User login
Selective eating
You may not have read the much ballyhooed article about selective eating in preschoolers that was distributed to the media prior to publication because it was buried online, but I bet that you have heard or read something about it (“Psychological and Psychosocial Impairment in Preschoolers with Selective Eating” by Zucker et al., [Pediatrics. 2015 Aug 3. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-2386]). In fact, there were so many news stories, both print and electronic, and the headlines were so divergent that my wife asked me if there were actually two studies released simultaneously.
Some news reports emphasized the reassuring observation by the authors that most picky eating preschoolers will mature into older children with less selective eating habits. However, others highlighted the authors’ primary message that young children with severe selective eating behavior often have significant psychopathology (anxiety, depression, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder), and those with even moderate picky eating may be manifesting the effects of living in a dysfunctional family.
The authors recommend that we pediatricians rethink our traditional party line on selective eating. Instead of simply administering frequent doses of reassurance to the parents of “picky eaters,” we should begin to view even moderate selective eating as a red flag that the child and his or her family need help.
This shift in emphasis is long overdue. I always have felt that problem picky eating is an example of normal infant behavior that has been mismanaged by the child’s family. And in some cases physicians also must share in the blame for not having given the most appropriate advice in a timely fashion to parents who have complained about their child’s selective eating.
It would help if we all took a deep breath, stepped back a few steps, and looked at the bigger picture. We are talking about eating, one of the critical life-sustaining activities. One can understand why most infants are wired to initially reject new tastes and textures. Neophobia – fear of anything new – has probably saved millions of infants from the serious consequences of unsupervised foraging. But don’t you think that these aversions are for the most part weak enough to be easily overridden by every child’s innate drive for self-preservation? “I don’t like how this smells, tastes, looks, or feels, but darn it, I’m getting hungry, and I have to eat to survive. So I will eat it.”
The problem is that while some parents can agree with that line of reasoning, many parents, including those who buy the rationale, can’t bring themselves to quietly accept their new role as merely being providers of a healthy diet. For 9 or 10 months, it was their job to get food into their child because the poor little thing lacked the skill to do it himself. But once a child can chew solids and put things in his mouth, he can not only survive but thrive if someone will simply present him a balanced diet of appropriate consistency and volume … and then step back and shut up.
Obviously, this transition is difficult to a significant number of parents. In many cases, it is because no one has told them that toddlers will appear to eat less than they did as infants or that allowing children unlimited access to energy-containing fluid will blunt their appetites. Or that it is okay that a child only eats one-and-a-half meals on some days. Or that it if you wait long enough without resorting to coaxing, bribing, or begging, a child will eat what his body needs. And failing to be patient and instead making an issue of eating (or not eating), what began as a normal infant aversion to new tastes and textures can spiral into a divisive family catastrophe.
Are there some infants who are so hypersensitive to new tastes and textures that waiting will endanger their health? If they exist, in my experience they are very rare. However, there are certainly toddlers who have become hypersensitive. In my opinion, they were always vulnerable and would have been much less of a problem had they been properly managed early on when they were just a little neophobic.
Are there clues during the child’s infancy that his family is more likely to have significant difficulty making the transition from “feeding” to “presenting” food? This new study observed that high maternal anxiety was frequently observed in both moderate and severe selective-eating children. This is another example of how we need to be aware from a very early stage when a parent is anxious or depressed. The failure to identify and see that those issues are addressed can seriously impair the whole family’s wellness.
Finally, on the other end of the spectrum, is usual garden variety selective eating outgrown? Have you tried to host a dinner party lately? I don’t mean a pot luck supper – I’m talking about a sit-down meal with a single menu. My wife and I have almost given up trying. “Martha is gluten free (without a diagnosis), Bob is watching his cholesterol, Rachel is pretty sure she is lactose intolerant, and you know Charlie hates vegetables. The Wilsons only do organic and are vegetarians.”
Next time we are considering mailing them gift certificates for their favorite restaurants along with an invitation to come over to our place for an after dinner drink. BYOB.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “Coping with a Picky Eater.”
You may not have read the much ballyhooed article about selective eating in preschoolers that was distributed to the media prior to publication because it was buried online, but I bet that you have heard or read something about it (“Psychological and Psychosocial Impairment in Preschoolers with Selective Eating” by Zucker et al., [Pediatrics. 2015 Aug 3. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-2386]). In fact, there were so many news stories, both print and electronic, and the headlines were so divergent that my wife asked me if there were actually two studies released simultaneously.
Some news reports emphasized the reassuring observation by the authors that most picky eating preschoolers will mature into older children with less selective eating habits. However, others highlighted the authors’ primary message that young children with severe selective eating behavior often have significant psychopathology (anxiety, depression, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder), and those with even moderate picky eating may be manifesting the effects of living in a dysfunctional family.
The authors recommend that we pediatricians rethink our traditional party line on selective eating. Instead of simply administering frequent doses of reassurance to the parents of “picky eaters,” we should begin to view even moderate selective eating as a red flag that the child and his or her family need help.
This shift in emphasis is long overdue. I always have felt that problem picky eating is an example of normal infant behavior that has been mismanaged by the child’s family. And in some cases physicians also must share in the blame for not having given the most appropriate advice in a timely fashion to parents who have complained about their child’s selective eating.
It would help if we all took a deep breath, stepped back a few steps, and looked at the bigger picture. We are talking about eating, one of the critical life-sustaining activities. One can understand why most infants are wired to initially reject new tastes and textures. Neophobia – fear of anything new – has probably saved millions of infants from the serious consequences of unsupervised foraging. But don’t you think that these aversions are for the most part weak enough to be easily overridden by every child’s innate drive for self-preservation? “I don’t like how this smells, tastes, looks, or feels, but darn it, I’m getting hungry, and I have to eat to survive. So I will eat it.”
The problem is that while some parents can agree with that line of reasoning, many parents, including those who buy the rationale, can’t bring themselves to quietly accept their new role as merely being providers of a healthy diet. For 9 or 10 months, it was their job to get food into their child because the poor little thing lacked the skill to do it himself. But once a child can chew solids and put things in his mouth, he can not only survive but thrive if someone will simply present him a balanced diet of appropriate consistency and volume … and then step back and shut up.
Obviously, this transition is difficult to a significant number of parents. In many cases, it is because no one has told them that toddlers will appear to eat less than they did as infants or that allowing children unlimited access to energy-containing fluid will blunt their appetites. Or that it is okay that a child only eats one-and-a-half meals on some days. Or that it if you wait long enough without resorting to coaxing, bribing, or begging, a child will eat what his body needs. And failing to be patient and instead making an issue of eating (or not eating), what began as a normal infant aversion to new tastes and textures can spiral into a divisive family catastrophe.
Are there some infants who are so hypersensitive to new tastes and textures that waiting will endanger their health? If they exist, in my experience they are very rare. However, there are certainly toddlers who have become hypersensitive. In my opinion, they were always vulnerable and would have been much less of a problem had they been properly managed early on when they were just a little neophobic.
Are there clues during the child’s infancy that his family is more likely to have significant difficulty making the transition from “feeding” to “presenting” food? This new study observed that high maternal anxiety was frequently observed in both moderate and severe selective-eating children. This is another example of how we need to be aware from a very early stage when a parent is anxious or depressed. The failure to identify and see that those issues are addressed can seriously impair the whole family’s wellness.
Finally, on the other end of the spectrum, is usual garden variety selective eating outgrown? Have you tried to host a dinner party lately? I don’t mean a pot luck supper – I’m talking about a sit-down meal with a single menu. My wife and I have almost given up trying. “Martha is gluten free (without a diagnosis), Bob is watching his cholesterol, Rachel is pretty sure she is lactose intolerant, and you know Charlie hates vegetables. The Wilsons only do organic and are vegetarians.”
Next time we are considering mailing them gift certificates for their favorite restaurants along with an invitation to come over to our place for an after dinner drink. BYOB.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “Coping with a Picky Eater.”
You may not have read the much ballyhooed article about selective eating in preschoolers that was distributed to the media prior to publication because it was buried online, but I bet that you have heard or read something about it (“Psychological and Psychosocial Impairment in Preschoolers with Selective Eating” by Zucker et al., [Pediatrics. 2015 Aug 3. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-2386]). In fact, there were so many news stories, both print and electronic, and the headlines were so divergent that my wife asked me if there were actually two studies released simultaneously.
Some news reports emphasized the reassuring observation by the authors that most picky eating preschoolers will mature into older children with less selective eating habits. However, others highlighted the authors’ primary message that young children with severe selective eating behavior often have significant psychopathology (anxiety, depression, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder), and those with even moderate picky eating may be manifesting the effects of living in a dysfunctional family.
The authors recommend that we pediatricians rethink our traditional party line on selective eating. Instead of simply administering frequent doses of reassurance to the parents of “picky eaters,” we should begin to view even moderate selective eating as a red flag that the child and his or her family need help.
This shift in emphasis is long overdue. I always have felt that problem picky eating is an example of normal infant behavior that has been mismanaged by the child’s family. And in some cases physicians also must share in the blame for not having given the most appropriate advice in a timely fashion to parents who have complained about their child’s selective eating.
It would help if we all took a deep breath, stepped back a few steps, and looked at the bigger picture. We are talking about eating, one of the critical life-sustaining activities. One can understand why most infants are wired to initially reject new tastes and textures. Neophobia – fear of anything new – has probably saved millions of infants from the serious consequences of unsupervised foraging. But don’t you think that these aversions are for the most part weak enough to be easily overridden by every child’s innate drive for self-preservation? “I don’t like how this smells, tastes, looks, or feels, but darn it, I’m getting hungry, and I have to eat to survive. So I will eat it.”
The problem is that while some parents can agree with that line of reasoning, many parents, including those who buy the rationale, can’t bring themselves to quietly accept their new role as merely being providers of a healthy diet. For 9 or 10 months, it was their job to get food into their child because the poor little thing lacked the skill to do it himself. But once a child can chew solids and put things in his mouth, he can not only survive but thrive if someone will simply present him a balanced diet of appropriate consistency and volume … and then step back and shut up.
Obviously, this transition is difficult to a significant number of parents. In many cases, it is because no one has told them that toddlers will appear to eat less than they did as infants or that allowing children unlimited access to energy-containing fluid will blunt their appetites. Or that it is okay that a child only eats one-and-a-half meals on some days. Or that it if you wait long enough without resorting to coaxing, bribing, or begging, a child will eat what his body needs. And failing to be patient and instead making an issue of eating (or not eating), what began as a normal infant aversion to new tastes and textures can spiral into a divisive family catastrophe.
Are there some infants who are so hypersensitive to new tastes and textures that waiting will endanger their health? If they exist, in my experience they are very rare. However, there are certainly toddlers who have become hypersensitive. In my opinion, they were always vulnerable and would have been much less of a problem had they been properly managed early on when they were just a little neophobic.
Are there clues during the child’s infancy that his family is more likely to have significant difficulty making the transition from “feeding” to “presenting” food? This new study observed that high maternal anxiety was frequently observed in both moderate and severe selective-eating children. This is another example of how we need to be aware from a very early stage when a parent is anxious or depressed. The failure to identify and see that those issues are addressed can seriously impair the whole family’s wellness.
Finally, on the other end of the spectrum, is usual garden variety selective eating outgrown? Have you tried to host a dinner party lately? I don’t mean a pot luck supper – I’m talking about a sit-down meal with a single menu. My wife and I have almost given up trying. “Martha is gluten free (without a diagnosis), Bob is watching his cholesterol, Rachel is pretty sure she is lactose intolerant, and you know Charlie hates vegetables. The Wilsons only do organic and are vegetarians.”
Next time we are considering mailing them gift certificates for their favorite restaurants along with an invitation to come over to our place for an after dinner drink. BYOB.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “Coping with a Picky Eater.”
Bedtime (and/or) stories
I’m not much of a reader. In fact, there was a 10-year period during which I wrote more books (four) than I read. In high school and college, I can’t recall ever finishing an assigned novel or play. I would read just enough to create the desired illusion. Even now that I have more time, I’m good for about 20 minutes before I have to put a book down and do something … anything. If my feet are level with my waist, four pages is my max before sleep overtakes me.
But I could be the poster boy for the value of reading to young children. My father was a great reader. At heart he was an actor, and I could listen to his theatrical voice read for hours. I was still being read to regularly until I was 8 or 9 years old. I am convinced that it was his gift for reading aloud when I was young that helped me develop a facility with language that was crucial to my academic successes. It certainly wasn’t my own reading.
Two recent studies have added to the growing body of evidence that reading to young children is critical to their later language development and success in school (“Home Reading Environment and Brain Activation in Preschool Children Listening to Stories,” by Hutton et al. [Pediatrics. 2015 Aug 10. pii: peds.2015-0359. Epub ahead of print] and “The Words Children Hear: Picture Books and the Statistics for Language Learning,” by Montag, Jones, and Smith [Psychol Sci. Aug 4, 2015. doi: 10.1177/0956797615594361. E-pub ahead of print]). Parents in your practice have probably not read either of these peer-reviewed studies, but they may have read the New York Times and an op-ed by pediatrician Perri Klass, in which she emphasizes the importance of reading (Bed Time Stories for Young Brains, August 17, 2015). They have received free books at your office and know that you recommend they read to their children every day.
Many of those parents who have bought into the value of reading also understand the importance of a good night’s sleep. But for some of those families, those two priorities can collide when it comes time for the warm and fuzzy tradition of reading a bedtime story.
Work schedules and other family obligations may have pushed their young child’s bedtime to the brink of and beyond a healthy hour. Adding a bedtime story – and we all know there is seldom just one story – will only compound the problem. Which is more important … a bedtime story or a healthy bedtime?
Of course if we are talking about a single isolated night, the answer is obvious … do both. But I’m talking about the family that is overbooked and always running late. On a “good” night, bedtime ritual for the 2-year-old may start at 7:30 p.m. Adding a story will push start time to a clearly unhealthy 8:00. As a physician long obsessed with the underappreciated and at times catastrophic effects of sleep deprivation, my answer would clearly be forget the bedtime story and turn off the light.
But families need not allow themselves to fall into situations that force such a binary decision of reading or not reading a bedtime story. In some cases, it is an adult-centered decision by one parent who selfishly expects his or her child to be kept up until the parent can be home to participate in the bedtime ritual. In other cases, instead of building the day’s schedule around a healthy bedtime, some families treat bedtime as an afterthought, something they will get to when they can get around to it.
In addition to enhancing a child’s language development, reading stories at bedtime can be a bonding and family-building activity. Reading also can be a calming ingredient and a sleep-enhancing component in an effective bedtime ritual. And for the child who resists bedtime, reading can be used a reward that can be withheld or increased as the situation requires.
While I sense that the practice of saying one’s prayers at bedtime has fallen out of fashion for many families, the bedtime story is alive and well. We must help remind parents that the bedtime is at least as important as the story.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “Coping with a Picky Eater” and “Is My Child Overtired?: The Sleep Solution for Raising Happier, Healthier Children.” Email him at [email protected].
I’m not much of a reader. In fact, there was a 10-year period during which I wrote more books (four) than I read. In high school and college, I can’t recall ever finishing an assigned novel or play. I would read just enough to create the desired illusion. Even now that I have more time, I’m good for about 20 minutes before I have to put a book down and do something … anything. If my feet are level with my waist, four pages is my max before sleep overtakes me.
But I could be the poster boy for the value of reading to young children. My father was a great reader. At heart he was an actor, and I could listen to his theatrical voice read for hours. I was still being read to regularly until I was 8 or 9 years old. I am convinced that it was his gift for reading aloud when I was young that helped me develop a facility with language that was crucial to my academic successes. It certainly wasn’t my own reading.
Two recent studies have added to the growing body of evidence that reading to young children is critical to their later language development and success in school (“Home Reading Environment and Brain Activation in Preschool Children Listening to Stories,” by Hutton et al. [Pediatrics. 2015 Aug 10. pii: peds.2015-0359. Epub ahead of print] and “The Words Children Hear: Picture Books and the Statistics for Language Learning,” by Montag, Jones, and Smith [Psychol Sci. Aug 4, 2015. doi: 10.1177/0956797615594361. E-pub ahead of print]). Parents in your practice have probably not read either of these peer-reviewed studies, but they may have read the New York Times and an op-ed by pediatrician Perri Klass, in which she emphasizes the importance of reading (Bed Time Stories for Young Brains, August 17, 2015). They have received free books at your office and know that you recommend they read to their children every day.
Many of those parents who have bought into the value of reading also understand the importance of a good night’s sleep. But for some of those families, those two priorities can collide when it comes time for the warm and fuzzy tradition of reading a bedtime story.
