When “Everything’s Fine” Isn’t

Mr. Alexander, a retired cop, was 73 when I became his doctor. His previous physician had left our practice.

The diagnoses listed in his chart included high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, and high cholesterol; all were well managed on appropriate medication.

Masks can fool us all.

“Any problems?” I asked.

“Nope. Feeling good,” he replied.

I asked about his medications; whether he had an adequate supply and if he thought any of them were causing side effects. We discussed exercise, sleep, his diet, and hobbies. He was an early morning mall-walker, part of an exercise group. To me, this was a good sign physically and socially.

I asked how his wife was.

“She made me promise to give this to you.”

He unfolded a piece of lined memo paper with neat cursive handwriting. On it was a list of his medications and their doses; the ones that needed refilling were starred. There was also a question about pain in his right knee, and a suggestion to check his hemoglobin A1c, a test used to monitor blood sugar control in diabetics.

This all seemed reasonable enough, but I wondered why if Mr. Alexander had knee pain, he needed a note from his wife to tell me about it.

“What’s going on with your knee?”

“Not much. I guess sometimes it’s a little stiff,” he offered.

I liked Mr. Alexander. He was affable, and somewhat typical of my older male patients: Stoic about all things medical, and unlikely to complain in response to an open-ended question. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

He benefitted from a wife who took charge of his medical care. She made sure that he attended his appointments, took his medications, and followed my recommendations. Mr. Alexander was all too willing to relinquish control over his medical care this way, in my mind, to his benefit.

Other patients aren’t lucky enough to have a spouse take such an active interest in their health. If they are, often they’re resistant to being “babied.”

I made a mental note about Mr. Alexander: Not forthcoming with medical complaints. In his chart, I documented that he’d brought a note from his wife and what the issues were that she’d hoped I would address. This was to serve both as record of the visit and to remind me about this dynamic at subsequent appointments.

At this point, you either identify with this story in relation to your own life and loved ones, or you’re thinking, “What kind of guy needs a note from his wife to remind a doctor about his knee pain?”

I saw Mr. Alexander a half dozen more times over the next two years. Each visit followed the pattern we had established: I’d ask him how he was; he would always answer “just fine.” A note from Mrs. Alexander might indicate a minor complaint but also thoroughly detailed his medications, necessary refills, and questions about routine testing for tracking his chronic conditions.

I looked forward to having Mr. Alexander on my schedule. Each time he’d come, we’d have an exchange of pleasantries and then “take care of business” as outlined by his wife.

His visits were a model of efficiency. Mine.

A doctor has a sixth sense, or should, that when things are going too smoothly there’s probably more to the story.

Continue Reading »

Share
7 Comments Posted in aging, narrative, patient experience, primary care
Tagged , ,
Generics

Later this year, the nation’s top selling drug–Lipitor–will lose its patent protection. Soon thereafter, generic drug manufacturers will compete to market a low cost version of the drug.

How low?

this is not an advertisement

The price will drop in the neighborhood of 90%. Makes you wonder why the cost is so high in the first place. Manufacturers justify it as the price of innovation. Patent exclusivity allows pharmaceutical firms to recoup their investments in research and development (and marketing).

To complicate matters, once the patent expires it’s not quite a free-for-all. For complicated legal reasons, a single generic manufacturer is given a six month window of exclusivity before the drug can be manufactured in the ‘public domain.’

This means that the price is certain to drop (if the generic manufacturer clears its legal hurdles), but not by the massive amount it will once there are lots of other manufacturers competing.

I mention this story for two reasons:

First, the company that makes brand-name Lipitor, Pfizer, is causing controversy by applying to sell its version of the drug over-the-counter (meaning available without a doctor’s prescription). Critics accuse the company of a naked cash grab, arguing that Pfizer is simply trying to extend their product’s market share dominance.

There’s a nice summary of the controversy from mega-medical blogger KevinMD. Link here.

No doubt many of you have opinions about generics–ranging from “I always choose them since it’s the most cost-effective strategy” to “Never. I don’t trust anything less than brand name. I don’t like being forced into generics by my insurer. Isn’t this why I have insurance in the first place?” [Patients have said that to me many times.]

The other reason I offer the story is to let you in on a secret of the medical profession. Get ready:

[sotto voce] Doctors like generics. We believe in them. In general, we find it ludicrous to pay the differential for brand name drugs. Claims about the superiority of brand name drugs are just so much smoke and mirrors. Don’t believe the hype.

Having said that, here are a couple of stories to keep us all on our toes:

Some drugs actually aren’t the same. For example, it’s been generally accepted that there are differences in the way brand name blood thinner Coumadin is metabolized versus it’s generic ‘equivalent,’ warfarin. So the absolute I just gave you about docs always favoring generics isn’t absolutely true.

Then try this on: Patients get confused when they’re on a generic and suddenly it switches. Happens all the time. Pharmacies get huge bulk discounts on the pills they sell. Next year, when you go for that refill on your amlodipine or metformin (the first a very common blood pressure medicine, the second the most common oral medicine for diabetes), the pill could easily change size, shape and color. But it’s for all intents and purposes the same thing. The only difference is the ‘inert’ stuff in the pills, what are called congeners.

But it is darn confusing when this happens. And even though the ‘active’ ingredient, the actual drug, is supposedly safe and effective, there are anecdotes of things going wrong. I had a patient on the blood pressure medicine lisinopril for years. She tolerated it well, and it worked to control her blood pressure. We were both happy.

Sure enough, her pharmacy changed her pills from round white ones to oblong pink ones. After the third dose, she had a major allergic reaction called angioedema. [Her face, tongue, and lips swelled up.] Luckily, with treatment, she got better and no further harm was done. Coincidence? We’ll never know. One thing we know: no more lisinopril for her.

