for special occasions and vacations, and even more so now for every day.
Potential adverse effects of eyelash extensions include ocular hyperemia, keratoconjunctivitis, allergic blepharitis, and allergic contact dermatitis in the patient. Keratoconjunctivitis is thought to be due to formaldehyde contained in some of the glues used for application.1 Eyelash extensions have also been associated with occupational allergic contact dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, and occupational asthma in the practitioner applying the eyelash extensions, particularly with the cyanoacrylate-based glues.2,3
In a national survey of eyelash extensions and their health-related problems in Japan, 10% (205) of the respondents had experience with eyelash extensions. Of those women, 27% (55) experienced problems that included ocular hyperemia, pain, and itchy swollen eyelids.4 Conjunctival erosion from the eyelid fixing tape used during application and subconjunctival hemorrhage from compression during removal of the extensions has been also reported.1 Hair breakage and even traction alopecia may occur, especially in patients who accidentally or intentionally pull the extensions off.
If permanent eyelash damage occurs, eyelash transplantation may be required to replace the eyelash, as eyelash growth medications such as bimatoprost may not be effective if the follicle is missing or severely damaged. Eyelash transplants often grow long enough where they require trimming, especially if donor sites are taken from the scalp.5
Eyelash extensions offer a nice alternative to daily use of mascara, temporary glue-on eyelashes, and daily application of topical eyelash growth products. As this procedure has increased in number, the dermatologist may be consulted for recommendations and treatment of any potential adverse events associated with it.
References
1. Cornea. 2012 Feb;31(2):121-5.
2. Contact Dermatitis. 2012 Nov;67(5):307-8.
3. Occup Med (Lond). 2013 Jun;63(4):294-7.
4. Nihon Eiseigaku Zasshi. 2013;68(3):168-74.
5. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015 Apr 7;3(3):e324.
Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are co-contributors to this column. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Wesley.
The obsession with longer, fuller, darker eyelashes has become a mainstay in our culture – initially with the ever growing options of mascaras and glue on eyelashes, and now with options that are longer lasting, including eyelash extensions (semipermanent eyelashes) and topical eyelash growth enhancers (such as bimatoprost).
Eyelash extensions are not the same as glue-on strip or individual lashes bought at the drug store or makeup counter that last 1-2 days. These are silk, mink, or poly nylon synthetic lashes that typically last for approximately four weeks, with refills often required at 2-4 week intervals as the natural eyelash sheds. They are adhered to the person’s natural eyelash via an adhesive bonding process that can take 1-2 hours for initial application. Generally, a single lash is applied to each natural lash.
When applied properly, neither the extension eyelash nor the glue should touch the eyelid. The bond is designed to last until the lashes naturally fall out, although the extensions may fall out faster if one uses oil-based eye makeup remover or rubs the eyes regularly, as oil weakens the bond between the glue and the lash. Eyelash extensions are waterproof and give the appearance of having mascara on without wearing it. In the United States, eyelash extension services can range from $100 to $500 for the initial application, with decreased cost for refills. Lash extensions are waterproof and popular for special occasions and vacations, and even more so now for every day.
Potential adverse effects of eyelash extensions include ocular hyperemia, keratoconjunctivitis, allergic blepharitis, and allergic contact dermatitis in the patient. Keratoconjunctivitis is thought to be due to formaldehyde contained in some of the glues used for application.1 Eyelash extensions have also been associated with occupational allergic contact dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, and occupational asthma in the practitioner applying the eyelash extensions, particularly with the cyanoacrylate-based glues.2,3
In a national survey of eyelash extensions and their health-related problems in Japan, 10% (205) of the respondents had experience with eyelash extensions. Of those women, 27% (55) experienced problems that included ocular hyperemia, pain, and itchy swollen eyelids.4 Conjunctival erosion from the eyelid fixing tape used during application and subconjunctival hemorrhage from compression during removal of the extensions has been also reported.1 Hair breakage and even traction alopecia may occur, especially in patients who accidentally or intentionally pull the extensions off.
If permanent eyelash damage occurs, eyelash transplantation may be required to replace the eyelash, as eyelash growth medications such as bimatoprost may not be effective if the follicle is missing or severely damaged. Eyelash transplants often grow long enough where they require trimming, especially if donor sites are taken from the scalp.5
Eyelash extensions offer a nice alternative to daily use of mascara, temporary glue-on eyelashes, and daily application of topical eyelash growth products. As this procedure has increased in number, the dermatologist may be consulted for recommendations and treatment of any potential adverse events associated with it.
References
1. Cornea. 2012 Feb;31(2):121-5.
2. Contact Dermatitis. 2012 Nov;67(5):307-8.
3. Occup Med (Lond). 2013 Jun;63(4):294-7.
4. Nihon Eiseigaku Zasshi. 2013;68(3):168-74.
5. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015 Apr 7;3(3):e324.
Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are co-contributors to this column. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Wesley.
The obsession with longer, fuller, darker eyelashes has become a mainstay in our culture – initially with the ever growing options of mascaras and glue on eyelashes, and now with options that are longer lasting, including eyelash extensions (semipermanent eyelashes) and topical eyelash growth enhancers (such as bimatoprost).
Eyelash extensions are not the same as glue-on strip or individual lashes bought at the drug store or makeup counter that last 1-2 days. These are silk, mink, or poly nylon synthetic lashes that typically last for approximately four weeks, with refills often required at 2-4 week intervals as the natural eyelash sheds. They are adhered to the person’s natural eyelash via an adhesive bonding process that can take 1-2 hours for initial application. Generally, a single lash is applied to each natural lash.
When applied properly, neither the extension eyelash nor the glue should touch the eyelid. The bond is designed to last until the lashes naturally fall out, although the extensions may fall out faster if one uses oil-based eye makeup remover or rubs the eyes regularly, as oil weakens the bond between the glue and the lash. Eyelash extensions are waterproof and give the appearance of having mascara on without wearing it. In the United States, eyelash extension services can range from $100 to $500 for the initial application, with decreased cost for refills. Lash extensions are waterproof and popular for special occasions and vacations, and even more so now for every day.
Potential adverse effects of eyelash extensions include ocular hyperemia, keratoconjunctivitis, allergic blepharitis, and allergic contact dermatitis in the patient. Keratoconjunctivitis is thought to be due to formaldehyde contained in some of the glues used for application.1 Eyelash extensions have also been associated with occupational allergic contact dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, and occupational asthma in the practitioner applying the eyelash extensions, particularly with the cyanoacrylate-based glues.2,3
In a national survey of eyelash extensions and their health-related problems in Japan, 10% (205) of the respondents had experience with eyelash extensions. Of those women, 27% (55) experienced problems that included ocular hyperemia, pain, and itchy swollen eyelids.4 Conjunctival erosion from the eyelid fixing tape used during application and subconjunctival hemorrhage from compression during removal of the extensions has been also reported.1 Hair breakage and even traction alopecia may occur, especially in patients who accidentally or intentionally pull the extensions off.
If permanent eyelash damage occurs, eyelash transplantation may be required to replace the eyelash, as eyelash growth medications such as bimatoprost may not be effective if the follicle is missing or severely damaged. Eyelash transplants often grow long enough where they require trimming, especially if donor sites are taken from the scalp.5
Eyelash extensions offer a nice alternative to daily use of mascara, temporary glue-on eyelashes, and daily application of topical eyelash growth products. As this procedure has increased in number, the dermatologist may be consulted for recommendations and treatment of any potential adverse events associated with it.
References
1. Cornea. 2012 Feb;31(2):121-5.
2. Contact Dermatitis. 2012 Nov;67(5):307-8.
3. Occup Med (Lond). 2013 Jun;63(4):294-7.
4. Nihon Eiseigaku Zasshi. 2013;68(3):168-74.
5. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015 Apr 7;3(3):e324.
Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are co-contributors to this column. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Wesley.
Getting involved
I hear it at least 6 times a month: “How can I get involved? How do I get on an AAD committee?” The quick answer is to pick a committee where you have some expertise, and get others (including other organizations where you have done committee work) to write supporting letters to the American Academy of Dermatology president-elect (this year Henry Lim). In October, the president-elect fills the empty committee spots, and whoever has the most expertise and support usually gets the spot. The support of the existing committee chair is most helpful as well.
The focus of the question above, however, is too limited. AAD committee work is important, but there are many other venues in which you can develop your skills and make an impact. The best spot to start is probably your local and state dermatology or county and state medical societies. They are always looking for new enthusiastic members. You will learn about parliamentary order and how to write and defend a resolution, and you may advance quickly – perhaps right up to a state leadership position or the state American Medical Association delegation. In the state and local societies, you will also learn about challenges practitioners face outside of dermatology. The skills you will develop are useful in any physician organization, including the AAD. The state medical societies are always interested in members who will travel to testify at the state legislature. This can be a valuable experience as well.
There are many state dermatology societies that need you for advocacy, service, and leadership. These are superb places to learn leadership skills and state advocacy.
The AAD “sister” societies – including the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery (ASDS), the American College of Mohs Surgery (ACMS), the American Society for Mohs Surgery ASMS, and the Women’s Dermatologic Society (WDS) – also have multiple committees, boards, and officer positions, which do advocacy and develop policy, and are arenas in which you can learn and contribute.
You should attend a meeting of the advisory board to the AAD. This is full-throttle democracy. State and local dermatology organizations are allowed to send delegates and alternate delegates to the advisory board, and these spots often go empty. The advisory board’s resolutions go directly to the AAD board of directors to be acted on. In addition, the advisory board also appoints one of the directors to the AAD board of directors. This opportunity is underappreciated.
