Health

No Image

Florida Doctor Says False Diagnoses Inflate Bills, Could Harm Patients

A federal whistleblower suit unsealed in late February alleges that Humana knew about billing fraud involving Medicare Advantage patients and didn't stop it.

A federal whistleblower suit unsealed in late February alleges that Humana knew about billing fraud involving Medicare Advantage patients and didn’t stop it. Ty Wright/Bloomberg via Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption Ty Wright/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Insurance giant Humana Inc., which operates some of the nation’s largest private Medicare health plans, knew for years of billing fraud at some South Florida clinics but did little to curb the practice even though it could harm patients, a doctor alleges in a newly unsealed whistleblower lawsuit.

The suit was filed by South Florida physician Mario M. Baez. It accuses Humana and Baez’s former business partner, Dr. Isaac K. Thompson, of engaging in a lucrative billing fraud scheme that lasted for years. The suit also names three other Palm Beach County doctors, two medical clinics and a doctors’ practice group as defendants. The suit was filed in October 2012 but remained under a federal court seal until Feb. 26.

Humana had no comment. “As a matter of long-standing company policy, Humana does not comment on pending litigation,” said company spokesman Tom Noland.

Thompson, a Delray Beach doctor, was indicted early last year on health care fraud charges stemming from similar allegations. He had pleaded not guilty but last week indicated he would change his plea and was to appear Friday in federal court in Fort Lauderdale, according to court records.

The Baez case is likely to bring fresh scrutiny to the giant Louisville, Ky.-based insurer, which covers more than 3 million elderly patients in its Medicare Advantage plans nationwide. The case could also spotlight costly flaws in the government’s complex and controversial method for paying private Medicare health plans.

The Baez suit targets a billing formula called a risk score, which is designed to pay Medicare health plans higher rates for sicker patients and less for people in good health. But overspending tied to inflated risk scores has cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars in recent years, as the Center for Public Integrity reported in a series of articles published in 2014.

Federal officials have struggled for years to stamp out these overcharges, known in health care circles as “upcoding,” while at least a half-dozen whistleblowers have filed lawsuits accusing Medicare Advantage plans of ripping off the government.

Baez’s case adds a new wrinkle because it alleges that inflating risks scores not only wastes taxpayer dollars but can also cause a patient to be harmed by improper medical treatment.

Baez said in a letter to the presiding judge in the case, U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra, that treating elderly patients with “multiple ailments” is difficult when you have accurate data, but “when medical records are poisoned with misleading data [from inflated risk scores] it becomes Russian roulette.” Patients aren’t told their risk score and aren’t likely to know if a doctor has exaggerated how sick they are or added bogus medical conditions to their medical records to boost profits, Baez said.

Baez and Thompson were partners in two clinics in Humana’s network, Lake Worth Medical P.A. and IM Medical P.A., in Delray Beach, from 2003 to 2012. Baez alleges in his suit that in February 2009 he became suspicious of billing practices at the two clinics and confronted doctors who worked there about it.

The doctors said they had been told by Thompson to “upcode” diagnoses, according to the suit. Baez said he reported the abuses to Humana in May 2009, but the company failed to return the alleged overpayments. In 2012, Baez contacted the FBI, which eventually sparked the Department of Justice criminal investigation that ensnared Thompson.

Doctors use a series of billing codes to document patients’ health, including any diseases they have and how severe they are. The Medicare Advantage plans report these codes to the government, which calculates a patient risk score and sends off a payment to the health plan.

In Thompson’s case, Humana paid 80 percent of the money it received to the doctor and retained the rest. Prosecutors charged that fraudulent diagnoses submitted by Thompson between January 2006 and June 2013 generated overpayments of $4.8 million.

Baez alleges that Humana encouraged overbilling by providing doctors in its network with forms that highlighted “more profitable” diagnosis codes they could use for patients. Many were statistically impossible to support, according to the suit, which cited allegedly inflated risk scores in more than three dozen patients.

For instance, scores of patients at IM Medical and Lake Worth Medical were diagnosed with a serious but rare spinal disorder called ankylosing spondylitis, when only 1 in 1,000 people truly has this disorder, according to Baez.

Similarly, aging patients with ordinary joint aches were diagnosed with “unspecified inflammatory polyarthropathy,” a chronic disease that requires the care of a specialist, according to the complaint.

