Commentary

“So tell me, Kathy,” I asked as I walked in. “Is the wedding still on?”

“Yes!” she said.

I was kidding, of course. I wanted to defuse the tension every bride feels as her big day approaches. With her nuptials 2 months off, Kathy was here for an acne tune-up.

Good news: no new pimples. Though Kathy had stopped squeezing her old ones, their marks were fading slowly. Brides don’t want to depend on makeup or Photoshop.

Her current regimen was a topical antibiotic in the morning and a retinoid at night. The question was whether to add or change anything.

“Maybe we should consider adding an oral medicine to help speed healing?” I asked. Then I watched her eyes. Her frown gave me my answer.

“I’d prefer to avoid oral medications unless I absolutely need them,” Kathy said.

“No problem,” I said. “You’re doing well, and we still have 2 months for the marks you have to fade.” I arranged to see her again shortly before the wedding, for any last-minute adjustments.

Outside the exam room, I took my student aside. “That’s how you negotiate,” I told her.

“Some young women approach their weddings in a kind of panic. They want to do whatever it takes to speed healing. If Kathy had felt that way, and I told her things were fine as they were, she would have been upset. ‘Isn’t there something else we can do, maybe something to take by mouth?’ she’d have asked.

“Instead, Kathy felt the opposite,” I told my student. “When patients have a specific problem, you can make a shrewd guess about how aggressive they want to be in addressing it. But you can’t be sure. That means watching their eyes and body language when making suggestions.

“Of course, not every medical condition is negotiable. Sometimes, the matter is so urgent or dire that there really is only one thing to do. Then you have to be more direct. But many situations are not so clear cut. You and the patient will have choices. Which is best may depend less on the medical condition than on the patient’s mindset and circumstances.

“Your job is to know the options, watch their eyes, and negotiate,” I said.

My student nodded, probably noticing that this is not standard clinical advice. In school, they teach you to make the right diagnosis and prescribe the treatment of choice. Anything else would be substandard care, a dereliction of professional duty.

Nowadays, teachers – and insurers – go in for algorithms, cookbook medicine. If the patient has this, do this. If that, do that. “How do you treat acne?” students often ask at the start of their rotation. “Can you give me a decision tree?”

These days more and more doctors spend their visit time clicking tablets or laptops. If the patient has acne, they are checking off vital data points like:

• Are there pimples, pustules, whiteheads, blackheads, cysts?

• How many of each?

• Where they are – face, chest, back?

This information is supposed to objectively describe and grade the patient’s acne. You click what is important: what you can count and measure.

Here is what electronic medical records do not have you click off:

• Is the patient getting married soon?

• Is she afraid of oral antibiotics because she’s heard they wreck your immune system and make you sick?

• Have her friends recommended an acne cream they are sure is the best thing since sliced tretinoin?

They don’t make boxes for what goes on inside people’s brains. You can’t count or measure that, and if you can’t count it, it doesn’t count.

So doctors click what they tell us to. As we click the keyboard, we are not looking at the patient’s face. So we don’t know whether the patient is buying what we have to offer.

More medical treatment than we care to admit is – or should be – a process of negotiation. Negotiating means looking people in the eye and hearing what they say and the way they say it. That way you know not only what they have, but what they want. In Kathy’s case, that would be a wedding to remember.

As she proceeds in her career, my student may do more than counting pimples and grading acne. At any rate, I hope so.

Dr. Rockoff practices dermatology in Brookline, Mass., and is a longtime contributor to Dermatology News. He serves on the clinical faculty at Tufts University, Boston, and has taught senior medical students and other trainees for 30 years.

“So tell me, Kathy,” I asked as I walked in. “Is the wedding still on?”

“Yes!” she said.

I was kidding, of course. I wanted to defuse the tension every bride feels as her big day approaches. With her nuptials 2 months off, Kathy was here for an acne tune-up.

Good news: no new pimples. Though Kathy had stopped squeezing her old ones, their marks were fading slowly. Brides don’t want to depend on makeup or Photoshop.

Her current regimen was a topical antibiotic in the morning and a retinoid at night. The question was whether to add or change anything.

“Maybe we should consider adding an oral medicine to help speed healing?” I asked. Then I watched her eyes. Her frown gave me my answer.

“I’d prefer to avoid oral medications unless I absolutely need them,” Kathy said.

“No problem,” I said. “You’re doing well, and we still have 2 months for the marks you have to fade.” I arranged to see her again shortly before the wedding, for any last-minute adjustments.

Outside the exam room, I took my student aside. “That’s how you negotiate,” I told her.

“Some young women approach their weddings in a kind of panic. They want to do whatever it takes to speed healing. If Kathy had felt that way, and I told her things were fine as they were, she would have been upset. ‘Isn’t there something else we can do, maybe something to take by mouth?’ she’d have asked.

“Instead, Kathy felt the opposite,” I told my student. “When patients have a specific problem, you can make a shrewd guess about how aggressive they want to be in addressing it. But you can’t be sure. That means watching their eyes and body language when making suggestions.

“Of course, not every medical condition is negotiable. Sometimes, the matter is so urgent or dire that there really is only one thing to do. Then you have to be more direct. But many situations are not so clear cut. You and the patient will have choices. Which is best may depend less on the medical condition than on the patient’s mindset and circumstances.

“Your job is to know the options, watch their eyes, and negotiate,” I said.

My student nodded, probably noticing that this is not standard clinical advice. In school, they teach you to make the right diagnosis and prescribe the treatment of choice. Anything else would be substandard care, a dereliction of professional duty.

Nowadays, teachers – and insurers – go in for algorithms, cookbook medicine. If the patient has this, do this. If that, do that. “How do you treat acne?” students often ask at the start of their rotation. “Can you give me a decision tree?”

These days more and more doctors spend their visit time clicking tablets or laptops. If the patient has acne, they are checking off vital data points like:

• Are there pimples, pustules, whiteheads, blackheads, cysts?

• How many of each?

• Where they are – face, chest, back?

This information is supposed to objectively describe and grade the patient’s acne. You click what is important: what you can count and measure.

Here is what electronic medical records do not have you click off:

• Is the patient getting married soon?

• Is she afraid of oral antibiotics because she’s heard they wreck your immune system and make you sick?

• Have her friends recommended an acne cream they are sure is the best thing since sliced tretinoin?

They don’t make boxes for what goes on inside people’s brains. You can’t count or measure that, and if you can’t count it, it doesn’t count.

So doctors click what they tell us to. As we click the keyboard, we are not looking at the patient’s face. So we don’t know whether the patient is buying what we have to offer.

More medical treatment than we care to admit is – or should be – a process of negotiation. Negotiating means looking people in the eye and hearing what they say and the way they say it. That way you know not only what they have, but what they want. In Kathy’s case, that would be a wedding to remember.

As she proceeds in her career, my student may do more than counting pimples and grading acne. At any rate, I hope so.

Dr. Rockoff practices dermatology in Brookline, Mass., and is a longtime contributor to Dermatology News. He serves on the clinical faculty at Tufts University, Boston, and has taught senior medical students and other trainees for 30 years.

“So tell me, Kathy,” I asked as I walked in. “Is the wedding still on?”

“Yes!” she said.

I was kidding, of course. I wanted to defuse the tension every bride feels as her big day approaches. With her nuptials 2 months off, Kathy was here for an acne tune-up.

Good news: no new pimples. Though Kathy had stopped squeezing her old ones, their marks were fading slowly. Brides don’t want to depend on makeup or Photoshop.

Her current regimen was a topical antibiotic in the morning and a retinoid at night. The question was whether to add or change anything.

“Maybe we should consider adding an oral medicine to help speed healing?” I asked. Then I watched her eyes. Her frown gave me my answer.

“I’d prefer to avoid oral medications unless I absolutely need them,” Kathy said.

“No problem,” I said. “You’re doing well, and we still have 2 months for the marks you have to fade.” I arranged to see her again shortly before the wedding, for any last-minute adjustments.

Outside the exam room, I took my student aside. “That’s how you negotiate,” I told her.

“Some young women approach their weddings in a kind of panic. They want to do whatever it takes to speed healing. If Kathy had felt that way, and I told her things were fine as they were, she would have been upset. ‘Isn’t there something else we can do, maybe something to take by mouth?’ she’d have asked.

“Instead, Kathy felt the opposite,” I told my student. “When patients have a specific problem, you can make a shrewd guess about how aggressive they want to be in addressing it. But you can’t be sure. That means watching their eyes and body language when making suggestions.

“Of course, not every medical condition is negotiable. Sometimes, the matter is so urgent or dire that there really is only one thing to do. Then you have to be more direct. But many situations are not so clear cut. You and the patient will have choices. Which is best may depend less on the medical condition than on the patient’s mindset and circumstances.

“Your job is to know the options, watch their eyes, and negotiate,” I said.

My student nodded, probably noticing that this is not standard clinical advice. In school, they teach you to make the right diagnosis and prescribe the treatment of choice. Anything else would be substandard care, a dereliction of professional duty.

Nowadays, teachers – and insurers – go in for algorithms, cookbook medicine. If the patient has this, do this. If that, do that. “How do you treat acne?” students often ask at the start of their rotation. “Can you give me a decision tree?”

These days more and more doctors spend their visit time clicking tablets or laptops. If the patient has acne, they are checking off vital data points like:

• Are there pimples, pustules, whiteheads, blackheads, cysts?

• How many of each?

• Where they are – face, chest, back?

This information is supposed to objectively describe and grade the patient’s acne. You click what is important: what you can count and measure.

Here is what electronic medical records do not have you click off:

• Is the patient getting married soon?

• Is she afraid of oral antibiotics because she’s heard they wreck your immune system and make you sick?

• Have her friends recommended an acne cream they are sure is the best thing since sliced tretinoin?

They don’t make boxes for what goes on inside people’s brains. You can’t count or measure that, and if you can’t count it, it doesn’t count.

So doctors click what they tell us to. As we click the keyboard, we are not looking at the patient’s face. So we don’t know whether the patient is buying what we have to offer.

More medical treatment than we care to admit is – or should be – a process of negotiation. Negotiating means looking people in the eye and hearing what they say and the way they say it. That way you know not only what they have, but what they want. In Kathy’s case, that would be a wedding to remember.

As she proceeds in her career, my student may do more than counting pimples and grading acne. At any rate, I hope so.

Dr. Rockoff practices dermatology in Brookline, Mass., and is a longtime contributor to Dermatology News. He serves on the clinical faculty at Tufts University, Boston, and has taught senior medical students and other trainees for 30 years.

For centuries, the leaves of Plantago major have been used in most regions of the world in traditional medical treatment of wounds and various diseases, including cutaneous conditions (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21). P. major, also known as broadleaf plantain or greater plantain, is a member of the Plantaginaceae family, which is now widely dispersed throughout the world, though native to much of Europe as well as northern and central Asia. The Norwegian and Swedish name for the plant, groblad, means “healing leaves” (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21). It was brought to the Americas by Europeans during the colonial period. Native Americans referred to it as the “white man’s footprint,” which inspired the genus name Plantago from the Latin planta (foot) (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21).

Among the biologically active constituents of P. major are polysaccharides, lipids, caffeic acid derivatives, flavonoids (apigenin, luteolin, scutellarin, baicalein, nepetin, hispidulin, plantagoside), iridoid glycosides (aucubin, catalpol), terpenoids, and alkaloids (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21; Medical Herbalism: The Science and Practice of Herbal Medicine, 2003, Healing Arts Press). In an ethnopharmacologic and folk medicine survey study of 1,225 residents of the Atlantic coast of Colombia completed in 2011, Gómez-Estrada et al. found that P. major was one of the plants traditionally used to treat inflammation; it also was used to treat kidney pain and eye injuries (J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 2011;7:27). P. major also is traditionally used as a mucilage and bulk laxative (Principles and Practice of Phytotherapy: Modern Herbal Medicine, 2013, Churchill Livingstone).