Involvement in SkinPAC would be most welcome (and earns you an asterisk by your name on the committee nomination roster!). The importance of legislative efforts cannot be overemphasized. Attending the legislative conference should be high on your list of things to do when you ask how to get involved.
You should also consider community involvement, regardless of your other activities. This will help your larger community in ways you could never imagine. I have served on the local health department for many years and find it rewarding and interesting. They are always keen to have more medical doctors on the board.
You can get appointed by writing the local officials (the county judge executive or mayor of the city) and expressing an interest, or to the medical director of the health department.
State medical boards are a large time commitment and a lot of work, but can be most important. We need more dermatologists on state medical boards since we are a unique specialty, and other physicians have no idea what you do in your office. Medical boards often make policy, and can have a huge impact. These positions are competitive in larger states and may require some political support from the governor in order for you to be appointed.
Charitable work is also important. Most of us volunteer to do skin cancer screenings, but there are also opportunities to provide dermatology services overseas. Dermatologists are rare in most of the world, and you will find the service most gratifying. There are opportunities closer to home in the free clinics almost anywhere.
Engagement and service by as many as possible is crucial for a specialty as small as ours, and your efforts will be noted and appreciated. There are thousands of ways to get involved, and I encourage you to get in there and do it.
Dr. Coldiron is a past president of the American Academy of Dermatology. He is currently in private practice, but maintains a clinical assistant professorship at the University of Cincinnati. He cares for patients, teaches medical students and residents, and has several active clinical research projects. Dr. Coldiron is the author of more than 80 scientific letters, papers, and several book chapters, and he speaks frequently on a variety of topics.
I hear it at least 6 times a month: “How can I get involved? How do I get on an AAD committee?” The quick answer is to pick a committee where you have some expertise, and get others (including other organizations where you have done committee work) to write supporting letters to the American Academy of Dermatology president-elect (this year Henry Lim). In October, the president-elect fills the empty committee spots, and whoever has the most expertise and support usually gets the spot. The support of the existing committee chair is most helpful as well.
The focus of the question above, however, is too limited. AAD committee work is important, but there are many other venues in which you can develop your skills and make an impact. The best spot to start is probably your local and state dermatology or county and state medical societies. They are always looking for new enthusiastic members. You will learn about parliamentary order and how to write and defend a resolution, and you may advance quickly – perhaps right up to a state leadership position or the state American Medical Association delegation. In the state and local societies, you will also learn about challenges practitioners face outside of dermatology. The skills you will develop are useful in any physician organization, including the AAD. The state medical societies are always interested in members who will travel to testify at the state legislature. This can be a valuable experience as well.
There are many state dermatology societies that need you for advocacy, service, and leadership. These are superb places to learn leadership skills and state advocacy.
The AAD “sister” societies – including the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery (ASDS), the American College of Mohs Surgery (ACMS), the American Society for Mohs Surgery ASMS, and the Women’s Dermatologic Society (WDS) – also have multiple committees, boards, and officer positions, which do advocacy and develop policy, and are arenas in which you can learn and contribute.
You should attend a meeting of the advisory board to the AAD. This is full-throttle democracy. State and local dermatology organizations are allowed to send delegates and alternate delegates to the advisory board, and these spots often go empty. The advisory board’s resolutions go directly to the AAD board of directors to be acted on. In addition, the advisory board also appoints one of the directors to the AAD board of directors. This opportunity is underappreciated.
Involvement in SkinPAC would be most welcome (and earns you an asterisk by your name on the committee nomination roster!). The importance of legislative efforts cannot be overemphasized. Attending the legislative conference should be high on your list of things to do when you ask how to get involved.
You should also consider community involvement, regardless of your other activities. This will help your larger community in ways you could never imagine. I have served on the local health department for many years and find it rewarding and interesting. They are always keen to have more medical doctors on the board.
You can get appointed by writing the local officials (the county judge executive or mayor of the city) and expressing an interest, or to the medical director of the health department.
State medical boards are a large time commitment and a lot of work, but can be most important. We need more dermatologists on state medical boards since we are a unique specialty, and other physicians have no idea what you do in your office. Medical boards often make policy, and can have a huge impact. These positions are competitive in larger states and may require some political support from the governor in order for you to be appointed.
Charitable work is also important. Most of us volunteer to do skin cancer screenings, but there are also opportunities to provide dermatology services overseas. Dermatologists are rare in most of the world, and you will find the service most gratifying. There are opportunities closer to home in the free clinics almost anywhere.
Engagement and service by as many as possible is crucial for a specialty as small as ours, and your efforts will be noted and appreciated. There are thousands of ways to get involved, and I encourage you to get in there and do it.
Dr. Coldiron is a past president of the American Academy of Dermatology. He is currently in private practice, but maintains a clinical assistant professorship at the University of Cincinnati. He cares for patients, teaches medical students and residents, and has several active clinical research projects. Dr. Coldiron is the author of more than 80 scientific letters, papers, and several book chapters, and he speaks frequently on a variety of topics.
I hear it at least 6 times a month: “How can I get involved? How do I get on an AAD committee?” The quick answer is to pick a committee where you have some expertise, and get others (including other organizations where you have done committee work) to write supporting letters to the American Academy of Dermatology president-elect (this year Henry Lim). In October, the president-elect fills the empty committee spots, and whoever has the most expertise and support usually gets the spot. The support of the existing committee chair is most helpful as well.
The focus of the question above, however, is too limited. AAD committee work is important, but there are many other venues in which you can develop your skills and make an impact. The best spot to start is probably your local and state dermatology or county and state medical societies. They are always looking for new enthusiastic members. You will learn about parliamentary order and how to write and defend a resolution, and you may advance quickly – perhaps right up to a state leadership position or the state American Medical Association delegation. In the state and local societies, you will also learn about challenges practitioners face outside of dermatology. The skills you will develop are useful in any physician organization, including the AAD. The state medical societies are always interested in members who will travel to testify at the state legislature. This can be a valuable experience as well.
There are many state dermatology societies that need you for advocacy, service, and leadership. These are superb places to learn leadership skills and state advocacy.
The AAD “sister” societies – including the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery (ASDS), the American College of Mohs Surgery (ACMS), the American Society for Mohs Surgery ASMS, and the Women’s Dermatologic Society (WDS) – also have multiple committees, boards, and officer positions, which do advocacy and develop policy, and are arenas in which you can learn and contribute.
You should attend a meeting of the advisory board to the AAD. This is full-throttle democracy. State and local dermatology organizations are allowed to send delegates and alternate delegates to the advisory board, and these spots often go empty. The advisory board’s resolutions go directly to the AAD board of directors to be acted on. In addition, the advisory board also appoints one of the directors to the AAD board of directors. This opportunity is underappreciated.
Involvement in SkinPAC would be most welcome (and earns you an asterisk by your name on the committee nomination roster!). The importance of legislative efforts cannot be overemphasized. Attending the legislative conference should be high on your list of things to do when you ask how to get involved.
You should also consider community involvement, regardless of your other activities. This will help your larger community in ways you could never imagine. I have served on the local health department for many years and find it rewarding and interesting. They are always keen to have more medical doctors on the board.
You can get appointed by writing the local officials (the county judge executive or mayor of the city) and expressing an interest, or to the medical director of the health department.
State medical boards are a large time commitment and a lot of work, but can be most important. We need more dermatologists on state medical boards since we are a unique specialty, and other physicians have no idea what you do in your office. Medical boards often make policy, and can have a huge impact. These positions are competitive in larger states and may require some political support from the governor in order for you to be appointed.
Charitable work is also important. Most of us volunteer to do skin cancer screenings, but there are also opportunities to provide dermatology services overseas. Dermatologists are rare in most of the world, and you will find the service most gratifying. There are opportunities closer to home in the free clinics almost anywhere.
Engagement and service by as many as possible is crucial for a specialty as small as ours, and your efforts will be noted and appreciated. There are thousands of ways to get involved, and I encourage you to get in there and do it.
Dr. Coldiron is a past president of the American Academy of Dermatology. He is currently in private practice, but maintains a clinical assistant professorship at the University of Cincinnati. He cares for patients, teaches medical students and residents, and has several active clinical research projects. Dr. Coldiron is the author of more than 80 scientific letters, papers, and several book chapters, and he speaks frequently on a variety of topics.
Small EMR tweak makes a big difference
I’m happier doing patient messages these days. That’s because of a little feature that we turned on in EPIC, our electronic medical record. The change doesn’t make me any faster or smarter. It doesn’t make me any more money. It merely adds a sprinkle of meaning to the work I do, and that has made all the difference.
In contrast to the usually glamorous portrayal of physicians’ work, most of our days are mundane. On a typical clinic day I’ll get up to a dozen requests from patients asking for something. Usually it’s just a refill, but several are from patients asking for a earlier appointment, when there are none. Or asking for a stronger treatment, when there aren’t any. Most of these requests are from patients who do not have interesting diagnoses or require sophisticated treatments. They are the itchy, and they remain itchy despite my advice. After a long day of seeing patients, the long list of messages that requires action feels endless, burdensome. Optimizing extenders has made me more efficient, but the work that remains isn’t fulfilling. A subtle change in our EMR has helped, though.