Others with minor depression were said to have bipolar disorder, which paid the health plan a higher rate. According to the complaint, Humana officials agreed to fully correct the overages, but later “reneged” on the promise to do so and failed to correct the record with Medicare, according to Baez. The health plans are required to attest to the accuracy of any diagnoses submitted to the government.

The other doctors named as defendants in the Baez suit are Dennis Salazar, Arnaldo Mora and Daniela Mayer. All formerly worked for Thompson. The suit also named MCCI Group Holdings, a medical practice group. None of the doctors could be reached for comment. MCCI Group had no comment.

Humana has previously acknowledged it has been the target of investigations into its billing practices, including some involving whistleblowers. So has another large Medicare Advantage plan operated by UnitedHealth Group. Last month, UnitedHealth said it was cooperating with a Department of Justice review of its billing practices, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

Court filings unsealed in the Baez case confirm that the company faces several similar whistleblower suits, including at least one that remains under court seal. The court records also suggest that the criminal fraud investigation that snared Thompson is not over.

“There are some components of the criminal investigation which remain active,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark A. Lavine wrote in a December 2015 court filing. Lavine added that the investigation “continues to move forward aggressively.”

Lavine also indicated that two other whistleblower cases have been filed against Humana “in connection with similar allegations at other clinics.”

Baez told the center he has been frustrated with the plodding pace of the government investigations into Medicare Advantage. Keeping the matter under seal for so long “protects those who have perpetrated the fraud, but keeps patients and the public in the dark.”

In November 2015, Baez wrote to Marra asking that the seal be lifted.

“Seven years ago I presented to Humana the problem with upcoding and entering false information in patients’ medical records in order to justify the upcoding. … Nothing has changed. Nothing has been done to protect the hundreds of patients with misleading medical information in their medical records,” Baez wrote.

This piece comes from the Center for Public Integrity, a nonpartisan, nonprofit investigative news organization. For more, follow the center on Twitter @Publici, or sign up for its newsletter. Follow Fred Schulte: @FredSchulte

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Donald Trump Releases Details Of Health Care Plan

2:55

Download

Donald Trump has promised to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, and now he has released some more details of how he would do that on his website.

Transcript

AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

Last night, Donald Trump released details of his health plan. No surprise – he wants to repeal Obamacare. NPR’s Alison Kodjak reports that the other proposals on Trump’s website include many Republican favorites and some that both liberals and conservatives find troubling.

ALISON KODJAK, BYLINE: When Trump was asked about his health care proposal in the debate last week broadcast on CNN, this is mostly what he talked about.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

DONALD TRUMP: We have to get rid of the lines around the states so that there’s serious, serious competition.

UNIDENTIFIED MODERATOR: But Mr…

KODJAK: What he meant was that he wants to allow insurance companies to sell policies across state lines. It’s a popular idea among Republicans, but beyond that, Trump was criticized because he had little more to offer. Now that’s changed. The Trump campaign has posted a seven-point health plan on his website. It includes getting rid of those lines around the states, and it adds a handful of other provisions that are mainstays in conservative health care circles. Joe Antos is a scholar at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute.

JOE ANTOS: He mentions things that, depending on how you interpret them, could really fit well within traditional Republican views.

KODJAK: Among those items, Trump calls for people to deduct their health insurance premiums from their taxes and use tax-free health savings accounts to pay for out-of-pocket costs. He proposes changes to Medicaid, the government health insurance for the poor and disabled. He’d give a fixed amount of money to each state rather than using today’s cost-sharing formulas. Trump’s plan leaves a lot up to interpretation. Antos likes the tax provision because he’s assuming Trump would ensure they be structured to benefit low-income people, but other conservatives see it differently. Jeffrey Anderson is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. He looks at the proposals for deducting premiums and health savings accounts and sees a huge giveaway.

JEFFREY ANDERSON: It creates a new tax loophole by providing an open-ended tax break on the individual side.

KODJAK: Anderson agrees with Trump’s goal to repeal the Affordable Care Act, but her worries about Medicaid. Trump’s plan says, quote, “we must review basic options for Medicaid and work with the states to ensure that those who want health care coverage can have it.” Anderson says that sounds to him like a huge Medicaid expansion. That’s the conservative discussion. Liberals are interpreting Trump in yet another way. Igor Volsky is deputy director of the American Progress Action Fund. He says Trump wants to simply ditch Obamacare.

IGOR VOLSKY: It gets rid of Obamacare but doesn’t talk about coverage expansion, doesn’t talk about cost controls. And so we’re left in the world where a lot of people are losing the coverage they currently have under Obamacare and they don’t actually get anything in return.