So, that’s this week’s debate. Where do you fall on generics vs. brand name?

Apparently, it’s no contest. A vast majority of Americans prefer generics and believe that they are safe and effective. Scott Hensley at NPR’s Shots blog has a nice post about this trend.

Share
7 Comments Posted in medication
Tagged
Moving on…

As many readers know, GlassHospital has pulled up stakes in the Windy City in pursuit of new adventures out on the plains.

We are leaving the friendly confines of the University of Chicago, our neighborhood in Hyde Park, and family and friends.

We will be joining the faculty at the University of Oklahoma School of Community Medicine in Tulsa, OK.

Many acquaintances, upon hearing our news, have responded with bewilderment:

soon'll be livin' in a brand new state!

Why leave a prestigious university?

Why leave a major metropolis?

What about your family?

Your patients?

Oklahoma?

Really?

Making a decision like this involves numerous considerations. As much as anything, though, the decision to move came down to challenging complacency. We wanted to grow by accepting new challenges and reaching in different directions.

The sense of dislocation is profound. I’ve been particularly touched by the reactions from patients. Many of them wrote to thank me for being a part of their lives, and for my service to them over nine years in Chicago.

I hadn’t anticipated these reactions. In U.S medicine today, it often seems like patients change doctors as often as they get the latest cell phone. This is as likely to be because of employer-sponosored health insurance forcing the decision as anything else, but still…

In Oklahoma, we will be part of many new communities. We hope that our service will be worthy of the faith that has been placed in us. Though we are leaving our Chicago communities, the advent of technologies like Facebook and Skype will allow us to stay in closer touch than has been previously possible.

We choose to think of it as extending our communities, rather than trading them or leaving ones behind. And of course, GlassHospital will be coming along for the adventure.

As Horace Greeley said, “Go West, young man.” In my case, more like “Go more toward the middle, midlife man.”

Share
7 Comments Posted in narrative
Tagged ,
County [Updated]

Those of you that like to see behind the veil of medical care in the U.S. will enjoy the new book by Dr. David Ansell: County: Life, Death, and Politics at Chicago’s Public Hospital.

Ansell began internship at Cook County Hospital in 1978. He stayed there seventeen years.

Along the way, he got involved in politics, fighting the good fight for the poor and disenfranchised of Chicago. He co-authored the landmark 1986 New England Journal of Medicine article understatedly titled “Transfers to a Public Hospital,” that led to the passage of EMTALA that same year.

[EMTALA is the law that was enacted to prevent "patient dumping," the practice of transferring patients from one emergency room to another (such as Cook County) because of a patient's lack of insurance.]

Dr. Ansell was responsible for another success: he helped establish a breast cancer screening program for women at Cook County. Prior to his work, it was believed by many that only specialized breast surgeons could implement such a screening program. Ansell fought medically and politically to achieve better access for poor and uninsured women, in addition to showing that disease screening could adequately be handled by frontline health personnel and not just specialists.

Part of what made the book so interesting for me was the recent history of Chicago and the stories of Ansell’s colleagues at County–many of whom I’ve been lucky to meet and learn from over the years:

There’s Quentin Young, social activist and physician who doctored to MLK and Jesse Jackson, among others. There’s husband and wife team Gordy Schiff and Mardge Cohen, who have inspired generations of Chicago medical students to put their progressive values out front when thinking about their profession. There’s also Renslow Sherer, a pioneer in developing AIDS treatment both at home and abroad, and someone I’ve been blessed to call a colleague for the last few years.

County is an excellent exploration of one doctor’s professional development over a lengthy career. Ansell, in an NPR radio interview, was asked about the poor conditions at the hospital. He likened it to working in the developing world. He and his colleagues were “Doctors within Borders,” as contrasted with the esteemed NGO that works globally in humanitarian disasters.

One thing Ansell didn’t touch on: He now is Chief Medical Officer at Rush, a major academic teaching hospital in Chicago. He made the leap from anti-establishment to major power player in the Chicago health stratosphere. I would have appreciated learning more of his mindset as he made this transition to leadership. I wonder, too, about reconciling values from his longhair days of picketing and demanding change to the more cloistered world of institutional change in the executive suite.

Maybe I’ll ask those questions diplomatically when I interview him.

[UPDATE: Abigail Zuger reviewed County in the NY Times. Link here.]

Share
1 Comment Posted in books, health care reform, hospital care, medical education, narrative
Tagged ,
Striving

Here’s the kind of story I love:

Albert Liebman, class of 2011

Meet Dr. Albert Liebman of Milwaukee. A member of the Greatest Generation, he enrolled as a freshman at the University of Chicago in 1939. He answered the nation’s call to war by enlisting in the Navy in 1942. He’d only completed three years of college. Fortunately for him, he’d already received an acceptance to medical school. [A bachelor's degree was not a requirement in those days.]

After the military, he completed a residency in internal medicine. But he later added subspecialty qualifications in psychiatry and geriatrics. “I was always pursuing something that would expand my usefulness in medicine,” he said. To me, that shows resourcefulness and resilience.

He taught at medical schools throughout his career, and only stopped as a volunteer teacher at age 86.

He self-published six books, and is currently at work on his second book of poetry. [You can read an example, called "A Meandering Path," here. This is a poem I can relate to.]

You gotta love a guy who gives his all to his country, his family, his profession, and his passions.

But what about that bachelors degree?

Better late than never, he concluded. So he checked with the university, which still had his records. Combined with some course work that he completed at the University of Wisconsin, he had enough credits to earn his degree.

So there he was at convocation, the oldest member (by several decades) of the class of 2011.

Serving as an inspiration to all of us; exemplifying the life of the mind.

And always striving.

Share
5 Comments Posted in aging, medical education, narrative
Tagged , ,