What is different? Our EPIC now includes a photo of each patient. That’s it. Ostensibly, having a photo is a security feature: it allows us to positively identify a patient, thereby reducing the risk that we treat an imposter posing as that patient (a small but real problem with drug seekers).
Why might this matter for physician satisfaction? Because seeing a patient photo brings an actual person to the top of mind. This changes our emotional connection to the work: how we interpret work is all that matters when it comes to job satisfaction. This is why volunteer work is so rewarding, despite having no monetary incentive, and why highly compensated professions, like those of many Wall Street traders, can ultimately fail to be fulfilling.
Tonight, long after the sun has set, I’m still working through messages. The next one, however, is not from any patient with nummular eczema. I see it’s from Mrs. Morales (not her real name), a sweet older woman with a warm smile and rich accent. She teaches water aerobics and she spent 5 minutes describing a typical Puerto Rican dinner (lots of stews) during her last appointment with me. Seeing her smiling face in the top left corner of the chart reminds me that the work I’m doing is for someone I know, someone I care for.
Radiologists have actually studied this phenomenon. Like much of medicine, radiology can be tedious. Researchers devised a simple test to see if making radiology work more human could improve not only the experience for, but also the effectiveness of, doctors. With patients’ consent, they took photos of 300 participants before their films were sent for reading. Radiologists who saw a patient’s photo along with their radiographic studies reported feeling more empathy for their patients. They also reported reading cases with photos more meticulously than those cases without photos. But that’s not all. When the radiologists were later shown the same films but without the patient photos, the doctors were less likely to notice incidental findings in the radiographs. The authors concluded that seeing patient photos made radiologists both more effective and more empathic (ScienceDaily 2008 Dec 14).
So consider adding photos of your patients to your EMR. Then remember to take a second or two to look at them before engaging in the task to be done. You, and your patients, will be better off because of it.
Dr. Benabio is a partner physician in the department of dermatology of the Southern California Permanente Group in San Diego, and a volunteer clinical assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. He is @dermdoc on Twitter. He has no conflicts related to the topic of this column.
I’m happier doing patient messages these days. That’s because of a little feature that we turned on in EPIC, our electronic medical record. The change doesn’t make me any faster or smarter. It doesn’t make me any more money. It merely adds a sprinkle of meaning to the work I do, and that has made all the difference.
In contrast to the usually glamorous portrayal of physicians’ work, most of our days are mundane. On a typical clinic day I’ll get up to a dozen requests from patients asking for something. Usually it’s just a refill, but several are from patients asking for a earlier appointment, when there are none. Or asking for a stronger treatment, when there aren’t any. Most of these requests are from patients who do not have interesting diagnoses or require sophisticated treatments. They are the itchy, and they remain itchy despite my advice. After a long day of seeing patients, the long list of messages that requires action feels endless, burdensome. Optimizing extenders has made me more efficient, but the work that remains isn’t fulfilling. A subtle change in our EMR has helped, though.
What is different? Our EPIC now includes a photo of each patient. That’s it. Ostensibly, having a photo is a security feature: it allows us to positively identify a patient, thereby reducing the risk that we treat an imposter posing as that patient (a small but real problem with drug seekers).
Why might this matter for physician satisfaction? Because seeing a patient photo brings an actual person to the top of mind. This changes our emotional connection to the work: how we interpret work is all that matters when it comes to job satisfaction. This is why volunteer work is so rewarding, despite having no monetary incentive, and why highly compensated professions, like those of many Wall Street traders, can ultimately fail to be fulfilling.
Tonight, long after the sun has set, I’m still working through messages. The next one, however, is not from any patient with nummular eczema. I see it’s from Mrs. Morales (not her real name), a sweet older woman with a warm smile and rich accent. She teaches water aerobics and she spent 5 minutes describing a typical Puerto Rican dinner (lots of stews) during her last appointment with me. Seeing her smiling face in the top left corner of the chart reminds me that the work I’m doing is for someone I know, someone I care for.
Radiologists have actually studied this phenomenon. Like much of medicine, radiology can be tedious. Researchers devised a simple test to see if making radiology work more human could improve not only the experience for, but also the effectiveness of, doctors. With patients’ consent, they took photos of 300 participants before their films were sent for reading. Radiologists who saw a patient’s photo along with their radiographic studies reported feeling more empathy for their patients. They also reported reading cases with photos more meticulously than those cases without photos. But that’s not all. When the radiologists were later shown the same films but without the patient photos, the doctors were less likely to notice incidental findings in the radiographs. The authors concluded that seeing patient photos made radiologists both more effective and more empathic (ScienceDaily 2008 Dec 14).
So consider adding photos of your patients to your EMR. Then remember to take a second or two to look at them before engaging in the task to be done. You, and your patients, will be better off because of it.
Dr. Benabio is a partner physician in the department of dermatology of the Southern California Permanente Group in San Diego, and a volunteer clinical assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. He is @dermdoc on Twitter. He has no conflicts related to the topic of this column.
I’m happier doing patient messages these days. That’s because of a little feature that we turned on in EPIC, our electronic medical record. The change doesn’t make me any faster or smarter. It doesn’t make me any more money. It merely adds a sprinkle of meaning to the work I do, and that has made all the difference.
In contrast to the usually glamorous portrayal of physicians’ work, most of our days are mundane. On a typical clinic day I’ll get up to a dozen requests from patients asking for something. Usually it’s just a refill, but several are from patients asking for a earlier appointment, when there are none. Or asking for a stronger treatment, when there aren’t any. Most of these requests are from patients who do not have interesting diagnoses or require sophisticated treatments. They are the itchy, and they remain itchy despite my advice. After a long day of seeing patients, the long list of messages that requires action feels endless, burdensome. Optimizing extenders has made me more efficient, but the work that remains isn’t fulfilling. A subtle change in our EMR has helped, though.
What is different? Our EPIC now includes a photo of each patient. That’s it. Ostensibly, having a photo is a security feature: it allows us to positively identify a patient, thereby reducing the risk that we treat an imposter posing as that patient (a small but real problem with drug seekers).
Why might this matter for physician satisfaction? Because seeing a patient photo brings an actual person to the top of mind. This changes our emotional connection to the work: how we interpret work is all that matters when it comes to job satisfaction. This is why volunteer work is so rewarding, despite having no monetary incentive, and why highly compensated professions, like those of many Wall Street traders, can ultimately fail to be fulfilling.
Tonight, long after the sun has set, I’m still working through messages. The next one, however, is not from any patient with nummular eczema. I see it’s from Mrs. Morales (not her real name), a sweet older woman with a warm smile and rich accent. She teaches water aerobics and she spent 5 minutes describing a typical Puerto Rican dinner (lots of stews) during her last appointment with me. Seeing her smiling face in the top left corner of the chart reminds me that the work I’m doing is for someone I know, someone I care for.
Radiologists have actually studied this phenomenon. Like much of medicine, radiology can be tedious. Researchers devised a simple test to see if making radiology work more human could improve not only the experience for, but also the effectiveness of, doctors. With patients’ consent, they took photos of 300 participants before their films were sent for reading. Radiologists who saw a patient’s photo along with their radiographic studies reported feeling more empathy for their patients. They also reported reading cases with photos more meticulously than those cases without photos. But that’s not all. When the radiologists were later shown the same films but without the patient photos, the doctors were less likely to notice incidental findings in the radiographs. The authors concluded that seeing patient photos made radiologists both more effective and more empathic (ScienceDaily 2008 Dec 14).
So consider adding photos of your patients to your EMR. Then remember to take a second or two to look at them before engaging in the task to be done. You, and your patients, will be better off because of it.
Dr. Benabio is a partner physician in the department of dermatology of the Southern California Permanente Group in San Diego, and a volunteer clinical assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. He is @dermdoc on Twitter. He has no conflicts related to the topic of this column.
Our Sacred Trust
It is my great pleasure and privilege to have been chosen to serve as editor-in-chief of Federal Practitioner, where I have long been a member of the Editorial Advisory Association, a reviewer, and a contributor. I want to thank James Felicetta, MD, my predecessor, for his many years of excellent stewardship of an increasingly informative and interesting monthly journal that also saw expansive growth especially online and in special issues.
As long as I can remember, the military and medicine have been inextricably linked in my life. My father was a career U.S. Army doctor who won a Bronze Star Medal for valor in World War II and was one of the founders of military pediatrics. My mother was a U.S. Army nurse. In my first career in theology, I worked as a religious educator and lay minister at a military base.
When I entered medicine as a second career, it was my good fortune to receive much of my medical and psychiatric training at VA hospitals. Inspired by the physicians who taught me, I joined the VA straight out of residency and have been there ever since, during both the good and bad times, and never wanted to be anywhere else.
I have spent my nearly 15 years in the VA not in behavioral health care but at the interface of medicine and psychiatry. My professional interest has always been training and consulting to physicians, nurses, and other health care professionals in primary care, medicine, and surgery who are providing vital medical care for patients also struggling with psychiatric, addictive, and pain conditions. Federal Practitioner has done excellent work in this area in the past, and it is one we hope to expand considerably in the future.
Suicide and the treatment of patients with posttraumatic stress disorder, chronic pain, and addiction are among the greatest challenges that our clinician readers face, and it is our obligation to offer timely, targeted news coverage and clinical articles to aid them in their noble efforts.
My other passion is bioethics, and it has been my honor to teach ethics at the university level and to serve as an ethics consultant on many levels of the VA. Ethics also is an increasingly visible and salient domain we hope to spotlight in coming journal issues.