KODJAK: We asked the Trump campaign to clarify some of these provisions. A spokeswoman said via email, quote, “the plan speaks for itself.” Alison Kodjak, NPR News.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Protestors Gather Outside Supreme Court As Justices Consider Abortion

2:26

Download

The Supreme Court Wednesday heard what could be its most consequential abortion case in a generation. Hundreds of protestors crowded the steps of the building while arguments took place inside.

Transcript

AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

As we mentioned earlier, people on both sides of the issue rallied outside of the court. That’s where NPR’s Jennifer Ludden was posted.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: If you love an abortion provider, make some noise.

(CHEERING)

JENNIFER LUDDEN, BYLINE: Abortion rights supporters vastly outnumbered abortion opponents. They packed the steps of the Supreme Court, spreading in a dense crowd to the edge of the sidewalk, where police struggled to keep people off the street. Mary Beth Hastings took time off work to be here. She said the stakes seem even higher with the death of Antonin Scalia and the need to pick a new justice.

MARY BETH HASTINGS: I think it’s tremendously important for people to think about this in terms of the election, in terms about – of Supreme Court justices. This is not something we can take for granted.

LUDDEN: Valerie Peterson came up from Texas to rally with the National Abortion Federation. Last summer, she was devastated to learn her 16-week fetus had a fatal brain abnormality. She said the Texas law being debated today meant a long wait for an abortion, with a mandated ultrasound and counseling, so she flew to Florida to get the procedure.

VALERIE PETERSON: I think that women that don’t have the means that I did will have no choice but to take matters into their own hands. And so this is a really cruel and grueling ruling process for women.

LUDDEN: Most of the few abortion opponents gathered in a small circle, pressed in on all sides by the crowd surrounding them. John Nagourney held a photo of a baby that said life counts.

JOHN NAGOURNEY: We’re kind of hemmed in, so just trying to do my part to, you know, to try to stand up for, you know, truth.

LUDDEN: Next to him, Annie Piper had driven three hours from Liberty University.

ANNIE PIPER: I think that a lot of abortion clinics don’t uphold women’s health standards, and so this is a very, very important issue for women.

LUDDEN: Most in the crowd were young, but not all. Sonia Conly is 77. She’s long supported abortion rights and remembers before Roe v. Wade.

SONIA CONLY: I did have a need for an abortion, but I know women who did. And I know women who had to go to Mexico, so I just think that we’re going backwards.

LUDDEN: Conly remembers walking by the Supreme Court back in 1976, during an early protest against abortion. She was pregnant then. She says she’d never have guessed she’d be here four decades later, still fighting for abortion rights. Jennifer Ludden, NPR news, Washington.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Women Hope To Sway Justices By Speaking Out About Abortion Experience

4:00

Download

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear what is being called the most significant abortion case in decades. In an effort to sway the justices, namely Justice Anthony Kennedy, women are sharing their personal experiences with abortion in briefs to the court. Among them is Ohio State legislator Teresa Fedor. She speaks with NPR’s Audie Cornish about why she’s telling her story now.

Transcript

AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

The Supreme Court hears arguments tomorrow in a case igniting passions on all sides. It’s about abortion, specifically a Texas law that’s so restrictive that critics say it will force most of the state’s abortion clinics to close. Women who have had abortions are talking about them in hopes of swaying the justices. They filed briefs both supporting and opposing the Texas law. Ohio State Representative Teresa Fedor has signed a brief opposing the law and joins us now. Welcome to the program.

TERESA FEDOR: Thank you.

CORNISH: Now you started speaking about your abortion during a debate over in Ohio abortion law. But can you talk about how you came to speak publicly?

FEDOR: Well, I’ve been a legislature for 16 years. Since I’ve been here, there have been a number of anti-abortion bills. And this last bill really was so extreme, called the Heartbeat Bill. And I just couldn’t take one more floor speech, especially from men. And so something inside of me just said enough is enough. I stood up, was recognized, and I shared my story and basically said, you know, I have this freedom. I don’t want this freedom taken away. And no one understands what I’ve gone through, being raped, and no one can walk in my shoes and judge me.

CORNISH: Why do you feel that the justices would find these particular personal narratives something that would change their minds?