Wikimedia Commons

Extracts of the plant have been associated with myriad biologic activities, including wound healing, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, analgesic, antioxidant, immunomodulating, and antiulcerogenic action, which Samuelsen suggested may account for the use of the botanical in traditional medicine (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21; Medical Herbalism: The Science and Practice of Herbal Medicine, 2003, Healing Arts Press). In fact, the range of biologic properties attributed to P. major also includes astringent, anesthetic, antihelminthic, analeptic, antihistaminic, antirheumatic, antiviral, antitumor, antiulcer, diuretic, hypotensive, and expectorant activity (Exp. Biol. Med. [Maywood] 2012;237:1379-86). Though not the most popular botanical for this indication, P. major is among the plants used in the treatment of cutaneous leishmanial ulcers in Bahia, Brazil, where Leishmania brazilenesis is endemic (Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop. 1996;29:229-32). Other dermatologic uses in traditional medicine include eczema, cuts, hemorrhoids, ulcerations, and wounds (Medical Herbalism: The Science and Practice of Herbal Medicine, 2003, Healing Arts Press).

Wound healing

The use of P. major for wound healing dates back to the first century, as described by the Greek physician Dioscorides in “De Materia Medica” (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21).

In 2011, Krasnov et al. developed an experimental model for characterizing proteins and showed that a newly discovered group of tissue-specific biogregulating proteins found previously in animal tissues was also present in P. major and responsible for the wound-healing activity associated with the plant (Prikl Biokhim. Mikrobiol. 2011;47:146-53).

The next year, Thomé et al. investigated and compared the wound-healing effects of P. major and Siparuna guianensis with a commercial product used in Brazil. Mice with cervical dorsal area wounds were treated with the botanical ingredients and the commercial product. Decreases in the wound area occurred earliest in mice treated with P. major, with complete closure (by day 15) seen only in this group. The investigators concluded that their findings support the traditional application of P. major, which shows potential as a viable wound-healing agent (Exp. Biol. Med. [Maywood] 2012;237:1379-86).

Conclusion

The numerous biologic properties of P. major are well established. In addition, use of the plant in traditional medicine for some cutaneous indications warrants consideration for modern therapeutic usage. Much more research is necessary, however, to elucidate the potential incorporation of this botanical into standard topical preparations for any of various skin conditions.

Dr. Baumann is chief executive officer of the Baumann Cosmetic & Research Institute in the Design District in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote the textbook “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and a book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). She has contributed to the Cosmeceutical Critique column in Dermatology News since January 2001. Her latest book, “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” was published in November 2014. Dr. Baumann has received funding for clinical grants from Allergan, Aveeno, Avon Products, Evolus, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Kythera Biopharmaceuticals, Mary Kay, Medicis Pharmaceuticals, Neutrogena, Philosophy, Topix Pharmaceuticals, and Unilever.

For centuries, the leaves of Plantago major have been used in most regions of the world in traditional medical treatment of wounds and various diseases, including cutaneous conditions (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21). P. major, also known as broadleaf plantain or greater plantain, is a member of the Plantaginaceae family, which is now widely dispersed throughout the world, though native to much of Europe as well as northern and central Asia. The Norwegian and Swedish name for the plant, groblad, means “healing leaves” (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21). It was brought to the Americas by Europeans during the colonial period. Native Americans referred to it as the “white man’s footprint,” which inspired the genus name Plantago from the Latin planta (foot) (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21).

Among the biologically active constituents of P. major are polysaccharides, lipids, caffeic acid derivatives, flavonoids (apigenin, luteolin, scutellarin, baicalein, nepetin, hispidulin, plantagoside), iridoid glycosides (aucubin, catalpol), terpenoids, and alkaloids (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21; Medical Herbalism: The Science and Practice of Herbal Medicine, 2003, Healing Arts Press). In an ethnopharmacologic and folk medicine survey study of 1,225 residents of the Atlantic coast of Colombia completed in 2011, Gómez-Estrada et al. found that P. major was one of the plants traditionally used to treat inflammation; it also was used to treat kidney pain and eye injuries (J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 2011;7:27). P. major also is traditionally used as a mucilage and bulk laxative (Principles and Practice of Phytotherapy: Modern Herbal Medicine, 2013, Churchill Livingstone).

Wikimedia Commons

Extracts of the plant have been associated with myriad biologic activities, including wound healing, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, analgesic, antioxidant, immunomodulating, and antiulcerogenic action, which Samuelsen suggested may account for the use of the botanical in traditional medicine (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21; Medical Herbalism: The Science and Practice of Herbal Medicine, 2003, Healing Arts Press). In fact, the range of biologic properties attributed to P. major also includes astringent, anesthetic, antihelminthic, analeptic, antihistaminic, antirheumatic, antiviral, antitumor, antiulcer, diuretic, hypotensive, and expectorant activity (Exp. Biol. Med. [Maywood] 2012;237:1379-86). Though not the most popular botanical for this indication, P. major is among the plants used in the treatment of cutaneous leishmanial ulcers in Bahia, Brazil, where Leishmania brazilenesis is endemic (Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop. 1996;29:229-32). Other dermatologic uses in traditional medicine include eczema, cuts, hemorrhoids, ulcerations, and wounds (Medical Herbalism: The Science and Practice of Herbal Medicine, 2003, Healing Arts Press).

Wound healing

The use of P. major for wound healing dates back to the first century, as described by the Greek physician Dioscorides in “De Materia Medica” (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21).

In 2011, Krasnov et al. developed an experimental model for characterizing proteins and showed that a newly discovered group of tissue-specific biogregulating proteins found previously in animal tissues was also present in P. major and responsible for the wound-healing activity associated with the plant (Prikl Biokhim. Mikrobiol. 2011;47:146-53).

The next year, Thomé et al. investigated and compared the wound-healing effects of P. major and Siparuna guianensis with a commercial product used in Brazil. Mice with cervical dorsal area wounds were treated with the botanical ingredients and the commercial product. Decreases in the wound area occurred earliest in mice treated with P. major, with complete closure (by day 15) seen only in this group. The investigators concluded that their findings support the traditional application of P. major, which shows potential as a viable wound-healing agent (Exp. Biol. Med. [Maywood] 2012;237:1379-86).

Conclusion

The numerous biologic properties of P. major are well established. In addition, use of the plant in traditional medicine for some cutaneous indications warrants consideration for modern therapeutic usage. Much more research is necessary, however, to elucidate the potential incorporation of this botanical into standard topical preparations for any of various skin conditions.

Dr. Baumann is chief executive officer of the Baumann Cosmetic & Research Institute in the Design District in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote the textbook “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and a book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). She has contributed to the Cosmeceutical Critique column in Dermatology News since January 2001. Her latest book, “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” was published in November 2014. Dr. Baumann has received funding for clinical grants from Allergan, Aveeno, Avon Products, Evolus, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Kythera Biopharmaceuticals, Mary Kay, Medicis Pharmaceuticals, Neutrogena, Philosophy, Topix Pharmaceuticals, and Unilever.

For centuries, the leaves of Plantago major have been used in most regions of the world in traditional medical treatment of wounds and various diseases, including cutaneous conditions (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21). P. major, also known as broadleaf plantain or greater plantain, is a member of the Plantaginaceae family, which is now widely dispersed throughout the world, though native to much of Europe as well as northern and central Asia. The Norwegian and Swedish name for the plant, groblad, means “healing leaves” (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21). It was brought to the Americas by Europeans during the colonial period. Native Americans referred to it as the “white man’s footprint,” which inspired the genus name Plantago from the Latin planta (foot) (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21).

Among the biologically active constituents of P. major are polysaccharides, lipids, caffeic acid derivatives, flavonoids (apigenin, luteolin, scutellarin, baicalein, nepetin, hispidulin, plantagoside), iridoid glycosides (aucubin, catalpol), terpenoids, and alkaloids (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21; Medical Herbalism: The Science and Practice of Herbal Medicine, 2003, Healing Arts Press). In an ethnopharmacologic and folk medicine survey study of 1,225 residents of the Atlantic coast of Colombia completed in 2011, Gómez-Estrada et al. found that P. major was one of the plants traditionally used to treat inflammation; it also was used to treat kidney pain and eye injuries (J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 2011;7:27). P. major also is traditionally used as a mucilage and bulk laxative (Principles and Practice of Phytotherapy: Modern Herbal Medicine, 2013, Churchill Livingstone).

Wikimedia Commons

Extracts of the plant have been associated with myriad biologic activities, including wound healing, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, analgesic, antioxidant, immunomodulating, and antiulcerogenic action, which Samuelsen suggested may account for the use of the botanical in traditional medicine (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21; Medical Herbalism: The Science and Practice of Herbal Medicine, 2003, Healing Arts Press). In fact, the range of biologic properties attributed to P. major also includes astringent, anesthetic, antihelminthic, analeptic, antihistaminic, antirheumatic, antiviral, antitumor, antiulcer, diuretic, hypotensive, and expectorant activity (Exp. Biol. Med. [Maywood] 2012;237:1379-86). Though not the most popular botanical for this indication, P. major is among the plants used in the treatment of cutaneous leishmanial ulcers in Bahia, Brazil, where Leishmania brazilenesis is endemic (Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop. 1996;29:229-32). Other dermatologic uses in traditional medicine include eczema, cuts, hemorrhoids, ulcerations, and wounds (Medical Herbalism: The Science and Practice of Herbal Medicine, 2003, Healing Arts Press).

Wound healing

The use of P. major for wound healing dates back to the first century, as described by the Greek physician Dioscorides in “De Materia Medica” (J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000;71:1-21).

In 2011, Krasnov et al. developed an experimental model for characterizing proteins and showed that a newly discovered group of tissue-specific biogregulating proteins found previously in animal tissues was also present in P. major and responsible for the wound-healing activity associated with the plant (Prikl Biokhim. Mikrobiol. 2011;47:146-53).

The next year, Thomé et al. investigated and compared the wound-healing effects of P. major and Siparuna guianensis with a commercial product used in Brazil. Mice with cervical dorsal area wounds were treated with the botanical ingredients and the commercial product. Decreases in the wound area occurred earliest in mice treated with P. major, with complete closure (by day 15) seen only in this group. The investigators concluded that their findings support the traditional application of P. major, which shows potential as a viable wound-healing agent (Exp. Biol. Med. [Maywood] 2012;237:1379-86).

Conclusion

The numerous biologic properties of P. major are well established. In addition, use of the plant in traditional medicine for some cutaneous indications warrants consideration for modern therapeutic usage. Much more research is necessary, however, to elucidate the potential incorporation of this botanical into standard topical preparations for any of various skin conditions.

Dr. Baumann is chief executive officer of the Baumann Cosmetic & Research Institute in the Design District in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote the textbook “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and a book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). She has contributed to the Cosmeceutical Critique column in Dermatology News since January 2001. Her latest book, “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” was published in November 2014. Dr. Baumann has received funding for clinical grants from Allergan, Aveeno, Avon Products, Evolus, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Kythera Biopharmaceuticals, Mary Kay, Medicis Pharmaceuticals, Neutrogena, Philosophy, Topix Pharmaceuticals, and Unilever.

“It’s best to let her cry it out.” Easy advice to give, but not always easy to follow. The simplest recommendations from pediatricians can pose great challenges, at least initially, for parents. As trainees in pediatrics, we learn the script, but we do not always understand the reality of implementing our advice. Before becoming a parent, “crying it out” seemed the obvious and easy choice. Now, as a parent, I have felt the desperate necessity of getting a child to fall asleep. Although I would never condone unsafe sleeping practices, I understand what drives parents to such extremes.

