Drop Down MenusCSS Drop Down MenuPure CSS Dropdown Menu
Alternative Text Alternative Text Alternative Text Alternative Text
Survivor of US Drone Attack:
Obama Belongs on List of World's Tyrants

Poisoning Black Cities: Corporate Campaign to Ethnically Cleanse US Cities Massive Marches in Poland
Against Authoritarian Threat of Far-Right
Ethiopia’s Invisible Crisis: Land Rights Activists Kidnapped and Tortured

Global Perspectives Now Global Perspectives Now
Showing posts with label doctors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label doctors. Show all posts

Beyond Ratings: More Tools Coming to Pick Your Doctor

Photo by Lisa Brewster
Photo by Lisa Brewster.

By Charles Ornstein ProPublica, This story was co-published with Los Angeles Times

This week, the federal government is planning to release a massive database capable of providing patients with much more information about their doctors.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the government agency that runs Medicare, plans to post on its website detailed information about how many visits and procedures individual health professionals billed the program for in 2012, and how much they were paid.

This new trove of data, which covers 880,000 health professionals, adds to a growing body of information available to patients who don't want to leave picking a doctor to chance. But to put that information to good use, consumers need to be aware of what is available, what's missing and how to interpret it.

So, what's out there?

As it stands, patients can go to websites such as Yelp or Healthgrades to read reviews of their doctors submitted by other patients. They can go to the websites of state medical boards to find out whether a doctor has faced disciplinary action. If they're really adventurous, they can seek out lawsuit filings.

At its website, ProPublica maintains a database on which patients can check whether their doctors have received payments or gifts from any of more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies. Another ProPublica database allows patients to look at which medications a doctor has prescribed to patients in Medicare's prescription drug program. The data enables patients to compare doctors with their peers, seeing if they have unusual practices or conflicts of interest.

This fall, under a little-debated part of the Affordable Care Act, the federal government will release data on personal, promotional and research payments to doctors from all pharmaceutical and medical device companies. Armed with this information, patients will be able to at least ask whether their doctors have prescribed a drug because it is the best one for their patients 2014 or because of a financial relationship.

It's important to remember, though, that data can sometimes be misleading. There's a big difference between, say, a hospice doctor giving almost every patient a narcotic and a podiatrist doing the same thing.

As my colleagues and I at ProPublica learned, seeming anomalies are sometimes easily explained. One Alaska nurse practitioner, for example, appeared to write an excessive number of orders for antipsychotics. But when we reached her to ask why, she told us that she wrote prescriptions for only a few days at a time to monitor patients' responses. Her explanation was borne out in the data.

These new tools all have limits. They won't tell you whether one doctor's patients are sicker than another's and need different therapies. They won't tell you about a doctor's bedside manner or willingness to return a phone call at 3 a.m. They won't tell you about a doctor's surgical skill.

It's also far from certain whether patients will embrace the tools. Currently, an array of information is available about hospitals and nursing homes, but it's unclear that it has made much of a difference in where patients seek care. Some people would simply prefer to make decisions the old-fashioned way, relying on community networks rather than data.

Still, our experience in making data available suggests lots of people are eager to use this information to drive healthcare choices. Millions have visited our Prescriber Checkup and Dollars for Docs news applications.

Moreover, despite grumbling from the American Medical Association and others in the medical establishment, the healthcare system has not collapsed because patients are learning more about their providers.

We're still a ways off from having enough information to do an overall comparison of the quality of care from one physician to another. But Medicare should be applauded for its new release of data, and it should continue to do more. It should also encourage private insurers and other public programs to follow suit.

Access to information is crucial if patients are to have any hope of answering that most basic of questions: How does my doctor practice medicine?


Reprinted with permission from ProPublica

Leaders of Teaching Hospitals Have Close Ties to Drug Companies, Study Shows

Doctor
Image from Pixabay.


By Charles Ornstein, ProPublica
Pharmaceutical company payments to doctors extend far beyond rank-and-file clinicians — and deep into the leadership of America's teaching hospitals, according to a study published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

A team of researchers at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center examined the boards of the 50 largest drug companies by global sales (excluding three companies that were not publicly traded). The researchers found that 40 percent — 19 companies — had at least one board member who also held a leadership role at an academic medical center. Sixteen of the 17 companies based in the United States had at least one. Several had more than one.

What the New ‘Collaborative Media' Can Mean
All told, the research team found that 41 of the companies' 2012 board members held leadership positions at academic medical centers. Six of the 41 were pharmaceutical company executives who served on hospital boards of directors or held other leadership posts.

Excluding the industry executives, the academics earned an average of nearly $313,000 that year for their board service.

ProPublica has been chronicling conflicts of interest in medicine for several years by looking at drug makers' payments to individual medical practitioners for consulting, speaking and more. Our Dollars for Docs database currently collects information on payments by 15 companies that publicly report them, most as a condition of lawsuit settlements with the federal government.

Beginning this fall, under a provision of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, all pharmaceutical and medical device companies will have to publicly report payments to physicians. The first report is expected to be released in September and will cover payments made from August to December 2013.

In the study published today, the authors wrote that when academic medical leaders serve on pharmaceutical company boards, it can lead to conflicts not only for individuals, but for the critically important health care institutions they guide.

As board members of drug companies, academic leaders take on a fiduciary duty to those companies' success. That can "conflict or compete" with their other responsibilities, the study says.

"Given the magnitude of competing priorities between academic institutions and pharmaceutical companies, dual leadership roles cannot simply be managed by internal disclosure," the authors conclude. "These relationships present potentially far-reaching consequences beyond those created when individual physicians consult with industry or receive gifts."

Among the academic leaders serving as drug-company board members was the dean of the University of Illinois College of Medicine, whose institution was criticized recently when members of its surgery department appeared in an ad for the daVinci surgical robot.


Reprinted with permission from ProPublica


Some Hospitals Think They Should Have Power Over You and Your Family: Hospital Ordered By Judge To Remove Life Support - Is STILL 'Deciding' If It Will

('Doctor Doctor Joke 25'. Illustration by  Alan O'Rourke)
Not satisfied with "just" playing God, some doctors and hospitals want to play "Judge
jury" too.  Will your doctor and hospital obey your wishes when the time comes? -
Don't bet your life on it. ('Doctor Doctor Joke 25'. Illustration by Alan O'Rourke)

By Natalie DiBlasio
A spokeswoman for a Texas hospital won't say whether it will follow a judge's order to take a pregnant brain-dead woman off of life support.

Marlise Munoz, 33, who is believed to be about 22 weeks pregnant, "is deceased" and therefore not subject to a state law that prohibits withdrawal of treatment from a pregnant person, Judge R.H. Wallace ruled on Friday afternoon. The judge said the Fort Worth hospital had until Monday at 5 p.m. to remove Munoz from life support.

Hospital spokeswoman J.R. Labbe said that John Peter Smith Hospital wouldn't announce a decision on whether to appeal the ruling on Saturday.

Continue Reading...
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...