FEDOR: Well, I know that the other side has 3,000 women that said they regret it or there’s some aftermath psychologically, but that’s not the case for all women. And I believe that there are more women who stand with me, but they’re not – they’re silent. And this shame and blame keeps them silent. So as a representative, I felt compelled to speak.

CORNISH: What were the circumstances of how you came to decide to have an abortion?

FEDOR: I was a single mom at the time, going to college, just out of the Air Force and was planning my life. And then going down that path, you run into an issue where you were violated, raped, and you found out you were pregnant. That is a devastating blow on the road that you’re traveling.

CORNISH: How long did you keep this secret – the fact that you had been raped, the fact that you got an abortion? How long had you kept this secret?

FEDOR: Probably 25, almost – 25 years for sure.

CORNISH: So when you finally did decide to talk about it in the Ohio Statehouse, did you surprise yourself?

FEDOR: I knew about a year ago when we had the Heartbeat Bill, the end of December – a lame-duck session – that it was so extreme I didn’t know if I would be able to sit in my chair and say nothing. And something just was pulling at my heart so strongly that I knew there would come a day I would have to tell my story if I stayed any longer in this place and if they kept doing these kinds of bills. So I felt it coming, but I didn’t know when. I felt that I’m going to have to speak and share, and even if it didn’t make any difference, it would be the voice of so many – not only myself, but other women as well.

CORNISH: Ohio State Representative Teresa Fedor, thank you so much for speaking with us.

FEDOR: You’re welcome.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

'Wilhemina's War' Explores Barriers To AIDS Treatment In U.S. South

3:41

Download

While many Americans now view HIV and AIDS as survivable conditions, treatment and care can still be difficult to get in the southern states, especially for African-Americans. A new Independent Lens documentary, Wilhemina’s War, explores those challenges.

Transcript

ARI SHAPIRO, HOST:

More than a million Americans are now living with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. For some people, it’s a serious but manageable condition. In the rural South, many struggle to get treatment. The Independent Lens documentary “Wilhemina’s War” explores that issue. It airs tonight on PBS. For NPR’s Code Switch team, Alexandra Starr reports.

ALEXANDRA STARR, BYLINE: Six years ago, filmmaker June Cross was shocked to learn that nearly half of all new cases of HIV were in the South.

JUNE CROSS: I was like, wow, what’s going on here?

STARR: Cross investigated to find out for herself. That’s how she met Wilhemina Dixon of Williston, S.C. In this scene, Dixon shares her story in a black church in nearby Orangeburg.

(SOUNDBITE OF DOCUMENTARY, “WILHEMINA’S WAR”)

WILHEMINA DIXON: First, I’d like to thank the reverend for having us here, and I came this morning to ask you all to listen at me since AIDS is in my family.

STARR: HIV struck two generations in her family. Her daughter, Toni Dicks, contracted the virus after years of drug use. She passed it onto her own daughter, Dayshal Dicks, who was born HIV-positive. Toni has since died. Dayshal, who is now 21, says Wilhemina Dixon has always been her caretaker and confidant.

DAYSHAL DICKS: Whenever I have problems, I go talk to her. She’s, like, my best friend.

STARR: And her sole support. Dixon works several odd jobs, earning about $12,000 a year. It’s all part of her fight to keep Dayshal from falling victim to a grim trend. AIDS is now one of the leading causes of death for African-American women of childbearing age. As June Cross explains, there are a lot of different factors behind that.

CROSS: Unemployment, poverty, lack of education, lack of access to health care. In a larger sense, it’s become one more way that we can measure inequality.

STARR: You see this in the experience of Dixon’s family. They had difficulty navigating the health care system, finding doctors. Even getting to the doctor was a challenge. Cross says Dixon had to drive her granddaughter 90 minutes each way for her appointments.

CROSS: There’s about one doctor for 4,000 to 10,000 people. There’s one county in South Carolina where it’s one doctor for 10,000 people.

STARR: But even for those who could get medical care, there’s the issue of stigma. Gina Wingood is a professor of public health at Columbia University. She says shame can be an obstacle to diagnosis and treatment of HIV.

GINA WINGOOD: If you have high rates of stigma, people aren’t going to go get health care. They’re not going to maybe even get a HIV test.

STARR: There are efforts to change this. In the documentary, we meet HIV outreach workers who operate a mobile health clinic. In one scene, an activist talks with an African-American woman who is about to be tested for HIV.

(SOUNDBITE OF DOCUMENTARY, “WILHEMINA’S WAR”)

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: You know back in the day, they used to say that this was a white, gay disease. Guess who the face of HIV is now – me and you.