I am also fortunate to have an outstanding editorial staff as collaborators: Reid Paul, Joyce Brody, Robert Fee, and Teraya Smith. We also have a talented and dedicated Editorial Advisory Association of health care professionals from the DoD, VA, and PHS, and we intend to actively engage them in expanding our contributors and readers. And we invite each of you to join us in improving the scholarly quality and clinical relevance of this journal. In coming editorials, I will outline some of our primary goals for the journal, and I invite you to write me with suggestions for the future direction of Federal Practitioner.
This journal fills a unique role in health care, because no other publication is dedicated to the service of the servants of the public in DoD, VA, and PHS. We want to feature the clinical innovations, research advances, and organizational initiatives of the men and women who carry out this sacred trust to care for the health of the military, veterans, and the public.
It is my great pleasure and privilege to have been chosen to serve as editor-in-chief of Federal Practitioner, where I have long been a member of the Editorial Advisory Association, a reviewer, and a contributor. I want to thank James Felicetta, MD, my predecessor, for his many years of excellent stewardship of an increasingly informative and interesting monthly journal that also saw expansive growth especially online and in special issues.
As long as I can remember, the military and medicine have been inextricably linked in my life. My father was a career U.S. Army doctor who won a Bronze Star Medal for valor in World War II and was one of the founders of military pediatrics. My mother was a U.S. Army nurse. In my first career in theology, I worked as a religious educator and lay minister at a military base.
When I entered medicine as a second career, it was my good fortune to receive much of my medical and psychiatric training at VA hospitals. Inspired by the physicians who taught me, I joined the VA straight out of residency and have been there ever since, during both the good and bad times, and never wanted to be anywhere else.
I have spent my nearly 15 years in the VA not in behavioral health care but at the interface of medicine and psychiatry. My professional interest has always been training and consulting to physicians, nurses, and other health care professionals in primary care, medicine, and surgery who are providing vital medical care for patients also struggling with psychiatric, addictive, and pain conditions. Federal Practitioner has done excellent work in this area in the past, and it is one we hope to expand considerably in the future.
Suicide and the treatment of patients with posttraumatic stress disorder, chronic pain, and addiction are among the greatest challenges that our clinician readers face, and it is our obligation to offer timely, targeted news coverage and clinical articles to aid them in their noble efforts.
My other passion is bioethics, and it has been my honor to teach ethics at the university level and to serve as an ethics consultant on many levels of the VA. Ethics also is an increasingly visible and salient domain we hope to spotlight in coming journal issues.
I am also fortunate to have an outstanding editorial staff as collaborators: Reid Paul, Joyce Brody, Robert Fee, and Teraya Smith. We also have a talented and dedicated Editorial Advisory Association of health care professionals from the DoD, VA, and PHS, and we intend to actively engage them in expanding our contributors and readers. And we invite each of you to join us in improving the scholarly quality and clinical relevance of this journal. In coming editorials, I will outline some of our primary goals for the journal, and I invite you to write me with suggestions for the future direction of Federal Practitioner.
This journal fills a unique role in health care, because no other publication is dedicated to the service of the servants of the public in DoD, VA, and PHS. We want to feature the clinical innovations, research advances, and organizational initiatives of the men and women who carry out this sacred trust to care for the health of the military, veterans, and the public.
It is my great pleasure and privilege to have been chosen to serve as editor-in-chief of Federal Practitioner, where I have long been a member of the Editorial Advisory Association, a reviewer, and a contributor. I want to thank James Felicetta, MD, my predecessor, for his many years of excellent stewardship of an increasingly informative and interesting monthly journal that also saw expansive growth especially online and in special issues.
As long as I can remember, the military and medicine have been inextricably linked in my life. My father was a career U.S. Army doctor who won a Bronze Star Medal for valor in World War II and was one of the founders of military pediatrics. My mother was a U.S. Army nurse. In my first career in theology, I worked as a religious educator and lay minister at a military base.
When I entered medicine as a second career, it was my good fortune to receive much of my medical and psychiatric training at VA hospitals. Inspired by the physicians who taught me, I joined the VA straight out of residency and have been there ever since, during both the good and bad times, and never wanted to be anywhere else.
I have spent my nearly 15 years in the VA not in behavioral health care but at the interface of medicine and psychiatry. My professional interest has always been training and consulting to physicians, nurses, and other health care professionals in primary care, medicine, and surgery who are providing vital medical care for patients also struggling with psychiatric, addictive, and pain conditions. Federal Practitioner has done excellent work in this area in the past, and it is one we hope to expand considerably in the future.
Suicide and the treatment of patients with posttraumatic stress disorder, chronic pain, and addiction are among the greatest challenges that our clinician readers face, and it is our obligation to offer timely, targeted news coverage and clinical articles to aid them in their noble efforts.
My other passion is bioethics, and it has been my honor to teach ethics at the university level and to serve as an ethics consultant on many levels of the VA. Ethics also is an increasingly visible and salient domain we hope to spotlight in coming journal issues.
I am also fortunate to have an outstanding editorial staff as collaborators: Reid Paul, Joyce Brody, Robert Fee, and Teraya Smith. We also have a talented and dedicated Editorial Advisory Association of health care professionals from the DoD, VA, and PHS, and we intend to actively engage them in expanding our contributors and readers. And we invite each of you to join us in improving the scholarly quality and clinical relevance of this journal. In coming editorials, I will outline some of our primary goals for the journal, and I invite you to write me with suggestions for the future direction of Federal Practitioner.
This journal fills a unique role in health care, because no other publication is dedicated to the service of the servants of the public in DoD, VA, and PHS. We want to feature the clinical innovations, research advances, and organizational initiatives of the men and women who carry out this sacred trust to care for the health of the military, veterans, and the public.
Global Surgery: ‘Partnership Among Friends’
Surgery volunteerism has been on the rise for several decades. The American College of Surgeons is increasing its role in organizing and facilitating these programs via Operation Giving Back (OGB). And many ACS members are prominent participants in this endeavor.
A leader in global surgery is Michael L. Bentz, M.D., FAAP, FACS, professor of surgery, pediatrics, and neurosurgery, and chairman of the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health. Dr. Bentz has led international missions in many countries of the world over nearly 20 years and has helped a team develop a long-term program of clinical care and training in Nicaragua. We talked with him about his experiences.
Q: You have been involved in international surgical missions for many years. Can you tell us something about your early projects?
I was first exposed to international work at the University of Pittsburgh. My mentor J. William Futrell, M.D., FACS, was a veteran of over 30 international surgical trips. I went on the first trip with him to Vietnam in the 1997 and have been going ever since. For that initial trip, we worked with a nonprofit organization called Interplast. I went with a large group of 20 people from the University that included plastic surgery attendings, plastic surgery residents, pediatric attendings, pediatric residents, and nursing and anesthesia staff.
In those days, many trips were based predominantly on clinical care – adult care and pediatric care. Teams would do a certain number of operations and then go home. We did cleft lip repairs, cleft palate repairs, burn reconstruction, congenital hand deformity surgery, and tumor management.
That would result in good outcomes for those who actually had a procedure done. But in any place I have ever worked overseas – Vietnam, China, Russia, Nicaragua – the need is overwhelming. The need far outstripped what surgical missions can provide in isolated, single trips back and forth.
Q: The years have brought changes to these missions. What are the most significant changes over the years in how these missions are conducted?
The scope and direction of global health is moving toward sustainable, long-term, and longitudinal education. In those earlier trips where there was an emphasis on doing as many operations as possible, people meant well – we meant well! But the real impact comes with the longitudinal education investment.
I have never been anywhere around the world where there weren’t interested, very capable, excellent surgeons committed to taking care of their patients who only need some support and facilitation.
If you compare the cases we are able to do on a trip with our partners with the cases they are able to do independently, it’s a logarithmic curve – they are far more productive than we could ever be on any number of trips. There is a multiplier effect that allows many more patients to be taken care of.
Q: Your institution has a long-term relationship with a hospital in Nicaragua. How does this work and what is the role of your team in the program?
The University of Wisconsin Division of Plastic Surgery and the Eduplast Foundation has a team of about 10 that goes to Nicaragua twice a year. Most importantly, we support a residency program in there. We move residents through a 3-year modular program much like programs in the U.S. and then examine them. We facilitate this educational process with trips there and we bring them to our institution in the U.S.
Over the past 10 years, we have been doing a weekly live webcast of our Plastic Surgery Grand Rounds which is received on several continents. This creates a very valuable bidirectional, and even tridirectional conversation. This webcast is simple, incredibly inexpensive, and has provided hundreds of hours of education over the years in addition to the on-site work we do.
There can be a language barrier in some cases, but we broadcast in English, with occasional translation support. In addition to Nicaragua, our webcast has been received in institutions in Thailand, China, Ecuador and across the United States. We keep records of cases performed. Our plastic surgery residents can get credit for the cases they do under faculty supervision at our international sites if we meet specific criteria set by our Resident Review Committee.
It is important to note that we take care of the patients in our partner institutions in Nicaragua exactly as we would care for patients in our institution in Wisconsin. There is no “practicing” as all operations are done by surgeons appropriately credentialed and trained for the task.
Q: Do you find that there is a cultural gap that you must bridge in working with colleagues and patients in Nicaragua?
Our program has an orientation session for team participants in advance of each trip, where we talk about the mechanics of the trip – safety, medical issues. We also talk about cultural considerations of each site. It is very important that the residents embed in the culture in which we are working. They also need to know the cultural norms of how to communicate with patients, parents, and children. Some of it is simply good manners – acting like your mother taught you!
