At-Home Rapid Strep Testing

Rapid strep test kits can be purchased by anybody to be done at home which may save parents/patients a lot of money in doctor visits for those prone to strep infections. Indeed, should a rapid strep test be positive, than you know that a doctor's visit is definitely worthwhile. (A doctor visit may still be worthwhile since a sore throat may be due to something else like cancer, aphthous ulcer, sinus infection, reflux, etc).

Such home kits (which in fact are the same kits used in medical offices) can be purchased online through Amazon. The price is surprisingly affordable at around the cost of a single copay $30 to do 25 tests.

However, with the purchase of such DIY kits, there are some pitfalls patients should be aware of if they decide to proceed.

1) Perform the internal controls that come with the kit!!! The kit may be a dud and needs to be tested against itself to ensure accurate results whether negative or positive. If the controls do not work, throw the whole test kit out and buy another.
2) You must follow the directions precisely, otherwise the test results will be unreliable. In other words, if the directions call for 4 drops, than it MUST be 4 drops (not 3 drops or 5). If directions state to wait 4 minutes... you must wait exactly 4 minutes. This literally is like precision baking.
3) The test strips need to be kept in protected, sealed bag and used immediately after taking one out, otherwise the test results will be unreliable.
4) When swabbing the throat, you MUST get the cotton tip on the tonsil and/or back wall of the mouth which than must be rubbed around a couple times. Getting the tongue or cheek will increase the risk of a false negative. As such, it may be worthwhile to invest in some tongue blades to help push the tongue down in order to perform this test properly.

Should patients elect to start performing home strep tests, please be aware that physicians will be obligated to not only REPEAT the testing but also examine the patient to ensure antibiotics are appropriate. An actual throat culture may be performed as well which is the gold standard test.

1) Repeat testing is required because the patient may not have followed the instructions precisely. For example, the test strips must be read at 5 minutes (variable depending on the kit). If test results are read past 5 minutes, it may incorrectly show a positive result.
2) Some patients unfortunately fabricate test results just so they can get an antibiotic without an office visit.
3) Some patients unfortunately also fabricate test results in order to skip work or school for personal reasons not related to an actual medical condition.
4) There are situations that even though the strep test is positive, no treatment may be recommended. The patient may be a strep carrier for which treatment of any kind is not recommended.

Read More

The Art of Facial Paralysis

Professional photographer Sage Sohier spent 3 years in a Boston ENT clinic photographing patients suffering from facial paralysis along with family members.

These intimate portrayals document the personal struggles patients with facial paralysis go through that is shared with family. Patients shown include children suffering from this malady.

Her collection of photographs include people with mild to complete degrees of facial paralysis, a condition that usually occurs on just one side of the face and can result from Bell’s palsy, cancer, stroke, accident, surgery, and congenital nerve damage. Sohier documented patients as they progressed through treatment capturing their progress over time, witnessing hope and excitement as they regained the ability to smile, speak, and eat.

Her collective photos resulted in a book About Face as well as a showing of her photographs to be displayed at the New York City Foley Gallery on April 17.

Learn more about facial paralysis here.

Read More

Forbes Critical of Patient Satisfaction Ratings of Physicians

Forbes on January 2, 2013 published a story critical of Press Gainey and other companies that obtain patient satisfaction scores.

Please note that the following is a reprint of prior blog articles (2/19/12 and 6/8/12) written on this subject by Fauquier ENT.

Indeed, much has been made about improving patient satisfaction in the healthcare industry in the belief that greater patient satisfaction equates with better health. To this end, patients are routinely asked to complete a survey based on their impressions on the care they received at a medical office, hospital, and/or emergency room.

BUT... does greater patient satisfaction actually result in or is the result of better care???

According to a recent study... higher patient satisfaction actually resulted in:

• Greater inpatient hospitalization
• Higher overall healthcare utilization
• Higher prescription usage
• INCREASED RISK OF DEATH!

The one and only measured benefit of higher patient satisfaction scores was decreased ER use.

Why would there be an increased risk of death with higher patient satisfaction scores?

Well, if a doctor always does what the patient wants, that would tend to lead towards higher patient satisfaction... EVEN if it's the wrong thing to do.

For example... when a patient sees a doctor for a perceived sinus infection, it is not uncommon for a patient to expect to leave with an antibiotic.

Unfortunately, many sinus infections are actually viral URI for which antibiotics is the WRONG course of action.

Inappropriate antibiotics lead to drug-resistant infections which lead to deaths.

However, if a doctor resists a patient's desire for an antibiotic, that would lead to a decrease in patient satisfaction.

Such medical decisions do not apply to just antibiotics, but also tests, procedures, and hospital admissions.