STARR: While there are unique challenges to battling HIV in the Bible Belt, Cross also points to high infection rates in poor urban neighborhoods and clusters of HIV developing in the rural Midwest. Still, she’s inspired by people like Dixon who have made fighting AIDS a personal mission.

CROSS: Wilhelmina gave me hope because she just refuses to stop. Dayshal is beginning to find strength to step forward and speak for herself now.

STARR: Dayshal is making a point of sharing her own story.

DICKS: My main motto is, HIV don’t have me. I have HIV.

STARR: And she’s planning to fight it all the way. For NPR News, I’m Alexandra Starr.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Healthcare.gov Marketplace Looks To More Selective California Model

3:49

Download

Healthcare.gov accepts any insurance plan on its marketplace that complies with minimum standards. It’s now considering strengthening those standards, and it’s looking to California to see how.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Keeping Up With The Joneses' Latest Medical Procedure

Katherine Streeter for NPR

Katherine Streeter for NPR

My father is approaching his 78th birthday, blessed with health good enough to still be an avid golfer and tennis player.

His regular group of tennis buddies changes from time to time. The lineup depends on how they’re feeling.

I remember when one of the gents renowned for his fitness and fastidious diet underwent a quadruple-bypass heart operation. The other guys were in shock. If Mr. Fit had a bum ticker, they all figured they better get to their doctors pronto.

“Don’t I need an operation or something to clean out my arteries?” Dad asked me.

It doesn’t work like that, I explained. We don’t recommend [they are done, let’s be honest] preventive heart surgeries, though many people make that assumption because of our culture’s worship of the latest, greatest medicine and technology.

Heart surgery should be considered disaster relief, I told him, not part of a regular tune-up or a solution for unhealthful habits.

When my father saw his own doctor a few weeks later and got his usual clean bill of health, Dad wasn’t satisfied. There must be some danger brewing somewhere inside him, he told me, despite reassurances from me and his doctor.

His concern faded after a while, but then several months later one of his cronies underwent a knee replacement. Dad’s first reaction: “When should I get my knee replaced?”

I tried to talk him through it. “Do you have pain with every step you take?” I asked. Clearly not, I thought, since he’s still playing tennis three times a week. He admitted that his pain is only intermittent. But as he has aged, he’s grown concerned that his balance has become wobbly.

I can’t fault my dad. He’s a child of the 1950s and has an unshakable belief in American ingenuity and medical progress. Newer is always better. For patients like him, more medical care equals more health.

If there’s one thing he and I have battled over (and as his doctor-son I’m sure I’ve disappointed him in this regard), it’s my insistence that quite the opposite is usually true: less is more in medicine and health care.

In the last decade a whole science has arisen to examine medical overuse — a big contributor to our country’s world-leading health care costs.

These talks with Dad got me thinking about his way of looking at things. I’ve even coined a name for his impulses. I call it, “medical me-tooism.” It reminds me of a millennial’s fear of missing out (FOMO!), but for the geriatric set.

One thing’s for sure, my father’s not alone. In clinical practice, I see medical me-tooism frequently.

Take my patient Jack. He’s 89, and he only stopped playing tennis when he moved to town from Las Vegas a year or so ago to be closer to his son.

Jack was awarded a Purple Heart in World War II, and he sees every day as a gift. But at a recent visit, he told me that out of a group of 13 childhood friends from his original neighborhood, only he and one other remain.

“Isn’t there some pill I can have,” Jack asked, only half-jokingly, “to keep me in good health?” He does take a few medicines, one for blood pressure and another for heartburn. Medically speaking, I think Jack is happier to do less, but his anxiety persists about his good fortune. It’s a form of survivor’s guilt.

Classically, survivor’s guilt is reaction to war, trauma, or natural disaster: Why did I live when others perished?

But it exists in the medical realm, too, especially for cancer survivors who see many of their afflicted compadres succumb to illness, suffering and death.

When I approached my father for permission to write about him, he and I wound up having a heart-to-heart talk about the indignities of our aging bodies, life and its natural end.

He didn’t entirely buy my view that he suffers from medical me-tooism when it comes to his tennis buddies. But he agreed conceptually that medical me-tooism is really a form of survivor’s guilt.

Having reached the average life expectancy for an American male, my father is acutely aware of life’s limits. Sadly, many of his friends have dropped from the tennis group, never to return. Some have died while others became too feeble to continue playing.