When the dreaded 2-month-visit came around, I also felt the angst of intentionally putting your child through pain. Sweat dripped down my forehead and my vision blurred when I first saw the nurse immunize my son. Before this, I had ordered countless vaccinations for other patients, and I heard their screaming every day in the halls of clinic as background noise. Yet, seeing my own son being held down and jabbed with a needle was hard to bear. His high-pitched scream seemed perfectly calibrated to pound me with guilt. Of course, I knew the science and I had no fear of adverse events, but seeing your own child in pain does strange things to you. It strikes the same evolutionary chord that sends parents running into traffic to save their babies.

As trainees, many of us have put off having children until later in life. There is nothing wrong with this choice; however, it means that many of us lack the firsthand experience of parenting. We may not know that something as simple as getting a toddler to sit at the dinner table to eat anything can be a night-long struggle. To better prepare new parents and to better understand seasoned parents, we ought to solicit their experiences during office visits. By simply listening for 2 minutes, we can give parents a chance to vent (often well needed and deserved), and we can store their experiences in our memory for future use. Just as we stow away the image of the lacy rash of Fifth disease, we also should stockpile parenting tidbits. The only way to empathize with people going through something foreign to us is to acquire surrogate experiences. Parents in our clinics carry expansive libraries of these experiences, and we should not waste this opportunity.

By better understanding the realities of parenting, we can learn to frame our recommendations in terms that resonate with parents. We can preface our advice with challenges the parents can expect. We can remind them that parenting is hard, but their struggles are normal. When we better understand parents, they can better understand us.

Dr. Sisk is a pediatrics resident at St. Louis Children’s Hospital. E-mail him at [email protected].

“It’s best to let her cry it out.” Easy advice to give, but not always easy to follow. The simplest recommendations from pediatricians can pose great challenges, at least initially, for parents. As trainees in pediatrics, we learn the script, but we do not always understand the reality of implementing our advice. Before becoming a parent, “crying it out” seemed the obvious and easy choice. Now, as a parent, I have felt the desperate necessity of getting a child to fall asleep. Although I would never condone unsafe sleeping practices, I understand what drives parents to such extremes.

When the dreaded 2-month-visit came around, I also felt the angst of intentionally putting your child through pain. Sweat dripped down my forehead and my vision blurred when I first saw the nurse immunize my son. Before this, I had ordered countless vaccinations for other patients, and I heard their screaming every day in the halls of clinic as background noise. Yet, seeing my own son being held down and jabbed with a needle was hard to bear. His high-pitched scream seemed perfectly calibrated to pound me with guilt. Of course, I knew the science and I had no fear of adverse events, but seeing your own child in pain does strange things to you. It strikes the same evolutionary chord that sends parents running into traffic to save their babies.

As trainees, many of us have put off having children until later in life. There is nothing wrong with this choice; however, it means that many of us lack the firsthand experience of parenting. We may not know that something as simple as getting a toddler to sit at the dinner table to eat anything can be a night-long struggle. To better prepare new parents and to better understand seasoned parents, we ought to solicit their experiences during office visits. By simply listening for 2 minutes, we can give parents a chance to vent (often well needed and deserved), and we can store their experiences in our memory for future use. Just as we stow away the image of the lacy rash of Fifth disease, we also should stockpile parenting tidbits. The only way to empathize with people going through something foreign to us is to acquire surrogate experiences. Parents in our clinics carry expansive libraries of these experiences, and we should not waste this opportunity.

By better understanding the realities of parenting, we can learn to frame our recommendations in terms that resonate with parents. We can preface our advice with challenges the parents can expect. We can remind them that parenting is hard, but their struggles are normal. When we better understand parents, they can better understand us.

Dr. Sisk is a pediatrics resident at St. Louis Children’s Hospital. E-mail him at [email protected].

“It’s best to let her cry it out.” Easy advice to give, but not always easy to follow. The simplest recommendations from pediatricians can pose great challenges, at least initially, for parents. As trainees in pediatrics, we learn the script, but we do not always understand the reality of implementing our advice. Before becoming a parent, “crying it out” seemed the obvious and easy choice. Now, as a parent, I have felt the desperate necessity of getting a child to fall asleep. Although I would never condone unsafe sleeping practices, I understand what drives parents to such extremes.

When the dreaded 2-month-visit came around, I also felt the angst of intentionally putting your child through pain. Sweat dripped down my forehead and my vision blurred when I first saw the nurse immunize my son. Before this, I had ordered countless vaccinations for other patients, and I heard their screaming every day in the halls of clinic as background noise. Yet, seeing my own son being held down and jabbed with a needle was hard to bear. His high-pitched scream seemed perfectly calibrated to pound me with guilt. Of course, I knew the science and I had no fear of adverse events, but seeing your own child in pain does strange things to you. It strikes the same evolutionary chord that sends parents running into traffic to save their babies.

As trainees, many of us have put off having children until later in life. There is nothing wrong with this choice; however, it means that many of us lack the firsthand experience of parenting. We may not know that something as simple as getting a toddler to sit at the dinner table to eat anything can be a night-long struggle. To better prepare new parents and to better understand seasoned parents, we ought to solicit their experiences during office visits. By simply listening for 2 minutes, we can give parents a chance to vent (often well needed and deserved), and we can store their experiences in our memory for future use. Just as we stow away the image of the lacy rash of Fifth disease, we also should stockpile parenting tidbits. The only way to empathize with people going through something foreign to us is to acquire surrogate experiences. Parents in our clinics carry expansive libraries of these experiences, and we should not waste this opportunity.

By better understanding the realities of parenting, we can learn to frame our recommendations in terms that resonate with parents. We can preface our advice with challenges the parents can expect. We can remind them that parenting is hard, but their struggles are normal. When we better understand parents, they can better understand us.

Dr. Sisk is a pediatrics resident at St. Louis Children’s Hospital. E-mail him at [email protected].

Why has teledermatology never taken off? Technically, we’ve been able to do it for years, yet most providers have been unwilling. This year, however, I expect we will cross the tipping point. The convergence of digital health records, expanding reimbursement, and consumerization of health care have led to a surge in demand, and now a supply of teledermatology services.

Much of this growth is from direct-to-consumer teledermatology providers. These are telehealth services marketed to patients where they access a dermatologist directly, paying out of pocket or with insurance. One such company is the aptly named Direct Dermatology.

Founded in 2009, it is an online dermatology clinic that provides 24/7 access to board-certified dermatologists. It is experiencing rapid growth and is currently looking to expand its network of dermatologists. For this month’s column, I share an interview with Dr. David Wong, cofounder of Direct Dermatology and clinical associate professor at Stanford (Calif.) University. I have no financial or other conflicts of interest to disclose.

Initially, telehealth was designed to serve rural communities with limited access to health care. Today it is used more widely. Would you share some examples of its use?

Dr. Wong: Much of the initial telehealth efforts and success have been in rural communities because telehealth solves a major problem of access to medical care in underserved areas. But it can be extremely valuable in all geographic areas, not just rural communities. Access is a problem even in urban areas, where wait time for a dermatologist appointment averages over 1 month. Telehealth has the potential to not only improve access, but also to improve quality of care and deliver care more efficiently for the patient, provider, and overall health system.

Teledermatology is being used by several employers as a benefit to their employees to provide convenient and timely access to dermatologists and decrease employee time away from work. There are several direct-to-consumer online teledermatology services that are being used by patients in all communities, especially urban communities.

The fact is that the majority of dermatology cases are seen by primary care physicians. If teledermatology can provide rapid, efficient, and reliable access to experienced dermatologists, the quality of dermatology care in the country will improve.

Please share some of the tangible benefits of teledermatology, such as triage, reducing the disparity in access to dermatologists, employer benefits, etc.

Another factor is that dermatology problems don’t occur only during business hours – we are seeing a growing number of cases submitted from our own patients over the weekend or in the evening. The ability to evaluate acutely developing skin problems within a few hours, such as rashes in children, can alleviate a lot of anxiety and avoid unnecessary emergency room costs.

Teledermatology also is beneficial to dermatologists in allowing us to provide care from anywhere on a flexible schedule. We don’t have to go into the office to “see” our patients. Both patient and provider satisfaction in our office’s teledermatology practice is very high.

Reimbursement has been a major drawback with telehealth. For example, Medicare reimburses for telemedicine services in some states, but others have restrictions. There are also more restrictions on the “store-and-forward” format than for the live, interactive format. Would you shed some light on this?

Dr. Wong: Yes, reimbursement has been a barrier to telehealth. But that is changing. A total of 22 states and the District of Columbia have passed parity laws for private insurance coverage of telemedicine, and 10 states have pending legislation. But whether telemedicine is actually covered by each health plan varies even in those 22 states. And coverage can vary depending on whether it is store-and-forward or live interactive teledermatology. Medicare still only covers store-and-forward teledermatology under a federal demonstration program in the states of Hawaii and Alaska. We believe that the ultimate driving force – delivery of high-quality and cost-effective specialty care to more patients – will continue to support the current trend in expanded telemedicine coverage.
 

What type of liability do dermatologists face when using telehealth?

Dr. Wong: The good news is that there have not been any malpractice lawsuits related to teledermatology to date. But physicians performing telehealth services should ensure that their malpractice liability insurance policy covers the exact form of telehealth that will be provided (just as it covers any other medical services that physicians provide), prior to starting to provide those services. Most medical malpractice insurance does not automatically cover telehealth services. In addition, be sure to understand state regulations about licensing, informed consent, and online prescribing.

How do patients feel about teledermatology? Do you notice any differences regarding patients’ gender and age?

Dr. Wong: I’m going to specifically speak about “store-and-forward” teledermatology, which is the predominant mode of teledermatology being used today. Store-and-forward teledermatology is an asynchronous mode where pictures of the skin problem and medical history are sent to the dermatologist. In general, patients love teledermatology. It is convenient; they don’t have to take time off from their busy schedules. They don’t have to wait for the next available appointment in my clinic. They can get answers and are placed on treatment that same day. In our practice, there is an opportunity for rapid, secure communication exchange with the dermatologist during the consultation as well. Of course, there are skeptics who wonder whether dermatologists can really make an accurate diagnosis with a picture. But once patients experience the service, they are typically very satisfied with what our dermatologists can do and with the quality of care. Anecdotally, we’re seeing a nearly equal distribution of male and female consumers seeking care through teledermatology. Individuals in their 30s comprise the largest age segment, but we see patients from all age groups, even pediatric cases sent by parents.

What do you say to physicians who are concerned that teledermatology will eventually replace in-person visits and erode the doctor-patient relationship?

Dr. Wong: Teledermatology will never completely replace in-person visits. But it will become an important component of our practices. Teledermatology can actually improve the doctor-patient relationship because it allows for increased connectivity between doctor and patient. It is important for dermatologists to define how teledermatology enhances our existing practices by improving the quality of care and actually strengthening our relationship with our patients.

What advice do you have for dermatologists who are considering implementing teledermatology in their practice?

Dr. Wong: Speak with other dermatologists who have had experience with providing teledermatology services in their practices. Learn from their best practices. In addition to adopting a new technology, think through how it incorporates into your clinic operations. And pay attention to regulatory and legal compliance in an environment where there is constant change.

What are your predictions for the future of teledermatology?

Dr. Wong: The future of teledermatology is exciting. It is now an important tool to provide even better care to our patients. The technology for high-quality photography from mobile devices has rapidly advanced, and in most cases, when done properly, the resulting images are as good as – or better than – what you can see with the unaided human eye in an exam room. Because of the way our field has thoughtfully implemented teledermatology alongside traditional dermatology, teledermatology will very soon become a standard of care. The term “teledermatology” will no longer be used because it will simply be a standard part of dermatology practice.

For more information and contacts, please visit DirectDermatology.com.

Dr. Benabio is a partner physician in the department of dermatology of the Southern California Permanente Group in San Diego, and a volunteer clinical assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. Dr. Benabio is @dermdoc on Twitter.

Why has teledermatology never taken off? Technically, we’ve been able to do it for years, yet most providers have been unwilling. This year, however, I expect we will cross the tipping point. The convergence of digital health records, expanding reimbursement, and consumerization of health care have led to a surge in demand, and now a supply of teledermatology services.