This example and others may oversimplify a very complex issue, but it does suggest that one interpretation of higher patient satisfaction scores are that doctors and hospital systems may choose to do the wrong thing in order to get a better score.

And that gets into the problems with how the surveys are obtained in the first place...

The Problem With Surveys

What if I told you 100% patient satisfaction scores were due to a survey of only two people... that I personally picked?

Welcome to the big bad world of patient satisfaction scores.

Often (well... pretty much all the time), I come across an article, bulletin posting, or meeting where patient satisfaction scores are announced... but no background information to back it up. HOW many people completed the survey? HOW were the people selected? WHO administered the survey?

HOW many people completed the survey?

The number of patients who actually completed the survey is very important. Mainly, because of the variance that may occur month-to-month as well as ease in manipulating the results.

Let's assume only TWO people completed the survey. The first month, both give me a thumbs up giving me a score of 100%.

However, the following month, another TWO people completed the survey, but only one gave me a thumbs up giving me a score of 50%.

NEWSFLASH!!! "Patient satisfaction scores plummeted 50% over a 1 month period of time!"

In order for meaningful interpretation of patient satisfaction scores, enough survey results MUST be obtained, especially when comparing scores across time.

HOW were the people selected?

Let's pick on the emergency room...

If I wanted to "pad" my results, I would tend to provide surveys to patients who had simple problems and who were seen quickly.

Child with an earache? Let's seem them immediately in Fast-Track ER. [Look in the ear! There's an ear infection.] Here's some antibiotics. Can you also complete this survey?

As opposed to...

55 year old narcotic-addicted patient with fibromyalgia demanding a prescription for 500 percocet pills for his chest pain. I would probably not want this patient to fill out the survey. Neither would the patient as he would probably toss it.

Granted these are extremes, but if performance bonuses are provided to departments with the best patient satisfaction scores and the ER staff were the ones providing the surveys, one can easily manipulate the results in their favor.

WHO administered the survey?

As mentioned above, survey results can be manipulated depending on who provides or gives the survey, ESPECIALLY if money is involved based on the results of the survey.

In order for survey results to be meaningful, a third uninvolved party should be the one to administer the test.

Survey Fatigue

Now even if the survey was done dispassionately and adequate number of surveys were completed, there's still the problem of survey fatigue...

What's that?

I don't know about you all, but I get about 3-4 letters per week and at least one phone call per day asking me to complete a survey on my car, toothbrush, tater tots... etc. You name it... there's a survey for it now.

Now add how many questions are asked... Hopefully one so it's quick.

But also HOW the questions are asked (yes/no versus a scale of 1-10).

As a person completing a survey, if I had my way, there would only be one question that is a yes/no question.

The more questions there are and if they are scaled rather than yes/no, the less likely I'm going to do it.

Now add if you are sick and in pain... How likely are you going to actually complete a 50 question survey on a scale of 1-10???

Probably not...

In fact, it's probably only going to be healthy individuals who tend to give better scores giving a skewed result.

Also, given the survey fatigue I and I bet most people have, it will be a rushed completion without much thought given. The default being five stars all the way down (I may not even bother to read the questions).

A decent way to look for survey fatigue is to have 2 randomly buried questions where rather than 5 stars being the best, 1 star is the best. Surveys where everything is 4 or 5 stars INCLUDING the reversed scale questions should be thrown out.

Summary

If surveys are accurately administered with statistical power and used in such a way that financial incentives are not so tightly linked to the outcomes, than potentially all stand to benefit.

However, performed the way they are currently, whether good or bad, patient satisfaction scores can be VERY misleading if not completely wrong...

I should also add that whenever money is involved, NO test is going to be 100% accurate due to cheating that is bound to happen one way or another... even if cheating occurs by providing healthcare not due to medical reasons.

I predict that this problem is going to get MUCH worse because health insurances will soon base how much reimbursement hospitals and physicians get based on patient satisfaction scores. We are talking about millions and millions of dollars.

Just read about the "no-child left behind" from the Bush era where student test scores influenced teacher pay leading to teachers allowing cheating on tests.


Sources:
Why Rating Your Doctor Is Bad For Your Health. Forbes 1/2/13

Greater Patient Satisfaction At Expense of Better Care? Fauquier ENT 2/19/12

100% Patient Satisfaction Scores. Fauquier ENT 6/8/12

Patient satisfaction: When a doctor’s judgment risks a poor rating. JAMA 11/26/12

Reference:
The Cost of Satisfaction: A National Study of Patient Satisfaction, Health Care Utilization, Expenditures, and Mortality. Arch Intern Med. Published online February 13, 2012. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.1662

Patient Satisfaction and Patient-Centered Care: Necessary but Not Equal. The Journal of the American Medical Association, July 11 (jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?doi=10.1001/jama.2012.7381)

Read More

Surgical Time-Out, circa Year 2050

In the year 2050, surgical time-outs have reached a new level of safety to ensure the utmost care and risk reduction for patients.