Work schedules and other family obligations may have pushed their young child’s bedtime to the brink of and beyond a healthy hour. Adding a bedtime story – and we all know there is seldom just one story – will only compound the problem. Which is more important … a bedtime story or a healthy bedtime?
Of course if we are talking about a single isolated night, the answer is obvious … do both. But I’m talking about the family that is overbooked and always running late. On a “good” night, bedtime ritual for the 2-year-old may start at 7:30 p.m. Adding a story will push start time to a clearly unhealthy 8:00. As a physician long obsessed with the underappreciated and at times catastrophic effects of sleep deprivation, my answer would clearly be forget the bedtime story and turn off the light.
But families need not allow themselves to fall into situations that force such a binary decision of reading or not reading a bedtime story. In some cases, it is an adult-centered decision by one parent who selfishly expects his or her child to be kept up until the parent can be home to participate in the bedtime ritual. In other cases, instead of building the day’s schedule around a healthy bedtime, some families treat bedtime as an afterthought, something they will get to when they can get around to it.
In addition to enhancing a child’s language development, reading stories at bedtime can be a bonding and family-building activity. Reading also can be a calming ingredient and a sleep-enhancing component in an effective bedtime ritual. And for the child who resists bedtime, reading can be used a reward that can be withheld or increased as the situation requires.
While I sense that the practice of saying one’s prayers at bedtime has fallen out of fashion for many families, the bedtime story is alive and well. We must help remind parents that the bedtime is at least as important as the story.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “Coping with a Picky Eater” and “Is My Child Overtired?: The Sleep Solution for Raising Happier, Healthier Children.” Email him at [email protected].
I’m not much of a reader. In fact, there was a 10-year period during which I wrote more books (four) than I read. In high school and college, I can’t recall ever finishing an assigned novel or play. I would read just enough to create the desired illusion. Even now that I have more time, I’m good for about 20 minutes before I have to put a book down and do something … anything. If my feet are level with my waist, four pages is my max before sleep overtakes me.
But I could be the poster boy for the value of reading to young children. My father was a great reader. At heart he was an actor, and I could listen to his theatrical voice read for hours. I was still being read to regularly until I was 8 or 9 years old. I am convinced that it was his gift for reading aloud when I was young that helped me develop a facility with language that was crucial to my academic successes. It certainly wasn’t my own reading.
Two recent studies have added to the growing body of evidence that reading to young children is critical to their later language development and success in school (“Home Reading Environment and Brain Activation in Preschool Children Listening to Stories,” by Hutton et al. [Pediatrics. 2015 Aug 10. pii: peds.2015-0359. Epub ahead of print] and “The Words Children Hear: Picture Books and the Statistics for Language Learning,” by Montag, Jones, and Smith [Psychol Sci. Aug 4, 2015. doi: 10.1177/0956797615594361. E-pub ahead of print]). Parents in your practice have probably not read either of these peer-reviewed studies, but they may have read the New York Times and an op-ed by pediatrician Perri Klass, in which she emphasizes the importance of reading (Bed Time Stories for Young Brains, August 17, 2015). They have received free books at your office and know that you recommend they read to their children every day.
Many of those parents who have bought into the value of reading also understand the importance of a good night’s sleep. But for some of those families, those two priorities can collide when it comes time for the warm and fuzzy tradition of reading a bedtime story.
Work schedules and other family obligations may have pushed their young child’s bedtime to the brink of and beyond a healthy hour. Adding a bedtime story – and we all know there is seldom just one story – will only compound the problem. Which is more important … a bedtime story or a healthy bedtime?
Of course if we are talking about a single isolated night, the answer is obvious … do both. But I’m talking about the family that is overbooked and always running late. On a “good” night, bedtime ritual for the 2-year-old may start at 7:30 p.m. Adding a story will push start time to a clearly unhealthy 8:00. As a physician long obsessed with the underappreciated and at times catastrophic effects of sleep deprivation, my answer would clearly be forget the bedtime story and turn off the light.
But families need not allow themselves to fall into situations that force such a binary decision of reading or not reading a bedtime story. In some cases, it is an adult-centered decision by one parent who selfishly expects his or her child to be kept up until the parent can be home to participate in the bedtime ritual. In other cases, instead of building the day’s schedule around a healthy bedtime, some families treat bedtime as an afterthought, something they will get to when they can get around to it.
In addition to enhancing a child’s language development, reading stories at bedtime can be a bonding and family-building activity. Reading also can be a calming ingredient and a sleep-enhancing component in an effective bedtime ritual. And for the child who resists bedtime, reading can be used a reward that can be withheld or increased as the situation requires.
While I sense that the practice of saying one’s prayers at bedtime has fallen out of fashion for many families, the bedtime story is alive and well. We must help remind parents that the bedtime is at least as important as the story.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “Coping with a Picky Eater” and “Is My Child Overtired?: The Sleep Solution for Raising Happier, Healthier Children.” Email him at [email protected].
Grandparents and the new baby
A couple having a baby brings together two family traditions that themselves blended the previous generations’ experiences and perspectives. Each of the new parents has been raised by two parents with their own histories, values, successes, and crises all available and potentially playing a part in the new baby’s future. A baby’s arrival can call forth memories of past successes, failures, hopes, and dreams – some fulfilled and some not.
As the pediatrician, you serve as an authority and a resource for the new parents. You will hear questions that have roots that may go back one, two, or more generations. Some may involve discipline, approaches to food, religious issues, or more subtle concerns relating to control and autonomy. And you may find that they will bring you the challenge of managing the beliefs, values, and expectations of the new grandparents. You may even find these new grandparents in your office! You have a unique opportunity to help new parents set a course with their own parents or in-laws that can promote family cohesion and honor family traditions or values, while empowering parents to trust themselves and truly be in charge of raising their own children.
Imagine this scenario: A young couple has just had their first baby, a son. The paternal grandfather, who played soccer in high school and college, presents his first grandchild with his own college soccer ball, proclaiming with great emotion that soccer will certainly be a part of his grandson’s future.
While this simple act may seem touching, it might also be perceived by the new parents as intrusive or controlling. How does the new father (who was maybe more bookish than athletic) feel the burden of this expectation? Perhaps the mother may wish her son to be more of a scholar than an athlete, or may want no expectation set, but may feel uncomfortable speaking honestly with her father-in-law. And this scenario is just about the gift of a soccer ball!
Grandparents (like parents) come with expectations, with beliefs about what practices worked and what failed over a wide range of areas from child rearing to managing finances to career to marriage. The arrival of a new grandchild will likely prompt them to share these beliefs, and do so in the way they usually communicate with their own children, be it blunt, emotional, indirect, or mute. These views might be forcefully presented, if a grandparent feels guilty or unfulfilled because a meaningful hope for their own child did not materialize: The new grandchild is their “last chance.” While their love and interest, their experience and wisdom can be invaluable, they might also arouse insecurity in a new parent or be disruptive. If they share opinions in a way that is stressful, devaluing, or confusing for new parents, that can translate into anxious, uncertain interactions with their new baby or a climate at home that is full of conflict instead of calm.
Parents are already blending their two styles and values, challenging enough before also trying to blend the elements of four grandparents.
The first weeks after the arrival of the new baby is a crucial time in the baby’s development, as well as in the development of the new parents, as all are rapidly acquiring new skills, adjusting to a new schedule, and learning how to understand and respond to each other. During these hard early days, grandparents often will be present, staying in the home or nearby to offer support to their children. Very commonly, they will share their opinions about such basics as nutrition and sleep. These are areas that are fundamentally important for a baby’s healthy development, but can be mysterious and challenging for new parents. They may seek out guidance from friends, books, websites, and pediatricians, as well as the new grandparents.
While their accumulated wisdom may be as helpful as their helping with laundry or meal preparation (think, “sleep when the baby sleeps”), it also might not. Perhaps the opinions are misguided (think, “sleeping on the tummy was always fine in my day”). And grandparents who are inadvertently undermining (“I don’t understand the difficulty, nursing was so easy for me”), or highly anxious might add to the new parents’ stress and uncertainty rather than alleviate it.
Grandparents also may come with strong cultural beliefs about child rearing. In families that are only one or two generations removed from immigration to this country, there may be powerfully held ideas about newborns, ones that might be inextricably linked for the grandparents with their drive to preserve their own cultural background. These may include ideas about when a child can eat solid food or what he or she should start eating. They may include beliefs that a child should never be put down or should be left to cry for long periods, lest they be “spoiled.” They might include ideas about when a baby can swim or how best to bathe them, what sorts of toys are appropriate or when their hair can be cut. While many of these beliefs have cultural value and no medical implications (like the timing of the first haircut), some may fly in the face of current scientific evidence (such as eating solids before they are able). And even when they are “safe,” new parents may experience these beliefs as fraught directives: ones that they may not believe in, but which will make them guilty of some cultural betrayal if they do not follow them.
Along a similar vein, grandparents may enter the home of their new grandchild with passionately held religious beliefs. While few of these may have direct medical implications for the new baby (such as circumcision), they can still have profound implications for life in the family’s home. When parents and grandparents all share the same religious beliefs, there is less possibility of conflict. But when new parents come from different religious traditions or no longer share their parents’ faith, there is high potential for emotionally charged differences. And if the new parents have not anticipated these conversations (say, whether or not to circumcise a baby boy when one parent is Jewish and the other is Protestant), trying to sort out these matters while also learning to change diapers or nurse a colicky baby can make a challenging situation into an overwhelming one.
Lastly, about 1% of all households have same-sex partners or marriages and about one in four are raising children. While same-sex parenthood has rapidly gained cultural acceptance over the past decade, it is possible that some grandparents will not have fully accepted the reality of their own child’s sexual orientation and committed relationship. If the parents speak to you about such a fraught situation, listen supportively. When it sounds like there is ambivalence in the grandparents, the new parents can try to nurture the love that is there and be patient when their own parents still struggle. They should nurture the connections with those in their families that offer unconditional support and who can model love and acceptance for the new grandparents. In situations in which there is deeper alienation and little or no contact, offer that they might want to find a way to share photos and stories through one who remains close to their parents and periodically offer opportunities to rebuild relationships. A new grandchild can be a loving moment to take a fresh look at unresolved anger and loss, and as clinicians we have seen families resolve differences as they look to a new baby’s future.
Pediatricians are in a unique position of both neutrality and authority with their new patient’s parents and grandparents. When parents come to a newborn check or well-baby check, it can be invaluable to determine “who else is helping you?” After finding out about nursing or feeding the baby and about sleep, inquire about where they are getting any guidance or support. Friends or siblings with children? Books or websites? Grandparents? What has been helpful and what has not? When you hear about grandparents and see an eye-roll or hear a deep sigh, be curious about what has been helpful and what has been challenging. It is vitally helpful to first-time parents to be validated in their feeling that their own parents are a valuable resource, but not without their challenges.
While it may be important to offer a “medical” opinion about certain matters (back-sleeping, cosleeping, and introducing solids, for example), on most matters, the pediatrician’s role will be to help parents set a framework that will help them to cultivate what is precious and helpful from grandparents while minimizing conflict or unnecessary stress. For new parents, this may be as simple as reminding them that while this is an vital time for the baby’s development, it is also a big transition for them into parenthood and a significant transition for their parents or in-laws into grandparenthood. Help the new parents to understand that there is sometimes no one “right” way to handle certain decisions or challenges, and they will have to try a variety of strategies before finding the one that fits them as parents to this particular child. Remind them that parenting is a learning curve and it is common to feel stressed in new territory with high stakes. But they will find the right rhythm with being attuned to their new baby and eventually managing routines and limits. They are allowed to embrace the support that they find helpful and limit that which they experience as deeply undermining, dismissive, or judgmental.
When you notice that parents sound very angry at or alienated from grandparents, particularly when it is causing some marital conflict, it can be powerful for you to suggest that they should sort out their wishes and beliefs as parents first and then find a clear and loving way to communicate these to the grandparents. Remind them that they are becoming the experts on their children and that they will best be able to set appropriate routines and expectations. But remind them also that grandparents are potentially a treasure to their grandchildren, beyond the help with laundry and meal preparation at the very start of a child’s life.
There can never be enough loving, interested adults in a child’s orbit or a big enough cheering section. And grandparents can be uniquely passionate, patient, curious, and supportive to their growing grandchildren. They bring perspective on a family’s history, wonderful as a growing child builds a story about who they are and where they come from. And their interest and love will help a growing child build a sense of what characteristics make them a treasure to others. Few people can do this as well as grandparents, and letting them begin this involvement at the start of their grandchild’s life only supports this role.
While the arrival of a new baby will be a joyful event for a family, it will also be emotionally complex. Providing your patient’s parents with support and even some language that may help them cultivate the grandparents’ interest and love, while building healthy boundaries around their own parenting, may help set the stage for the healthiest development of your very young patient.
Dr. Swick is an attending psychiatrist in the division of child psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, and director of the Parenting at a Challenging Time (PACT) Program at the Vernon Cancer Center at Newton Wellesley Hospital, also in Boston. Dr. Jellinek is professor of psychiatry and of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, Boston. E-mail them at [email protected].
A couple having a baby brings together two family traditions that themselves blended the previous generations’ experiences and perspectives. Each of the new parents has been raised by two parents with their own histories, values, successes, and crises all available and potentially playing a part in the new baby’s future. A baby’s arrival can call forth memories of past successes, failures, hopes, and dreams – some fulfilled and some not.
As the pediatrician, you serve as an authority and a resource for the new parents. You will hear questions that have roots that may go back one, two, or more generations. Some may involve discipline, approaches to food, religious issues, or more subtle concerns relating to control and autonomy. And you may find that they will bring you the challenge of managing the beliefs, values, and expectations of the new grandparents. You may even find these new grandparents in your office! You have a unique opportunity to help new parents set a course with their own parents or in-laws that can promote family cohesion and honor family traditions or values, while empowering parents to trust themselves and truly be in charge of raising their own children.
Imagine this scenario: A young couple has just had their first baby, a son. The paternal grandfather, who played soccer in high school and college, presents his first grandchild with his own college soccer ball, proclaiming with great emotion that soccer will certainly be a part of his grandson’s future.
While this simple act may seem touching, it might also be perceived by the new parents as intrusive or controlling. How does the new father (who was maybe more bookish than athletic) feel the burden of this expectation? Perhaps the mother may wish her son to be more of a scholar than an athlete, or may want no expectation set, but may feel uncomfortable speaking honestly with her father-in-law. And this scenario is just about the gift of a soccer ball!
Grandparents (like parents) come with expectations, with beliefs about what practices worked and what failed over a wide range of areas from child rearing to managing finances to career to marriage. The arrival of a new grandchild will likely prompt them to share these beliefs, and do so in the way they usually communicate with their own children, be it blunt, emotional, indirect, or mute. These views might be forcefully presented, if a grandparent feels guilty or unfulfilled because a meaningful hope for their own child did not materialize: The new grandchild is their “last chance.” While their love and interest, their experience and wisdom can be invaluable, they might also arouse insecurity in a new parent or be disruptive. If they share opinions in a way that is stressful, devaluing, or confusing for new parents, that can translate into anxious, uncertain interactions with their new baby or a climate at home that is full of conflict instead of calm.
Parents are already blending their two styles and values, challenging enough before also trying to blend the elements of four grandparents.
The first weeks after the arrival of the new baby is a crucial time in the baby’s development, as well as in the development of the new parents, as all are rapidly acquiring new skills, adjusting to a new schedule, and learning how to understand and respond to each other. During these hard early days, grandparents often will be present, staying in the home or nearby to offer support to their children. Very commonly, they will share their opinions about such basics as nutrition and sleep. These are areas that are fundamentally important for a baby’s healthy development, but can be mysterious and challenging for new parents. They may seek out guidance from friends, books, websites, and pediatricians, as well as the new grandparents.
While their accumulated wisdom may be as helpful as their helping with laundry or meal preparation (think, “sleep when the baby sleeps”), it also might not. Perhaps the opinions are misguided (think, “sleeping on the tummy was always fine in my day”). And grandparents who are inadvertently undermining (“I don’t understand the difficulty, nursing was so easy for me”), or highly anxious might add to the new parents’ stress and uncertainty rather than alleviate it.