Much of this growth is from direct-to-consumer teledermatology providers. These are telehealth services marketed to patients where they access a dermatologist directly, paying out of pocket or with insurance. One such company is the aptly named Direct Dermatology.

Founded in 2009, it is an online dermatology clinic that provides 24/7 access to board-certified dermatologists. It is experiencing rapid growth and is currently looking to expand its network of dermatologists. For this month’s column, I share an interview with Dr. David Wong, cofounder of Direct Dermatology and clinical associate professor at Stanford (Calif.) University. I have no financial or other conflicts of interest to disclose.

Initially, telehealth was designed to serve rural communities with limited access to health care. Today it is used more widely. Would you share some examples of its use?

Dr. Wong: Much of the initial telehealth efforts and success have been in rural communities because telehealth solves a major problem of access to medical care in underserved areas. But it can be extremely valuable in all geographic areas, not just rural communities. Access is a problem even in urban areas, where wait time for a dermatologist appointment averages over 1 month. Telehealth has the potential to not only improve access, but also to improve quality of care and deliver care more efficiently for the patient, provider, and overall health system.

Teledermatology is being used by several employers as a benefit to their employees to provide convenient and timely access to dermatologists and decrease employee time away from work. There are several direct-to-consumer online teledermatology services that are being used by patients in all communities, especially urban communities.

The fact is that the majority of dermatology cases are seen by primary care physicians. If teledermatology can provide rapid, efficient, and reliable access to experienced dermatologists, the quality of dermatology care in the country will improve.

Please share some of the tangible benefits of teledermatology, such as triage, reducing the disparity in access to dermatologists, employer benefits, etc.

Another factor is that dermatology problems don’t occur only during business hours – we are seeing a growing number of cases submitted from our own patients over the weekend or in the evening. The ability to evaluate acutely developing skin problems within a few hours, such as rashes in children, can alleviate a lot of anxiety and avoid unnecessary emergency room costs.

Teledermatology also is beneficial to dermatologists in allowing us to provide care from anywhere on a flexible schedule. We don’t have to go into the office to “see” our patients. Both patient and provider satisfaction in our office’s teledermatology practice is very high.

Reimbursement has been a major drawback with telehealth. For example, Medicare reimburses for telemedicine services in some states, but others have restrictions. There are also more restrictions on the “store-and-forward” format than for the live, interactive format. Would you shed some light on this?

Dr. Wong: Yes, reimbursement has been a barrier to telehealth. But that is changing. A total of 22 states and the District of Columbia have passed parity laws for private insurance coverage of telemedicine, and 10 states have pending legislation. But whether telemedicine is actually covered by each health plan varies even in those 22 states. And coverage can vary depending on whether it is store-and-forward or live interactive teledermatology. Medicare still only covers store-and-forward teledermatology under a federal demonstration program in the states of Hawaii and Alaska. We believe that the ultimate driving force – delivery of high-quality and cost-effective specialty care to more patients – will continue to support the current trend in expanded telemedicine coverage.
 

What type of liability do dermatologists face when using telehealth?

Dr. Wong: The good news is that there have not been any malpractice lawsuits related to teledermatology to date. But physicians performing telehealth services should ensure that their malpractice liability insurance policy covers the exact form of telehealth that will be provided (just as it covers any other medical services that physicians provide), prior to starting to provide those services. Most medical malpractice insurance does not automatically cover telehealth services. In addition, be sure to understand state regulations about licensing, informed consent, and online prescribing.

How do patients feel about teledermatology? Do you notice any differences regarding patients’ gender and age?

Dr. Wong: I’m going to specifically speak about “store-and-forward” teledermatology, which is the predominant mode of teledermatology being used today. Store-and-forward teledermatology is an asynchronous mode where pictures of the skin problem and medical history are sent to the dermatologist. In general, patients love teledermatology. It is convenient; they don’t have to take time off from their busy schedules. They don’t have to wait for the next available appointment in my clinic. They can get answers and are placed on treatment that same day. In our practice, there is an opportunity for rapid, secure communication exchange with the dermatologist during the consultation as well. Of course, there are skeptics who wonder whether dermatologists can really make an accurate diagnosis with a picture. But once patients experience the service, they are typically very satisfied with what our dermatologists can do and with the quality of care. Anecdotally, we’re seeing a nearly equal distribution of male and female consumers seeking care through teledermatology. Individuals in their 30s comprise the largest age segment, but we see patients from all age groups, even pediatric cases sent by parents.

What do you say to physicians who are concerned that teledermatology will eventually replace in-person visits and erode the doctor-patient relationship?

Dr. Wong: Teledermatology will never completely replace in-person visits. But it will become an important component of our practices. Teledermatology can actually improve the doctor-patient relationship because it allows for increased connectivity between doctor and patient. It is important for dermatologists to define how teledermatology enhances our existing practices by improving the quality of care and actually strengthening our relationship with our patients.

What advice do you have for dermatologists who are considering implementing teledermatology in their practice?

Dr. Wong: Speak with other dermatologists who have had experience with providing teledermatology services in their practices. Learn from their best practices. In addition to adopting a new technology, think through how it incorporates into your clinic operations. And pay attention to regulatory and legal compliance in an environment where there is constant change.

What are your predictions for the future of teledermatology?

Dr. Wong: The future of teledermatology is exciting. It is now an important tool to provide even better care to our patients. The technology for high-quality photography from mobile devices has rapidly advanced, and in most cases, when done properly, the resulting images are as good as – or better than – what you can see with the unaided human eye in an exam room. Because of the way our field has thoughtfully implemented teledermatology alongside traditional dermatology, teledermatology will very soon become a standard of care. The term “teledermatology” will no longer be used because it will simply be a standard part of dermatology practice.

For more information and contacts, please visit DirectDermatology.com.

Dr. Benabio is a partner physician in the department of dermatology of the Southern California Permanente Group in San Diego, and a volunteer clinical assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. Dr. Benabio is @dermdoc on Twitter.

Why has teledermatology never taken off? Technically, we’ve been able to do it for years, yet most providers have been unwilling. This year, however, I expect we will cross the tipping point. The convergence of digital health records, expanding reimbursement, and consumerization of health care have led to a surge in demand, and now a supply of teledermatology services.

Much of this growth is from direct-to-consumer teledermatology providers. These are telehealth services marketed to patients where they access a dermatologist directly, paying out of pocket or with insurance. One such company is the aptly named Direct Dermatology.

Founded in 2009, it is an online dermatology clinic that provides 24/7 access to board-certified dermatologists. It is experiencing rapid growth and is currently looking to expand its network of dermatologists. For this month’s column, I share an interview with Dr. David Wong, cofounder of Direct Dermatology and clinical associate professor at Stanford (Calif.) University. I have no financial or other conflicts of interest to disclose.

Initially, telehealth was designed to serve rural communities with limited access to health care. Today it is used more widely. Would you share some examples of its use?

Dr. Wong: Much of the initial telehealth efforts and success have been in rural communities because telehealth solves a major problem of access to medical care in underserved areas. But it can be extremely valuable in all geographic areas, not just rural communities. Access is a problem even in urban areas, where wait time for a dermatologist appointment averages over 1 month. Telehealth has the potential to not only improve access, but also to improve quality of care and deliver care more efficiently for the patient, provider, and overall health system.

Teledermatology is being used by several employers as a benefit to their employees to provide convenient and timely access to dermatologists and decrease employee time away from work. There are several direct-to-consumer online teledermatology services that are being used by patients in all communities, especially urban communities.

The fact is that the majority of dermatology cases are seen by primary care physicians. If teledermatology can provide rapid, efficient, and reliable access to experienced dermatologists, the quality of dermatology care in the country will improve.

Please share some of the tangible benefits of teledermatology, such as triage, reducing the disparity in access to dermatologists, employer benefits, etc.

Another factor is that dermatology problems don’t occur only during business hours – we are seeing a growing number of cases submitted from our own patients over the weekend or in the evening. The ability to evaluate acutely developing skin problems within a few hours, such as rashes in children, can alleviate a lot of anxiety and avoid unnecessary emergency room costs.

Teledermatology also is beneficial to dermatologists in allowing us to provide care from anywhere on a flexible schedule. We don’t have to go into the office to “see” our patients. Both patient and provider satisfaction in our office’s teledermatology practice is very high.

Reimbursement has been a major drawback with telehealth. For example, Medicare reimburses for telemedicine services in some states, but others have restrictions. There are also more restrictions on the “store-and-forward” format than for the live, interactive format. Would you shed some light on this?

Dr. Wong: Yes, reimbursement has been a barrier to telehealth. But that is changing. A total of 22 states and the District of Columbia have passed parity laws for private insurance coverage of telemedicine, and 10 states have pending legislation. But whether telemedicine is actually covered by each health plan varies even in those 22 states. And coverage can vary depending on whether it is store-and-forward or live interactive teledermatology. Medicare still only covers store-and-forward teledermatology under a federal demonstration program in the states of Hawaii and Alaska. We believe that the ultimate driving force – delivery of high-quality and cost-effective specialty care to more patients – will continue to support the current trend in expanded telemedicine coverage.
 

What type of liability do dermatologists face when using telehealth?

Dr. Wong: The good news is that there have not been any malpractice lawsuits related to teledermatology to date. But physicians performing telehealth services should ensure that their malpractice liability insurance policy covers the exact form of telehealth that will be provided (just as it covers any other medical services that physicians provide), prior to starting to provide those services. Most medical malpractice insurance does not automatically cover telehealth services. In addition, be sure to understand state regulations about licensing, informed consent, and online prescribing.

How do patients feel about teledermatology? Do you notice any differences regarding patients’ gender and age?

Dr. Wong: I’m going to specifically speak about “store-and-forward” teledermatology, which is the predominant mode of teledermatology being used today. Store-and-forward teledermatology is an asynchronous mode where pictures of the skin problem and medical history are sent to the dermatologist. In general, patients love teledermatology. It is convenient; they don’t have to take time off from their busy schedules. They don’t have to wait for the next available appointment in my clinic. They can get answers and are placed on treatment that same day. In our practice, there is an opportunity for rapid, secure communication exchange with the dermatologist during the consultation as well. Of course, there are skeptics who wonder whether dermatologists can really make an accurate diagnosis with a picture. But once patients experience the service, they are typically very satisfied with what our dermatologists can do and with the quality of care. Anecdotally, we’re seeing a nearly equal distribution of male and female consumers seeking care through teledermatology. Individuals in their 30s comprise the largest age segment, but we see patients from all age groups, even pediatric cases sent by parents.

What do you say to physicians who are concerned that teledermatology will eventually replace in-person visits and erode the doctor-patient relationship?

Dr. Wong: Teledermatology will never completely replace in-person visits. But it will become an important component of our practices. Teledermatology can actually improve the doctor-patient relationship because it allows for increased connectivity between doctor and patient. It is important for dermatologists to define how teledermatology enhances our existing practices by improving the quality of care and actually strengthening our relationship with our patients.

What advice do you have for dermatologists who are considering implementing teledermatology in their practice?

Dr. Wong: Speak with other dermatologists who have had experience with providing teledermatology services in their practices. Learn from their best practices. In addition to adopting a new technology, think through how it incorporates into your clinic operations. And pay attention to regulatory and legal compliance in an environment where there is constant change.

What are your predictions for the future of teledermatology?

Dr. Wong: The future of teledermatology is exciting. It is now an important tool to provide even better care to our patients. The technology for high-quality photography from mobile devices has rapidly advanced, and in most cases, when done properly, the resulting images are as good as – or better than – what you can see with the unaided human eye in an exam room. Because of the way our field has thoughtfully implemented teledermatology alongside traditional dermatology, teledermatology will very soon become a standard of care. The term “teledermatology” will no longer be used because it will simply be a standard part of dermatology practice.

For more information and contacts, please visit DirectDermatology.com.