The team can reside in a local hotel, but often stays in the homes of local hosts, and this can be a beautiful opportunity to learn about local norms and communication.
Q: What is your favorite part of these missions?
I have so many favorite parts! I like caring for people who otherwise might not receive medical care. This is “giving back” and I think all of the participants would agree that we come home feeling like we received much more than we gave. These experiences remind you of why you went to medical school. It is an opportunity to provide something in return for all the investment that has been made in us for our education. In working with colleagues from other countries, I learn as much as I teach. I come back a better surgeon.
The benefits to residents from our institution are many. They learn how to operate in a resource-limited setting, and they return with a greater appreciation for the equipment and supplies we have available at our institution in Madison. The cultural competence and awareness they also learn is an invaluable life skill.
I want to stress that the friendships with our fellow surgeons are what makes this work. We achieve a degree of continuity and even watch our pediatric patients grow up over the years because of our long-term relationship with the hospital in León and our dedicated colleagues there. This is a truly a partnership among friends.
Q: Do you have some advice for a surgeon interested in participating in an international program?
For those surgeons who were not exposed to these programs during residency, finding a mentor or mentoring organization is the way to begin. A beginner should consider making the first couple of trips with someone who knows the ropes in terms of understanding cultural competency, practical issues of safety, and relevant clinical issues. Almost every surgery discipline has an organization with the capability of identifying volunteer surgery groups in their specialty. ACS’ Operation Giving Back is a particularly important resource for helping Fellows find the right international program.
If you would like to learn more about global surgery programs, contact Operation Giving Back at [email protected]. Or if you would like to share your experiences as an international surgical volunteer, please email this publication at [email protected].
Surgery volunteerism has been on the rise for several decades. The American College of Surgeons is increasing its role in organizing and facilitating these programs via Operation Giving Back (OGB). And many ACS members are prominent participants in this endeavor.
A leader in global surgery is Michael L. Bentz, M.D., FAAP, FACS, professor of surgery, pediatrics, and neurosurgery, and chairman of the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health. Dr. Bentz has led international missions in many countries of the world over nearly 20 years and has helped a team develop a long-term program of clinical care and training in Nicaragua. We talked with him about his experiences.
Q: You have been involved in international surgical missions for many years. Can you tell us something about your early projects?
I was first exposed to international work at the University of Pittsburgh. My mentor J. William Futrell, M.D., FACS, was a veteran of over 30 international surgical trips. I went on the first trip with him to Vietnam in the 1997 and have been going ever since. For that initial trip, we worked with a nonprofit organization called Interplast. I went with a large group of 20 people from the University that included plastic surgery attendings, plastic surgery residents, pediatric attendings, pediatric residents, and nursing and anesthesia staff.
In those days, many trips were based predominantly on clinical care – adult care and pediatric care. Teams would do a certain number of operations and then go home. We did cleft lip repairs, cleft palate repairs, burn reconstruction, congenital hand deformity surgery, and tumor management.
That would result in good outcomes for those who actually had a procedure done. But in any place I have ever worked overseas – Vietnam, China, Russia, Nicaragua – the need is overwhelming. The need far outstripped what surgical missions can provide in isolated, single trips back and forth.
Q: The years have brought changes to these missions. What are the most significant changes over the years in how these missions are conducted?
The scope and direction of global health is moving toward sustainable, long-term, and longitudinal education. In those earlier trips where there was an emphasis on doing as many operations as possible, people meant well – we meant well! But the real impact comes with the longitudinal education investment.
I have never been anywhere around the world where there weren’t interested, very capable, excellent surgeons committed to taking care of their patients who only need some support and facilitation.
If you compare the cases we are able to do on a trip with our partners with the cases they are able to do independently, it’s a logarithmic curve – they are far more productive than we could ever be on any number of trips. There is a multiplier effect that allows many more patients to be taken care of.
Q: Your institution has a long-term relationship with a hospital in Nicaragua. How does this work and what is the role of your team in the program?
The University of Wisconsin Division of Plastic Surgery and the Eduplast Foundation has a team of about 10 that goes to Nicaragua twice a year. Most importantly, we support a residency program in there. We move residents through a 3-year modular program much like programs in the U.S. and then examine them. We facilitate this educational process with trips there and we bring them to our institution in the U.S.
Over the past 10 years, we have been doing a weekly live webcast of our Plastic Surgery Grand Rounds which is received on several continents. This creates a very valuable bidirectional, and even tridirectional conversation. This webcast is simple, incredibly inexpensive, and has provided hundreds of hours of education over the years in addition to the on-site work we do.
There can be a language barrier in some cases, but we broadcast in English, with occasional translation support. In addition to Nicaragua, our webcast has been received in institutions in Thailand, China, Ecuador and across the United States. We keep records of cases performed. Our plastic surgery residents can get credit for the cases they do under faculty supervision at our international sites if we meet specific criteria set by our Resident Review Committee.
It is important to note that we take care of the patients in our partner institutions in Nicaragua exactly as we would care for patients in our institution in Wisconsin. There is no “practicing” as all operations are done by surgeons appropriately credentialed and trained for the task.
Q: Do you find that there is a cultural gap that you must bridge in working with colleagues and patients in Nicaragua?
Our program has an orientation session for team participants in advance of each trip, where we talk about the mechanics of the trip – safety, medical issues. We also talk about cultural considerations of each site. It is very important that the residents embed in the culture in which we are working. They also need to know the cultural norms of how to communicate with patients, parents, and children. Some of it is simply good manners – acting like your mother taught you!
The team can reside in a local hotel, but often stays in the homes of local hosts, and this can be a beautiful opportunity to learn about local norms and communication.
Q: What is your favorite part of these missions?
I have so many favorite parts! I like caring for people who otherwise might not receive medical care. This is “giving back” and I think all of the participants would agree that we come home feeling like we received much more than we gave. These experiences remind you of why you went to medical school. It is an opportunity to provide something in return for all the investment that has been made in us for our education. In working with colleagues from other countries, I learn as much as I teach. I come back a better surgeon.
The benefits to residents from our institution are many. They learn how to operate in a resource-limited setting, and they return with a greater appreciation for the equipment and supplies we have available at our institution in Madison. The cultural competence and awareness they also learn is an invaluable life skill.
I want to stress that the friendships with our fellow surgeons are what makes this work. We achieve a degree of continuity and even watch our pediatric patients grow up over the years because of our long-term relationship with the hospital in León and our dedicated colleagues there. This is a truly a partnership among friends.
Q: Do you have some advice for a surgeon interested in participating in an international program?
For those surgeons who were not exposed to these programs during residency, finding a mentor or mentoring organization is the way to begin. A beginner should consider making the first couple of trips with someone who knows the ropes in terms of understanding cultural competency, practical issues of safety, and relevant clinical issues. Almost every surgery discipline has an organization with the capability of identifying volunteer surgery groups in their specialty. ACS’ Operation Giving Back is a particularly important resource for helping Fellows find the right international program.
If you would like to learn more about global surgery programs, contact Operation Giving Back at [email protected]. Or if you would like to share your experiences as an international surgical volunteer, please email this publication at [email protected].
Surgery volunteerism has been on the rise for several decades. The American College of Surgeons is increasing its role in organizing and facilitating these programs via Operation Giving Back (OGB). And many ACS members are prominent participants in this endeavor.
A leader in global surgery is Michael L. Bentz, M.D., FAAP, FACS, professor of surgery, pediatrics, and neurosurgery, and chairman of the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health. Dr. Bentz has led international missions in many countries of the world over nearly 20 years and has helped a team develop a long-term program of clinical care and training in Nicaragua. We talked with him about his experiences.
Q: You have been involved in international surgical missions for many years. Can you tell us something about your early projects?
I was first exposed to international work at the University of Pittsburgh. My mentor J. William Futrell, M.D., FACS, was a veteran of over 30 international surgical trips. I went on the first trip with him to Vietnam in the 1997 and have been going ever since. For that initial trip, we worked with a nonprofit organization called Interplast. I went with a large group of 20 people from the University that included plastic surgery attendings, plastic surgery residents, pediatric attendings, pediatric residents, and nursing and anesthesia staff.
In those days, many trips were based predominantly on clinical care – adult care and pediatric care. Teams would do a certain number of operations and then go home. We did cleft lip repairs, cleft palate repairs, burn reconstruction, congenital hand deformity surgery, and tumor management.
That would result in good outcomes for those who actually had a procedure done. But in any place I have ever worked overseas – Vietnam, China, Russia, Nicaragua – the need is overwhelming. The need far outstripped what surgical missions can provide in isolated, single trips back and forth.
Q: The years have brought changes to these missions. What are the most significant changes over the years in how these missions are conducted?
The scope and direction of global health is moving toward sustainable, long-term, and longitudinal education. In those earlier trips where there was an emphasis on doing as many operations as possible, people meant well – we meant well! But the real impact comes with the longitudinal education investment.
I have never been anywhere around the world where there weren’t interested, very capable, excellent surgeons committed to taking care of their patients who only need some support and facilitation.
If you compare the cases we are able to do on a trip with our partners with the cases they are able to do independently, it’s a logarithmic curve – they are far more productive than we could ever be on any number of trips. There is a multiplier effect that allows many more patients to be taken care of.
Q: Your institution has a long-term relationship with a hospital in Nicaragua. How does this work and what is the role of your team in the program?