Grandparents also may come with strong cultural beliefs about child rearing. In families that are only one or two generations removed from immigration to this country, there may be powerfully held ideas about newborns, ones that might be inextricably linked for the grandparents with their drive to preserve their own cultural background. These may include ideas about when a child can eat solid food or what he or she should start eating. They may include beliefs that a child should never be put down or should be left to cry for long periods, lest they be “spoiled.” They might include ideas about when a baby can swim or how best to bathe them, what sorts of toys are appropriate or when their hair can be cut. While many of these beliefs have cultural value and no medical implications (like the timing of the first haircut), some may fly in the face of current scientific evidence (such as eating solids before they are able). And even when they are “safe,” new parents may experience these beliefs as fraught directives: ones that they may not believe in, but which will make them guilty of some cultural betrayal if they do not follow them.
Along a similar vein, grandparents may enter the home of their new grandchild with passionately held religious beliefs. While few of these may have direct medical implications for the new baby (such as circumcision), they can still have profound implications for life in the family’s home. When parents and grandparents all share the same religious beliefs, there is less possibility of conflict. But when new parents come from different religious traditions or no longer share their parents’ faith, there is high potential for emotionally charged differences. And if the new parents have not anticipated these conversations (say, whether or not to circumcise a baby boy when one parent is Jewish and the other is Protestant), trying to sort out these matters while also learning to change diapers or nurse a colicky baby can make a challenging situation into an overwhelming one.
Lastly, about 1% of all households have same-sex partners or marriages and about one in four are raising children. While same-sex parenthood has rapidly gained cultural acceptance over the past decade, it is possible that some grandparents will not have fully accepted the reality of their own child’s sexual orientation and committed relationship. If the parents speak to you about such a fraught situation, listen supportively. When it sounds like there is ambivalence in the grandparents, the new parents can try to nurture the love that is there and be patient when their own parents still struggle. They should nurture the connections with those in their families that offer unconditional support and who can model love and acceptance for the new grandparents. In situations in which there is deeper alienation and little or no contact, offer that they might want to find a way to share photos and stories through one who remains close to their parents and periodically offer opportunities to rebuild relationships. A new grandchild can be a loving moment to take a fresh look at unresolved anger and loss, and as clinicians we have seen families resolve differences as they look to a new baby’s future.
Pediatricians are in a unique position of both neutrality and authority with their new patient’s parents and grandparents. When parents come to a newborn check or well-baby check, it can be invaluable to determine “who else is helping you?” After finding out about nursing or feeding the baby and about sleep, inquire about where they are getting any guidance or support. Friends or siblings with children? Books or websites? Grandparents? What has been helpful and what has not? When you hear about grandparents and see an eye-roll or hear a deep sigh, be curious about what has been helpful and what has been challenging. It is vitally helpful to first-time parents to be validated in their feeling that their own parents are a valuable resource, but not without their challenges.
While it may be important to offer a “medical” opinion about certain matters (back-sleeping, cosleeping, and introducing solids, for example), on most matters, the pediatrician’s role will be to help parents set a framework that will help them to cultivate what is precious and helpful from grandparents while minimizing conflict or unnecessary stress. For new parents, this may be as simple as reminding them that while this is an vital time for the baby’s development, it is also a big transition for them into parenthood and a significant transition for their parents or in-laws into grandparenthood. Help the new parents to understand that there is sometimes no one “right” way to handle certain decisions or challenges, and they will have to try a variety of strategies before finding the one that fits them as parents to this particular child. Remind them that parenting is a learning curve and it is common to feel stressed in new territory with high stakes. But they will find the right rhythm with being attuned to their new baby and eventually managing routines and limits. They are allowed to embrace the support that they find helpful and limit that which they experience as deeply undermining, dismissive, or judgmental.
When you notice that parents sound very angry at or alienated from grandparents, particularly when it is causing some marital conflict, it can be powerful for you to suggest that they should sort out their wishes and beliefs as parents first and then find a clear and loving way to communicate these to the grandparents. Remind them that they are becoming the experts on their children and that they will best be able to set appropriate routines and expectations. But remind them also that grandparents are potentially a treasure to their grandchildren, beyond the help with laundry and meal preparation at the very start of a child’s life.
There can never be enough loving, interested adults in a child’s orbit or a big enough cheering section. And grandparents can be uniquely passionate, patient, curious, and supportive to their growing grandchildren. They bring perspective on a family’s history, wonderful as a growing child builds a story about who they are and where they come from. And their interest and love will help a growing child build a sense of what characteristics make them a treasure to others. Few people can do this as well as grandparents, and letting them begin this involvement at the start of their grandchild’s life only supports this role.
While the arrival of a new baby will be a joyful event for a family, it will also be emotionally complex. Providing your patient’s parents with support and even some language that may help them cultivate the grandparents’ interest and love, while building healthy boundaries around their own parenting, may help set the stage for the healthiest development of your very young patient.
Dr. Swick is an attending psychiatrist in the division of child psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, and director of the Parenting at a Challenging Time (PACT) Program at the Vernon Cancer Center at Newton Wellesley Hospital, also in Boston. Dr. Jellinek is professor of psychiatry and of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, Boston. E-mail them at [email protected].
A couple having a baby brings together two family traditions that themselves blended the previous generations’ experiences and perspectives. Each of the new parents has been raised by two parents with their own histories, values, successes, and crises all available and potentially playing a part in the new baby’s future. A baby’s arrival can call forth memories of past successes, failures, hopes, and dreams – some fulfilled and some not.
As the pediatrician, you serve as an authority and a resource for the new parents. You will hear questions that have roots that may go back one, two, or more generations. Some may involve discipline, approaches to food, religious issues, or more subtle concerns relating to control and autonomy. And you may find that they will bring you the challenge of managing the beliefs, values, and expectations of the new grandparents. You may even find these new grandparents in your office! You have a unique opportunity to help new parents set a course with their own parents or in-laws that can promote family cohesion and honor family traditions or values, while empowering parents to trust themselves and truly be in charge of raising their own children.
Imagine this scenario: A young couple has just had their first baby, a son. The paternal grandfather, who played soccer in high school and college, presents his first grandchild with his own college soccer ball, proclaiming with great emotion that soccer will certainly be a part of his grandson’s future.
While this simple act may seem touching, it might also be perceived by the new parents as intrusive or controlling. How does the new father (who was maybe more bookish than athletic) feel the burden of this expectation? Perhaps the mother may wish her son to be more of a scholar than an athlete, or may want no expectation set, but may feel uncomfortable speaking honestly with her father-in-law. And this scenario is just about the gift of a soccer ball!
Grandparents (like parents) come with expectations, with beliefs about what practices worked and what failed over a wide range of areas from child rearing to managing finances to career to marriage. The arrival of a new grandchild will likely prompt them to share these beliefs, and do so in the way they usually communicate with their own children, be it blunt, emotional, indirect, or mute. These views might be forcefully presented, if a grandparent feels guilty or unfulfilled because a meaningful hope for their own child did not materialize: The new grandchild is their “last chance.” While their love and interest, their experience and wisdom can be invaluable, they might also arouse insecurity in a new parent or be disruptive. If they share opinions in a way that is stressful, devaluing, or confusing for new parents, that can translate into anxious, uncertain interactions with their new baby or a climate at home that is full of conflict instead of calm.
Parents are already blending their two styles and values, challenging enough before also trying to blend the elements of four grandparents.
The first weeks after the arrival of the new baby is a crucial time in the baby’s development, as well as in the development of the new parents, as all are rapidly acquiring new skills, adjusting to a new schedule, and learning how to understand and respond to each other. During these hard early days, grandparents often will be present, staying in the home or nearby to offer support to their children. Very commonly, they will share their opinions about such basics as nutrition and sleep. These are areas that are fundamentally important for a baby’s healthy development, but can be mysterious and challenging for new parents. They may seek out guidance from friends, books, websites, and pediatricians, as well as the new grandparents.
While their accumulated wisdom may be as helpful as their helping with laundry or meal preparation (think, “sleep when the baby sleeps”), it also might not. Perhaps the opinions are misguided (think, “sleeping on the tummy was always fine in my day”). And grandparents who are inadvertently undermining (“I don’t understand the difficulty, nursing was so easy for me”), or highly anxious might add to the new parents’ stress and uncertainty rather than alleviate it.
Grandparents also may come with strong cultural beliefs about child rearing. In families that are only one or two generations removed from immigration to this country, there may be powerfully held ideas about newborns, ones that might be inextricably linked for the grandparents with their drive to preserve their own cultural background. These may include ideas about when a child can eat solid food or what he or she should start eating. They may include beliefs that a child should never be put down or should be left to cry for long periods, lest they be “spoiled.” They might include ideas about when a baby can swim or how best to bathe them, what sorts of toys are appropriate or when their hair can be cut. While many of these beliefs have cultural value and no medical implications (like the timing of the first haircut), some may fly in the face of current scientific evidence (such as eating solids before they are able). And even when they are “safe,” new parents may experience these beliefs as fraught directives: ones that they may not believe in, but which will make them guilty of some cultural betrayal if they do not follow them.
Along a similar vein, grandparents may enter the home of their new grandchild with passionately held religious beliefs. While few of these may have direct medical implications for the new baby (such as circumcision), they can still have profound implications for life in the family’s home. When parents and grandparents all share the same religious beliefs, there is less possibility of conflict. But when new parents come from different religious traditions or no longer share their parents’ faith, there is high potential for emotionally charged differences. And if the new parents have not anticipated these conversations (say, whether or not to circumcise a baby boy when one parent is Jewish and the other is Protestant), trying to sort out these matters while also learning to change diapers or nurse a colicky baby can make a challenging situation into an overwhelming one.
Lastly, about 1% of all households have same-sex partners or marriages and about one in four are raising children. While same-sex parenthood has rapidly gained cultural acceptance over the past decade, it is possible that some grandparents will not have fully accepted the reality of their own child’s sexual orientation and committed relationship. If the parents speak to you about such a fraught situation, listen supportively. When it sounds like there is ambivalence in the grandparents, the new parents can try to nurture the love that is there and be patient when their own parents still struggle. They should nurture the connections with those in their families that offer unconditional support and who can model love and acceptance for the new grandparents. In situations in which there is deeper alienation and little or no contact, offer that they might want to find a way to share photos and stories through one who remains close to their parents and periodically offer opportunities to rebuild relationships. A new grandchild can be a loving moment to take a fresh look at unresolved anger and loss, and as clinicians we have seen families resolve differences as they look to a new baby’s future.
Pediatricians are in a unique position of both neutrality and authority with their new patient’s parents and grandparents. When parents come to a newborn check or well-baby check, it can be invaluable to determine “who else is helping you?” After finding out about nursing or feeding the baby and about sleep, inquire about where they are getting any guidance or support. Friends or siblings with children? Books or websites? Grandparents? What has been helpful and what has not? When you hear about grandparents and see an eye-roll or hear a deep sigh, be curious about what has been helpful and what has been challenging. It is vitally helpful to first-time parents to be validated in their feeling that their own parents are a valuable resource, but not without their challenges.
While it may be important to offer a “medical” opinion about certain matters (back-sleeping, cosleeping, and introducing solids, for example), on most matters, the pediatrician’s role will be to help parents set a framework that will help them to cultivate what is precious and helpful from grandparents while minimizing conflict or unnecessary stress. For new parents, this may be as simple as reminding them that while this is an vital time for the baby’s development, it is also a big transition for them into parenthood and a significant transition for their parents or in-laws into grandparenthood. Help the new parents to understand that there is sometimes no one “right” way to handle certain decisions or challenges, and they will have to try a variety of strategies before finding the one that fits them as parents to this particular child. Remind them that parenting is a learning curve and it is common to feel stressed in new territory with high stakes. But they will find the right rhythm with being attuned to their new baby and eventually managing routines and limits. They are allowed to embrace the support that they find helpful and limit that which they experience as deeply undermining, dismissive, or judgmental.
When you notice that parents sound very angry at or alienated from grandparents, particularly when it is causing some marital conflict, it can be powerful for you to suggest that they should sort out their wishes and beliefs as parents first and then find a clear and loving way to communicate these to the grandparents. Remind them that they are becoming the experts on their children and that they will best be able to set appropriate routines and expectations. But remind them also that grandparents are potentially a treasure to their grandchildren, beyond the help with laundry and meal preparation at the very start of a child’s life.
There can never be enough loving, interested adults in a child’s orbit or a big enough cheering section. And grandparents can be uniquely passionate, patient, curious, and supportive to their growing grandchildren. They bring perspective on a family’s history, wonderful as a growing child builds a story about who they are and where they come from. And their interest and love will help a growing child build a sense of what characteristics make them a treasure to others. Few people can do this as well as grandparents, and letting them begin this involvement at the start of their grandchild’s life only supports this role.
While the arrival of a new baby will be a joyful event for a family, it will also be emotionally complex. Providing your patient’s parents with support and even some language that may help them cultivate the grandparents’ interest and love, while building healthy boundaries around their own parenting, may help set the stage for the healthiest development of your very young patient.
Dr. Swick is an attending psychiatrist in the division of child psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, and director of the Parenting at a Challenging Time (PACT) Program at the Vernon Cancer Center at Newton Wellesley Hospital, also in Boston. Dr. Jellinek is professor of psychiatry and of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, Boston. E-mail them at [email protected].
Recognizing and treating vulvar cancer
Vulvar cancer is a rare gynecologic cancer comprising only 5% of gynecologic malignancies. Given the low incidence of disease, many primary providers and even obstetricians and gynecologists many never encounter a case. Increased awareness of vulvar cancer and vulvar dysplasia among patients and physicians may decrease diagnostic delays and expedite patient therapy.
Diagnosis
There is a well documented delay in diagnosis of vulvar cancer that is attributed to both the patient and the physician. Patients may feel uncomfortable or embarrassed telling their physicians about vulvar symptoms and providers may not recognize the risk for malignancy and provide alternative therapies prior to biopsy (J Reprod Med. 1999;44[9]:766-8.).
Risk factors for vulvar cancer include human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, a history of smoking, immunosuppression, and a history of an abnormal pap smear. Vulvar dystrophy, lichen sclerosis, and squamous intraepithelial lesions have also been suggested as precursor lesions of invasive cancers. The key to early diagnosis and treatment is immediate in-office biopsy.
When evaluating a patient with a vulvar lesion, the initial evaluation should include a thorough exam with a measurement of the lesion and evaluation of inguinal lymph nodes. Also, a detailed description of a lesion’s relationship to the midline (how many centimeters away) and other vital structures (clitoris, urethra, anus) is important.
An in-office biopsy can be done on initial presentation and should include the lesion in question and underlying stroma in an effort to delineate depth of invasion. While shave biopsies may be appropriate for some skin lesions, if there is any concern for malignancy, a punch biopsy is preferred.
Pathology
Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common histologic subtype (greater than 90%) followed by malignant melanoma. Malignant melanoma poses a diagnostic challenge as 25% may present with nonpigmented lesions. These lesions may arise from a junctional nevus and are more common in postmenopausal white women.
The measurement of tumor thickness is essential in evaluation of melanoma. A diagnosis of vulvar melanoma should be referred to a gynecologic oncologist for further evaluation and treatment. Frequently these patients require a multidisciplinary approach with other medical and surgical subspecialties consulting.
Adenocarcinoma of the vulva frequently arises within the Bartholin glands. Bartholin gland disease is typically a disease of young women. Any abscess or lesion in the bartholin gland in women older than 50 years should raise awareness of the possibility of malignancy. Providers should have a low threshold for biopsy of any Bartholin lesion in older women and for any Bartholin gland lesion or cyst that returns or persists after initial drainage.
Staging pearls
Vulvar cancer spreads by direct extension, lymphatic embolization and hematogenous spread. Lymphatic spread can occur early in the disease and portends a much worse prognosis. In 2009, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) revised the staging system. The most significant change was in stage III disease, which now includes any patient with lymph node involvement. This change emphasizes lymph node status as the single most important prognostic factor. The 5-year overall survival of patients with locally advanced tumors but negative regional lymph nodes (62%) has been found to be significantly better than those with positive nodal status (39%, P value less than.0001) (Gynecol Oncol. 2008;110[1]:83-6.).
In patients with stage IA disease, which includes lesions less than 2 cm in size with stromal invasion of less than 1 mm, the risk of lymph node metastasis is low. These patients do not require inguinal lymph node dissection. If lesions are greater than 2 cm and/or have greater than 1 mm depth of invasion, a lymph node dissection is indicated. Lymph node dissection is performed on the ipsilateral side of the lesion as long as the lesion is more than 2 cm from a midline structure. If the lesion is in the midline or within 2 cm of the midline, a bilateral inguinal lymph node dissection is recommended.
There has been a recent uptake of the sentinel inguinal lymph node biopsy technique after two large prospective studies (the GROINSS V trial and GOG 173) validated this methodology (Lancet Oncol. 2010 Jul;11[7]:646-52 and Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Feb;128[2]:155-9).