Still, compared with their peers, the tennis elders seem to be enjoying life and living longer than their spectating counterparts.

The observation is anecdotal, to be sure, but I’m convinced it speaks to the value of moving around and socializing.

Those are two things my father and I fully agree on.

John Henning Schumann is a writer and doctor in Tulsa, Okla. He serves as president of the University of Oklahoma, Tulsa. He also hosts Public Radio Tulsa’s Medical Matters. He’s on Twitter: @GlassHospital

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

The Stethoscope: Timeless Tool Or Outdated Relic?

Kidney specialist Steven Peitzman, a professor at Drexel University College of Medicine, says physicians who are now in their 60s and 70s used to get praise if they had the "ear" to hear and interpret subtle sounds through a stethoscope.
3:46

Download

Kidney specialist Steven Peitzman, a professor at Drexel University College of Medicine, says physicians who are now in their 60s and 70s used to get praise if they had the “ear” to hear and interpret subtle sounds through a stethoscope. Kim Paynter/WHYY hide caption

toggle caption Kim Paynter/WHYY

To hear a patient’s heart, doctors used to just put an ear up to a patient’s chest and listen. Then, in 1816, things changed.

Lore has it that 35-year-old Paris physician Rene Laennec was caring for a young woman who was apparently plump, with a bad heart and large breasts. Dr. George Davis, an obstetrician at East Tennessee State University who collects vintage stethoscopes, says the young Dr. Laennec didn’t feel comfortable pressing his ear to the woman’s bosom.

“So he took 24 sheets of paper and rolled them into a long tube and put that up against her chest, listened to the other end and found that not only could he hear the heart sounds very, very well, but it was actually better than what he could hear with his ear,” Davis says.

Or, it could have been poor 19th century hygiene — lice and the smell of unwashed bodies — that kept Laennec from getting too close to his patient.

Either way, he went home and crafted a wooden cylinder with a hole down the middle, and that became the first stethoscope.

It took a while for the art of listening to the body through a tube to catch on. But the new tool fit into an evolving idea that doctors needed a more focused approached to diagnosis, “that you should distinguish tuberculosis from a lung abscess — and not just call it all consumption,” says Dr. Steven Peitzman, a professor at Drexel University College of Medicine.

He says doctors used to get praise if they had the ‘ear’ to hear and interpret the subtle body sounds that travel through a stethoscope’s rubber tubing; the stethoscope is the iconic symbol of a physician.

Vidya Viswanathan, a first-year student at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, is still getting used to hers.

Some doctors say clinicians can now get much more information from newer technology than they can get from a stethoscope. Clinging to the old tool isn't necessary, they say.

Some doctors say clinicians can now get much more information from newer technology than they can get from a stethoscope. Clinging to the old tool isn’t necessary, they say. Kimberly Paynter/WHYY hide caption

toggle caption Kimberly Paynter/WHYY

“You don’t realize until you are wearing it and trying to use it, how pokey it is in your ears,” she says. “I’m almost embarrassed to wear it because it implies I have knowledge I don’t have yet.”

Medical schools teach the art of listening.

“I am astounded at the things I’ll find with my stethoscope,” says Allison Rhodes, a third-year student at the Perelman School of Medicine. “I had a patient that had pneumonia, and it was really wonderful to be able to listen to her and say, ‘This is what I think it is.’ And then, later, see on the chest X-ray that that was exactly what it was.”

But some argue that the stethoscope is becoming less useful in this digital age. Dr. Bret Nelson, an emergency medicine physician at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, says clinicians now get a lot more information from newer technology.

An ultrasound, for example, turns sound waves into moving images of blood pumping and heart valves clicking open and shut; those visual cues are easier to interpret than muffled murmurs, and may produce a more accurate diagnosis, Nelson says.

He admits the stethoscope is an icon but doesn’t buy the argument that if you lose the stethoscope, you lose the tradition of “healing touch.”

“Pulling an ultrasound machine out of my pocket, or wheeling the cart over next to the patient [and] talking through with them exactly what I’m looking for and how I’m looking for it — the fact that they can see the same image on the screen that I’m seeing strengthens that bond more than anything in the last 50 years,” Nelson says.

Nelson is 42 years old and graduated from medical school 16 years ago. He teaches medical students, and says it’s helpful to show new learners what “lies beneath.” At Mount Sinai, when medical students are taught to examine a heart, they learn how to use the stethoscope and an ultrasound machine on the same day.

