A Window Into Cancer Research
Exciting Time with World Renowned Experts from Patient Power® on Vimeo.
*This blog post was originally published at Andrew's Blog*
Latest Posts
Who’s More Pessimistic About Healthcare Reform, Physicians Or Patients?
While public opposition to healthcare reform has diminished since its passage, physician opinions are still negative, especially among specialists who see their value to the healthcare system decreasing as reform emphasizes primary care.
A survey reports that 65 percent of nearly 3,000 physicians in all specialties said the quality of healthcare in the country will deteriorate in the next five years. Seventeen percent of respondents believe the quality of healthcare will stay the same and 18 percent believe it will improve. Meanwhile, 30 percent of healthcare consumers believe that the quality of healthcare will improve.
Physicians cited as reasons for their pessimism personal political beliefs, anger at insurance companies and a lack of accurate planning in the reform act. Other reasons include that primary care physicians won’t have the time to keep up with the extra workload, forcing more patients to depend upon nurse practitioners for primary care. When asked who will likely handle the 32 million Americans expected to receive healthcare following passage of the reform, 44 percent said primary care physicians will handle the load and 44 percent said that nurse practitioners will see them. (Physicians could vote for more than one category; options include physicians assistants and specialists, for example.) Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at ACP Internist*
Personal Genetic Testing: Psychological And Behavioral Effects
Genome-wide profiling is increasingly being marketed towards consumers to assess their risk of developing certain diseases. However, there has been little research into the psychological effects of these tests.
Researchers from Scripps Translational Science Institute have now looked into these effects in a large group of patients. They followed 2,037 participants who took the Navigenics Health Compass, a test that assesses the risk for about 20 common diseases, for a period of three months.
Taking the test did not increase anxiety symptoms, dietary fat intake, or exercise behavior. There was some test-related distress correlated with the average estimated lifetime risk of getting the diseases tested for, but at the same time 90.3 percent of all subjects had no test-related distress at all. The use of screening tests did not change among the group and notably health effects of the test were not studied.
In conclusion, personal genetic testing does not seem to generate a lot of distress, although the study was clearly limited by a high dropout percentage of 44 percent and the self-selection of participants who opted to do the test.
Article in New England Journal of Medicine: Effect of Direct-to-Consumer Genomewide Profiling to Assess Disease Risk
Flashback: An Interview with Navigenics…
*This blog post was originally published at Medgadget*
What Is Secondary Prevention?
A November letter to the editor in American Family Physician chastises that publication for misusing the term “secondary prevention,” even using it in the title of an article that was actually about tertiary prevention.
I am guilty of the same sin. I had been influenced by simplistic explanations that distinguished only two kinds of prevention: Primary and secondary. I thought primary prevention was for those who didn’t yet have a disease, and secondary prevention was for those who already had the disease, to prevent recurrence or exacerbation. For example, vaccinations would be primary prevention and treatment of risk factors to prevent a second myocardial infarct would be secondary prevention.
No, there are three kinds of prevention: Primary, secondary and tertiary. Primary prevention aims to prevent disease from developing in the first place. Secondary prevention aims to detect and treat disease that has not yet become symptomatic. Tertiary prevention is directed at those who already have symptomatic disease, in an attempt to prevent further deterioration, recurrent symptoms and subsequent events.
Some have suggested a fourth kind, quaternary prevention, to describe “… the set of health activities that mitigate or avoid the consequences of unnecessary or excessive interventions in the health system.” Another version is “Action taken to identify patient at risk of overmedicalisation, to protect him from new medical invasion, and to suggest to him interventions, which are ethically acceptable.” But this is not a generally accepted category. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Science-Based Medicine*
How Good Is Your Doctor At Diagnosing You?
We’ve all been there. It often starts with some kind of recurring pain or dull ache. We don’t know what’s causing the pain or ache. During the light of day we tell ourselves that it’s nothing. But at 3:00am when the pain wakes you, worry sets in: “Maybe I have cancer or heart disease or some other life-ending ailment.” The next day you make an appointment to see your doctor.
So now you’re sitting in the exam room explaining this scenario to your doctor. Based on your previous experience, what’s the first thing your doctor would do?
A. Order a battery of tests and schedule a follow-up appointment.
B. Put you in a patient gown and conduct a thorough physical examination, including asking you detailed questions about your complaint before ordering any tests.
If you answered “A,” you have a lot of company. A recent post by Robert Centor, M.D., reminded me of yet another disturbing trend in the doctor-patient interaction. The post, entitled “Many doctors order tests rather than do a history and physical,” talks about how physicians today rely more on technology for diagnosing patients than their own “hands-on” diagnostic skills — a good patient history and physical exam, for example.
Prior to the technology revolution in medicine over the last 20 years, physician training taught doctors how to diagnose patients using with a comprehensive history and physical exam. More physicians today are practicing “test-centered medicine rather than patient-centered medicine.” Medical schools focus on teaching doctors to “click as many buttons on the computer order set as we possibly can in order to cover every life-threatening diagnosis.” The problem is that medicine is still an imperfect science, and technology is not a good substitute for an experienced, hands-on diagnostician. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Mind The Gap*