Treatment
Surgical management of stage I and II disease involves a wide radical excision of the tumor with a 1-cm circumferential margin. Tumors with a depth of invasion of less than 1 mm do not require lymphadenectomy (Gynecol Oncol. 1992 Mar;44[3]:240-4). Stage I/II disease with deeper than 1-mm invasion requires a 2-cm margin and either sentinel node evaluation or lymphadenectomy. Survival for women with adequate resection of primary squamous carcinoma with negative lymph node involvement is greater than 90%.
Patients with metastasis to the groin frequently receive bilateral groin and pelvic radiation; however, recommendations are individualized based on size and number of metastasis. Patients should expect to receive recommendations for therapy after pathologic review and multidisciplinary consultation; therapy should be individualized for each clinical situation.
This disease is one of the elderly, but it is important to remember that treatment recommendations should not be made according to age alone. A British study found that when women over the age of 80 received standard treatment, their recurrence rate was 25% compared with a 53% recurrence rate in those whose treatment was modified (Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009;19[4]:752-5.). In patients with advanced disease, preoperative radiation, with or without chemotherapy, is frequently regarded as the treatment of choice and may eliminate the need for radical surgery.
While vulvar cancer is a rare gynecologic malignancy, it can be devastating for patients and families, especially at late stages. Early diagnosis and treatment is imperative for improved patient outcomes. An increased awareness among patients and physicians alike may allow for earlier diagnosis and treatment.
Dr. Sullivan is a fellow in the division of gynecologic oncology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Dr. Gehrig is professor and director of gynecologic oncology at the university. Dr. Sullivan and Dr. Gehrig reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Vulvar cancer is a rare gynecologic cancer comprising only 5% of gynecologic malignancies. Given the low incidence of disease, many primary providers and even obstetricians and gynecologists many never encounter a case. Increased awareness of vulvar cancer and vulvar dysplasia among patients and physicians may decrease diagnostic delays and expedite patient therapy.
Diagnosis
There is a well documented delay in diagnosis of vulvar cancer that is attributed to both the patient and the physician. Patients may feel uncomfortable or embarrassed telling their physicians about vulvar symptoms and providers may not recognize the risk for malignancy and provide alternative therapies prior to biopsy (J Reprod Med. 1999;44[9]:766-8.).
Risk factors for vulvar cancer include human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, a history of smoking, immunosuppression, and a history of an abnormal pap smear. Vulvar dystrophy, lichen sclerosis, and squamous intraepithelial lesions have also been suggested as precursor lesions of invasive cancers. The key to early diagnosis and treatment is immediate in-office biopsy.
When evaluating a patient with a vulvar lesion, the initial evaluation should include a thorough exam with a measurement of the lesion and evaluation of inguinal lymph nodes. Also, a detailed description of a lesion’s relationship to the midline (how many centimeters away) and other vital structures (clitoris, urethra, anus) is important.
An in-office biopsy can be done on initial presentation and should include the lesion in question and underlying stroma in an effort to delineate depth of invasion. While shave biopsies may be appropriate for some skin lesions, if there is any concern for malignancy, a punch biopsy is preferred.
Pathology
Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common histologic subtype (greater than 90%) followed by malignant melanoma. Malignant melanoma poses a diagnostic challenge as 25% may present with nonpigmented lesions. These lesions may arise from a junctional nevus and are more common in postmenopausal white women.
The measurement of tumor thickness is essential in evaluation of melanoma. A diagnosis of vulvar melanoma should be referred to a gynecologic oncologist for further evaluation and treatment. Frequently these patients require a multidisciplinary approach with other medical and surgical subspecialties consulting.
Adenocarcinoma of the vulva frequently arises within the Bartholin glands. Bartholin gland disease is typically a disease of young women. Any abscess or lesion in the bartholin gland in women older than 50 years should raise awareness of the possibility of malignancy. Providers should have a low threshold for biopsy of any Bartholin lesion in older women and for any Bartholin gland lesion or cyst that returns or persists after initial drainage.
Staging pearls
Vulvar cancer spreads by direct extension, lymphatic embolization and hematogenous spread. Lymphatic spread can occur early in the disease and portends a much worse prognosis. In 2009, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) revised the staging system. The most significant change was in stage III disease, which now includes any patient with lymph node involvement. This change emphasizes lymph node status as the single most important prognostic factor. The 5-year overall survival of patients with locally advanced tumors but negative regional lymph nodes (62%) has been found to be significantly better than those with positive nodal status (39%, P value less than.0001) (Gynecol Oncol. 2008;110[1]:83-6.).
In patients with stage IA disease, which includes lesions less than 2 cm in size with stromal invasion of less than 1 mm, the risk of lymph node metastasis is low. These patients do not require inguinal lymph node dissection. If lesions are greater than 2 cm and/or have greater than 1 mm depth of invasion, a lymph node dissection is indicated. Lymph node dissection is performed on the ipsilateral side of the lesion as long as the lesion is more than 2 cm from a midline structure. If the lesion is in the midline or within 2 cm of the midline, a bilateral inguinal lymph node dissection is recommended.
There has been a recent uptake of the sentinel inguinal lymph node biopsy technique after two large prospective studies (the GROINSS V trial and GOG 173) validated this methodology (Lancet Oncol. 2010 Jul;11[7]:646-52 and Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Feb;128[2]:155-9).
Treatment
Surgical management of stage I and II disease involves a wide radical excision of the tumor with a 1-cm circumferential margin. Tumors with a depth of invasion of less than 1 mm do not require lymphadenectomy (Gynecol Oncol. 1992 Mar;44[3]:240-4). Stage I/II disease with deeper than 1-mm invasion requires a 2-cm margin and either sentinel node evaluation or lymphadenectomy. Survival for women with adequate resection of primary squamous carcinoma with negative lymph node involvement is greater than 90%.
Patients with metastasis to the groin frequently receive bilateral groin and pelvic radiation; however, recommendations are individualized based on size and number of metastasis. Patients should expect to receive recommendations for therapy after pathologic review and multidisciplinary consultation; therapy should be individualized for each clinical situation.
This disease is one of the elderly, but it is important to remember that treatment recommendations should not be made according to age alone. A British study found that when women over the age of 80 received standard treatment, their recurrence rate was 25% compared with a 53% recurrence rate in those whose treatment was modified (Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009;19[4]:752-5.). In patients with advanced disease, preoperative radiation, with or without chemotherapy, is frequently regarded as the treatment of choice and may eliminate the need for radical surgery.
While vulvar cancer is a rare gynecologic malignancy, it can be devastating for patients and families, especially at late stages. Early diagnosis and treatment is imperative for improved patient outcomes. An increased awareness among patients and physicians alike may allow for earlier diagnosis and treatment.
Dr. Sullivan is a fellow in the division of gynecologic oncology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Dr. Gehrig is professor and director of gynecologic oncology at the university. Dr. Sullivan and Dr. Gehrig reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Vulvar cancer is a rare gynecologic cancer comprising only 5% of gynecologic malignancies. Given the low incidence of disease, many primary providers and even obstetricians and gynecologists many never encounter a case. Increased awareness of vulvar cancer and vulvar dysplasia among patients and physicians may decrease diagnostic delays and expedite patient therapy.
Diagnosis
There is a well documented delay in diagnosis of vulvar cancer that is attributed to both the patient and the physician. Patients may feel uncomfortable or embarrassed telling their physicians about vulvar symptoms and providers may not recognize the risk for malignancy and provide alternative therapies prior to biopsy (J Reprod Med. 1999;44[9]:766-8.).
Risk factors for vulvar cancer include human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, a history of smoking, immunosuppression, and a history of an abnormal pap smear. Vulvar dystrophy, lichen sclerosis, and squamous intraepithelial lesions have also been suggested as precursor lesions of invasive cancers. The key to early diagnosis and treatment is immediate in-office biopsy.
When evaluating a patient with a vulvar lesion, the initial evaluation should include a thorough exam with a measurement of the lesion and evaluation of inguinal lymph nodes. Also, a detailed description of a lesion’s relationship to the midline (how many centimeters away) and other vital structures (clitoris, urethra, anus) is important.
An in-office biopsy can be done on initial presentation and should include the lesion in question and underlying stroma in an effort to delineate depth of invasion. While shave biopsies may be appropriate for some skin lesions, if there is any concern for malignancy, a punch biopsy is preferred.
Pathology
Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common histologic subtype (greater than 90%) followed by malignant melanoma. Malignant melanoma poses a diagnostic challenge as 25% may present with nonpigmented lesions. These lesions may arise from a junctional nevus and are more common in postmenopausal white women.
The measurement of tumor thickness is essential in evaluation of melanoma. A diagnosis of vulvar melanoma should be referred to a gynecologic oncologist for further evaluation and treatment. Frequently these patients require a multidisciplinary approach with other medical and surgical subspecialties consulting.
Adenocarcinoma of the vulva frequently arises within the Bartholin glands. Bartholin gland disease is typically a disease of young women. Any abscess or lesion in the bartholin gland in women older than 50 years should raise awareness of the possibility of malignancy. Providers should have a low threshold for biopsy of any Bartholin lesion in older women and for any Bartholin gland lesion or cyst that returns or persists after initial drainage.
Staging pearls
Vulvar cancer spreads by direct extension, lymphatic embolization and hematogenous spread. Lymphatic spread can occur early in the disease and portends a much worse prognosis. In 2009, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) revised the staging system. The most significant change was in stage III disease, which now includes any patient with lymph node involvement. This change emphasizes lymph node status as the single most important prognostic factor. The 5-year overall survival of patients with locally advanced tumors but negative regional lymph nodes (62%) has been found to be significantly better than those with positive nodal status (39%, P value less than.0001) (Gynecol Oncol. 2008;110[1]:83-6.).
In patients with stage IA disease, which includes lesions less than 2 cm in size with stromal invasion of less than 1 mm, the risk of lymph node metastasis is low. These patients do not require inguinal lymph node dissection. If lesions are greater than 2 cm and/or have greater than 1 mm depth of invasion, a lymph node dissection is indicated. Lymph node dissection is performed on the ipsilateral side of the lesion as long as the lesion is more than 2 cm from a midline structure. If the lesion is in the midline or within 2 cm of the midline, a bilateral inguinal lymph node dissection is recommended.
There has been a recent uptake of the sentinel inguinal lymph node biopsy technique after two large prospective studies (the GROINSS V trial and GOG 173) validated this methodology (Lancet Oncol. 2010 Jul;11[7]:646-52 and Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Feb;128[2]:155-9).
Treatment
Surgical management of stage I and II disease involves a wide radical excision of the tumor with a 1-cm circumferential margin. Tumors with a depth of invasion of less than 1 mm do not require lymphadenectomy (Gynecol Oncol. 1992 Mar;44[3]:240-4). Stage I/II disease with deeper than 1-mm invasion requires a 2-cm margin and either sentinel node evaluation or lymphadenectomy. Survival for women with adequate resection of primary squamous carcinoma with negative lymph node involvement is greater than 90%.
Patients with metastasis to the groin frequently receive bilateral groin and pelvic radiation; however, recommendations are individualized based on size and number of metastasis. Patients should expect to receive recommendations for therapy after pathologic review and multidisciplinary consultation; therapy should be individualized for each clinical situation.
This disease is one of the elderly, but it is important to remember that treatment recommendations should not be made according to age alone. A British study found that when women over the age of 80 received standard treatment, their recurrence rate was 25% compared with a 53% recurrence rate in those whose treatment was modified (Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009;19[4]:752-5.). In patients with advanced disease, preoperative radiation, with or without chemotherapy, is frequently regarded as the treatment of choice and may eliminate the need for radical surgery.
While vulvar cancer is a rare gynecologic malignancy, it can be devastating for patients and families, especially at late stages. Early diagnosis and treatment is imperative for improved patient outcomes. An increased awareness among patients and physicians alike may allow for earlier diagnosis and treatment.
Dr. Sullivan is a fellow in the division of gynecologic oncology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Dr. Gehrig is professor and director of gynecologic oncology at the university. Dr. Sullivan and Dr. Gehrig reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Prescribing drugs outside your specialty
I prescribe medications. You do, too. It’s part of what we do.
What I don’t do is prescribe meds for other docs, or expect them to prescribe mine.
Seems reasonable, right? Yet, I’ve seen several recent posts on physician gripe boards talking about doctors dodging out on this in a few ways. Some examples follow:
• Specialists who diagnose a patient with epilepsy, and send a note back to the internists suggesting they start Tegretol.
• Internists who want the patient to take a drug for neuropathy, and give them a note to take to the specialist asking them to start Lyrica.
• Specialists who want the internist to manage another field entirely, such as a dermatologist telling the internist what to prescribe for a patient’s diabetes.
Personally, I wouldn’t expect any internist to continue a medication that I started prescribing. If they referred the patient to me, I assume they want me to handle it. If they’d prefer the patient return to them for continuing care of the condition, that’s fine, but I generally figure it’s now my issue.
On the flip side, it always bugs me when someone who’s not in my field tells a patient what they think I should prescribe. Sometimes I agree with the choice, but to me it undermines my relationship with the patient. If you want me to handle the case, then don’t give the patient expectations of what should be used. Otherwise, if I decide to try something else, Mr. Smith feels like he’s been short-changed and may call the internist to complain.
I wouldn’t dream of handing a patient a card that says, “Needs to be started on (Actos/Coreg/amiodarone/whatever),” so am always surprised when they bring a note saying, “Please start Dilantin, I think he has seizures.”
This isn’t, I admit, a common occurrence. In my little world, I can count on one hand the number of times it happens per year, almost always from a physician whom I haven’t previously worked with. My referral sources (hopefully) trust me to handle neurology, and I feel the same way about them to handle other issues.
But it must be happening to others, or it wouldn’t be showing up on Sermo and other sites. I have to wonder about the background mindset. Is it just laziness on the part of other doctors? A reluctance to prescribe, knowing that then you’ll be the one stuck with the prior authorization and refill requests? A paternalistic approach to medicine, where you feel you’re right, and therefore another doc should unquestioningly follow your instructions (if you know what’s best, why refer at all?).
More disturbingly, are a few docs seeing patients as someone else’s problem? I really hope not. I’d like to think that the affront, when present, is simply from a lack of practice experience and/or social skills, and will fade with time. Things that irritate other physicians only end up hurting the patient, which isn’t what we’re here for.
Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.
I prescribe medications. You do, too. It’s part of what we do.
What I don’t do is prescribe meds for other docs, or expect them to prescribe mine.
Seems reasonable, right? Yet, I’ve seen several recent posts on physician gripe boards talking about doctors dodging out on this in a few ways. Some examples follow:
• Specialists who diagnose a patient with epilepsy, and send a note back to the internists suggesting they start Tegretol.
• Internists who want the patient to take a drug for neuropathy, and give them a note to take to the specialist asking them to start Lyrica.
• Specialists who want the internist to manage another field entirely, such as a dermatologist telling the internist what to prescribe for a patient’s diabetes.
Personally, I wouldn’t expect any internist to continue a medication that I started prescribing. If they referred the patient to me, I assume they want me to handle it. If they’d prefer the patient return to them for continuing care of the condition, that’s fine, but I generally figure it’s now my issue.
On the flip side, it always bugs me when someone who’s not in my field tells a patient what they think I should prescribe. Sometimes I agree with the choice, but to me it undermines my relationship with the patient. If you want me to handle the case, then don’t give the patient expectations of what should be used. Otherwise, if I decide to try something else, Mr. Smith feels like he’s been short-changed and may call the internist to complain.
I wouldn’t dream of handing a patient a card that says, “Needs to be started on (Actos/Coreg/amiodarone/whatever),” so am always surprised when they bring a note saying, “Please start Dilantin, I think he has seizures.”
This isn’t, I admit, a common occurrence. In my little world, I can count on one hand the number of times it happens per year, almost always from a physician whom I haven’t previously worked with. My referral sources (hopefully) trust me to handle neurology, and I feel the same way about them to handle other issues.
But it must be happening to others, or it wouldn’t be showing up on Sermo and other sites. I have to wonder about the background mindset. Is it just laziness on the part of other doctors? A reluctance to prescribe, knowing that then you’ll be the one stuck with the prior authorization and refill requests? A paternalistic approach to medicine, where you feel you’re right, and therefore another doc should unquestioningly follow your instructions (if you know what’s best, why refer at all?).
More disturbingly, are a few docs seeing patients as someone else’s problem? I really hope not. I’d like to think that the affront, when present, is simply from a lack of practice experience and/or social skills, and will fade with time. Things that irritate other physicians only end up hurting the patient, which isn’t what we’re here for.
Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.
I prescribe medications. You do, too. It’s part of what we do.
What I don’t do is prescribe meds for other docs, or expect them to prescribe mine.
Seems reasonable, right? Yet, I’ve seen several recent posts on physician gripe boards talking about doctors dodging out on this in a few ways. Some examples follow:
• Specialists who diagnose a patient with epilepsy, and send a note back to the internists suggesting they start Tegretol.
• Internists who want the patient to take a drug for neuropathy, and give them a note to take to the specialist asking them to start Lyrica.
• Specialists who want the internist to manage another field entirely, such as a dermatologist telling the internist what to prescribe for a patient’s diabetes.
Personally, I wouldn’t expect any internist to continue a medication that I started prescribing. If they referred the patient to me, I assume they want me to handle it. If they’d prefer the patient return to them for continuing care of the condition, that’s fine, but I generally figure it’s now my issue.
On the flip side, it always bugs me when someone who’s not in my field tells a patient what they think I should prescribe. Sometimes I agree with the choice, but to me it undermines my relationship with the patient. If you want me to handle the case, then don’t give the patient expectations of what should be used. Otherwise, if I decide to try something else, Mr. Smith feels like he’s been short-changed and may call the internist to complain.
I wouldn’t dream of handing a patient a card that says, “Needs to be started on (Actos/Coreg/amiodarone/whatever),” so am always surprised when they bring a note saying, “Please start Dilantin, I think he has seizures.”
This isn’t, I admit, a common occurrence. In my little world, I can count on one hand the number of times it happens per year, almost always from a physician whom I haven’t previously worked with. My referral sources (hopefully) trust me to handle neurology, and I feel the same way about them to handle other issues.
But it must be happening to others, or it wouldn’t be showing up on Sermo and other sites. I have to wonder about the background mindset. Is it just laziness on the part of other doctors? A reluctance to prescribe, knowing that then you’ll be the one stuck with the prior authorization and refill requests? A paternalistic approach to medicine, where you feel you’re right, and therefore another doc should unquestioningly follow your instructions (if you know what’s best, why refer at all?).
More disturbingly, are a few docs seeing patients as someone else’s problem? I really hope not. I’d like to think that the affront, when present, is simply from a lack of practice experience and/or social skills, and will fade with time. Things that irritate other physicians only end up hurting the patient, which isn’t what we’re here for.
Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.
Contagion, mass shootings, and fetal alcohol exposure
After the Newtown, Conn., tragedy in December 2012, I wrote about my understanding of “suicide preceded by mass murder” and my supposition that an element of contagion was involved with the dynamics of such events.
I highlighted David Phillips’ seminal research in the area of “contagion suicides,” and noted that when an individual commits suicide and the media give that suicide a lot of coverage, shortly afterward, “copycat” or “contagion” suicides seem to occur.
The association is so strong that the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, the American Association of Suicidology, and the Annenberg Public Policy Center have provided “Reporting on Suicide: Recommendations for the Media.” These guidelines suggest that the media not give a great deal of attention to the phenomenon of suicide, and they begin with the assertion that “suicide contagion is real.”
The problem is that suicide preceded by mass murder and such events are so “newsworthy” that it is difficult for the media to avoid reporting on them. Researchers at Arizona State University’s Simon A. Levin Mathematical, Computational and Modeling Sciences Center, Tempe, and Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, have done probability studies indicating that the patterns of many such events are bunched in time rather than occurring randomly (indicating contagion). Specifically, the researchers found “significant evidence that mass killings involving firearms are incented by similar events in the immediate past” (PLOS One. 2015 Jul 2. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117259). “We also find significant evidence of contagion in school shootings, for an incident is contagious for an average of 13 days, and incites an average of at least 0.22 new incidents (P = .0001),” they noted.
The researchers also identified patterns among mass shootings in the United States involving firearms and school shootings: “Mass killings involving firearms occur approximately every 2 weeks in the United States, while school shootings occur on average monthly,” they wrote.
They used the same methodology that Phillips used in his studies, but the more recent research had to use a wider data base (Phillips used local newspapers; pre-Internet, most news was local), and relied on USA Today mass killings data and Brady Campaign data as the media coverage of these events is widespread and ubiquitous. The authors’ study shows that 20%-30% of the suicides preceded by mass murder stem from contagion.
Still, those of us who are in the business of prevention and treatment must wonder who is susceptible.
One empirically based observation about school shootings has come to my attention, thanks to Jody Allen Crowe, a lifelong educator who has studied many of the school shootings and written a book on the topic called, “The Fatal Link” (Denver: Outskirts Press, 2008).
In this book, he addresses a simple question: “What would cause a person to have such poor judgment as to go into a school, kill a bunch of innocent people, and then often kill themselves?” Mr. Crowe’s answer is simple: “fetal alcohol exposure.” He has been an educator on several Native American reservation schools and has seen firsthand the classical dysfunctional emotional and behavioral patterns of children who were exposed to alcohol as fetuses – poor social skills and affect regulation, intellectual challenges, difficulty learning from experience, and so on.
He has taken the time to gather information about the 69 school shooters from 1966 to 2008. He was able to cull enough information on 66% of the shooters to determine that they probably had prenatal exposure to alcohol. In 25%, there was not enough information, and 9% did not have the five factors used to determine probable exposure, according to Mr. Crowe, founder and president of a nonprofit organization called Healthy Brains for Children.
My question is: When is America’s media going to learn that inundating American citizens with stories of “suicide preceded by mass murder” leads to more casualties? Such stories are just not healthy. Of course we want our First Amendment freedoms, but I doubt if any of us want violent ideas being planted in those most vulnerable to being influenced to perpetrate a school shooting.
The difficulty is getting the media’s frontal lobes awake enough to stop being imprisoned by their amygdalae and their urge to follow the maximum, ‘If it bleeds, it leads,” and to help them understand, based on research, that they are promoting 20%-30% of the school shootings – maybe even more.
If Jody Allen Crowe is right, and, based on my own clinical experience and research, I believe he is, the medical community needs to do something about the root cause of school shootings – fetal alcohol exposure. As former Surgeon General David Satcher always reminds us, “There is a terrifying gap between what we do know and how we act.”
Dr. Bell is staff psychiatrist at the Jackson Park Hospital Family Medicine Center and former president/CEO of the Community Mental Health Council, both in Chicago. He is former director of the Institute for Juvenile Research and former professor of psychiatry and public health at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
After the Newtown, Conn., tragedy in December 2012, I wrote about my understanding of “suicide preceded by mass murder” and my supposition that an element of contagion was involved with the dynamics of such events.
I highlighted David Phillips’ seminal research in the area of “contagion suicides,” and noted that when an individual commits suicide and the media give that suicide a lot of coverage, shortly afterward, “copycat” or “contagion” suicides seem to occur.
The association is so strong that the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, the American Association of Suicidology, and the Annenberg Public Policy Center have provided “Reporting on Suicide: Recommendations for the Media.” These guidelines suggest that the media not give a great deal of attention to the phenomenon of suicide, and they begin with the assertion that “suicide contagion is real.”
The problem is that suicide preceded by mass murder and such events are so “newsworthy” that it is difficult for the media to avoid reporting on them. Researchers at Arizona State University’s Simon A. Levin Mathematical, Computational and Modeling Sciences Center, Tempe, and Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, have done probability studies indicating that the patterns of many such events are bunched in time rather than occurring randomly (indicating contagion). Specifically, the researchers found “significant evidence that mass killings involving firearms are incented by similar events in the immediate past” (PLOS One. 2015 Jul 2. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117259). “We also find significant evidence of contagion in school shootings, for an incident is contagious for an average of 13 days, and incites an average of at least 0.22 new incidents (P = .0001),” they noted.
The researchers also identified patterns among mass shootings in the United States involving firearms and school shootings: “Mass killings involving firearms occur approximately every 2 weeks in the United States, while school shootings occur on average monthly,” they wrote.
They used the same methodology that Phillips used in his studies, but the more recent research had to use a wider data base (Phillips used local newspapers; pre-Internet, most news was local), and relied on USA Today mass killings data and Brady Campaign data as the media coverage of these events is widespread and ubiquitous. The authors’ study shows that 20%-30% of the suicides preceded by mass murder stem from contagion.
Still, those of us who are in the business of prevention and treatment must wonder who is susceptible.
One empirically based observation about school shootings has come to my attention, thanks to Jody Allen Crowe, a lifelong educator who has studied many of the school shootings and written a book on the topic called, “The Fatal Link” (Denver: Outskirts Press, 2008).
In this book, he addresses a simple question: “What would cause a person to have such poor judgment as to go into a school, kill a bunch of innocent people, and then often kill themselves?” Mr. Crowe’s answer is simple: “fetal alcohol exposure.” He has been an educator on several Native American reservation schools and has seen firsthand the classical dysfunctional emotional and behavioral patterns of children who were exposed to alcohol as fetuses – poor social skills and affect regulation, intellectual challenges, difficulty learning from experience, and so on.
He has taken the time to gather information about the 69 school shooters from 1966 to 2008. He was able to cull enough information on 66% of the shooters to determine that they probably had prenatal exposure to alcohol. In 25%, there was not enough information, and 9% did not have the five factors used to determine probable exposure, according to Mr. Crowe, founder and president of a nonprofit organization called Healthy Brains for Children.
My question is: When is America’s media going to learn that inundating American citizens with stories of “suicide preceded by mass murder” leads to more casualties? Such stories are just not healthy. Of course we want our First Amendment freedoms, but I doubt if any of us want violent ideas being planted in those most vulnerable to being influenced to perpetrate a school shooting.
The difficulty is getting the media’s frontal lobes awake enough to stop being imprisoned by their amygdalae and their urge to follow the maximum, ‘If it bleeds, it leads,” and to help them understand, based on research, that they are promoting 20%-30% of the school shootings – maybe even more.
If Jody Allen Crowe is right, and, based on my own clinical experience and research, I believe he is, the medical community needs to do something about the root cause of school shootings – fetal alcohol exposure. As former Surgeon General David Satcher always reminds us, “There is a terrifying gap between what we do know and how we act.”
Dr. Bell is staff psychiatrist at the Jackson Park Hospital Family Medicine Center and former president/CEO of the Community Mental Health Council, both in Chicago. He is former director of the Institute for Juvenile Research and former professor of psychiatry and public health at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
After the Newtown, Conn., tragedy in December 2012, I wrote about my understanding of “suicide preceded by mass murder” and my supposition that an element of contagion was involved with the dynamics of such events.
I highlighted David Phillips’ seminal research in the area of “contagion suicides,” and noted that when an individual commits suicide and the media give that suicide a lot of coverage, shortly afterward, “copycat” or “contagion” suicides seem to occur.
The association is so strong that the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, the American Association of Suicidology, and the Annenberg Public Policy Center have provided “Reporting on Suicide: Recommendations for the Media.” These guidelines suggest that the media not give a great deal of attention to the phenomenon of suicide, and they begin with the assertion that “suicide contagion is real.”
The problem is that suicide preceded by mass murder and such events are so “newsworthy” that it is difficult for the media to avoid reporting on them. Researchers at Arizona State University’s Simon A. Levin Mathematical, Computational and Modeling Sciences Center, Tempe, and Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, have done probability studies indicating that the patterns of many such events are bunched in time rather than occurring randomly (indicating contagion). Specifically, the researchers found “significant evidence that mass killings involving firearms are incented by similar events in the immediate past” (PLOS One. 2015 Jul 2. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117259). “We also find significant evidence of contagion in school shootings, for an incident is contagious for an average of 13 days, and incites an average of at least 0.22 new incidents (P = .0001),” they noted.
The researchers also identified patterns among mass shootings in the United States involving firearms and school shootings: “Mass killings involving firearms occur approximately every 2 weeks in the United States, while school shootings occur on average monthly,” they wrote.
They used the same methodology that Phillips used in his studies, but the more recent research had to use a wider data base (Phillips used local newspapers; pre-Internet, most news was local), and relied on USA Today mass killings data and Brady Campaign data as the media coverage of these events is widespread and ubiquitous. The authors’ study shows that 20%-30% of the suicides preceded by mass murder stem from contagion.
Still, those of us who are in the business of prevention and treatment must wonder who is susceptible.
One empirically based observation about school shootings has come to my attention, thanks to Jody Allen Crowe, a lifelong educator who has studied many of the school shootings and written a book on the topic called, “The Fatal Link” (Denver: Outskirts Press, 2008).
In this book, he addresses a simple question: “What would cause a person to have such poor judgment as to go into a school, kill a bunch of innocent people, and then often kill themselves?” Mr. Crowe’s answer is simple: “fetal alcohol exposure.” He has been an educator on several Native American reservation schools and has seen firsthand the classical dysfunctional emotional and behavioral patterns of children who were exposed to alcohol as fetuses – poor social skills and affect regulation, intellectual challenges, difficulty learning from experience, and so on.
He has taken the time to gather information about the 69 school shooters from 1966 to 2008. He was able to cull enough information on 66% of the shooters to determine that they probably had prenatal exposure to alcohol. In 25%, there was not enough information, and 9% did not have the five factors used to determine probable exposure, according to Mr. Crowe, founder and president of a nonprofit organization called Healthy Brains for Children.
My question is: When is America’s media going to learn that inundating American citizens with stories of “suicide preceded by mass murder” leads to more casualties? Such stories are just not healthy. Of course we want our First Amendment freedoms, but I doubt if any of us want violent ideas being planted in those most vulnerable to being influenced to perpetrate a school shooting.
The difficulty is getting the media’s frontal lobes awake enough to stop being imprisoned by their amygdalae and their urge to follow the maximum, ‘If it bleeds, it leads,” and to help them understand, based on research, that they are promoting 20%-30% of the school shootings – maybe even more.
If Jody Allen Crowe is right, and, based on my own clinical experience and research, I believe he is, the medical community needs to do something about the root cause of school shootings – fetal alcohol exposure. As former Surgeon General David Satcher always reminds us, “There is a terrifying gap between what we do know and how we act.”
Dr. Bell is staff psychiatrist at the Jackson Park Hospital Family Medicine Center and former president/CEO of the Community Mental Health Council, both in Chicago. He is former director of the Institute for Juvenile Research and former professor of psychiatry and public health at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
Postpartum psychosis and ill-advised discharge
Muslim Bangladeshi female presents
The patient is a 31-year-old married Muslim Bangladeshi female homemaker admitted to an inpatient unit in a private hospital in a large urban area in the northeastern United States because of postpartum psychosis. She recently had immigrated to the United States and spoke no English. She lived with her husband, his parents, and his siblings in a city neighborhood predominantly comprised of South Asian immigrants. Her sole source of financial support was her husband, who worked as a cab driver. Both patient and her husband were uninsured. They identified strongly with their religion and culture of origin.
Key questions
Communication was a challenge and was accomplished using an interpreter, who was not always available. The patient did not seem to respond to treatment, and there was a question about the possibility that she was “cheeking” her medications. Her husband requested her discharge against medical advice, despite her still showing signs of psychosis. He appeared ambivalent about outpatient follow-up.
What is the duty of care in this situation, given the complexities inherent in a cross-cultural situation, the presence of communication barriers, the question of patient and infant safety, the husband’s role (given the understanding that his actions were probably culturally sanctioned and consistent with his role), issues regarding financing their current and follow-up care, and their ambivalence toward follow-up care?
Family perspective
Working with a qualified medical interpreter is imperative, and hospitals and health care providers who accept federal funds are obliged to provide language assistance services under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
First, it is important to accurately assess the woman’s psychosis, including risk of self-harm, risk of harming the infant or others, and capacity to care adequately and safely for the infant.
Second, the team should assess the patient’s and husband’s beliefs about the illness, hospitalization, and treatment. For some Muslim patients, the daily practice of Islam may necessitate the separation of sexes, meaning that female nurses and physicians might be optimal. Accessing professional spiritual or pastoral care in meeting the patient’s and family’s religious needs should be considered. Additional cultural practices that might help increase the acceptability of inpatient psychiatric care for the family include practices regarding diet, dress, hygiene, and prayer. The husband also might want to stay and sleep in the patient’s room during her hospitalization.
It also might be challenging for some North American therapists to understand and focus on the entire family as a functioning unit, rather than seeing the issues as only between husband and wife. Learning about how “normal family functioning” is defined, especially in terms of roles, hierarchy, and intimacy, is critical to supporting this mother and baby. Cultivating “cultural humility” in working with patients and families from diverse backgrounds is extremely important.