The University of Wisconsin Division of Plastic Surgery and the Eduplast Foundation has a team of about 10 that goes to Nicaragua twice a year. Most importantly, we support a residency program in there. We move residents through a 3-year modular program much like programs in the U.S. and then examine them. We facilitate this educational process with trips there and we bring them to our institution in the U.S.
Over the past 10 years, we have been doing a weekly live webcast of our Plastic Surgery Grand Rounds which is received on several continents. This creates a very valuable bidirectional, and even tridirectional conversation. This webcast is simple, incredibly inexpensive, and has provided hundreds of hours of education over the years in addition to the on-site work we do.
There can be a language barrier in some cases, but we broadcast in English, with occasional translation support. In addition to Nicaragua, our webcast has been received in institutions in Thailand, China, Ecuador and across the United States. We keep records of cases performed. Our plastic surgery residents can get credit for the cases they do under faculty supervision at our international sites if we meet specific criteria set by our Resident Review Committee.
It is important to note that we take care of the patients in our partner institutions in Nicaragua exactly as we would care for patients in our institution in Wisconsin. There is no “practicing” as all operations are done by surgeons appropriately credentialed and trained for the task.
Q: Do you find that there is a cultural gap that you must bridge in working with colleagues and patients in Nicaragua?
Our program has an orientation session for team participants in advance of each trip, where we talk about the mechanics of the trip – safety, medical issues. We also talk about cultural considerations of each site. It is very important that the residents embed in the culture in which we are working. They also need to know the cultural norms of how to communicate with patients, parents, and children. Some of it is simply good manners – acting like your mother taught you!
The team can reside in a local hotel, but often stays in the homes of local hosts, and this can be a beautiful opportunity to learn about local norms and communication.
Q: What is your favorite part of these missions?
I have so many favorite parts! I like caring for people who otherwise might not receive medical care. This is “giving back” and I think all of the participants would agree that we come home feeling like we received much more than we gave. These experiences remind you of why you went to medical school. It is an opportunity to provide something in return for all the investment that has been made in us for our education. In working with colleagues from other countries, I learn as much as I teach. I come back a better surgeon.
The benefits to residents from our institution are many. They learn how to operate in a resource-limited setting, and they return with a greater appreciation for the equipment and supplies we have available at our institution in Madison. The cultural competence and awareness they also learn is an invaluable life skill.
I want to stress that the friendships with our fellow surgeons are what makes this work. We achieve a degree of continuity and even watch our pediatric patients grow up over the years because of our long-term relationship with the hospital in León and our dedicated colleagues there. This is a truly a partnership among friends.
Q: Do you have some advice for a surgeon interested in participating in an international program?
For those surgeons who were not exposed to these programs during residency, finding a mentor or mentoring organization is the way to begin. A beginner should consider making the first couple of trips with someone who knows the ropes in terms of understanding cultural competency, practical issues of safety, and relevant clinical issues. Almost every surgery discipline has an organization with the capability of identifying volunteer surgery groups in their specialty. ACS’ Operation Giving Back is a particularly important resource for helping Fellows find the right international program.
If you would like to learn more about global surgery programs, contact Operation Giving Back at [email protected]. Or if you would like to share your experiences as an international surgical volunteer, please email this publication at [email protected].
Commentary: ACS continues to support surgeons in training and in practice
It is once again my privilege to provide ACS Surgery News readers with an update on the activities of the American College of Surgeons (ACS). Each year the scope of the College’s projects as described in this missive continues to expand as the ACS leadership and staff strive to meet our members’ evolving demands.
FIRST things first
A highlight from this last year has been the College’s participation in the Flexibility in Duty Hour Requirements for Surgical Trainees (FIRST) Trial. As members of an organization founded largely for purposes of ensuring that surgeons are adequately trained to provide quality care, many ACS Fellows have expressed concern about the structure of today’s surgical residency programs. They are particularly concerned about the effects of the residency work hour restrictions that the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) issued in 2003 and 2011.
The ACS, the American Board of Surgery, and ACGME sponsored the FIRST Trial to determine whether modified restrictions on resident work hours would affect patient care, surgical outcomes, and resident perceptions. Karl Y. Bilimoria, MD, MS, FACS, ACS Faculty Scholar and director, Surgical Outcomes and Quality Improvement Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, led the study, which involved 117 ACGME-approved U.S. general surgery residency programs and their 151 affiliated hospitals. These institutions were randomly assigned to either an intervention group with flexible duty hours or a control group.
For both groups the workweek was limited to an average of 80 hours, residents averaged one day off per week, and residents could take call no more than every third night. The standard policy group, composed of 59 training programs and 71 affiliated hospitals, also complied with the ACGME’s other mandates, whereas the 58 training programs and 80 affiliate hospitals in the flexible policy group received permission from the ACGME to waive some of the restrictions on maximum shift lengths and time off between shifts.
Using the ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP®) platform to measure death or serious morbidity within 30 days of an operation, the FIRST Trial showed that of the nearly 139,000 patients treated, the rate of this composite outcome was similar in both study groups (9 percent). We also found no group differences for 10 other patient outcomes, including the need for a second operation. Moreover, residents in the flexible policy group were more likely than were participants in the standard policy group to report improved continuity of patient care, acquisition of operative skills, and levels of professionalism.
Results of the FIRST Trial were published in the New England Journal of Medicine and announced at the Academic Surgical Congress last month. In light of the study’s findings, the ACGME has agreed to review its work hour policies. I am confident that the ACS, ABS, and ACGME will be able to use this initiative to develop new consensus-based protocols for resident work hours.
Other ACS initiatives
The FIRST Trial is just one important initiative that the College has undertaken recently. We remained active on the advocacy front, working closely with Congress and other physician groups to achieve passage of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA). This important legislation repeals the sustainable growth rate Medicare physician payment formula, establishes an annual payment update of 0.5 percent for five years, and seeks to establish a Merit-Based Incentive Payment System. The College also issued public comments on physician rating systems, questioning the usefulness of information that is based on administrative rather than clinical data.
In terms of practice management, the College has provided resources and information to help surgeons make the transition to the 10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases coding system (ICD-10). We also have continued to sponsor Current Procedural Terminology coding workshops and to offer access to the ACS Coding Hotline.
To ensure that all patients have access to quality care, the ACS Committee on Health Care Disparities established a relationship with National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities and conducted a symposium in May 2015 to address variations in care across all patient populations.
Through involvement with the Hartford Consensus, chaired by ACS Regent Lenworth Jacobs, MD, FACS, the College has sought to ensure that victims of mass casualty events receive timely lifesaving care. This past year, the Hartford Consensus joined forces with the White House to publish a compendium of strategies to enhance survival in mass casualty events and ensure the public understands how to assist victims of these tragic incidents.
The College has continued to strengthen its Quality Programs and is attaining a high-profile reputation in this arena. For example, ACS NSQIP received the John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety and Quality Award for Innovation in Patient Safety and Quality at the National Level from The Joint Commission and National Quality Forum for bringing the outcomes measurement program to nearly 700 hospitals.
In addition, we launched the Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery Project to improve care of older patients though a standards and verification program launched July 1 with funding from the John A. Hartford Foundation. To satisfy the needs of patients at the other end of the age spectrum, the College also continued development of the Children’s Surgery Verification Quality Improvement Program. Furthermore, through the ACS Clinical Research Program, we published the first edition of Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery.
Finally, the College is working to integrate all of our clinical registries into a common, consolidated warehouse and reporting platform. We are excited about the potential of this project and how it will help ACS members more easily report their outcomes to regulatory bodies, measure their performance, and, most importantly, improve the quality of patient care.
Clearly, the College provides positive support to surgeons in training and in practice. As always, I welcome your suggestions regarding how we can better meet your needs and help you provide surgical care of the highest standards to your patients.
Dr. Hoyt is the Executive Director of the American College of Surgeons.
It is once again my privilege to provide ACS Surgery News readers with an update on the activities of the American College of Surgeons (ACS). Each year the scope of the College’s projects as described in this missive continues to expand as the ACS leadership and staff strive to meet our members’ evolving demands.
FIRST things first
A highlight from this last year has been the College’s participation in the Flexibility in Duty Hour Requirements for Surgical Trainees (FIRST) Trial. As members of an organization founded largely for purposes of ensuring that surgeons are adequately trained to provide quality care, many ACS Fellows have expressed concern about the structure of today’s surgical residency programs. They are particularly concerned about the effects of the residency work hour restrictions that the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) issued in 2003 and 2011.
The ACS, the American Board of Surgery, and ACGME sponsored the FIRST Trial to determine whether modified restrictions on resident work hours would affect patient care, surgical outcomes, and resident perceptions. Karl Y. Bilimoria, MD, MS, FACS, ACS Faculty Scholar and director, Surgical Outcomes and Quality Improvement Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, led the study, which involved 117 ACGME-approved U.S. general surgery residency programs and their 151 affiliated hospitals. These institutions were randomly assigned to either an intervention group with flexible duty hours or a control group.
For both groups the workweek was limited to an average of 80 hours, residents averaged one day off per week, and residents could take call no more than every third night. The standard policy group, composed of 59 training programs and 71 affiliated hospitals, also complied with the ACGME’s other mandates, whereas the 58 training programs and 80 affiliate hospitals in the flexible policy group received permission from the ACGME to waive some of the restrictions on maximum shift lengths and time off between shifts.
