A BETTER PHYSICIAN

Audio-book Review
By Chet Yarbrough

(Blog:awalkingdelight)
Website: chetyarbrough.com

Better-A Surgeon's Notes on PerformanceBetter: A Surgeon’s Notes on Performance

By Atul Gawande

Narrated by John Bedford Lloyd

“Better: A Surgeon’s Notes on Performance” is about physician and hospital performance measurement.  With properly reported physician and hospital information, the author argues that doctors can make better medical decisions.  Doctor Atul Gawande suggests that hospitals and physicians that report and categorize successes and failures in treatment of patients improves all who practice medicine.

As in all walks of life, there are those who work to be the best they can be, and those who work to get by.  Doctor Gawande falls into the former rather than the latter category of working physicians.

DOCTOR ATUL GAWANDE

SURGICAL PHYSICIAN- ATUL GAWANDE

Doctor Gawande is a practicing surgeon at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, an associate professor of surgery at Harvard, and a writer.  “Better…” is a brief evaluation of medical service in the United States.  It contains more criticism than praise of the American practice of medicine.

On the one hand, Gawande praises American military medical practice that has reduced battle field deaths with the military’s use of statistical analysis to measure and modify medical procedures.  On the other hand, Gawande pointedly criticizes domestic hospitals for failing to collect and categorize medical information that measures successes and failures of doctors and hospital staff in treating patients.

Because medical treatments and results are not nationally codified, patients, doctors, and hospitals are unaware of statistically significant improvements in patient’ medical procedures and infection prevention programs.     Patients have limited ways of knowing which general practitioners are more successfully treating particular diseases.  Patients generally have less information about which surgeons have better surgical results, or what hospitals have fewer accidental infection outbreaks.  Changes in medical procedures that improve doctor and hospital performance are handicapped by lack of relevant statistical information about medical procedures that improve patient recovery and reduce hospital mistakes.

Gawande praises doctors that focus on improving their medical performance based on statistical reports that show patient results from common medical treatments.  The problem is that few medical treatment reports are based on broad doctor and/or hospital experience.  He gives the example of cystic fibrosis treatments that are more effectively performed in one place than another.  There is a wide discrepancy in the survival rates of cystic fibrosis patients in different treatment programs.  Gawande notes that systematic questioning of patients about treatment in one clinic results in longer lives for cystic fibrosis patients; while a clinic that relies on the mechanics of treatment, without careful questioning of patient’ treatment compliance, loses patients at earlier ages.  Detailed statistical studies can reveal differences in treatment of cystic fibrosis to improve patient survival rates.  Differences in treatment are a life and death consequence for stricken patients.

Gawande notes that per capita cost of medical services is too high in America and gives a startling comparison of what is done in India to show how much can be done to combat disease with a fraction of what American’ patients pay.  Gawande criticizes insurance industry interference in doctor/patient relationship.  He vilifies Obama-care because it fails to offer any solution to insurance industry’ encroachment on doctor/patient relationship.  In fact, Obama-care increases rather than decreases interference.  (In fairness, the political influence of insurance industry lobbying limits  legislator’ and President’ flexibility in changing American medical policy.) On the other hand, Gawande notes that Obama-care offers medical care to people who receive no health care except in emergencies which unfairly burden general tax payers and bankrupt marginally employed patients.

Gawande touches on the unconscionable fees that doctors pay for malpractice insurance to protect themselves from both nuisance and legitimate patient lawsuits.  Gawande sees both sides of the issue.  He interviews a surgeon that abandons his practice to become a lawyer. The doctor, turned lawyer, files lawsuits against doctors on behalf of patients that have been harmed by physician’ mistakes.  Mistakes happen because the medical profession is no different from any human endeavor.  A mistake at a construction site like a mistake in surgery may end in death.

Gawande suggests that doctors and hospital staffs should be held responsible for their mistakes. However, Gawande notes that insurance companies distort the process of settlement in the same way they distort medical treatment for patients.  For an insurance company, settlement is strictly a matter of cost; not whether a doctor is guilty of negligence but how much it will cost to settle the lawsuit in respect to revenues received from insurance premiums.  Gawande suggests that some kind of sinking fund be established by the medical profession to handle disputes between doctors, hospitals, and patients.  The legal system remains a part of the process but settlements are more physician/patient related than insurance/doctor/patient related.

Gawande shines a light on dark corners of medical practice in the United States and suggests ways American medical mistakes can be reduced, methodology constructively changed, costs better controlled, and service equitably improved.