During the hospitalization as the patient improves, a plan for care needs to be developed with the patient and her family. This plan should include adequate support of the mother and her baby. The husband should bring his parents and siblings to an initial meeting early during the hospitalization, being mindful of addressing any HIPAA-related issues. This will allow for a uniform understanding of the patient’s illness and treatment. At this meeting, all family members should express their concerns, worries, beliefs, and perceived barriers to optimal care. If the family members feel listened to, they are more likely to feel understood and adhere to recommendations.
At the initial meeting and subsequent ones, the following questions might be helpful to ask to gather information in negotiating a mutually acceptable treatment plan:
1. What is the family’s understanding of her illness? What do they think may have caused it? How do they understand postpartum psychosis? Do they think there is a role for medication? Are any other alternative healing modalities being considered or used?
2. Who is caring for the baby now? Is the baby healthy? Does the family understand how the mother’s illness affects the baby? Can the family provide adequate care for the baby?
3. How are decisions made in the family? Are there any other issues in the family, such as ill health in a parent?
4. Was this an arranged marriage? How long have they known the patient? Do they care for her? What is the family’s attitude toward her?
5. Besides the mother-in-law, are there other adult females (for example, her husband’s sisters and his brothers’ wives) living in the household? How old is the mother-in-law? Who runs the household? Who does all the work? If possible, it will be important to interview anyone else in the household. How long have the couple and the family been in the United States? Did they all come at the same time?
6. Does the family have a supportive community? What are their beliefs about mental illness? Whom do they trust in their community? A religious leader? A local doctor? Who treats the women in the community?
7. If there is time, other issues can be explored. For example, what were the circumstances of their immigration? What has the transition from Bangladesh to life in the United States been like for the family?
8. Who will care for her at home? Who will ensure she takes her medications? Who will take her to follow-up visits?
There are many unknowns in this case that require further exploration. Time taken to arrange for a medically qualified interpreter and an extended family meeting will help the physician and psychiatric team understand the current situation and set up an appropriate plan of care.
Cultural perspective
The case material raises many questions. In the first place, there is no need to assume that the husband was behaving in a “culturally sanctioned and consistent way.” In a large population like that of Bangladeshi Muslims, significant heterogeneity exists, and there are more ways than one to respond. Although access to care is increasing for some population segments, Bangladesh still has limited mental health services and resources.
What were the reasons for the patient to be admitted to a psychiatric unit? How many days after the delivery? Were there any hostile actions or reactions to the baby? What is the patient’s pregnancy history? What meaning was ascribed to the symptoms and behavior that the patient manifested prior to hospitalization? Was this the first episode of psychiatric illness for the patient? Has she shown any dangerous behaviors before?
The reason why the husband is taking the wife home against medical advice is unclear. What reason did the husband give for this decision? Could stigma toward mental illness or hospitalization play a role? Was an interpreter used to help understand his reasoning? Was the husband dissatisfied about something? This is important, because it is likely that the husband brought the wife for hospitalization in the first place. Were the inpatient physician and nurses male or female, and could gender-related issues have been a barrier to accepting care? Might there have been a Muslim chaplain in the hospital or in the community or someone else who could have served as a cultural broker earlier in the hospitalization to have prevented this impasse?
The Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) in the DSM-5 and the CFI-Informant Version for family members provide a framework to explore these questions and the questions recommended in the Family Perspective throughout the course of treatment.
Additional relevant questions include the following: What are cultural norms for their expectations for support of a new mother during the postpartum period? What are the norms for who, besides the mother, provides infant care? Are normative postpartum practices possible, or have they been disrupted in the hospital setting and/or in their home? If the mother and baby are both on the unit, is the request motivated by a desire to bring the baby home? If the baby is not on the unit, is this driving the family’s concern?
How isolated will the woman feel when she is home with the baby and her husband is out working as a taxi driver? Are there community-based organizations that the clinicians could collaborate with to provide resources and support for this woman (for example, women’s groups, immigrant groups, religious groups)? This would require learning more about what appeals to her, which groups she might identify with, and what is available in her neighborhood/community that aligns with what appeals to her.
It also would be important to determine if the patient was having any side effects from her psychotropic medications. Many South Asians have a low tolerance for side effects. Did the patient or family have any religious or cultural concerns about how the medications were manufactured or their composition (for example, worries about alcohol content)? Could any of these factors be related to the patient’s possible “cheeking” of her medications?
The major ethical/legal question to address is the patient’s attitude toward and relationship with the baby, and whether she was and is currently a danger to herself or others. Was the baby with the patient in the hospital? Did she feed the baby? What were the signs of psychosis that the patient exhibited, and what were the bases of her diagnosis? Was there an opportunity to discuss these issues with the husband? If so, what was his response?
Unless the patient is found to be dangerous to herself or others, including the baby, there is no option but to discharge. If a Bengali-speaking psychiatrist/therapist could be located within a reasonable driving distance, every effort should be made to connect the two. Husband and wife certainly should be instructed at the first sign of trouble to seek medical/psychiatric assistance, with or without insurance. Is there a possibility of home visits with an interpreter given the potential risks of patient and infant safety? Close follow-up and coordination of care with the patient’s and baby’s primary care physician is needed. Seeking support from the patient’s religious community also is worth considering.
Contributors
Alison M. Heru, M.D. – University of Colorado Denver, Aurora
Ellen Berman, M.D. – University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Annelle B. Primm, M.D., M.P.H. – Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (adjunct faculty)
Anne E. Becker, M.D., Ph.D. – Harvard Medical School, Boston
Robert C. Like, M.D., M.S. – Rutgers University, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick
Resources
Farooq S., Fear C. Working Through Interpreters. (Adv Psychiatr Treat. 2003 Mar;9[2]:104-9. doi: 10.1192/apt.01.12 http://apt.rcpsych.org/content/9/2/104.full.)
Chandra P.S. Postpartum Psychiatric Care in India: The need for Integration and Innovation. (World Psychiatry. 2004;3[2]:99-100.)
Ahmad F., Shik A., Vanza R., Cheung A.M., George U, Stewart D.E. Voices of South Asian Women: Immigration and Mental Health. (Women Health 2004; 40[4]:113-130.)
Mantle F. Developing a Culture-Specific Tool to Assess Postnatal Depression in the Indian Community. (Br J Community Nurs. 2003;8[4]:176-180.)
To read about the goals of Curbside Consult, the guiding principles for assessment, and the guidelines for case submission, see “Considering patients’ family, culture,” Clinical Psychiatry News, January 2015, p. 12. The contributors have revised selected patient details to shield the identities of the patients/cases and to comply with HIPAA requirements. This column is meant to be educational and does not constitute medical advice. The opinions expressed are those of the contributors and do not represent those of the organizations they are employed by or affiliated with or the Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry (GAP).
This column is in memory of Dr. Prakash N. Desai, who contributed to this piece before his death earlier this year.
Muslim Bangladeshi female presents
The patient is a 31-year-old married Muslim Bangladeshi female homemaker admitted to an inpatient unit in a private hospital in a large urban area in the northeastern United States because of postpartum psychosis. She recently had immigrated to the United States and spoke no English. She lived with her husband, his parents, and his siblings in a city neighborhood predominantly comprised of South Asian immigrants. Her sole source of financial support was her husband, who worked as a cab driver. Both patient and her husband were uninsured. They identified strongly with their religion and culture of origin.
Key questions
Communication was a challenge and was accomplished using an interpreter, who was not always available. The patient did not seem to respond to treatment, and there was a question about the possibility that she was “cheeking” her medications. Her husband requested her discharge against medical advice, despite her still showing signs of psychosis. He appeared ambivalent about outpatient follow-up.
What is the duty of care in this situation, given the complexities inherent in a cross-cultural situation, the presence of communication barriers, the question of patient and infant safety, the husband’s role (given the understanding that his actions were probably culturally sanctioned and consistent with his role), issues regarding financing their current and follow-up care, and their ambivalence toward follow-up care?
Family perspective
Working with a qualified medical interpreter is imperative, and hospitals and health care providers who accept federal funds are obliged to provide language assistance services under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
First, it is important to accurately assess the woman’s psychosis, including risk of self-harm, risk of harming the infant or others, and capacity to care adequately and safely for the infant.
Second, the team should assess the patient’s and husband’s beliefs about the illness, hospitalization, and treatment. For some Muslim patients, the daily practice of Islam may necessitate the separation of sexes, meaning that female nurses and physicians might be optimal. Accessing professional spiritual or pastoral care in meeting the patient’s and family’s religious needs should be considered. Additional cultural practices that might help increase the acceptability of inpatient psychiatric care for the family include practices regarding diet, dress, hygiene, and prayer. The husband also might want to stay and sleep in the patient’s room during her hospitalization.
It also might be challenging for some North American therapists to understand and focus on the entire family as a functioning unit, rather than seeing the issues as only between husband and wife. Learning about how “normal family functioning” is defined, especially in terms of roles, hierarchy, and intimacy, is critical to supporting this mother and baby. Cultivating “cultural humility” in working with patients and families from diverse backgrounds is extremely important.
During the hospitalization as the patient improves, a plan for care needs to be developed with the patient and her family. This plan should include adequate support of the mother and her baby. The husband should bring his parents and siblings to an initial meeting early during the hospitalization, being mindful of addressing any HIPAA-related issues. This will allow for a uniform understanding of the patient’s illness and treatment. At this meeting, all family members should express their concerns, worries, beliefs, and perceived barriers to optimal care. If the family members feel listened to, they are more likely to feel understood and adhere to recommendations.
At the initial meeting and subsequent ones, the following questions might be helpful to ask to gather information in negotiating a mutually acceptable treatment plan:
1. What is the family’s understanding of her illness? What do they think may have caused it? How do they understand postpartum psychosis? Do they think there is a role for medication? Are any other alternative healing modalities being considered or used?
2. Who is caring for the baby now? Is the baby healthy? Does the family understand how the mother’s illness affects the baby? Can the family provide adequate care for the baby?
3. How are decisions made in the family? Are there any other issues in the family, such as ill health in a parent?
4. Was this an arranged marriage? How long have they known the patient? Do they care for her? What is the family’s attitude toward her?
5. Besides the mother-in-law, are there other adult females (for example, her husband’s sisters and his brothers’ wives) living in the household? How old is the mother-in-law? Who runs the household? Who does all the work? If possible, it will be important to interview anyone else in the household. How long have the couple and the family been in the United States? Did they all come at the same time?
6. Does the family have a supportive community? What are their beliefs about mental illness? Whom do they trust in their community? A religious leader? A local doctor? Who treats the women in the community?
7. If there is time, other issues can be explored. For example, what were the circumstances of their immigration? What has the transition from Bangladesh to life in the United States been like for the family?
8. Who will care for her at home? Who will ensure she takes her medications? Who will take her to follow-up visits?
There are many unknowns in this case that require further exploration. Time taken to arrange for a medically qualified interpreter and an extended family meeting will help the physician and psychiatric team understand the current situation and set up an appropriate plan of care.
Cultural perspective
The case material raises many questions. In the first place, there is no need to assume that the husband was behaving in a “culturally sanctioned and consistent way.” In a large population like that of Bangladeshi Muslims, significant heterogeneity exists, and there are more ways than one to respond. Although access to care is increasing for some population segments, Bangladesh still has limited mental health services and resources.
What were the reasons for the patient to be admitted to a psychiatric unit? How many days after the delivery? Were there any hostile actions or reactions to the baby? What is the patient’s pregnancy history? What meaning was ascribed to the symptoms and behavior that the patient manifested prior to hospitalization? Was this the first episode of psychiatric illness for the patient? Has she shown any dangerous behaviors before?
The reason why the husband is taking the wife home against medical advice is unclear. What reason did the husband give for this decision? Could stigma toward mental illness or hospitalization play a role? Was an interpreter used to help understand his reasoning? Was the husband dissatisfied about something? This is important, because it is likely that the husband brought the wife for hospitalization in the first place. Were the inpatient physician and nurses male or female, and could gender-related issues have been a barrier to accepting care? Might there have been a Muslim chaplain in the hospital or in the community or someone else who could have served as a cultural broker earlier in the hospitalization to have prevented this impasse?
The Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) in the DSM-5 and the CFI-Informant Version for family members provide a framework to explore these questions and the questions recommended in the Family Perspective throughout the course of treatment.
Additional relevant questions include the following: What are cultural norms for their expectations for support of a new mother during the postpartum period? What are the norms for who, besides the mother, provides infant care? Are normative postpartum practices possible, or have they been disrupted in the hospital setting and/or in their home? If the mother and baby are both on the unit, is the request motivated by a desire to bring the baby home? If the baby is not on the unit, is this driving the family’s concern?
How isolated will the woman feel when she is home with the baby and her husband is out working as a taxi driver? Are there community-based organizations that the clinicians could collaborate with to provide resources and support for this woman (for example, women’s groups, immigrant groups, religious groups)? This would require learning more about what appeals to her, which groups she might identify with, and what is available in her neighborhood/community that aligns with what appeals to her.
It also would be important to determine if the patient was having any side effects from her psychotropic medications. Many South Asians have a low tolerance for side effects. Did the patient or family have any religious or cultural concerns about how the medications were manufactured or their composition (for example, worries about alcohol content)? Could any of these factors be related to the patient’s possible “cheeking” of her medications?
The major ethical/legal question to address is the patient’s attitude toward and relationship with the baby, and whether she was and is currently a danger to herself or others. Was the baby with the patient in the hospital? Did she feed the baby? What were the signs of psychosis that the patient exhibited, and what were the bases of her diagnosis? Was there an opportunity to discuss these issues with the husband? If so, what was his response?
Unless the patient is found to be dangerous to herself or others, including the baby, there is no option but to discharge. If a Bengali-speaking psychiatrist/therapist could be located within a reasonable driving distance, every effort should be made to connect the two. Husband and wife certainly should be instructed at the first sign of trouble to seek medical/psychiatric assistance, with or without insurance. Is there a possibility of home visits with an interpreter given the potential risks of patient and infant safety? Close follow-up and coordination of care with the patient’s and baby’s primary care physician is needed. Seeking support from the patient’s religious community also is worth considering.
Contributors
Alison M. Heru, M.D. – University of Colorado Denver, Aurora
Ellen Berman, M.D. – University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Annelle B. Primm, M.D., M.P.H. – Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (adjunct faculty)
Anne E. Becker, M.D., Ph.D. – Harvard Medical School, Boston
Robert C. Like, M.D., M.S. – Rutgers University, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick
Resources
Farooq S., Fear C. Working Through Interpreters. (Adv Psychiatr Treat. 2003 Mar;9[2]:104-9. doi: 10.1192/apt.01.12 http://apt.rcpsych.org/content/9/2/104.full.)
Chandra P.S. Postpartum Psychiatric Care in India: The need for Integration and Innovation. (World Psychiatry. 2004;3[2]:99-100.)
Ahmad F., Shik A., Vanza R., Cheung A.M., George U, Stewart D.E. Voices of South Asian Women: Immigration and Mental Health. (Women Health 2004; 40[4]:113-130.)
Mantle F. Developing a Culture-Specific Tool to Assess Postnatal Depression in the Indian Community. (Br J Community Nurs. 2003;8[4]:176-180.)
To read about the goals of Curbside Consult, the guiding principles for assessment, and the guidelines for case submission, see “Considering patients’ family, culture,” Clinical Psychiatry News, January 2015, p. 12. The contributors have revised selected patient details to shield the identities of the patients/cases and to comply with HIPAA requirements. This column is meant to be educational and does not constitute medical advice. The opinions expressed are those of the contributors and do not represent those of the organizations they are employed by or affiliated with or the Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry (GAP).
This column is in memory of Dr. Prakash N. Desai, who contributed to this piece before his death earlier this year.
Muslim Bangladeshi female presents
The patient is a 31-year-old married Muslim Bangladeshi female homemaker admitted to an inpatient unit in a private hospital in a large urban area in the northeastern United States because of postpartum psychosis. She recently had immigrated to the United States and spoke no English. She lived with her husband, his parents, and his siblings in a city neighborhood predominantly comprised of South Asian immigrants. Her sole source of financial support was her husband, who worked as a cab driver. Both patient and her husband were uninsured. They identified strongly with their religion and culture of origin.
Key questions
Communication was a challenge and was accomplished using an interpreter, who was not always available. The patient did not seem to respond to treatment, and there was a question about the possibility that she was “cheeking” her medications. Her husband requested her discharge against medical advice, despite her still showing signs of psychosis. He appeared ambivalent about outpatient follow-up.