Dr. Benabio is a partner physician in the department of dermatology of the Southern California Permanente Group in San Diego, and a volunteer clinical assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. Dr. Benabio is @dermdoc on Twitter.

When I last wrote about the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) – last year, at about this time – the switchover was scheduled to take place on Oct. 1. Shortly thereafter, of course, Congress decided to delay the inevitable for 1 year. While the House Energy and Commerce Committee has hinted at the possibility of further postponements, we must all assume, until we hear otherwise, that the day of reckoning will arrive as scheduled. You will need to be ready if you expect to be paid come October.

Remember, on Sept. 30 you will be using ICD-9 codes, and the next day you will have to begin using ICD-10. There is no transition period; all ICD-9–coded claims will be rejected from Oct. 1 forward, and no ICD-10 codes can be used before that date. Failure to prepare will be an unmitigated disaster for your practice’s cash flow.

First, decide which parts of your coding and billing systems – and EHR, if you have one – need to be upgraded, how you will do it, and what it will cost. Then, you must get familiar with the new system.

Coders and billers will need the most training on the new methodology, but physicians and other providers must also learn how the new codes are different from the old ones. In general, most differences are in specificity and level of documentation (left/right, acute/chronic, etc.), but there are new codes as well.

I suggest you start by identifying your most-used 20 or 30 diagnosis codes, and then study in detail the differences between the ICD-9 and ICD-10 versions of them. Once you have mastered those, you can go on to other, less-used codes. Take as much time as you need to do this: Remember, everything changes abruptly on Oct. 1, and you will have to get it right the first time.

Be sure to cross-train your coders and other staff members. If a crucial employee quits in the middle of September, you don’t want to have to start from square one. Also, ask your employees to plan their vacations well in advance – and not during the last 3 months of the year. That goes for you, too. This will not be a good time for you to be away, or for the office to run short-staffed.

Next, I suggest you contact all of your third-party payers, billing services, and clearinghouses. Be aggressive; ask them how, exactly, they are preparing for the changeover, and stay in continuous contact with them. Unfortunately, many of these organizations are as behind as most medical practices in their preparations.

Many payers and clearinghouses (including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) are staging test runs during which you can submit practice claims using the new system. Payers will determine whether your ICD-10 code is in the right place and in the right format; whether the code you used is appropriate; and whether the claim would have been accepted, rejected, or held pending additional information. You will need to do this for each payer, because each will have different coding policies. Many of those policies have not yet been released, and, in some cases, have not even been developed.

You can register for CMS testing sessions through your local Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) website. Use the sessions to test your internal system as well, to ensure that everything works smoothly from the time you code a claim until payment is received. Select commonly used ICD-9 claims and practice coding them in ICD-10. The American Academy of Dermatology offers an assortment of training aids at its website, aad.org.

Even the best-laid plans can go awry, however, so it would be prudent to put aside a cash reserve or secure a line of credit to cover expenses during the first few months of the transition, in case the payment machinery falters and large numbers of claims go unpaid. For the same reason, consider postponing major capital investments until early 2016.

You may have heard that ICD-10 is only a transition system; that ICD-11 will be following closely on its heels. I doubt it. In all probability, we will be using ICD-10 a lot longer than CMS originally planned. Besides, ICD-11 is essentially a refinement of ICD-10, not the significant departure that the 10th revision is over the 9th.

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.

When I last wrote about the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) – last year, at about this time – the switchover was scheduled to take place on Oct. 1. Shortly thereafter, of course, Congress decided to delay the inevitable for 1 year. While the House Energy and Commerce Committee has hinted at the possibility of further postponements, we must all assume, until we hear otherwise, that the day of reckoning will arrive as scheduled. You will need to be ready if you expect to be paid come October.

Remember, on Sept. 30 you will be using ICD-9 codes, and the next day you will have to begin using ICD-10. There is no transition period; all ICD-9–coded claims will be rejected from Oct. 1 forward, and no ICD-10 codes can be used before that date. Failure to prepare will be an unmitigated disaster for your practice’s cash flow.

First, decide which parts of your coding and billing systems – and EHR, if you have one – need to be upgraded, how you will do it, and what it will cost. Then, you must get familiar with the new system.

Coders and billers will need the most training on the new methodology, but physicians and other providers must also learn how the new codes are different from the old ones. In general, most differences are in specificity and level of documentation (left/right, acute/chronic, etc.), but there are new codes as well.

I suggest you start by identifying your most-used 20 or 30 diagnosis codes, and then study in detail the differences between the ICD-9 and ICD-10 versions of them. Once you have mastered those, you can go on to other, less-used codes. Take as much time as you need to do this: Remember, everything changes abruptly on Oct. 1, and you will have to get it right the first time.

Be sure to cross-train your coders and other staff members. If a crucial employee quits in the middle of September, you don’t want to have to start from square one. Also, ask your employees to plan their vacations well in advance – and not during the last 3 months of the year. That goes for you, too. This will not be a good time for you to be away, or for the office to run short-staffed.

Next, I suggest you contact all of your third-party payers, billing services, and clearinghouses. Be aggressive; ask them how, exactly, they are preparing for the changeover, and stay in continuous contact with them. Unfortunately, many of these organizations are as behind as most medical practices in their preparations.

Many payers and clearinghouses (including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) are staging test runs during which you can submit practice claims using the new system. Payers will determine whether your ICD-10 code is in the right place and in the right format; whether the code you used is appropriate; and whether the claim would have been accepted, rejected, or held pending additional information. You will need to do this for each payer, because each will have different coding policies. Many of those policies have not yet been released, and, in some cases, have not even been developed.

You can register for CMS testing sessions through your local Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) website. Use the sessions to test your internal system as well, to ensure that everything works smoothly from the time you code a claim until payment is received. Select commonly used ICD-9 claims and practice coding them in ICD-10. The American Academy of Dermatology offers an assortment of training aids at its website, aad.org.

Even the best-laid plans can go awry, however, so it would be prudent to put aside a cash reserve or secure a line of credit to cover expenses during the first few months of the transition, in case the payment machinery falters and large numbers of claims go unpaid. For the same reason, consider postponing major capital investments until early 2016.

You may have heard that ICD-10 is only a transition system; that ICD-11 will be following closely on its heels. I doubt it. In all probability, we will be using ICD-10 a lot longer than CMS originally planned. Besides, ICD-11 is essentially a refinement of ICD-10, not the significant departure that the 10th revision is over the 9th.

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.

When I last wrote about the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) – last year, at about this time – the switchover was scheduled to take place on Oct. 1. Shortly thereafter, of course, Congress decided to delay the inevitable for 1 year. While the House Energy and Commerce Committee has hinted at the possibility of further postponements, we must all assume, until we hear otherwise, that the day of reckoning will arrive as scheduled. You will need to be ready if you expect to be paid come October.

Remember, on Sept. 30 you will be using ICD-9 codes, and the next day you will have to begin using ICD-10. There is no transition period; all ICD-9–coded claims will be rejected from Oct. 1 forward, and no ICD-10 codes can be used before that date. Failure to prepare will be an unmitigated disaster for your practice’s cash flow.

First, decide which parts of your coding and billing systems – and EHR, if you have one – need to be upgraded, how you will do it, and what it will cost. Then, you must get familiar with the new system.

Coders and billers will need the most training on the new methodology, but physicians and other providers must also learn how the new codes are different from the old ones. In general, most differences are in specificity and level of documentation (left/right, acute/chronic, etc.), but there are new codes as well.

I suggest you start by identifying your most-used 20 or 30 diagnosis codes, and then study in detail the differences between the ICD-9 and ICD-10 versions of them. Once you have mastered those, you can go on to other, less-used codes. Take as much time as you need to do this: Remember, everything changes abruptly on Oct. 1, and you will have to get it right the first time.

Be sure to cross-train your coders and other staff members. If a crucial employee quits in the middle of September, you don’t want to have to start from square one. Also, ask your employees to plan their vacations well in advance – and not during the last 3 months of the year. That goes for you, too. This will not be a good time for you to be away, or for the office to run short-staffed.

Next, I suggest you contact all of your third-party payers, billing services, and clearinghouses. Be aggressive; ask them how, exactly, they are preparing for the changeover, and stay in continuous contact with them. Unfortunately, many of these organizations are as behind as most medical practices in their preparations.

Many payers and clearinghouses (including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) are staging test runs during which you can submit practice claims using the new system. Payers will determine whether your ICD-10 code is in the right place and in the right format; whether the code you used is appropriate; and whether the claim would have been accepted, rejected, or held pending additional information. You will need to do this for each payer, because each will have different coding policies. Many of those policies have not yet been released, and, in some cases, have not even been developed.

You can register for CMS testing sessions through your local Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) website. Use the sessions to test your internal system as well, to ensure that everything works smoothly from the time you code a claim until payment is received. Select commonly used ICD-9 claims and practice coding them in ICD-10. The American Academy of Dermatology offers an assortment of training aids at its website, aad.org.

Even the best-laid plans can go awry, however, so it would be prudent to put aside a cash reserve or secure a line of credit to cover expenses during the first few months of the transition, in case the payment machinery falters and large numbers of claims go unpaid. For the same reason, consider postponing major capital investments until early 2016.

You may have heard that ICD-10 is only a transition system; that ICD-11 will be following closely on its heels. I doubt it. In all probability, we will be using ICD-10 a lot longer than CMS originally planned. Besides, ICD-11 is essentially a refinement of ICD-10, not the significant departure that the 10th revision is over the 9th.

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.

Question: A patient who is a school bus driver is also an alcoholic, but he continues to drive despite his physician’s warning against drinking and driving. He already has had one prior driving under the influence (DUI) conviction. Fearing a potential vehicular accident with injuries to the schoolchildren, the physician, with permission, informed the patient’s wife of the situation; but that did not make a difference.

Under the circumstances, which of the following is best?

A. The physician has discharged his professional duty by warning the patient and informing his wife.

B. It is unethical for the physician to report this to the employer, because it violates the principle of confidentiality.

C. The physician may have an ethical and legal duty to report, because the risk of harm to the school children is foreseeable and outweighs other considerations.

D. A and B.

E. A and C.

Answer: C. The issue in this hypothetical revolves around the failure to warn and report when a doctor has determined that his or her patient poses a significant societal risk. It places the health care provider in a dilemma, because it pits patient confidentiality against the public interest in safety.

There does not appear to be an appellate case precisely on point, but the well known case of Tarasoff¹ offers useful insight.

In Tarasoff, a California court imposed a legal duty on a college psychologist to warn an intended victim of harm, even though that meant breaching confidentiality in a professional relationship. A jilted patient had confided in the university psychologist his intention to kill his ex-girlfriend. The information, though shared with campus security, was not released to the intended victim, the girlfriend, whom the patient stabbed to death 2 months later.

The California court found the psychologist and the University of California (as the psychologist’s employer) liable, reasoning that the protection of public safety was more important than the sanctity of the doctor-patient confidentiality relationship.

The court wrote: “We recognize the public interest in supporting effective treatment of mental illness and in protecting the rights of patients to privacy and the consequent public importance of safeguarding the confidential character of psychotherapeutic communication. Against this interest, however, we must weigh the public interest in safety from violent assault. ... In this risk-infested society, we can hardly tolerate the further exposure to danger that would result from a concealed knowledge of the therapist that his patient was lethal.”

However, the duty to warn a third party may not be as clear cut where there is no readily identifiable victim.²

Further, the law is unsettled regarding a physician’s duty to report negligent conduct that poses a significant risk to public safety, e.g., where a patient insists on operating a vehicle against medical advice. Obviously, the doctor should spare no effort in trying to persuade such a patient to discontinue driving. When this fails, however, and depending on the circumstances, the physician should seriously consider breaching patent confidentiality by notifying the driving licensing bureau.

