I think we suffer from medium confusion.
Twitter, Facebook, and blogs are just a medium. They are not an end unto themselves but more a mere tool or amplifier. Our digital footprint may be littered with pictures and pithy tweets, but what separates a key opinion leader from a follower is content.
Content is the first principal. It is where intelligence, meets communication, and dances with relevance. Content is the work product of our brilliance. Without it, creation dies and curation flops about like a fish out of water.
In the new world order, communication relies on content amplified by medium to be curated, aggregated, and most importantly commented on. Content begets content, tweet begets retweet, blog post begets civil discourse through dissenting blog post.
When we create and amplify garbage, we dilute the medium. And here's the rub, the content by key opinion leaders becomes lost in a sea of excrement. The true content producer has but two options in this great arms race towards relevance, amplify louder or increase output. Both of which ultimately lead to burnout.
And then the true drivers of change like Mike Sevilla bow out. We've been all yelling so loud that our faces have turned blue. We have one up'd ourselves into TED talks and book deals. The stakes get greater, the amplifiers are turned up higher.
Instead of killing innovation, we need to embrace it. We have created a social media behemoth.
The future of this important endeavor lies in better filters.
We need to learn to use them more liberally!
Tuesday, June 11, 2013
Saturday, June 8, 2013
Is Social Media A Kingmaker? @drmikesevilla Take A Bow!
It's hard to believe that just seven hours earlier I had been watching Sting belt out Roxanne at Ravinia. Relegated to lawn seats, I craned my neck around the entrance of the pavilion to catch a glimpse. The large screens on either side of the stage reflected a solitary figure with guitar in hand. He was in complete control. The words came out almost effortlessly, but the sound and quality was unmistakable. The crowd swayed back and forth, jumping up and down. Thousands of hands raised, and voices sang along. After all these years, he was still at the very top.
This morning I crawled into the car at five AM to make the lonely trip to the hospital. As I turned off my block and onto a larger street, I was again struck by a solitary figure. He had a backpack, shorts, and a large brimmed hat. He walked in the middle of the empty street, and as I passed I caught a glimpse of his face. He was staring toward the sunrise with his hat in his hand, and a satisfied smile on his lips.
*
The healthcare social media community was stunned to find this week that one of our most respected and stalwart leaders has decided to sign off. @drmikesevilla has made the personal decision to withdraw from social media. In a series of raw posts on his blog this week, he enumerates the uncertainty and frustration many of us have felt over the years. It does not serve to reiterate. You can read his posts here.
I feel a real connection to Mike Sevilla. We started blogging at the exact same time in 2006. I read some of his very first blog posts and he mine. For years now, I have watched in envy and joy to see his meteoric rise. In many ways, I often felt that my social media destiny was more akin to the lone journeyman on the empty road smiling quietly in the sun. And yes, Mike was more like Sting, belting it out for crowds of adoring fans.
Only with time, have I realized that actually, we share in the fact that both of our paths have been littered with both very public and private moments.
We ask ourselves if we are relevant, we shout in the echo chamber, and then we wait for the ether to confirm or deny our deep held suspicions.
The mistake is expecting social media to be a kingmaker.
Mike, you were a king before you wrote your first blog post, and you will be one after you publish your last tweet.
Who knows the wondrous unheard melody that Sting cooed to his daughter as he rocked her to sleep. Our lonely journeyman may enjoy the hustle and bustle of Time Square just as much as the little street I found him wandering on.
You touched us Mike, so take a bow.
We will be here when you return. And if you don't,
That's OK too!
This morning I crawled into the car at five AM to make the lonely trip to the hospital. As I turned off my block and onto a larger street, I was again struck by a solitary figure. He had a backpack, shorts, and a large brimmed hat. He walked in the middle of the empty street, and as I passed I caught a glimpse of his face. He was staring toward the sunrise with his hat in his hand, and a satisfied smile on his lips.
*
The healthcare social media community was stunned to find this week that one of our most respected and stalwart leaders has decided to sign off. @drmikesevilla has made the personal decision to withdraw from social media. In a series of raw posts on his blog this week, he enumerates the uncertainty and frustration many of us have felt over the years. It does not serve to reiterate. You can read his posts here.
I feel a real connection to Mike Sevilla. We started blogging at the exact same time in 2006. I read some of his very first blog posts and he mine. For years now, I have watched in envy and joy to see his meteoric rise. In many ways, I often felt that my social media destiny was more akin to the lone journeyman on the empty road smiling quietly in the sun. And yes, Mike was more like Sting, belting it out for crowds of adoring fans.
Only with time, have I realized that actually, we share in the fact that both of our paths have been littered with both very public and private moments.
We ask ourselves if we are relevant, we shout in the echo chamber, and then we wait for the ether to confirm or deny our deep held suspicions.
The mistake is expecting social media to be a kingmaker.
Mike, you were a king before you wrote your first blog post, and you will be one after you publish your last tweet.
Who knows the wondrous unheard melody that Sting cooed to his daughter as he rocked her to sleep. Our lonely journeyman may enjoy the hustle and bustle of Time Square just as much as the little street I found him wandering on.
You touched us Mike, so take a bow.
We will be here when you return. And if you don't,
That's OK too!
Wednesday, June 5, 2013
A Unified Voice
Many ask of our profession.
Are you knight or knave?
The supposition, that there exists a dichotomy of options for the current physician, is a false one. Likely we are a little bit of both, and many shades in between. The maddening belief that the future of our healthcare system depends on this delineation is preposterous. I would more aptly characterize us as pawns.