SKIN IN THE GAME

habitat for humanitySKIN IN THE GAME

By Chet Yarbrough

3/7/13

It’s 6:00 A.M.– getting ready for red-shirt volunteers at a Habitat for Humanity’ construction site.  It is a sunshiny day in September 2009 that will push heat above 100 degrees by 12:30.

The Project Manager prepares a work site for a handful of experienced group leaders that will help future homeowners, their friends, and a dozen inexperienced volunteers build a house for a working family that needs a home but cannot afford a conventional mortgage.   Habitat for Humanity is an international success in the shelter business because every home buyer has “skin in the game”; i.e. every home-built to be sold to a working family is partly built by that family.

At 61 years of age, it’s a dream job with little stress and a work environment that employees feel privileged to experience.  The privilege is in the joy that comes from working with people who need shelter and volunteers that want to do good for others.

Unlike past early mornings, the Project Manager is feeling oddly weak as he opens job boxes, lays out tools, brews a pot of coffee, and sets water out for the day’s work.  After sitting down, the weakness disappears and the day goes on but the Project Manager makes an appointment to see Dr. Feelgood, his general practitioner, to get some advice on what happened earlier.  (Doctor’s names are fictitious and are not meant to either praise or blame any real person.)

Dr. Feelgood gives the Project Manager an examination and refers him to a cardiologist.  The Cardiologist, Dr. Dewit, examines the PM and schedules him for a stress test and electrocardiogram.  Dr. Dewit is new to the PM but is recommended by Dr. Feelgood which gives the PM some confidence in Dr. Dewit’s ability.  In a follow-up appointment, Dr. Dewit recommends an angiogram be done.  This is the second time the PM has met Dr. Dewit.  Dr. Dewit explains the procedure which involves being anesthetized, and injected with a dye that is squirted into a femoral artery in a patient’s groin.  The PM explains to Dr. Dewit that he does not want a stent automatically inserted if blockage is found in an artery.  The PM wants to discuss the results with Dr. Dewit before a stent is installed.  Dr. Dewit reluctantly agrees.

The PM is anesthetized, the dye is injected, and a 90% blockage is noted in one of the three main arteries feeding the heart.  In the follow-up meeting, Dr. Dewit, recommends that a stent be surgically implanted to allow blood flow through the nearly blocked artery.  The PM is aware of studies that have shown medication to be as effective as stent insertion for coronary artery decease but the PM reluctantly agrees.

The PM is anesthetized again.  Dr. Dewit is unable to get the stent implanted because of the arterial occlusion.  Dr. Dewit said, “This has never happened to me before.”  The PM is kept in intensive care for three days with one visit from Dr. Dewit.  The PM, a restless and impatient person, objects to the confinement, pulls the IV tubing out of his arm and plans to go home.  Dr. Dewit eventually arrives and explains that collateral arteries, shown in X-rays taken before the attempted stent implant, had luckily replaced the nutritive value of the cardiovascular artery that was blocked.  Dr. Dewit said, “These collateral arteries compensate for the blocked artery; without any apparent damage to the PM’s heart.”  Dr. Dewit tells the PM it is ok to go home with follow-up care.

Revelation #1—Doctors are not wholly good or bad; they, like all human beings, are motivated by money, power, and prestige.  Doctors make mistakes.  Patients make mistakes. Human beings are not immortal and life is ephemeral.  Luck, both good and bad, accompanies good and bad decisions made by both doctors and patients.

The former PM is now a retired, 65-year-old, seeing a new general practitioner and a new cardiologist.  In follow-up examinations, there are some changes in his electrocardiogram with some chest tightening when the PM hikes at higher altitudes.  No stent yet but the new cardiologist wants to do another angiogram with authorization from the PM to implant a stent if further blockage is revealed.  So far, the PM’s decision on another angiogram and possible stent is no.  Stay tuned because Dr. Goodforme, the new cardiologist, wants to see the patient again in 6 weeks.

Life is a gamble but it is a patient’s gamble, not a practitioners’.  Who knows what the proportional motivation is for a practitioner?  A patient’s motivation is health which allows for continued pursuit of money, power, and prestige.  A doctor’s motivation is the same; only diminished or increased by the next willing or un-willing patient, but it is the patient who has skin in the game.