“They know how to feel it, they know how to listen to it, and they know how to look at it,” Nelson says.

Still, obstetrician George Davis wants to keep the stethoscope around for a while. High-tech machines and imaging scans are great backup resources, he says, but his stethoscope helps him figure out which patients actually need additional testing.

“How much do those ultrasound machines cost?” Davis asks. “I can get a good stethoscope for less than $20. We are not going to sit there and do an echocardiogram on every patient who walks through the door.”

Davis worries that a whole generation of doctors is learning to rely too much on technology; he wants to hold on to first-line tools that are safe, effective and cheaper.

“Shouldn’t we be using what is low-tech and practical?” he asks.

Nelson counters that point-of-care imaging is becoming less expensive every day. Twenty years ago, he says, an ultrasound machine was as big as a refrigerator and cost $400,000. Today, a handheld, portable device plugs into a computer tablet and costs less than $10,000.

Many care providers in the community may even have an ultrasound in their pocket one day soon, he says. Who would have foreseen that today we have, “a slide rule, a calculator, a flashlight, a phone, a computer terminal and 36 video games,” all on one device — our smartphone.

This story is part of NPR’s reporting partnership with WHYY’s health show The Pulse and Kaiser Health News.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Treating Addiction As A Chronic Disease

8:13

Download

“The people that I know who have lost spouses, children, some of them are so ashamed that they wouldn’t even acknowledge it as a cause of death,” says A. Thomas McLellan, co-founder of the Treatment Research Institute. Courtesy of Treatment Research Institute hide caption

toggle caption Courtesy of Treatment Research Institute

With the opioid epidemic reaching into every corner of the U.S., more people are talking about addiction as a chronic disease rather than a moral failing.

For researcher A. Thomas McLellan, who has spent his entire career studying substance abuse, the shift is a welcome one, though it has come frustratingly late.

McLellan is co-founder of the Treatment Research Institute in Philadelphia and former deputy director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. His work has focused on understanding addiction as a disease and improving the ways it is treated, a mission that took a personal turn midway through his career when he lost a son to overdose.

NPR’s Audie Cornish spoke with McLellan about how addiction is viewed and how that view has shaped the treatment system we have today. He also has suggestions on how to make it better.

Here are interview highlights, edited for length and clarity.

On why addiction has traditionally been seen as a criminal justice issue, not a health issue

Think about it. If you didn’t have brain science, which has just really emerged in the last two or three decades, all you had to look at was the behavior of addicted people. They are not pleasant people when they are in full addiction. They steal, they lie, they swear they’re going to do something and they don’t. It’s quite easy to think of this as it has been thought of for literally hundreds of years: as a character disorder, as poor upbringing as a problem of parenting. And that’s how we approached it. It’s not coincidence that the Justice Department has played such a pivotal role. The emerging science shows this is a brain disease. It’s got the same genetic transmutability as a lot of chronic illnesses. And the organ that it affects is the brain, and within the brain it is motivation, inhibition, cognition, all those things that produce the aberrant, unpleasant behaviors that are associated with addiction.

On whether the drug treatment system is prepared to address the current opioid crisis

So there are two ways you have to think of it. First, there’s the traditional addiction treatment system. It was purposely set up to be separate from all of health care and that’s the way it’s been for four decades. They’ve been doing heroic things, but they’ve been underfunded, undertrained and they have been unable to provide the most contemporary kinds of treatment and monitoring. So then you turn to the rest of health care, mainstream health care. What we found is that less than 10 percent of American medical schools have a course in addiction. Ditto nursing, ditto pharmacy schools. So, contemporary physicians are not equipped to do it. Yet it’s those same kind of services, medications, behavioral therapies, monitoring and management, they now do routinely for diabetes, hypertension, chronic pain.

On the idea that addiction has to be treated over the long haul, the way diabetes and other chronic diseases are

It’s a tough sell on two sides. No. 1, it’s a tough sell for people who suffer from addiction. It’s tough to hear, “I’m sorry, we don’t have a cure. You can’t get detoxed, go away for 30 days, get your head straight and not be affected.” Same is true for diabetes. There is no place that I know of that gives you 30 days of insulin treatment and a hearty handshake and sends you off to a church basement. It just won’t work, so that’s tough.