Using the ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP®) platform to measure death or serious morbidity within 30 days of an operation, the FIRST Trial showed that of the nearly 139,000 patients treated, the rate of this composite outcome was similar in both study groups (9 percent). We also found no group differences for 10 other patient outcomes, including the need for a second operation. Moreover, residents in the flexible policy group were more likely than were participants in the standard policy group to report improved continuity of patient care, acquisition of operative skills, and levels of professionalism.
Results of the FIRST Trial were published in the New England Journal of Medicine and announced at the Academic Surgical Congress last month. In light of the study’s findings, the ACGME has agreed to review its work hour policies. I am confident that the ACS, ABS, and ACGME will be able to use this initiative to develop new consensus-based protocols for resident work hours.
Other ACS initiatives
The FIRST Trial is just one important initiative that the College has undertaken recently. We remained active on the advocacy front, working closely with Congress and other physician groups to achieve passage of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA). This important legislation repeals the sustainable growth rate Medicare physician payment formula, establishes an annual payment update of 0.5 percent for five years, and seeks to establish a Merit-Based Incentive Payment System. The College also issued public comments on physician rating systems, questioning the usefulness of information that is based on administrative rather than clinical data.
In terms of practice management, the College has provided resources and information to help surgeons make the transition to the 10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases coding system (ICD-10). We also have continued to sponsor Current Procedural Terminology coding workshops and to offer access to the ACS Coding Hotline.
To ensure that all patients have access to quality care, the ACS Committee on Health Care Disparities established a relationship with National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities and conducted a symposium in May 2015 to address variations in care across all patient populations.
Through involvement with the Hartford Consensus, chaired by ACS Regent Lenworth Jacobs, MD, FACS, the College has sought to ensure that victims of mass casualty events receive timely lifesaving care. This past year, the Hartford Consensus joined forces with the White House to publish a compendium of strategies to enhance survival in mass casualty events and ensure the public understands how to assist victims of these tragic incidents.
The College has continued to strengthen its Quality Programs and is attaining a high-profile reputation in this arena. For example, ACS NSQIP received the John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety and Quality Award for Innovation in Patient Safety and Quality at the National Level from The Joint Commission and National Quality Forum for bringing the outcomes measurement program to nearly 700 hospitals.
In addition, we launched the Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery Project to improve care of older patients though a standards and verification program launched July 1 with funding from the John A. Hartford Foundation. To satisfy the needs of patients at the other end of the age spectrum, the College also continued development of the Children’s Surgery Verification Quality Improvement Program. Furthermore, through the ACS Clinical Research Program, we published the first edition of Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery.
Finally, the College is working to integrate all of our clinical registries into a common, consolidated warehouse and reporting platform. We are excited about the potential of this project and how it will help ACS members more easily report their outcomes to regulatory bodies, measure their performance, and, most importantly, improve the quality of patient care.
Clearly, the College provides positive support to surgeons in training and in practice. As always, I welcome your suggestions regarding how we can better meet your needs and help you provide surgical care of the highest standards to your patients.
Dr. Hoyt is the Executive Director of the American College of Surgeons.
It is once again my privilege to provide ACS Surgery News readers with an update on the activities of the American College of Surgeons (ACS). Each year the scope of the College’s projects as described in this missive continues to expand as the ACS leadership and staff strive to meet our members’ evolving demands.
FIRST things first
A highlight from this last year has been the College’s participation in the Flexibility in Duty Hour Requirements for Surgical Trainees (FIRST) Trial. As members of an organization founded largely for purposes of ensuring that surgeons are adequately trained to provide quality care, many ACS Fellows have expressed concern about the structure of today’s surgical residency programs. They are particularly concerned about the effects of the residency work hour restrictions that the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) issued in 2003 and 2011.
The ACS, the American Board of Surgery, and ACGME sponsored the FIRST Trial to determine whether modified restrictions on resident work hours would affect patient care, surgical outcomes, and resident perceptions. Karl Y. Bilimoria, MD, MS, FACS, ACS Faculty Scholar and director, Surgical Outcomes and Quality Improvement Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, led the study, which involved 117 ACGME-approved U.S. general surgery residency programs and their 151 affiliated hospitals. These institutions were randomly assigned to either an intervention group with flexible duty hours or a control group.
For both groups the workweek was limited to an average of 80 hours, residents averaged one day off per week, and residents could take call no more than every third night. The standard policy group, composed of 59 training programs and 71 affiliated hospitals, also complied with the ACGME’s other mandates, whereas the 58 training programs and 80 affiliate hospitals in the flexible policy group received permission from the ACGME to waive some of the restrictions on maximum shift lengths and time off between shifts.
Using the ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP®) platform to measure death or serious morbidity within 30 days of an operation, the FIRST Trial showed that of the nearly 139,000 patients treated, the rate of this composite outcome was similar in both study groups (9 percent). We also found no group differences for 10 other patient outcomes, including the need for a second operation. Moreover, residents in the flexible policy group were more likely than were participants in the standard policy group to report improved continuity of patient care, acquisition of operative skills, and levels of professionalism.
Results of the FIRST Trial were published in the New England Journal of Medicine and announced at the Academic Surgical Congress last month. In light of the study’s findings, the ACGME has agreed to review its work hour policies. I am confident that the ACS, ABS, and ACGME will be able to use this initiative to develop new consensus-based protocols for resident work hours.
Other ACS initiatives
The FIRST Trial is just one important initiative that the College has undertaken recently. We remained active on the advocacy front, working closely with Congress and other physician groups to achieve passage of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA). This important legislation repeals the sustainable growth rate Medicare physician payment formula, establishes an annual payment update of 0.5 percent for five years, and seeks to establish a Merit-Based Incentive Payment System. The College also issued public comments on physician rating systems, questioning the usefulness of information that is based on administrative rather than clinical data.
In terms of practice management, the College has provided resources and information to help surgeons make the transition to the 10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases coding system (ICD-10). We also have continued to sponsor Current Procedural Terminology coding workshops and to offer access to the ACS Coding Hotline.
To ensure that all patients have access to quality care, the ACS Committee on Health Care Disparities established a relationship with National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities and conducted a symposium in May 2015 to address variations in care across all patient populations.
Through involvement with the Hartford Consensus, chaired by ACS Regent Lenworth Jacobs, MD, FACS, the College has sought to ensure that victims of mass casualty events receive timely lifesaving care. This past year, the Hartford Consensus joined forces with the White House to publish a compendium of strategies to enhance survival in mass casualty events and ensure the public understands how to assist victims of these tragic incidents.
The College has continued to strengthen its Quality Programs and is attaining a high-profile reputation in this arena. For example, ACS NSQIP received the John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety and Quality Award for Innovation in Patient Safety and Quality at the National Level from The Joint Commission and National Quality Forum for bringing the outcomes measurement program to nearly 700 hospitals.
In addition, we launched the Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery Project to improve care of older patients though a standards and verification program launched July 1 with funding from the John A. Hartford Foundation. To satisfy the needs of patients at the other end of the age spectrum, the College also continued development of the Children’s Surgery Verification Quality Improvement Program. Furthermore, through the ACS Clinical Research Program, we published the first edition of Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery.
Finally, the College is working to integrate all of our clinical registries into a common, consolidated warehouse and reporting platform. We are excited about the potential of this project and how it will help ACS members more easily report their outcomes to regulatory bodies, measure their performance, and, most importantly, improve the quality of patient care.
Clearly, the College provides positive support to surgeons in training and in practice. As always, I welcome your suggestions regarding how we can better meet your needs and help you provide surgical care of the highest standards to your patients.
Dr. Hoyt is the Executive Director of the American College of Surgeons.
From the Washington Office: 2016 Leadership and Advocacy Summit
The American College of Surgeons (ACS) will host the fifth annual Leadership & Advocacy Summit, April 9-12, at the JW Marriott in Washington, D.C. This annual Summit event is a dual-purpose meeting that offers volunteer ACS leaders and surgeon advocates comprehensive and specialized sessions focused on the tools needed to be more effective leaders as well as comprehensive, focused, and interactive advocacy training. The meeting “capstones” on April 12 with Capitol Hill meetings in congressional offices scheduled with the senators and representatives of whom individual Fellows are constituents.
I first attended the program in 2010 and with each subsequent year become ever more convinced of how critically important it is that surgeons be informed about and engaged in the processes of both the legislative and the administrative branches of their individual state and federal governments. This year’s program promises to educate, challenge and prepare Fellows to assist the ACS in shaping the future of surgical practice while working collaboratively with ACS leaders, key elected officials, as well as their surgery colleagues.
As surgeons, we must be leaders and experts in the building and maintenance of effective teams, changing and ever-evolving cultures, time management, mentoring, coaching, and taking decisive action. The leadership program is designed to develop and hone exemplary leadership skills. Current topics and presenters include Leading Through Team Conflict, David A. Rogers, MD, FACS; Toward Better Communications and Teamwork: Skills for Handling Difficult Conversations, Kurt O’Brien, MHROD; Social Media for the Surgeon: Lifelong Learning, Engagement, and Reputation Management, Deanna J. Attai, MD, FACS; and Enhancing Our Cultural Dexterity: The Next Step in Reducing Disparities and Providing Patient Centered Care, Adil H. Hader, MPH, MD, FACS. In addition, chapter success stories will be presented by ACS Governors from West Virginia, North Texas, and Georgia.
The advocacy portion of the program kicks off on the evening of April 10 with a dinner during which those assembled will hear from Chris Matthews, the host of Hardball on MSNBC.