This opinion is in accord with the AMA Code of Medical Ethics: “Physicians should use their best judgment when determining when to report impairments that could limit a patient’s ability to drive safely. In situations where clear evidence of substantial driving impairment implies a strong threat to patient and public safety, and where the physician’s advice to discontinue driving privileges is ignored, it is desirable and ethical to notify the department of motor vehicles.”³

What about informing the patient’s employer if the risk of harm arises in the work setting?

The duty to report is clearer if the physician is a company doctor specifically charged with the task of determining whether an employee is fit for work. However, a patient’s personal physician may be a different matter, because he or she does not share the same contractual obligation as a company employed doctor.

Still, the circumstances may well dictate the need to report. In the hypothetical scenario posed above, the patient is refusing to heed the advice of physician and spouse, and given the history of a DUI, can be said to be placing innocent children and others at risk. The physician may need to go beyond warning the patient and wife, even though revealing a patient’s diagnosis violates the principle of confidentiality.

Arguably controversial, the physician’s justification is that there is a higher ethical and legal duty to report, as the risk of harm to the school children is both unreasonable and foreseeable, outweighing other considerations.

The same analysis concerning reporting may be applied in uncooperative patients with certain medical diagnoses (e.g., uncontrolled epilepsy, serious mental illness, or disabling cardiac or cerebrovascular disease, to name a few) and in those taking mind-altering prescription medications or illicit drugs.

A key inquiry is whether the patient’s work activity is potentially hazardous, as in those who are entrusted with public transportation, e.g., bus drivers, pilots and train/ship engineers, or those who operate heavy machinery.

The most familiar example of the failure to warn (as opposed to report) is of course in informed consent litigation, where the physician is faulted for not warning the patient of the risk of harm and the patient in fact suffers that harm. It is framed as the failure to disclose material risks. The California Supreme Court has stated that “material information is that which the physician knows or should know would be regarded as significant by a reasonable person in the patient’s position when deciding to accept or reject the recommended medical procedure”; that “a (material) fact must also be one which is not commonly appreciated”; and the scope of disclosure may be expanded in patients with “unique concerns or lack of familiarity with medical procedures.”⁴ There is, however, no legal requirement to deliver a “mini-course in medical science.”⁵

Another situation where there may have been a failure to warn is in medical products liability. Here, the plaintiff alleges that the defective product has caused injuries because the manufacturer has issued no prior warning to the health care provider or end user. A prime example is the current Lipitor and diabetes class action lawsuit against Pfizer.

In failing to warn a patient, a doctor may incur liability not only for injuries to the patient but also to nonpatient third parties.

In a 2002 Hawaii case, a car suddenly veered across five lanes of traffic, striking an 11-year-old girl and crushing her against a cement planter.⁶ The driver alleged that the prescription medication prazosin caused him to develop hypotension and lose control of the car, and that the treating physician was negligent in failing to warn of this potential side effect.

The Hawaii Supreme Court held that physicians have a duty to their patients to warn of potential adverse effects, and this responsibility should therefore extend to third parties.

Court decisions elsewhere have also found liability where, for public policy reasons, a “special relationship” is deemed to exist between the doctor and the injured third party. Foreseeability is one important factor in construing its existence, notwithstanding the absence of the traditional doctor-patient relationship.

References

1. Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 551 P.2d 334 (Cal. 1976).

2. Furr v. Spring Grove State Hospital, 454 A.2d 414 (Md. 1983).

3. AMA Code of Medical Ethics [2.24 (3), 2012-2013 ed.].

4. Truman v. Thomas, 27 Cal.3d 285 (1980).

5. Cobbs v. Grant, 8 Cal.3d 229 (1972).

6. McKenzie v. Hawaii Permanente Medical Group, 47 P.3d 1209 (Haw. 2002).

Dr. Tan is emeritus professor of medicine and former adjunct professor of law at the University of Hawaii. He currently directs the St. Francis International Center for Healthcare Ethics in Honolulu. This article is meant to be educational and does not constitute medical, ethical, or legal advice. For additional information, readers may contact the author at [email protected].

Question: A patient who is a school bus driver is also an alcoholic, but he continues to drive despite his physician’s warning against drinking and driving. He already has had one prior driving under the influence (DUI) conviction. Fearing a potential vehicular accident with injuries to the schoolchildren, the physician, with permission, informed the patient’s wife of the situation; but that did not make a difference.

Under the circumstances, which of the following is best?

A. The physician has discharged his professional duty by warning the patient and informing his wife.

B. It is unethical for the physician to report this to the employer, because it violates the principle of confidentiality.

C. The physician may have an ethical and legal duty to report, because the risk of harm to the school children is foreseeable and outweighs other considerations.

D. A and B.

E. A and C.

Answer: C. The issue in this hypothetical revolves around the failure to warn and report when a doctor has determined that his or her patient poses a significant societal risk. It places the health care provider in a dilemma, because it pits patient confidentiality against the public interest in safety.

There does not appear to be an appellate case precisely on point, but the well known case of Tarasoff¹ offers useful insight.

In Tarasoff, a California court imposed a legal duty on a college psychologist to warn an intended victim of harm, even though that meant breaching confidentiality in a professional relationship. A jilted patient had confided in the university psychologist his intention to kill his ex-girlfriend. The information, though shared with campus security, was not released to the intended victim, the girlfriend, whom the patient stabbed to death 2 months later.

The California court found the psychologist and the University of California (as the psychologist’s employer) liable, reasoning that the protection of public safety was more important than the sanctity of the doctor-patient confidentiality relationship.

The court wrote: “We recognize the public interest in supporting effective treatment of mental illness and in protecting the rights of patients to privacy and the consequent public importance of safeguarding the confidential character of psychotherapeutic communication. Against this interest, however, we must weigh the public interest in safety from violent assault. ... In this risk-infested society, we can hardly tolerate the further exposure to danger that would result from a concealed knowledge of the therapist that his patient was lethal.”

However, the duty to warn a third party may not be as clear cut where there is no readily identifiable victim.²

Further, the law is unsettled regarding a physician’s duty to report negligent conduct that poses a significant risk to public safety, e.g., where a patient insists on operating a vehicle against medical advice. Obviously, the doctor should spare no effort in trying to persuade such a patient to discontinue driving. When this fails, however, and depending on the circumstances, the physician should seriously consider breaching patent confidentiality by notifying the driving licensing bureau.

This opinion is in accord with the AMA Code of Medical Ethics: “Physicians should use their best judgment when determining when to report impairments that could limit a patient’s ability to drive safely. In situations where clear evidence of substantial driving impairment implies a strong threat to patient and public safety, and where the physician’s advice to discontinue driving privileges is ignored, it is desirable and ethical to notify the department of motor vehicles.”³

What about informing the patient’s employer if the risk of harm arises in the work setting?

The duty to report is clearer if the physician is a company doctor specifically charged with the task of determining whether an employee is fit for work. However, a patient’s personal physician may be a different matter, because he or she does not share the same contractual obligation as a company employed doctor.

Still, the circumstances may well dictate the need to report. In the hypothetical scenario posed above, the patient is refusing to heed the advice of physician and spouse, and given the history of a DUI, can be said to be placing innocent children and others at risk. The physician may need to go beyond warning the patient and wife, even though revealing a patient’s diagnosis violates the principle of confidentiality.

Arguably controversial, the physician’s justification is that there is a higher ethical and legal duty to report, as the risk of harm to the school children is both unreasonable and foreseeable, outweighing other considerations.

The same analysis concerning reporting may be applied in uncooperative patients with certain medical diagnoses (e.g., uncontrolled epilepsy, serious mental illness, or disabling cardiac or cerebrovascular disease, to name a few) and in those taking mind-altering prescription medications or illicit drugs.

A key inquiry is whether the patient’s work activity is potentially hazardous, as in those who are entrusted with public transportation, e.g., bus drivers, pilots and train/ship engineers, or those who operate heavy machinery.

The most familiar example of the failure to warn (as opposed to report) is of course in informed consent litigation, where the physician is faulted for not warning the patient of the risk of harm and the patient in fact suffers that harm. It is framed as the failure to disclose material risks. The California Supreme Court has stated that “material information is that which the physician knows or should know would be regarded as significant by a reasonable person in the patient’s position when deciding to accept or reject the recommended medical procedure”; that “a (material) fact must also be one which is not commonly appreciated”; and the scope of disclosure may be expanded in patients with “unique concerns or lack of familiarity with medical procedures.”⁴ There is, however, no legal requirement to deliver a “mini-course in medical science.”⁵

Another situation where there may have been a failure to warn is in medical products liability. Here, the plaintiff alleges that the defective product has caused injuries because the manufacturer has issued no prior warning to the health care provider or end user. A prime example is the current Lipitor and diabetes class action lawsuit against Pfizer.

In failing to warn a patient, a doctor may incur liability not only for injuries to the patient but also to nonpatient third parties.

In a 2002 Hawaii case, a car suddenly veered across five lanes of traffic, striking an 11-year-old girl and crushing her against a cement planter.⁶ The driver alleged that the prescription medication prazosin caused him to develop hypotension and lose control of the car, and that the treating physician was negligent in failing to warn of this potential side effect.

The Hawaii Supreme Court held that physicians have a duty to their patients to warn of potential adverse effects, and this responsibility should therefore extend to third parties.

Court decisions elsewhere have also found liability where, for public policy reasons, a “special relationship” is deemed to exist between the doctor and the injured third party. Foreseeability is one important factor in construing its existence, notwithstanding the absence of the traditional doctor-patient relationship.

References

1. Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 551 P.2d 334 (Cal. 1976).

2. Furr v. Spring Grove State Hospital, 454 A.2d 414 (Md. 1983).

3. AMA Code of Medical Ethics [2.24 (3), 2012-2013 ed.].

4. Truman v. Thomas, 27 Cal.3d 285 (1980).

5. Cobbs v. Grant, 8 Cal.3d 229 (1972).

6. McKenzie v. Hawaii Permanente Medical Group, 47 P.3d 1209 (Haw. 2002).

Dr. Tan is emeritus professor of medicine and former adjunct professor of law at the University of Hawaii. He currently directs the St. Francis International Center for Healthcare Ethics in Honolulu. This article is meant to be educational and does not constitute medical, ethical, or legal advice. For additional information, readers may contact the author at [email protected].

Question: A patient who is a school bus driver is also an alcoholic, but he continues to drive despite his physician’s warning against drinking and driving. He already has had one prior driving under the influence (DUI) conviction. Fearing a potential vehicular accident with injuries to the schoolchildren, the physician, with permission, informed the patient’s wife of the situation; but that did not make a difference.

Under the circumstances, which of the following is best?

A. The physician has discharged his professional duty by warning the patient and informing his wife.

B. It is unethical for the physician to report this to the employer, because it violates the principle of confidentiality.

C. The physician may have an ethical and legal duty to report, because the risk of harm to the school children is foreseeable and outweighs other considerations.

D. A and B.

E. A and C.

Answer: C. The issue in this hypothetical revolves around the failure to warn and report when a doctor has determined that his or her patient poses a significant societal risk. It places the health care provider in a dilemma, because it pits patient confidentiality against the public interest in safety.

There does not appear to be an appellate case precisely on point, but the well known case of Tarasoff¹ offers useful insight.

In Tarasoff, a California court imposed a legal duty on a college psychologist to warn an intended victim of harm, even though that meant breaching confidentiality in a professional relationship. A jilted patient had confided in the university psychologist his intention to kill his ex-girlfriend. The information, though shared with campus security, was not released to the intended victim, the girlfriend, whom the patient stabbed to death 2 months later.

The California court found the psychologist and the University of California (as the psychologist’s employer) liable, reasoning that the protection of public safety was more important than the sanctity of the doctor-patient confidentiality relationship.

The court wrote: “We recognize the public interest in supporting effective treatment of mental illness and in protecting the rights of patients to privacy and the consequent public importance of safeguarding the confidential character of psychotherapeutic communication. Against this interest, however, we must weigh the public interest in safety from violent assault. ... In this risk-infested society, we can hardly tolerate the further exposure to danger that would result from a concealed knowledge of the therapist that his patient was lethal.”