Unlike the primitive time-outs performed in the the first decade of the 21st century (2000-2012) which involved one designated individual to confirm prior to incision (Basic9), the patient name, surgical site, performing surgeon, allergies, antibiotic administration, positioning, x-ray name confirmation, fire hazards, and fall risk, significant additional safety checklists have been implemented to create a new state-of-the-art culture of safety both in and out of the operating room.

In 2015, surgical time-outs extended to also include electrical and air quality checks (Environ2) along with separate mandatory time-outs of the Basic9 before, during, and at conclusion of surgery.  To ensure minimal air contaminants as well as maintain the highest performance of all electrical equipment in the operating room, the Environ2 requires a separate electrical and environmental engineer to certify all equipment and confirm air quality at a level of no more than one contaminant part per trillion to the 10th power in 35 separate locations within the operating theater. The Environ2 checks are double-confirmed by the circulating nurse who has been granted broad powers to cancel surgery for any reason without consequence if there are any concerns with the operating room environment that may increase infection risk for the patient as well as sub-optimal performance of any and all equipment used to perform the surgery.

In 2020, the Total5 was added to Basic9 and Environ2 which truly heralded the onset of state-of-the-art surgical time-outs. Total5, developed jointly by the Harvard School of Public Health and National Institute of Medicine, involves a comprehensive time-out of any and all individuals entering into the operating room in the knowledge that surgical outcomes are affected by personnel movement into and out of the operating room whether from contaminants on the skin or clothing of staff to infections that they may or may not be harboring. In rare cases, given the recent terrorist attacks both biological as well as chemical, the Total5 would additionally eliminate such threats.

As such, Total5 involves for each and every staff member that enters the operating room to undergo "individual time-outs":

1) Geiger counter check

2) Body pat-down by TSA (whose duties have tremendously expanded from initial airport security)

3) Metal detector check

4) Chemical check (specifically looking for arsenic, mercury, formaldehyde, etc as well as drug screen)

5) Biohazard check (routine organisms include MRSA, VRSA, C dif, HIV, hepatitis, etc as well as more exotic organisms like Ebola, Swine Flu, Anthrax, etc).

A separate consent must be in the chart for each and every individual who is present for the patient's surgery with their Total5 report.

The Basic9, Environ2, and Total5 surgical time-outs collectively have ensured a 360 degree safety net for the patient.

But... it is not until now in the year 2050 that the surgical time-out has reached a penultimate state with the expansion of the Total5 to Total10. In addition to the original Total5 for surgical staff, 5 additional time-out checks of surgical staff is now required. Continuing with #6...

6) Retina scan (to confirm staff identity)

7) Fingerprint scan (to double-check staff identity)

8) Malpractice insurance check (if positive, consent must be in chart to ensure patient was aware of any malpractice committed by any surgical personnel doctor or nurse)

9) EKG to ensure peak cardiac health of staff member

10) EEG to ensure a rested mind at peak performance of staff member

As with the Total5, Total10 report for each staff member must be included in the patient consent in the patient's chart.

There was some confusion whether each staff member can undergo just one Total10 per day, but with new regulation acknowledging possibility of patient infection contaminating personnel as well as staff member fatigue that may progress throughout the day, a Total10 MUST be performed before each and every surgical case.

For any further questions on surgical time-outs, please contact your local hospital JCAHO executive liaison.

Read More

The Four Types of Patients Seen in a Surgeon's Clinic

Over the years, I have found that patients can be loosely grouped into 4 different types. Nothing particularly wrong with any type, but it does help me to approach patients appropriately if I can get a sense of what type they are.

The four types are:

Type A:  If a surgery can "fix" or "cure" me such that I won't have to take medications every day of my life, than let's do it.

Type B: I will never consider surgery unless it is a life-threatening situation. If a medicine can help, why do it???

Type C: I will consider surgery only as a last resort when all else fails.

Type D: They thought they were Type B or C, but over time, they realize they are Type A.

Why is this important?

Because if a patient is Type B and surgery is recommended, the patient often develops an automatic distrust of the surgeon. The patient may see the surgeon as a "gun-slinger" who likes to cut people.

If a patient is Type A and the surgeon approaches them like Type B or C, such patients may come out of a visit quite disappointed and at worst, upset that the surgeon will not do what they want.

Ultimately, for a happy clinic encounter, a mutual understanding needs to quickly happen otherwise a mutual discord may snowball ultimately leading to a second opinion with another surgeon.

Of course, there is a more complex dynamic going on, but it's a good over-simplification.

Read More