It’s been tough for medicine, too. These are doctors who have never learned about addiction in school. Why in the world, if they’re already busy trying to treat other chronic illnesses, why should they take this on? And here is actually the best answer. You may say that expanding insurance options, providing more and better care for addicts is a waste of money, or it’s a gift to someone who doesn’t deserve it. The real gift is for the rest of health care, because it is impossible to manage most chronic illnesses without some attention to substance use disorders. They’ve been willfully ignored by medicine for decades and it’s costing them roughly $200 billion a year in wasted or inappropriate medical care.

On what has changed for people whose families are affected by addiction

The people that I know who have lost spouses, children, some of them are so ashamed that they wouldn’t even acknowledge it as a cause of death. And one thing I’ve found is that in health care, you don’t get the kind of health care that science dictates or that is even economically prudent. You get the health care that you negotiate and that is politically motivated. So for most of my life, there has been no groundswell demanding the kind of care that other illnesses have rightfully come to expect. In my life, the best thing that has ever happened and given people like me hope that your grandkids won’t have the same illness is the Affordable Care Act. It now mandates that the same kinds of care that are available for other illnesses of the body are also available for illnesses of the mind. We can do it. It’s economically sensible to do. We just haven’t had the political will.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.


No Image

Is Venezuela's Collapsing Health System Ill-Equipped To Handle Zika?

3:31

Download

The scale of the Zika virus outbreak in Venezuela is unclear. The government is reporting more than 5,000 cases with three related deaths. But independent Venezuelan physicians fear it could be as many as 400,000 infections. The outbreak is occurring in a country with a collapsing medical system, an economy in tatters and no funds to buy mosquito repellant, contraception or medicine.

Transcript

AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

Next to Colombia in Venezuela, the poor state of the country’s medical system has health experts particularly worried about the rise of Zika. Colombian health officials say Venezuelans with Zika are crossing the border to seek treatment. Reporter John Otis is in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas. He joins us now. And first, John, what’s known about the extent of the spread of Zika in Venezuela right now?

JOHN OTIS, BYLINE: Well, it remains a big mystery, The Venezuelan Health Ministry said last month that there were about 4,000 cases of Zika, but there’s also been a big spike in fevers that have nothing to do with the usual culprits like dengue or malaria. And so that’s why there’s a lot of doctors here speculating that the numbers of Zika cases could be much, much higher. Some will even say there’s up to a few hundred-thousand cases. But again, this is speculation.

There’ve also been about 240 cases of Guillain-Barre. That’s a disease that can cause paralysis and might be linked to Zika. So far, the government’s reported no cases of microcephaly, but that could change because pregnant women who were infected with Zika when the virus first hit last year – they’re going to start having their babies later this spring.

CORNISH: You mentioned doctors, but what are Venezuelan officials saying to the public about this?

OTIS: That’s one of the big problems here. They’re just not saying much. This is a very secretive government. They often withhold data about everything – just normal things like inflation or agricultural production. They stopped publishing their weekly health bulletins back in 2008, and – while other countries – presidents in other countries often use the bully pulpit to educate people about Zika. President Nicolas Maduro here in Venezuela – he’ll often give speeches of up to five hours, but so far, he’s barely mentioned Zika.

CORNISH: You know, you talked about the problems here – obviously political upheaval in Venezuela, a bad economy. When it comes to the medical system’s kind of ability to handle something like this, what are the concerns?

OTIS: There are major, major concerns here, Audie. This country’s going through a severe economic crisis, and that’s left the health system in shambles. Oil is Venezuela’s main export. The prices have collapsed, and so the government now lacks petrodollars to import medicines and even basic products to help prevent Zika like mosquito repellent or Tylenol to take care of the fevers. There’s a major shortage of hospital beds, and you’ve also got brain drain because doctors who, because of the collapsing currency, are only earning a hundred bucks a month or so – a lot of them have left the country for better-paying jobs abroad.

CORNISH: What about the international community? What resources are people sending to help?

OTIS: Opposition lawmakers recently went up to Washington, and they asked the World Health Organization if they could provide emergency help to Venezuela. But for that to happen, for the World Health Organization operate, they need a formal request. And the Moduro government has refused to make that request because they just don’t want to recognize that Zika’s a problem here.

There was also a meeting of Latin American health ministers in Uruguay last month to discuss Zika, and Venezuela was the only country that showed up that failed to put forward a plan for combating Zika. So things look pretty grim here right now.

CORNISH: Journalist John Otis reporting to us from Caracas, Venezuela. Thank you so much, John.

OTIS: Thank you very much.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.