However, the duty to warn a third party may not be as clear cut where there is no readily identifiable victim.²

Further, the law is unsettled regarding a physician’s duty to report negligent conduct that poses a significant risk to public safety, e.g., where a patient insists on operating a vehicle against medical advice. Obviously, the doctor should spare no effort in trying to persuade such a patient to discontinue driving. When this fails, however, and depending on the circumstances, the physician should seriously consider breaching patent confidentiality by notifying the driving licensing bureau.

This opinion is in accord with the AMA Code of Medical Ethics: “Physicians should use their best judgment when determining when to report impairments that could limit a patient’s ability to drive safely. In situations where clear evidence of substantial driving impairment implies a strong threat to patient and public safety, and where the physician’s advice to discontinue driving privileges is ignored, it is desirable and ethical to notify the department of motor vehicles.”³

What about informing the patient’s employer if the risk of harm arises in the work setting?

The duty to report is clearer if the physician is a company doctor specifically charged with the task of determining whether an employee is fit for work. However, a patient’s personal physician may be a different matter, because he or she does not share the same contractual obligation as a company employed doctor.

Still, the circumstances may well dictate the need to report. In the hypothetical scenario posed above, the patient is refusing to heed the advice of physician and spouse, and given the history of a DUI, can be said to be placing innocent children and others at risk. The physician may need to go beyond warning the patient and wife, even though revealing a patient’s diagnosis violates the principle of confidentiality.

Arguably controversial, the physician’s justification is that there is a higher ethical and legal duty to report, as the risk of harm to the school children is both unreasonable and foreseeable, outweighing other considerations.

The same analysis concerning reporting may be applied in uncooperative patients with certain medical diagnoses (e.g., uncontrolled epilepsy, serious mental illness, or disabling cardiac or cerebrovascular disease, to name a few) and in those taking mind-altering prescription medications or illicit drugs.

A key inquiry is whether the patient’s work activity is potentially hazardous, as in those who are entrusted with public transportation, e.g., bus drivers, pilots and train/ship engineers, or those who operate heavy machinery.

The most familiar example of the failure to warn (as opposed to report) is of course in informed consent litigation, where the physician is faulted for not warning the patient of the risk of harm and the patient in fact suffers that harm. It is framed as the failure to disclose material risks. The California Supreme Court has stated that “material information is that which the physician knows or should know would be regarded as significant by a reasonable person in the patient’s position when deciding to accept or reject the recommended medical procedure”; that “a (material) fact must also be one which is not commonly appreciated”; and the scope of disclosure may be expanded in patients with “unique concerns or lack of familiarity with medical procedures.”⁴ There is, however, no legal requirement to deliver a “mini-course in medical science.”⁵

Another situation where there may have been a failure to warn is in medical products liability. Here, the plaintiff alleges that the defective product has caused injuries because the manufacturer has issued no prior warning to the health care provider or end user. A prime example is the current Lipitor and diabetes class action lawsuit against Pfizer.

In failing to warn a patient, a doctor may incur liability not only for injuries to the patient but also to nonpatient third parties.

In a 2002 Hawaii case, a car suddenly veered across five lanes of traffic, striking an 11-year-old girl and crushing her against a cement planter.⁶ The driver alleged that the prescription medication prazosin caused him to develop hypotension and lose control of the car, and that the treating physician was negligent in failing to warn of this potential side effect.

The Hawaii Supreme Court held that physicians have a duty to their patients to warn of potential adverse effects, and this responsibility should therefore extend to third parties.

Court decisions elsewhere have also found liability where, for public policy reasons, a “special relationship” is deemed to exist between the doctor and the injured third party. Foreseeability is one important factor in construing its existence, notwithstanding the absence of the traditional doctor-patient relationship.

References

1. Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 551 P.2d 334 (Cal. 1976).

2. Furr v. Spring Grove State Hospital, 454 A.2d 414 (Md. 1983).

3. AMA Code of Medical Ethics [2.24 (3), 2012-2013 ed.].

4. Truman v. Thomas, 27 Cal.3d 285 (1980).

5. Cobbs v. Grant, 8 Cal.3d 229 (1972).

6. McKenzie v. Hawaii Permanente Medical Group, 47 P.3d 1209 (Haw. 2002).

Dr. Tan is emeritus professor of medicine and former adjunct professor of law at the University of Hawaii. He currently directs the St. Francis International Center for Healthcare Ethics in Honolulu. This article is meant to be educational and does not constitute medical, ethical, or legal advice. For additional information, readers may contact the author at [email protected].

Cosmetic procedures in general should be postponed until after pregnancy. Factors to consider in a pregnant patient include the hormonal and physiologic changes of the patient during pregnancy, as well as the risk to the fetus.

Many dermatologic changes occur during a pregnancy. Pregnant women may develop hyperpigmentation, formation of vascular lesions and varicose veins, hirsutism, striae, acne, and increased skin growths. These changes may lead pregnant women to seek cosmetic treatments.

However, physiologic changes such as increased blood volume, decreased hematocrit, increased flushing, increased melanocyte stimulation, and decreased wound healing should prompt a delay of cosmetic procedures until 3-6 months after the postpartum period, when these factors return to normal and the risk of complications is reduced.

The safety of many cosmetic treatments during pregnancy remains unknown. This includes microdermabrasion, chemical peels, and laser treatments. Given the increased risk of postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, as well as poor wound healing and increased risk of hypertrophic and keloidal scarring in pregnancy, these procedures are often avoided.

The safety of injectable treatments during pregnancy, such as liquid sclerosants and fillers, has not been evaluated. However, the manufacturers list pregnancy and breastfeeding as contraindications to treatment. Neurotoxins are also avoided during pregnancy and breastfeeding, based on teratogenicity in animal studies. There have been no controlled trials in humans.

Though there have been incidental exposures of botulinum toxin in women who did not know they were pregnant, no documented reports of fetal anomaly during these incidental exposures has been reported. In addition, no studies have been conducted to evaluate whether the toxin is excreted in breast milk, or when it is safe to use neurotoxins, fillers, or liquid sclerosants prior to conception.

The 10 months of pregnancy and many months of nursing can be a long stretch to wait for women who get regular cosmetic treatments. The skin changes of pregnancy can be bothersome; however, the risks of complications to the mother and the fetus outweigh the transient benefits of cosmetic procedures. The hormonal and physiologic changes of pregnancy are widely different in each woman, and sometimes the long-term side effects and complications can be completely unpredictable. Thus, patience and thorough counseling are the best strategies for treating our pregnant and nursing moms.

References

Nussbaum, R. and Benedetto, A.V. Cosmetic aspects of pregnancy. Clinics in Dermatology 2006;24:133-41.

Morgan, J.C. et al. Botulinum Toxin and Pregnancy Skinmed 2006;5:308.

Monteiro, E. Botulinum toxin A during pregnancy: a survey of treating physicians. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 2006;77:117-9.

Lee, K.C., et al. Safety of cosmetic dermatologic procedures during pregnancy. Dermatol. Surg. 2013;39:1573-86.

Goldberg, D. and Maloney, M. Dermatologic surgery and cosmetic procedures during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Dermatologic Therapy 2013;26:321-30.

Dr. Talakoub and Dr. Wesley are co-contributors to a monthly Aesthetic Dermatology column in Dermatology News. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub.

Cosmetic procedures in general should be postponed until after pregnancy. Factors to consider in a pregnant patient include the hormonal and physiologic changes of the patient during pregnancy, as well as the risk to the fetus.

Many dermatologic changes occur during a pregnancy. Pregnant women may develop hyperpigmentation, formation of vascular lesions and varicose veins, hirsutism, striae, acne, and increased skin growths. These changes may lead pregnant women to seek cosmetic treatments.

However, physiologic changes such as increased blood volume, decreased hematocrit, increased flushing, increased melanocyte stimulation, and decreased wound healing should prompt a delay of cosmetic procedures until 3-6 months after the postpartum period, when these factors return to normal and the risk of complications is reduced.

The safety of many cosmetic treatments during pregnancy remains unknown. This includes microdermabrasion, chemical peels, and laser treatments. Given the increased risk of postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, as well as poor wound healing and increased risk of hypertrophic and keloidal scarring in pregnancy, these procedures are often avoided.

The safety of injectable treatments during pregnancy, such as liquid sclerosants and fillers, has not been evaluated. However, the manufacturers list pregnancy and breastfeeding as contraindications to treatment. Neurotoxins are also avoided during pregnancy and breastfeeding, based on teratogenicity in animal studies. There have been no controlled trials in humans.

Though there have been incidental exposures of botulinum toxin in women who did not know they were pregnant, no documented reports of fetal anomaly during these incidental exposures has been reported. In addition, no studies have been conducted to evaluate whether the toxin is excreted in breast milk, or when it is safe to use neurotoxins, fillers, or liquid sclerosants prior to conception.

The 10 months of pregnancy and many months of nursing can be a long stretch to wait for women who get regular cosmetic treatments. The skin changes of pregnancy can be bothersome; however, the risks of complications to the mother and the fetus outweigh the transient benefits of cosmetic procedures. The hormonal and physiologic changes of pregnancy are widely different in each woman, and sometimes the long-term side effects and complications can be completely unpredictable. Thus, patience and thorough counseling are the best strategies for treating our pregnant and nursing moms.

References

Nussbaum, R. and Benedetto, A.V. Cosmetic aspects of pregnancy. Clinics in Dermatology 2006;24:133-41.

Morgan, J.C. et al. Botulinum Toxin and Pregnancy Skinmed 2006;5:308.

Monteiro, E. Botulinum toxin A during pregnancy: a survey of treating physicians. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 2006;77:117-9.

Lee, K.C., et al. Safety of cosmetic dermatologic procedures during pregnancy. Dermatol. Surg. 2013;39:1573-86.

Goldberg, D. and Maloney, M. Dermatologic surgery and cosmetic procedures during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Dermatologic Therapy 2013;26:321-30.

Dr. Talakoub and Dr. Wesley are co-contributors to a monthly Aesthetic Dermatology column in Dermatology News. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub.

Cosmetic procedures in general should be postponed until after pregnancy. Factors to consider in a pregnant patient include the hormonal and physiologic changes of the patient during pregnancy, as well as the risk to the fetus.

Many dermatologic changes occur during a pregnancy. Pregnant women may develop hyperpigmentation, formation of vascular lesions and varicose veins, hirsutism, striae, acne, and increased skin growths. These changes may lead pregnant women to seek cosmetic treatments.

However, physiologic changes such as increased blood volume, decreased hematocrit, increased flushing, increased melanocyte stimulation, and decreased wound healing should prompt a delay of cosmetic procedures until 3-6 months after the postpartum period, when these factors return to normal and the risk of complications is reduced.

The safety of many cosmetic treatments during pregnancy remains unknown. This includes microdermabrasion, chemical peels, and laser treatments. Given the increased risk of postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, as well as poor wound healing and increased risk of hypertrophic and keloidal scarring in pregnancy, these procedures are often avoided.

The safety of injectable treatments during pregnancy, such as liquid sclerosants and fillers, has not been evaluated. However, the manufacturers list pregnancy and breastfeeding as contraindications to treatment. Neurotoxins are also avoided during pregnancy and breastfeeding, based on teratogenicity in animal studies. There have been no controlled trials in humans.

Though there have been incidental exposures of botulinum toxin in women who did not know they were pregnant, no documented reports of fetal anomaly during these incidental exposures has been reported. In addition, no studies have been conducted to evaluate whether the toxin is excreted in breast milk, or when it is safe to use neurotoxins, fillers, or liquid sclerosants prior to conception.