What is the duty of care in this situation, given the complexities inherent in a cross-cultural situation, the presence of communication barriers, the question of patient and infant safety, the husband’s role (given the understanding that his actions were probably culturally sanctioned and consistent with his role), issues regarding financing their current and follow-up care, and their ambivalence toward follow-up care?
Family perspective
Working with a qualified medical interpreter is imperative, and hospitals and health care providers who accept federal funds are obliged to provide language assistance services under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
First, it is important to accurately assess the woman’s psychosis, including risk of self-harm, risk of harming the infant or others, and capacity to care adequately and safely for the infant.
Second, the team should assess the patient’s and husband’s beliefs about the illness, hospitalization, and treatment. For some Muslim patients, the daily practice of Islam may necessitate the separation of sexes, meaning that female nurses and physicians might be optimal. Accessing professional spiritual or pastoral care in meeting the patient’s and family’s religious needs should be considered. Additional cultural practices that might help increase the acceptability of inpatient psychiatric care for the family include practices regarding diet, dress, hygiene, and prayer. The husband also might want to stay and sleep in the patient’s room during her hospitalization.
It also might be challenging for some North American therapists to understand and focus on the entire family as a functioning unit, rather than seeing the issues as only between husband and wife. Learning about how “normal family functioning” is defined, especially in terms of roles, hierarchy, and intimacy, is critical to supporting this mother and baby. Cultivating “cultural humility” in working with patients and families from diverse backgrounds is extremely important.
During the hospitalization as the patient improves, a plan for care needs to be developed with the patient and her family. This plan should include adequate support of the mother and her baby. The husband should bring his parents and siblings to an initial meeting early during the hospitalization, being mindful of addressing any HIPAA-related issues. This will allow for a uniform understanding of the patient’s illness and treatment. At this meeting, all family members should express their concerns, worries, beliefs, and perceived barriers to optimal care. If the family members feel listened to, they are more likely to feel understood and adhere to recommendations.
At the initial meeting and subsequent ones, the following questions might be helpful to ask to gather information in negotiating a mutually acceptable treatment plan:
1. What is the family’s understanding of her illness? What do they think may have caused it? How do they understand postpartum psychosis? Do they think there is a role for medication? Are any other alternative healing modalities being considered or used?
2. Who is caring for the baby now? Is the baby healthy? Does the family understand how the mother’s illness affects the baby? Can the family provide adequate care for the baby?
3. How are decisions made in the family? Are there any other issues in the family, such as ill health in a parent?
4. Was this an arranged marriage? How long have they known the patient? Do they care for her? What is the family’s attitude toward her?
5. Besides the mother-in-law, are there other adult females (for example, her husband’s sisters and his brothers’ wives) living in the household? How old is the mother-in-law? Who runs the household? Who does all the work? If possible, it will be important to interview anyone else in the household. How long have the couple and the family been in the United States? Did they all come at the same time?
6. Does the family have a supportive community? What are their beliefs about mental illness? Whom do they trust in their community? A religious leader? A local doctor? Who treats the women in the community?
7. If there is time, other issues can be explored. For example, what were the circumstances of their immigration? What has the transition from Bangladesh to life in the United States been like for the family?
8. Who will care for her at home? Who will ensure she takes her medications? Who will take her to follow-up visits?
There are many unknowns in this case that require further exploration. Time taken to arrange for a medically qualified interpreter and an extended family meeting will help the physician and psychiatric team understand the current situation and set up an appropriate plan of care.
Cultural perspective
The case material raises many questions. In the first place, there is no need to assume that the husband was behaving in a “culturally sanctioned and consistent way.” In a large population like that of Bangladeshi Muslims, significant heterogeneity exists, and there are more ways than one to respond. Although access to care is increasing for some population segments, Bangladesh still has limited mental health services and resources.
What were the reasons for the patient to be admitted to a psychiatric unit? How many days after the delivery? Were there any hostile actions or reactions to the baby? What is the patient’s pregnancy history? What meaning was ascribed to the symptoms and behavior that the patient manifested prior to hospitalization? Was this the first episode of psychiatric illness for the patient? Has she shown any dangerous behaviors before?
The reason why the husband is taking the wife home against medical advice is unclear. What reason did the husband give for this decision? Could stigma toward mental illness or hospitalization play a role? Was an interpreter used to help understand his reasoning? Was the husband dissatisfied about something? This is important, because it is likely that the husband brought the wife for hospitalization in the first place. Were the inpatient physician and nurses male or female, and could gender-related issues have been a barrier to accepting care? Might there have been a Muslim chaplain in the hospital or in the community or someone else who could have served as a cultural broker earlier in the hospitalization to have prevented this impasse?
The Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) in the DSM-5 and the CFI-Informant Version for family members provide a framework to explore these questions and the questions recommended in the Family Perspective throughout the course of treatment.
Additional relevant questions include the following: What are cultural norms for their expectations for support of a new mother during the postpartum period? What are the norms for who, besides the mother, provides infant care? Are normative postpartum practices possible, or have they been disrupted in the hospital setting and/or in their home? If the mother and baby are both on the unit, is the request motivated by a desire to bring the baby home? If the baby is not on the unit, is this driving the family’s concern?
How isolated will the woman feel when she is home with the baby and her husband is out working as a taxi driver? Are there community-based organizations that the clinicians could collaborate with to provide resources and support for this woman (for example, women’s groups, immigrant groups, religious groups)? This would require learning more about what appeals to her, which groups she might identify with, and what is available in her neighborhood/community that aligns with what appeals to her.
It also would be important to determine if the patient was having any side effects from her psychotropic medications. Many South Asians have a low tolerance for side effects. Did the patient or family have any religious or cultural concerns about how the medications were manufactured or their composition (for example, worries about alcohol content)? Could any of these factors be related to the patient’s possible “cheeking” of her medications?
The major ethical/legal question to address is the patient’s attitude toward and relationship with the baby, and whether she was and is currently a danger to herself or others. Was the baby with the patient in the hospital? Did she feed the baby? What were the signs of psychosis that the patient exhibited, and what were the bases of her diagnosis? Was there an opportunity to discuss these issues with the husband? If so, what was his response?
Unless the patient is found to be dangerous to herself or others, including the baby, there is no option but to discharge. If a Bengali-speaking psychiatrist/therapist could be located within a reasonable driving distance, every effort should be made to connect the two. Husband and wife certainly should be instructed at the first sign of trouble to seek medical/psychiatric assistance, with or without insurance. Is there a possibility of home visits with an interpreter given the potential risks of patient and infant safety? Close follow-up and coordination of care with the patient’s and baby’s primary care physician is needed. Seeking support from the patient’s religious community also is worth considering.
Contributors
Alison M. Heru, M.D. – University of Colorado Denver, Aurora
Ellen Berman, M.D. – University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Annelle B. Primm, M.D., M.P.H. – Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (adjunct faculty)
Anne E. Becker, M.D., Ph.D. – Harvard Medical School, Boston
Robert C. Like, M.D., M.S. – Rutgers University, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick
Resources
Farooq S., Fear C. Working Through Interpreters. (Adv Psychiatr Treat. 2003 Mar;9[2]:104-9. doi: 10.1192/apt.01.12 http://apt.rcpsych.org/content/9/2/104.full.)
Chandra P.S. Postpartum Psychiatric Care in India: The need for Integration and Innovation. (World Psychiatry. 2004;3[2]:99-100.)
Ahmad F., Shik A., Vanza R., Cheung A.M., George U, Stewart D.E. Voices of South Asian Women: Immigration and Mental Health. (Women Health 2004; 40[4]:113-130.)
Mantle F. Developing a Culture-Specific Tool to Assess Postnatal Depression in the Indian Community. (Br J Community Nurs. 2003;8[4]:176-180.)
To read about the goals of Curbside Consult, the guiding principles for assessment, and the guidelines for case submission, see “Considering patients’ family, culture,” Clinical Psychiatry News, January 2015, p. 12. The contributors have revised selected patient details to shield the identities of the patients/cases and to comply with HIPAA requirements. This column is meant to be educational and does not constitute medical advice. The opinions expressed are those of the contributors and do not represent those of the organizations they are employed by or affiliated with or the Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry (GAP).
This column is in memory of Dr. Prakash N. Desai, who contributed to this piece before his death earlier this year.
End-user agreements
Long-time readers will chuckle – but after years of affirming and reaffirming that I would never adopt electronic records in my practice, I’m in the process of doing just that. It still runs contrary to my better judgment; but the advent of ICD-10, combined with space issues and other factors that I won’t bore you with, has forced my hand.
Before implementing any electronic health record system, you first must sign an end-user license agreement (EULA) with the EHR vendor. The sales manager for the company I had chosen assured me that the EULA was a “routine” document.
“Just sign it,” he said. “It’s all basic stuff ... but you can read it, if you would like.” Of course I would like. First, it was quite clear that the agreement was designed primarily to protect the vendor. (Not surprising, since the company’s lawyer wrote it.) But then I noticed that the vendor assumed no liability at all in the event of accidental destruction of my records. And when I saw, a few paragraphs later, that the vendor would have the unrestricted right to sell my practice data to third parties, I knew I would not be “just signing” anything.
My attorney referred me to a colleague with expertise in technology contracts and HIPAA law. I asked him if EULAs were always this one-sided. “Some are much worse,” he replied. Why would any physician sign such an egregious document, I asked? “Because most of them never read it.”
Wow.
A couple of weeks later, my attorney and the vendor’s counsel signed off on a much fairer agreement. The bill was significant – but it was money well spent.
A EULA details your and your vendor’s responsibilities relating to installation of your EHR, training your staff, and ongoing software and hardware support. Sales reps will often chide you (as mine did) for “taking this much too seriously.” Any legal document that you sign – and by which you will be bound for the foreseeable future – must be taken seriously. You should never allow yourself to be pressured into signing anything that you cannot comfortably live with in perpetuity.
So if you are taking the EHR plunge, find a lawyer who understands tech contracts and medical privacy laws before you sign anything. Make certain that he or she knows your concerns, and the provisions that you can and cannot live with. Among other things, my attorney succeeded in removing clauses requiring a minimum contract term, and a hefty fee if I wanted out; a nondisclosure clause preventing any public criticism of the vendor; and that crazy provision giving them the right to sell or give practice data to anyone who asked for it.
One EHR installation in three ultimately fails, according to one management firm; so more than anything else, you need to be certain that you do not get locked into a long-term contract should your EHR turn out to be a poor performer. Be sure that the agreement allows you to terminate the contract if the product’s performance – by your criteria – proves to be inadequate.
Some seemingly obvious considerations need to be spelled out; for example, that you will have ownership of your data. You need to know exactly what happens to your data if the vendor goes out of business, or if a flood wipes out its servers, or your contract is terminated by either party, or anything else that forces you to switch vendors. The process of migrating your records to a new platform can go smoothly, or it can be a nightmare – depending on the agreement in place. It should include specific methods by which data will be migrated; and be sure to lose any clauses that force you to pay a “ransom” to regain control of your own records.
You will want to know how your data is backed up – and how the backup is backed up – and whether you can maintain a separate backup in-house if necessary. My attorney also insisted on a “guarantee of system uptime,” including the steps the vendor agrees to take in the event of a significant crash or other prolonged downtime.
The basic point, of course, is never sign a EULA without having it reviewed by an experienced technology attorney. A good one should be able to eliminate the more onerous clauses; but don’t expect perfection. My vendor refused to cave on several of my attorney’s concerns. “The agreement is still one-sided,” he told me, but it’s the best we will get at this point. Once there is more competition in the EHR field, things will be different.”
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.
Long-time readers will chuckle – but after years of affirming and reaffirming that I would never adopt electronic records in my practice, I’m in the process of doing just that. It still runs contrary to my better judgment; but the advent of ICD-10, combined with space issues and other factors that I won’t bore you with, has forced my hand.
Before implementing any electronic health record system, you first must sign an end-user license agreement (EULA) with the EHR vendor. The sales manager for the company I had chosen assured me that the EULA was a “routine” document.
“Just sign it,” he said. “It’s all basic stuff ... but you can read it, if you would like.” Of course I would like. First, it was quite clear that the agreement was designed primarily to protect the vendor. (Not surprising, since the company’s lawyer wrote it.) But then I noticed that the vendor assumed no liability at all in the event of accidental destruction of my records. And when I saw, a few paragraphs later, that the vendor would have the unrestricted right to sell my practice data to third parties, I knew I would not be “just signing” anything.
My attorney referred me to a colleague with expertise in technology contracts and HIPAA law. I asked him if EULAs were always this one-sided. “Some are much worse,” he replied. Why would any physician sign such an egregious document, I asked? “Because most of them never read it.”
Wow.
A couple of weeks later, my attorney and the vendor’s counsel signed off on a much fairer agreement. The bill was significant – but it was money well spent.
A EULA details your and your vendor’s responsibilities relating to installation of your EHR, training your staff, and ongoing software and hardware support. Sales reps will often chide you (as mine did) for “taking this much too seriously.” Any legal document that you sign – and by which you will be bound for the foreseeable future – must be taken seriously. You should never allow yourself to be pressured into signing anything that you cannot comfortably live with in perpetuity.
So if you are taking the EHR plunge, find a lawyer who understands tech contracts and medical privacy laws before you sign anything. Make certain that he or she knows your concerns, and the provisions that you can and cannot live with. Among other things, my attorney succeeded in removing clauses requiring a minimum contract term, and a hefty fee if I wanted out; a nondisclosure clause preventing any public criticism of the vendor; and that crazy provision giving them the right to sell or give practice data to anyone who asked for it.
One EHR installation in three ultimately fails, according to one management firm; so more than anything else, you need to be certain that you do not get locked into a long-term contract should your EHR turn out to be a poor performer. Be sure that the agreement allows you to terminate the contract if the product’s performance – by your criteria – proves to be inadequate.
Some seemingly obvious considerations need to be spelled out; for example, that you will have ownership of your data. You need to know exactly what happens to your data if the vendor goes out of business, or if a flood wipes out its servers, or your contract is terminated by either party, or anything else that forces you to switch vendors. The process of migrating your records to a new platform can go smoothly, or it can be a nightmare – depending on the agreement in place. It should include specific methods by which data will be migrated; and be sure to lose any clauses that force you to pay a “ransom” to regain control of your own records.
You will want to know how your data is backed up – and how the backup is backed up – and whether you can maintain a separate backup in-house if necessary. My attorney also insisted on a “guarantee of system uptime,” including the steps the vendor agrees to take in the event of a significant crash or other prolonged downtime.
The basic point, of course, is never sign a EULA without having it reviewed by an experienced technology attorney. A good one should be able to eliminate the more onerous clauses; but don’t expect perfection. My vendor refused to cave on several of my attorney’s concerns. “The agreement is still one-sided,” he told me, but it’s the best we will get at this point. Once there is more competition in the EHR field, things will be different.”
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.
Long-time readers will chuckle – but after years of affirming and reaffirming that I would never adopt electronic records in my practice, I’m in the process of doing just that. It still runs contrary to my better judgment; but the advent of ICD-10, combined with space issues and other factors that I won’t bore you with, has forced my hand.
Before implementing any electronic health record system, you first must sign an end-user license agreement (EULA) with the EHR vendor. The sales manager for the company I had chosen assured me that the EULA was a “routine” document.
“Just sign it,” he said. “It’s all basic stuff ... but you can read it, if you would like.” Of course I would like. First, it was quite clear that the agreement was designed primarily to protect the vendor. (Not surprising, since the company’s lawyer wrote it.) But then I noticed that the vendor assumed no liability at all in the event of accidental destruction of my records. And when I saw, a few paragraphs later, that the vendor would have the unrestricted right to sell my practice data to third parties, I knew I would not be “just signing” anything.
My attorney referred me to a colleague with expertise in technology contracts and HIPAA law. I asked him if EULAs were always this one-sided. “Some are much worse,” he replied. Why would any physician sign such an egregious document, I asked? “Because most of them never read it.”
Wow.
A couple of weeks later, my attorney and the vendor’s counsel signed off on a much fairer agreement. The bill was significant – but it was money well spent.
A EULA details your and your vendor’s responsibilities relating to installation of your EHR, training your staff, and ongoing software and hardware support. Sales reps will often chide you (as mine did) for “taking this much too seriously.” Any legal document that you sign – and by which you will be bound for the foreseeable future – must be taken seriously. You should never allow yourself to be pressured into signing anything that you cannot comfortably live with in perpetuity.
So if you are taking the EHR plunge, find a lawyer who understands tech contracts and medical privacy laws before you sign anything. Make certain that he or she knows your concerns, and the provisions that you can and cannot live with. Among other things, my attorney succeeded in removing clauses requiring a minimum contract term, and a hefty fee if I wanted out; a nondisclosure clause preventing any public criticism of the vendor; and that crazy provision giving them the right to sell or give practice data to anyone who asked for it.