MEDICINE

Audio-book Review
By Chet Yarbrough

(Blog:awalkingdelight)
Website: chetyarbrough.com

the demon under the microscopeThe Demon under the Microscope

By: Thomas Hager 

Narrated by: Stephen Hoye

Those born after 1945 take anti-bacterial medicine for granted.  Before 1932, approximately 100,000 people died from pneumonia in the United States; an estimated 2,000 mothers died from “child birth” fever.  There were no effective treatments for syphilis or malaria.  Sore throats, commonly referred to as “strep throat”, were notorious killers.  The spread of germs from poor hygiene and contaminated surgical procedures killed as many surgery patients as it saved.  With the advance of WWI, wound infection became as great a danger to survival as combat.

THOMAS HAGER

THOMAS HAGER

GEHARD DOMAGK (1895-1964)

GEHARD DOMAGK (1895-1964)

Thomas Hager tells the story of I.G. Farben Industry and their employment of Gerhard Domagk, a German pathologist that discovered, with the help of Josef Klarer, sulfonamides in the 1930s.  Domagk won a Nobel Prize for medicine but was unable to accept the award in 1939 because of Germany’s rejection of the Nobel institution’s support of pacifism; i.e. the institute had awarded an earlier Nobel Peace Prize.  I.G. Farben grew to be one of the four largest companies in the world.

I.G.FARBEN CONGLOMERATE

I.G.FARBEN CONGLOMERATE

As WWII approached, the growth and success of I.G. Farben increases while its reputation becomes besmirched by its research ethics and growing cooperation with Nazi Germany.

Thomas Hager is well suited to write about anti-bacterial medicine; i.e. his master’s degrees in microbiology, immunology, and journalism offer insight and clarity to the scientific investigation, discovery, and consequence of pharmacological science.  “The Demon under the Microscope” begins at the turn of the twentieth century and carries through two world wars.

I.G. Farben’s drive for market domination is freighted with greed.  I.G. Farben started as a dye maker but began hiring medical researchers to expand into the pharmacological industry.  The theory underlying Farben’s widening industrial interest is that dye became a useful tool to more clearly mark microbial organisms. Gram staining became a useful

PAUL EHRLICH (1854-1915)

PAUL EHRLICH (1854-1915)

diagnostic tool in the medical field.  As gram staining became more refined, Paul Ehrlich (winner of the 1908 Nobel Prize in medicine) began working with the idea of dye targeted drug delivery to attack biological killers in the human body. Ehrlich’s collaboration with I.G. Farben hugely expanded Farben industry’s pharmacological research effort.

What Hager reveals is that the value of sulfonamides, the first family of drugs to combat bacterial infection, had little to do with dye.  I.G. Farben obscured that truth of sulfa as the active ingredient in the war against biological disease because no patent could be acquired for sulfa as a naturally produced chemical.

ERNEST FOURNEAU (1872-1949)

ERNEST FOURNEAU (1872-1949)

The French chemist, Ernest Fourneau, working in the Pasteur Institute in France, realizes Farben’s paring of sulfa with dye is unnecessary for drug production.  Hager notes that Fourneau’s discovery made Farben’s “questionably ethical” effort to corner the market impossible.  Farben’s domination disappeared within two years of Fourneau and his associate’s discovery.

Sulfa drugs saved millions of lives during and after two world wars.  Until penicillin is discovered in 1928 by Alexander Fleming, the only anti-bacterial drugs available were sulfa-based.

The craze for sulfa medication led to manufacturing mistakes that, at the least, caused liver and kidney damage, and at the worst, death.  Hager writes that growth of the Federal Drug Administration is directly attributed to the story of S. E. Massengill Company’s manufacture of “Elixir Sulfanilamide”.  Massengill chemically bonds diethylene glycol, a toxic solvent, with sulfa because it creates a more consistent mixture.  More than 100 people in 15 states died from the Elixir.  The FDA is shown by Hager to have been instrumental in limiting the number of deaths.  Soon after the Massengill’ disaster, patent laws are refined, manufacturer

ELXIR SULFANILAMIDE

ELXIR SULFANILAMIDE

standards are established, and drug testing is regulated.

Hager tells a terrific story that resonates with today’s complex societal relationship with the drug manufacturing industry.  On the one hand, huge investment is needed to discover patentable new drugs; on the other hand, millions of people cannot afford new medicines that are manufactured and controlled by drug companies that seek better return on their investment.  The opportunity for a manufacturer to hide behind patent law to unreasonably dominate a critically important drug is as possible today as it was in the early 1900s.  One wonders how much rising medical costs are a function of greed.