We will begin the morning of April 11 with a panel session entitled, Strategies for Successful State Advocacy, followed by breakout sessions for advocacy training tailored to individual experience levels. Attendees will then hear from Patrick Conway, MD, MSc, the Deputy Administrator for Innovation and Quality and Chief Medical Officer, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Dr. Conway leads the Center for Clinical Standards and Quality (CCSQ) and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) at CMS. As such he is leading the way within CMS to move into the new physician payment systems prescribed by the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA), which will replace the current physician payment system in 2019.
The Political Luncheon, sponsored by SurgeonsPAC will feature Dr. Larry J. Sabato, founder and director, the University of Virginia Center for Politics and the University Professor of Politics at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
In recognition of the fact that “data” is THE buzzword today in health care policy, the afternoon session will feature a panel on how data is being utilized to change our current delivery and payment systems. Panelists include Vindell Washington, MD, the Principal Deputy National Coordinator in the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), and Brian Kelly, MD, President, Payer and Provider Solutions for Quintiles. ACS has recently partnered with Quintiles on a major project to make the College’s multiple systems of data management more effective.
As mentioned above, the Leadership and Advocacy Summit closes on Tuesday, April 12, with a trip to Capitol Hill for Fellows to meet their individual members of the House of Representatives and Senate as well as their staff. This activity provides an important opportunity to put to good use the skills learned or refined on Sunday and Monday. We strongly encourage everyone who attends to stay through to the end of the Summit and participate in this important advocacy initiative.
Make a difference and join us in Washington. Register today to attend the 2016 Leadership and Advocacy Summit.
For questions about registration, please contact ACS Registration Services at [email protected] or 312-202-5244.
For questions surrounding the Leadership Summit, please contact Donna Tieberg at [email protected] or 312-202-5361.
For questions regarding the Advocacy Summit, please contact Michael Carmody at [email protected] or 202-672-1511.
I look forward to seeing you in April in Washington!
Until next month …
The American College of Surgeons (ACS) will host the fifth annual Leadership & Advocacy Summit, April 9-12, at the JW Marriott in Washington, D.C. This annual Summit event is a dual-purpose meeting that offers volunteer ACS leaders and surgeon advocates comprehensive and specialized sessions focused on the tools needed to be more effective leaders as well as comprehensive, focused, and interactive advocacy training. The meeting “capstones” on April 12 with Capitol Hill meetings in congressional offices scheduled with the senators and representatives of whom individual Fellows are constituents.
I first attended the program in 2010 and with each subsequent year become ever more convinced of how critically important it is that surgeons be informed about and engaged in the processes of both the legislative and the administrative branches of their individual state and federal governments. This year’s program promises to educate, challenge and prepare Fellows to assist the ACS in shaping the future of surgical practice while working collaboratively with ACS leaders, key elected officials, as well as their surgery colleagues.
As surgeons, we must be leaders and experts in the building and maintenance of effective teams, changing and ever-evolving cultures, time management, mentoring, coaching, and taking decisive action. The leadership program is designed to develop and hone exemplary leadership skills. Current topics and presenters include Leading Through Team Conflict, David A. Rogers, MD, FACS; Toward Better Communications and Teamwork: Skills for Handling Difficult Conversations, Kurt O’Brien, MHROD; Social Media for the Surgeon: Lifelong Learning, Engagement, and Reputation Management, Deanna J. Attai, MD, FACS; and Enhancing Our Cultural Dexterity: The Next Step in Reducing Disparities and Providing Patient Centered Care, Adil H. Hader, MPH, MD, FACS. In addition, chapter success stories will be presented by ACS Governors from West Virginia, North Texas, and Georgia.
The advocacy portion of the program kicks off on the evening of April 10 with a dinner during which those assembled will hear from Chris Matthews, the host of Hardball on MSNBC.
We will begin the morning of April 11 with a panel session entitled, Strategies for Successful State Advocacy, followed by breakout sessions for advocacy training tailored to individual experience levels. Attendees will then hear from Patrick Conway, MD, MSc, the Deputy Administrator for Innovation and Quality and Chief Medical Officer, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Dr. Conway leads the Center for Clinical Standards and Quality (CCSQ) and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) at CMS. As such he is leading the way within CMS to move into the new physician payment systems prescribed by the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA), which will replace the current physician payment system in 2019.
The Political Luncheon, sponsored by SurgeonsPAC will feature Dr. Larry J. Sabato, founder and director, the University of Virginia Center for Politics and the University Professor of Politics at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
In recognition of the fact that “data” is THE buzzword today in health care policy, the afternoon session will feature a panel on how data is being utilized to change our current delivery and payment systems. Panelists include Vindell Washington, MD, the Principal Deputy National Coordinator in the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), and Brian Kelly, MD, President, Payer and Provider Solutions for Quintiles. ACS has recently partnered with Quintiles on a major project to make the College’s multiple systems of data management more effective.
As mentioned above, the Leadership and Advocacy Summit closes on Tuesday, April 12, with a trip to Capitol Hill for Fellows to meet their individual members of the House of Representatives and Senate as well as their staff. This activity provides an important opportunity to put to good use the skills learned or refined on Sunday and Monday. We strongly encourage everyone who attends to stay through to the end of the Summit and participate in this important advocacy initiative.
Make a difference and join us in Washington. Register today to attend the 2016 Leadership and Advocacy Summit.
For questions about registration, please contact ACS Registration Services at [email protected] or 312-202-5244.
For questions surrounding the Leadership Summit, please contact Donna Tieberg at [email protected] or 312-202-5361.
For questions regarding the Advocacy Summit, please contact Michael Carmody at [email protected] or 202-672-1511.
I look forward to seeing you in April in Washington!
Until next month …
The American College of Surgeons (ACS) will host the fifth annual Leadership & Advocacy Summit, April 9-12, at the JW Marriott in Washington, D.C. This annual Summit event is a dual-purpose meeting that offers volunteer ACS leaders and surgeon advocates comprehensive and specialized sessions focused on the tools needed to be more effective leaders as well as comprehensive, focused, and interactive advocacy training. The meeting “capstones” on April 12 with Capitol Hill meetings in congressional offices scheduled with the senators and representatives of whom individual Fellows are constituents.
I first attended the program in 2010 and with each subsequent year become ever more convinced of how critically important it is that surgeons be informed about and engaged in the processes of both the legislative and the administrative branches of their individual state and federal governments. This year’s program promises to educate, challenge and prepare Fellows to assist the ACS in shaping the future of surgical practice while working collaboratively with ACS leaders, key elected officials, as well as their surgery colleagues.
As surgeons, we must be leaders and experts in the building and maintenance of effective teams, changing and ever-evolving cultures, time management, mentoring, coaching, and taking decisive action. The leadership program is designed to develop and hone exemplary leadership skills. Current topics and presenters include Leading Through Team Conflict, David A. Rogers, MD, FACS; Toward Better Communications and Teamwork: Skills for Handling Difficult Conversations, Kurt O’Brien, MHROD; Social Media for the Surgeon: Lifelong Learning, Engagement, and Reputation Management, Deanna J. Attai, MD, FACS; and Enhancing Our Cultural Dexterity: The Next Step in Reducing Disparities and Providing Patient Centered Care, Adil H. Hader, MPH, MD, FACS. In addition, chapter success stories will be presented by ACS Governors from West Virginia, North Texas, and Georgia.
The advocacy portion of the program kicks off on the evening of April 10 with a dinner during which those assembled will hear from Chris Matthews, the host of Hardball on MSNBC.
We will begin the morning of April 11 with a panel session entitled, Strategies for Successful State Advocacy, followed by breakout sessions for advocacy training tailored to individual experience levels. Attendees will then hear from Patrick Conway, MD, MSc, the Deputy Administrator for Innovation and Quality and Chief Medical Officer, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Dr. Conway leads the Center for Clinical Standards and Quality (CCSQ) and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) at CMS. As such he is leading the way within CMS to move into the new physician payment systems prescribed by the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA), which will replace the current physician payment system in 2019.
The Political Luncheon, sponsored by SurgeonsPAC will feature Dr. Larry J. Sabato, founder and director, the University of Virginia Center for Politics and the University Professor of Politics at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
In recognition of the fact that “data” is THE buzzword today in health care policy, the afternoon session will feature a panel on how data is being utilized to change our current delivery and payment systems. Panelists include Vindell Washington, MD, the Principal Deputy National Coordinator in the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), and Brian Kelly, MD, President, Payer and Provider Solutions for Quintiles. ACS has recently partnered with Quintiles on a major project to make the College’s multiple systems of data management more effective.
As mentioned above, the Leadership and Advocacy Summit closes on Tuesday, April 12, with a trip to Capitol Hill for Fellows to meet their individual members of the House of Representatives and Senate as well as their staff. This activity provides an important opportunity to put to good use the skills learned or refined on Sunday and Monday. We strongly encourage everyone who attends to stay through to the end of the Summit and participate in this important advocacy initiative.
Make a difference and join us in Washington. Register today to attend the 2016 Leadership and Advocacy Summit.
For questions about registration, please contact ACS Registration Services at [email protected] or 312-202-5244.
For questions surrounding the Leadership Summit, please contact Donna Tieberg at [email protected] or 312-202-5361.
For questions regarding the Advocacy Summit, please contact Michael Carmody at [email protected] or 202-672-1511.
I look forward to seeing you in April in Washington!
Until next month …