One EHR installation in three ultimately fails, according to one management firm; so more than anything else, you need to be certain that you do not get locked into a long-term contract should your EHR turn out to be a poor performer. Be sure that the agreement allows you to terminate the contract if the product’s performance – by your criteria – proves to be inadequate.
Some seemingly obvious considerations need to be spelled out; for example, that you will have ownership of your data. You need to know exactly what happens to your data if the vendor goes out of business, or if a flood wipes out its servers, or your contract is terminated by either party, or anything else that forces you to switch vendors. The process of migrating your records to a new platform can go smoothly, or it can be a nightmare – depending on the agreement in place. It should include specific methods by which data will be migrated; and be sure to lose any clauses that force you to pay a “ransom” to regain control of your own records.
You will want to know how your data is backed up – and how the backup is backed up – and whether you can maintain a separate backup in-house if necessary. My attorney also insisted on a “guarantee of system uptime,” including the steps the vendor agrees to take in the event of a significant crash or other prolonged downtime.
The basic point, of course, is never sign a EULA without having it reviewed by an experienced technology attorney. A good one should be able to eliminate the more onerous clauses; but don’t expect perfection. My vendor refused to cave on several of my attorney’s concerns. “The agreement is still one-sided,” he told me, but it’s the best we will get at this point. Once there is more competition in the EHR field, things will be different.”
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.
ICDs in the elderly
There has been a spate of recent publications dealing with the lack of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantations in the elderly. The most recent indicates that only 8% of patients over age 75 years who have experienced a non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or STEMI receive an ICD largely due to the restriction of implantation within 40 days of the incident infarction because of the delayed repair of ventricular function after an MI and the uncertainty of ejection fraction measurements during this period. That article indicates that despite this delay, patients who receive an ICD had an improved survival over the subsequent 2 years, compared with those who did not (JAMA. 2015;313[24]:2433-40). Some of my octogenarian friends might question whether improved survival and the prevention of sudden death is a benefit at that age.
An accompanying editorial suggests that a closer follow-up of these patients is warranted in order to improve the rate of implantation in those patients who are discharged so that they do not “fall through the cracks” and are lost to follow-up (JAMA. 2015:313[24]:2429-30).
Although there has been a tapering off of the explosive use of ICDs in the United States, almost a quarter million devices were implanted between 2010 and 2011 (Heart Rhythm. 2013 Apr;10[4]:e59-65). The U.S. number is roughly four times that of Western Europe. Primary prevention was the reason for implantation in 73.8%, and half of the implantations were in patients over 65; 29% were in the 70-79 age group, and 14% were octogenarians. A history of New York Heart Association class II-IV heart failure was present in 82% and a myocardial infarction in 49%.
There are of course other reasons why the elderly may not receive an ICD. The most frequent are the presence of concomitant diseases like stroke, cancer, and chronic renal disease. However, many elderly do not wish to have their survival tied to a device that they have no control over. Some may view sudden death as an acceptable mortality outcome considering other alternatives. Certainly, adverse lifestyle changes at advanced age may be a reason for the reluctance to choose an ICD.
The application of our new technologies like ICDs, catheter-implanted aortic valves, and mini–left ventricular assist devices have been remarkably successful and have brought lifesaving interventions to thousands of patients. Their relative ease of application has led to a casualness in regard to appropriateness in patients with concomitant diseases, and particularly in the elderly.
The definition of who is elderly has changed dramatically in clinical trials from the mid–20th century when those studies excluded patients over 65. In today’s world, the definition of the elderly has become a slippery slope, as there is no age limit and the inclusion of octogenarians is not unusual. The observation that elderly postinfarction patients with decreased ejection fraction can experience improved survival needs to be evaluated in the light of important considerations of current and expected quality of life in individual patients, as well as their own mortality expectations.
Most of the studies examining implantation rates, extensively analyze the effect of comorbidity and cost benefit of implantation. They rarely deal with how quality of life of the patient and their own mortality expectation impacts on the decision for ICD implantation. Once implanted, removal of the device is often impossible and when possible, as with an ICD, raise important and difficult ethical questions for patient, family, and doctor.
For those of us who are octogenarians and treat octogenarians, these issues are first and foremost in the decision process. The decision to use these devices for the relatively short-term benefit may become an onerous burden for the very elderly whose future quality of life can become abruptly abbreviated by the aging process. Easy exodus from life by sudden death may unfortunately be prolonged by an ICD.
Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.
There has been a spate of recent publications dealing with the lack of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantations in the elderly. The most recent indicates that only 8% of patients over age 75 years who have experienced a non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or STEMI receive an ICD largely due to the restriction of implantation within 40 days of the incident infarction because of the delayed repair of ventricular function after an MI and the uncertainty of ejection fraction measurements during this period. That article indicates that despite this delay, patients who receive an ICD had an improved survival over the subsequent 2 years, compared with those who did not (JAMA. 2015;313[24]:2433-40). Some of my octogenarian friends might question whether improved survival and the prevention of sudden death is a benefit at that age.
An accompanying editorial suggests that a closer follow-up of these patients is warranted in order to improve the rate of implantation in those patients who are discharged so that they do not “fall through the cracks” and are lost to follow-up (JAMA. 2015:313[24]:2429-30).
Although there has been a tapering off of the explosive use of ICDs in the United States, almost a quarter million devices were implanted between 2010 and 2011 (Heart Rhythm. 2013 Apr;10[4]:e59-65). The U.S. number is roughly four times that of Western Europe. Primary prevention was the reason for implantation in 73.8%, and half of the implantations were in patients over 65; 29% were in the 70-79 age group, and 14% were octogenarians. A history of New York Heart Association class II-IV heart failure was present in 82% and a myocardial infarction in 49%.
There are of course other reasons why the elderly may not receive an ICD. The most frequent are the presence of concomitant diseases like stroke, cancer, and chronic renal disease. However, many elderly do not wish to have their survival tied to a device that they have no control over. Some may view sudden death as an acceptable mortality outcome considering other alternatives. Certainly, adverse lifestyle changes at advanced age may be a reason for the reluctance to choose an ICD.
The application of our new technologies like ICDs, catheter-implanted aortic valves, and mini–left ventricular assist devices have been remarkably successful and have brought lifesaving interventions to thousands of patients. Their relative ease of application has led to a casualness in regard to appropriateness in patients with concomitant diseases, and particularly in the elderly.
The definition of who is elderly has changed dramatically in clinical trials from the mid–20th century when those studies excluded patients over 65. In today’s world, the definition of the elderly has become a slippery slope, as there is no age limit and the inclusion of octogenarians is not unusual. The observation that elderly postinfarction patients with decreased ejection fraction can experience improved survival needs to be evaluated in the light of important considerations of current and expected quality of life in individual patients, as well as their own mortality expectations.
Most of the studies examining implantation rates, extensively analyze the effect of comorbidity and cost benefit of implantation. They rarely deal with how quality of life of the patient and their own mortality expectation impacts on the decision for ICD implantation. Once implanted, removal of the device is often impossible and when possible, as with an ICD, raise important and difficult ethical questions for patient, family, and doctor.
For those of us who are octogenarians and treat octogenarians, these issues are first and foremost in the decision process. The decision to use these devices for the relatively short-term benefit may become an onerous burden for the very elderly whose future quality of life can become abruptly abbreviated by the aging process. Easy exodus from life by sudden death may unfortunately be prolonged by an ICD.
Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.
There has been a spate of recent publications dealing with the lack of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantations in the elderly. The most recent indicates that only 8% of patients over age 75 years who have experienced a non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or STEMI receive an ICD largely due to the restriction of implantation within 40 days of the incident infarction because of the delayed repair of ventricular function after an MI and the uncertainty of ejection fraction measurements during this period. That article indicates that despite this delay, patients who receive an ICD had an improved survival over the subsequent 2 years, compared with those who did not (JAMA. 2015;313[24]:2433-40). Some of my octogenarian friends might question whether improved survival and the prevention of sudden death is a benefit at that age.
An accompanying editorial suggests that a closer follow-up of these patients is warranted in order to improve the rate of implantation in those patients who are discharged so that they do not “fall through the cracks” and are lost to follow-up (JAMA. 2015:313[24]:2429-30).
Although there has been a tapering off of the explosive use of ICDs in the United States, almost a quarter million devices were implanted between 2010 and 2011 (Heart Rhythm. 2013 Apr;10[4]:e59-65). The U.S. number is roughly four times that of Western Europe. Primary prevention was the reason for implantation in 73.8%, and half of the implantations were in patients over 65; 29% were in the 70-79 age group, and 14% were octogenarians. A history of New York Heart Association class II-IV heart failure was present in 82% and a myocardial infarction in 49%.
There are of course other reasons why the elderly may not receive an ICD. The most frequent are the presence of concomitant diseases like stroke, cancer, and chronic renal disease. However, many elderly do not wish to have their survival tied to a device that they have no control over. Some may view sudden death as an acceptable mortality outcome considering other alternatives. Certainly, adverse lifestyle changes at advanced age may be a reason for the reluctance to choose an ICD.
The application of our new technologies like ICDs, catheter-implanted aortic valves, and mini–left ventricular assist devices have been remarkably successful and have brought lifesaving interventions to thousands of patients. Their relative ease of application has led to a casualness in regard to appropriateness in patients with concomitant diseases, and particularly in the elderly.
The definition of who is elderly has changed dramatically in clinical trials from the mid–20th century when those studies excluded patients over 65. In today’s world, the definition of the elderly has become a slippery slope, as there is no age limit and the inclusion of octogenarians is not unusual. The observation that elderly postinfarction patients with decreased ejection fraction can experience improved survival needs to be evaluated in the light of important considerations of current and expected quality of life in individual patients, as well as their own mortality expectations.
Most of the studies examining implantation rates, extensively analyze the effect of comorbidity and cost benefit of implantation. They rarely deal with how quality of life of the patient and their own mortality expectation impacts on the decision for ICD implantation. Once implanted, removal of the device is often impossible and when possible, as with an ICD, raise important and difficult ethical questions for patient, family, and doctor.
For those of us who are octogenarians and treat octogenarians, these issues are first and foremost in the decision process. The decision to use these devices for the relatively short-term benefit may become an onerous burden for the very elderly whose future quality of life can become abruptly abbreviated by the aging process. Easy exodus from life by sudden death may unfortunately be prolonged by an ICD.
Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.
Annals essays portray ob.gyns. unfairly
In the upcoming issue of Annals of Internal Medicine, there are two articles that highlight highly unprofessional and unethical behavior by physicians toward their female patients. I have read “Our Family Secrets” and “On Being a Doctor: Shining a Light in the Dark Side” multiple times and shared the stories with ob.gyn. residents, faculty, and medical students (Ann Intern Med. 2015 doi: 10.7326/M14-2168; doi: 10.7326/M15-1144). Thus, you may say that the mission of opening a dialogue on professionalism was accomplished.
My initial reactions remain unchanged. I am offended that the authors chose the pathway of shock value to illicit a visceral response. Though there is merit in the conversation, publishing two stories from the field of obstetrics and gynecology is irresponsible and inflammatory. I am certain that the editors could have taken additional time to identify similar stories from other fields that would have led to the same response.
Further, I would have expected the article to include the fact that those in women’s health are caring, compassionate, and empathic providers, and these examples represent extreme actions. No one in the field of women’s health would find these behaviors acceptable. To paint the field of obstetrics and gynecology with a broad stroke breaks down the relationship that we seek to foster with our internal medicine colleagues. Publishing such stories in Annals without seeking comment from the ob.gyn. community feels as if someone is talking behind my back.
I cannot stare at my pen and maintain my silence. I feel the need to take on the role of the ”anesthesiologist” portrayed in “Our Family Secrets” and respectfully request that we collaborate as professionals to create a culture of mutual respect, accountability, and understanding. The understanding that doctors are human, and that sometimes the stress of the responsibility provokes behavior that we would like to be forgiven for.
We should continue to work toward creating a medical community where such behaviors are never tolerated and medical students, nurses, residents, and colleagues feel safe to immediately put an end to all disrespectful actions.
I applaud Annals for addressing professionalism, respect, and personal accountability. Certainly, we should all strive to be better.
Dr. Jaspan is chairman of the department of obstetrics and gynecology, chief of gynecology, director of minimally invasive and pelvic surgery, and associate residency program director at the Einstein Medical Center in Philadelphia. He is an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the Thomas Jefferson University, also in Philadelphia.
In the upcoming issue of Annals of Internal Medicine, there are two articles that highlight highly unprofessional and unethical behavior by physicians toward their female patients. I have read “Our Family Secrets” and “On Being a Doctor: Shining a Light in the Dark Side” multiple times and shared the stories with ob.gyn. residents, faculty, and medical students (Ann Intern Med. 2015 doi: 10.7326/M14-2168; doi: 10.7326/M15-1144). Thus, you may say that the mission of opening a dialogue on professionalism was accomplished.
My initial reactions remain unchanged. I am offended that the authors chose the pathway of shock value to illicit a visceral response. Though there is merit in the conversation, publishing two stories from the field of obstetrics and gynecology is irresponsible and inflammatory. I am certain that the editors could have taken additional time to identify similar stories from other fields that would have led to the same response.
Further, I would have expected the article to include the fact that those in women’s health are caring, compassionate, and empathic providers, and these examples represent extreme actions. No one in the field of women’s health would find these behaviors acceptable. To paint the field of obstetrics and gynecology with a broad stroke breaks down the relationship that we seek to foster with our internal medicine colleagues. Publishing such stories in Annals without seeking comment from the ob.gyn. community feels as if someone is talking behind my back.
I cannot stare at my pen and maintain my silence. I feel the need to take on the role of the ”anesthesiologist” portrayed in “Our Family Secrets” and respectfully request that we collaborate as professionals to create a culture of mutual respect, accountability, and understanding. The understanding that doctors are human, and that sometimes the stress of the responsibility provokes behavior that we would like to be forgiven for.
We should continue to work toward creating a medical community where such behaviors are never tolerated and medical students, nurses, residents, and colleagues feel safe to immediately put an end to all disrespectful actions.
I applaud Annals for addressing professionalism, respect, and personal accountability. Certainly, we should all strive to be better.
Dr. Jaspan is chairman of the department of obstetrics and gynecology, chief of gynecology, director of minimally invasive and pelvic surgery, and associate residency program director at the Einstein Medical Center in Philadelphia. He is an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the Thomas Jefferson University, also in Philadelphia.
In the upcoming issue of Annals of Internal Medicine, there are two articles that highlight highly unprofessional and unethical behavior by physicians toward their female patients. I have read “Our Family Secrets” and “On Being a Doctor: Shining a Light in the Dark Side” multiple times and shared the stories with ob.gyn. residents, faculty, and medical students (Ann Intern Med. 2015 doi: 10.7326/M14-2168; doi: 10.7326/M15-1144). Thus, you may say that the mission of opening a dialogue on professionalism was accomplished.
My initial reactions remain unchanged. I am offended that the authors chose the pathway of shock value to illicit a visceral response. Though there is merit in the conversation, publishing two stories from the field of obstetrics and gynecology is irresponsible and inflammatory. I am certain that the editors could have taken additional time to identify similar stories from other fields that would have led to the same response.
Further, I would have expected the article to include the fact that those in women’s health are caring, compassionate, and empathic providers, and these examples represent extreme actions. No one in the field of women’s health would find these behaviors acceptable. To paint the field of obstetrics and gynecology with a broad stroke breaks down the relationship that we seek to foster with our internal medicine colleagues. Publishing such stories in Annals without seeking comment from the ob.gyn. community feels as if someone is talking behind my back.
I cannot stare at my pen and maintain my silence. I feel the need to take on the role of the ”anesthesiologist” portrayed in “Our Family Secrets” and respectfully request that we collaborate as professionals to create a culture of mutual respect, accountability, and understanding. The understanding that doctors are human, and that sometimes the stress of the responsibility provokes behavior that we would like to be forgiven for.
We should continue to work toward creating a medical community where such behaviors are never tolerated and medical students, nurses, residents, and colleagues feel safe to immediately put an end to all disrespectful actions.
I applaud Annals for addressing professionalism, respect, and personal accountability. Certainly, we should all strive to be better.
Dr. Jaspan is chairman of the department of obstetrics and gynecology, chief of gynecology, director of minimally invasive and pelvic surgery, and associate residency program director at the Einstein Medical Center in Philadelphia. He is an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the Thomas Jefferson University, also in Philadelphia.