The 10 months of pregnancy and many months of nursing can be a long stretch to wait for women who get regular cosmetic treatments. The skin changes of pregnancy can be bothersome; however, the risks of complications to the mother and the fetus outweigh the transient benefits of cosmetic procedures. The hormonal and physiologic changes of pregnancy are widely different in each woman, and sometimes the long-term side effects and complications can be completely unpredictable. Thus, patience and thorough counseling are the best strategies for treating our pregnant and nursing moms.

References

Nussbaum, R. and Benedetto, A.V. Cosmetic aspects of pregnancy. Clinics in Dermatology 2006;24:133-41.

Morgan, J.C. et al. Botulinum Toxin and Pregnancy Skinmed 2006;5:308.

Monteiro, E. Botulinum toxin A during pregnancy: a survey of treating physicians. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 2006;77:117-9.

Lee, K.C., et al. Safety of cosmetic dermatologic procedures during pregnancy. Dermatol. Surg. 2013;39:1573-86.

Goldberg, D. and Maloney, M. Dermatologic surgery and cosmetic procedures during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Dermatologic Therapy 2013;26:321-30.

Dr. Talakoub and Dr. Wesley are co-contributors to a monthly Aesthetic Dermatology column in Dermatology News. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub.

My job recently changed to include some administrative responsibilities, so having done purely clinical work for my entire career as a physician, I thought it wise to begin broadening my horizons to learn how to best meet the new challenges ahead of me. Fortunately, not only was the Hospital Medicine 2015 conference just an hour’s drive away, it occurred just when I needed it most, within days of my taking on a new role.

Naturally, I opted for the Practice Management track this year since I will need a different skill set than I currently have. In the first session, called Case Studies in Improving Patient Experience, I learned about a patient named John, who had developed typical ischemic chest pain during a weekly tennis game with his wife. His doctors did everything right, or so they thought. They exceeded the national guidelines for each quality measure, including the time it took them to revascularize his blocked artery. John had no significant residual damage and within 2 weeks was back on the tennis courts.

But there had been a huge disconnect. His doctors practiced excellent medicine, yet John was displeased with his care. The hospital team had not communicated well with John during his hospital stay. A great success story seen through the eyes of his medical team was a great failure as seen through the eyes of John and his wife. The hospital team’s lack of communication trumped the fact that they had played a huge role in saving John’s life.

As a matter of fact, John and his wife were so distraught over their experience that they went to the hospital administration to express their concerns about how poorly they had been treated.

This story also was aired as part of a segment on National Public Radio. Some of the comments of listeners echoed the sentiments we hear often, such as “doctors don’t know how to communicate with patients” and “doctors don’t care.” While the former statement may be true in many cases, the latter couldn’t be further from the truth. We do care. Why else would we sacrifice so much of our lives to help others? There are certainly other careers that pay more than medicine, especially considering all the time and financial investment that go into becoming a physician.

So why is it that as intelligent as we are as a group, we often fall short of meeting the communication goals that are so important to our patients? Some believe – and I am one of them – that most physicians are examples of the cognitive load theory. Our brains are simply overloaded. This theory, developed by psychologist John Sweller in the 1980s, refers to the total amount of mental effort used in one’s working memory.

There are three types of cognitive load: intrinsic, extraneous, and germane. Intrinsic cognitive load refers to how much effort goes into a particular topic, and in the field of medicine, the complexity of the information we deal with is very high, as is our intrinsic load.

Extraneous cognitive load refers to how this information is presented to us. When the pager is incessantly beeping, a line of nurses is waiting to ask a question, you desperately need to get to the ED to admit a potential stroke patient, and you eye a family member anxiously pacing the hallway and waiting for a chance to speak with you, your brain is bombarded with a variety of complex issues coming in all directions. In short, your extraneous load is through the roof.

The germane cognitive load refers to the work you put into processing information and creating a permanent store of that knowledge, creating a schema, so to speak. For instance, after much experience, it has become relatively simple to classify a patient as having heart failure if he presents with bilateral leg edema, progressive shortness of breath, and crackles on exam.

Experience helps us with our germane cognitive load and sometimes we have little control over our intrinisic load, but there are many potential opportunities to organize our extraneous cognitive load into chunks that flow more seamlessly, make our workday run more smoothly, and free up mental energy and time to deal effectively with other important issues. We all have our personal preferences for how we like our workday to flow. Chances are, with a little creativity, we can have a significant impact on our own extraneous loads.

Getting back to John, he is just one of many patients who feel emotionally neglected, not respected, or not kept up to date regarding their statuses. Considering his doctors, they were probably overwhelmed with the load they were carrying; the responsibility for a life is something only medical professionals can fully grasp. I know there have been times when I too felt simply overwhelmed and unable to do every single thing that would have been good, but not crucial, to the goal of curing the patient. Had I managed my intrinisic load better, perhaps I would have been better equipped to spend more time talking to patients and their family members. I suspect I am not alone.

My job recently changed to include some administrative responsibilities, so having done purely clinical work for my entire career as a physician, I thought it wise to begin broadening my horizons to learn how to best meet the new challenges ahead of me. Fortunately, not only was the Hospital Medicine 2015 conference just an hour’s drive away, it occurred just when I needed it most, within days of my taking on a new role.

Naturally, I opted for the Practice Management track this year since I will need a different skill set than I currently have. In the first session, called Case Studies in Improving Patient Experience, I learned about a patient named John, who had developed typical ischemic chest pain during a weekly tennis game with his wife. His doctors did everything right, or so they thought. They exceeded the national guidelines for each quality measure, including the time it took them to revascularize his blocked artery. John had no significant residual damage and within 2 weeks was back on the tennis courts.

But there had been a huge disconnect. His doctors practiced excellent medicine, yet John was displeased with his care. The hospital team had not communicated well with John during his hospital stay. A great success story seen through the eyes of his medical team was a great failure as seen through the eyes of John and his wife. The hospital team’s lack of communication trumped the fact that they had played a huge role in saving John’s life.

As a matter of fact, John and his wife were so distraught over their experience that they went to the hospital administration to express their concerns about how poorly they had been treated.

This story also was aired as part of a segment on National Public Radio. Some of the comments of listeners echoed the sentiments we hear often, such as “doctors don’t know how to communicate with patients” and “doctors don’t care.” While the former statement may be true in many cases, the latter couldn’t be further from the truth. We do care. Why else would we sacrifice so much of our lives to help others? There are certainly other careers that pay more than medicine, especially considering all the time and financial investment that go into becoming a physician.

So why is it that as intelligent as we are as a group, we often fall short of meeting the communication goals that are so important to our patients? Some believe – and I am one of them – that most physicians are examples of the cognitive load theory. Our brains are simply overloaded. This theory, developed by psychologist John Sweller in the 1980s, refers to the total amount of mental effort used in one’s working memory.

There are three types of cognitive load: intrinsic, extraneous, and germane. Intrinsic cognitive load refers to how much effort goes into a particular topic, and in the field of medicine, the complexity of the information we deal with is very high, as is our intrinsic load.

Extraneous cognitive load refers to how this information is presented to us. When the pager is incessantly beeping, a line of nurses is waiting to ask a question, you desperately need to get to the ED to admit a potential stroke patient, and you eye a family member anxiously pacing the hallway and waiting for a chance to speak with you, your brain is bombarded with a variety of complex issues coming in all directions. In short, your extraneous load is through the roof.

The germane cognitive load refers to the work you put into processing information and creating a permanent store of that knowledge, creating a schema, so to speak. For instance, after much experience, it has become relatively simple to classify a patient as having heart failure if he presents with bilateral leg edema, progressive shortness of breath, and crackles on exam.

Experience helps us with our germane cognitive load and sometimes we have little control over our intrinisic load, but there are many potential opportunities to organize our extraneous cognitive load into chunks that flow more seamlessly, make our workday run more smoothly, and free up mental energy and time to deal effectively with other important issues. We all have our personal preferences for how we like our workday to flow. Chances are, with a little creativity, we can have a significant impact on our own extraneous loads.

Getting back to John, he is just one of many patients who feel emotionally neglected, not respected, or not kept up to date regarding their statuses. Considering his doctors, they were probably overwhelmed with the load they were carrying; the responsibility for a life is something only medical professionals can fully grasp. I know there have been times when I too felt simply overwhelmed and unable to do every single thing that would have been good, but not crucial, to the goal of curing the patient. Had I managed my intrinisic load better, perhaps I would have been better equipped to spend more time talking to patients and their family members. I suspect I am not alone.

My job recently changed to include some administrative responsibilities, so having done purely clinical work for my entire career as a physician, I thought it wise to begin broadening my horizons to learn how to best meet the new challenges ahead of me. Fortunately, not only was the Hospital Medicine 2015 conference just an hour’s drive away, it occurred just when I needed it most, within days of my taking on a new role.

Naturally, I opted for the Practice Management track this year since I will need a different skill set than I currently have. In the first session, called Case Studies in Improving Patient Experience, I learned about a patient named John, who had developed typical ischemic chest pain during a weekly tennis game with his wife. His doctors did everything right, or so they thought. They exceeded the national guidelines for each quality measure, including the time it took them to revascularize his blocked artery. John had no significant residual damage and within 2 weeks was back on the tennis courts.

But there had been a huge disconnect. His doctors practiced excellent medicine, yet John was displeased with his care. The hospital team had not communicated well with John during his hospital stay. A great success story seen through the eyes of his medical team was a great failure as seen through the eyes of John and his wife. The hospital team’s lack of communication trumped the fact that they had played a huge role in saving John’s life.

As a matter of fact, John and his wife were so distraught over their experience that they went to the hospital administration to express their concerns about how poorly they had been treated.

This story also was aired as part of a segment on National Public Radio. Some of the comments of listeners echoed the sentiments we hear often, such as “doctors don’t know how to communicate with patients” and “doctors don’t care.” While the former statement may be true in many cases, the latter couldn’t be further from the truth. We do care. Why else would we sacrifice so much of our lives to help others? There are certainly other careers that pay more than medicine, especially considering all the time and financial investment that go into becoming a physician.

So why is it that as intelligent as we are as a group, we often fall short of meeting the communication goals that are so important to our patients? Some believe – and I am one of them – that most physicians are examples of the cognitive load theory. Our brains are simply overloaded. This theory, developed by psychologist John Sweller in the 1980s, refers to the total amount of mental effort used in one’s working memory.

There are three types of cognitive load: intrinsic, extraneous, and germane. Intrinsic cognitive load refers to how much effort goes into a particular topic, and in the field of medicine, the complexity of the information we deal with is very high, as is our intrinsic load.

Extraneous cognitive load refers to how this information is presented to us. When the pager is incessantly beeping, a line of nurses is waiting to ask a question, you desperately need to get to the ED to admit a potential stroke patient, and you eye a family member anxiously pacing the hallway and waiting for a chance to speak with you, your brain is bombarded with a variety of complex issues coming in all directions. In short, your extraneous load is through the roof.

The germane cognitive load refers to the work you put into processing information and creating a permanent store of that knowledge, creating a schema, so to speak. For instance, after much experience, it has become relatively simple to classify a patient as having heart failure if he presents with bilateral leg edema, progressive shortness of breath, and crackles on exam.

Experience helps us with our germane cognitive load and sometimes we have little control over our intrinisic load, but there are many potential opportunities to organize our extraneous cognitive load into chunks that flow more seamlessly, make our workday run more smoothly, and free up mental energy and time to deal effectively with other important issues. We all have our personal preferences for how we like our workday to flow. Chances are, with a little creativity, we can have a significant impact on our own extraneous loads.

Getting back to John, he is just one of many patients who feel emotionally neglected, not respected, or not kept up to date regarding their statuses. Considering his doctors, they were probably overwhelmed with the load they were carrying; the responsibility for a life is something only medical professionals can fully grasp. I know there have been times when I too felt simply overwhelmed and unable to do every single thing that would have been good, but not crucial, to the goal of curing the patient. Had I managed my intrinisic load better, perhaps I would have been better equipped to spend more time talking to patients and their family members. I suspect I am not alone.