The time for change has come.
After patiently listening to my rants and raves, my readers are starting to wonder if I have any solutions for the problems I so frequently call to attention. I have many thoughts, and a few suggestions for a path forward.
Change, I fear, will only lead to debacle if left in the hands of politicians, economists, and administrators. Our current state of misery stems from such loss of control. We didn't enter this profession to care for the economy of a nation, we would much rather focus on the well being of each and every one of it's members. Yet along with our brother and sister care providers, we are the primary driver and product of the system. Without us, the health of this nation falls to it's knees.
Whether knight, knave, or pawn, no soldier would enter battle without a strong suite of armour. Yes, my fellow physicians, it's time we banded together to protect ourselves from the fall out of this massive system makeover. This in no way changes our commitment to our patients.
As conscientious physicians actively engaged in the care of our community, I see no way forward other then the en masse rejection of the following economically wastefull and time consuming entities:
ICD-10
CPT
Coding and Compliance
Meaningful Use
Face to face evaluations
HIPAA
By abolishing the above policies, billions of dollars of waste could be cleansed from the system. Make billing easy and straight forward. Each visit could be either low, moderate, or high complexity. Submission should be in a centralized, simplified, form that should not require lavish amounts of time or billing professionals. How much would medicare save if it didn't have to process so many million complex claims?
A universal electronic medical record that houses clinical notes, labs, and radiology is all that's necessary. The bells and whistles add very little. Don't make physicians slaves to big data by ensnaring them in an overly complex reporting system.
HIPAA is too complicated and costly, and needs to be converted to common sense privacy laws that aren't so dangerous and prohibitive.
I could go on, but these are a few common sense suggestions that would help the system greatly without detracting from clinical care.
Unfortunately, unless physicians learn how to use a unified voice, the likelihood for substantial change is minimal.
Are you knight or knave?
The supposition, that there exists a dichotomy of options for the current physician, is a false one. Likely we are a little bit of both, and many shades in between. The maddening belief that the future of our healthcare system depends on this delineation is preposterous. I would more aptly characterize us as pawns.
The time for change has come.
After patiently listening to my rants and raves, my readers are starting to wonder if I have any solutions for the problems I so frequently call to attention. I have many thoughts, and a few suggestions for a path forward.
Change, I fear, will only lead to debacle if left in the hands of politicians, economists, and administrators. Our current state of misery stems from such loss of control. We didn't enter this profession to care for the economy of a nation, we would much rather focus on the well being of each and every one of it's members. Yet along with our brother and sister care providers, we are the primary driver and product of the system. Without us, the health of this nation falls to it's knees.
Whether knight, knave, or pawn, no soldier would enter battle without a strong suite of armour. Yes, my fellow physicians, it's time we banded together to protect ourselves from the fall out of this massive system makeover. This in no way changes our commitment to our patients.
As conscientious physicians actively engaged in the care of our community, I see no way forward other then the en masse rejection of the following economically wastefull and time consuming entities:
ICD-10
CPT
Coding and Compliance
Meaningful Use
Face to face evaluations
HIPAA
By abolishing the above policies, billions of dollars of waste could be cleansed from the system. Make billing easy and straight forward. Each visit could be either low, moderate, or high complexity. Submission should be in a centralized, simplified, form that should not require lavish amounts of time or billing professionals. How much would medicare save if it didn't have to process so many million complex claims?
A universal electronic medical record that houses clinical notes, labs, and radiology is all that's necessary. The bells and whistles add very little. Don't make physicians slaves to big data by ensnaring them in an overly complex reporting system.
HIPAA is too complicated and costly, and needs to be converted to common sense privacy laws that aren't so dangerous and prohibitive.
I could go on, but these are a few common sense suggestions that would help the system greatly without detracting from clinical care.
Unfortunately, unless physicians learn how to use a unified voice, the likelihood for substantial change is minimal.
Monday, June 3, 2013
Picked To The Bone
My first instinct was to yell into the phone as loudly as possible.
Run away, run away while you still have time.
But I suspected that the medical student on the the other side of the mobile would have been traumatized. She was just trying to find an attending to shadow. How was she supposed to know that at that exact moment the nursing home administrator had pulled out thousands of computer generated order sheets. Each bearing my hand written signature but apparently now needed to be dated. For ten years I had signed these documents without dating them. But all the sudden some distant regulation had changed, and I was on the hook.
Certainly annoying, but no big deal. At least, no big deal unless taken in context of the rest of my day. It started at 6AM with a phone call from the nursing home announcing a skin tear.
Sorry to wake you doc, we are following the wound care protocol, but its regulations, you know!
Then there was the discharge from the hospital. After seeing the patient and documenting appropriately, a new litany of computer/paperwork: med-reconciliation, continuity of care form, discharge instructions, and a face to face eval.
The office was no better. The papers on my desk had stacked up over the last twenty four hours. I plowed through the hand written narcotic scripts, assisted living history and physical forms, duplicate death certificates, FMLA, and disability questionaires. Of course, the power wheel chair application for my paraplegic patient was denied because I forgot to strike a pertinent negative from the review of systems.
All of this before seeing my first patient and contending with the futility of meaningful use and all those pointless clicks.
The primary care physician is being slowly picked to the bone.
Better to not say a word to the medical student.
Let her shadow me. The facts will speak for themselves.
Another budding radiologist/dermatologist/allergist in the making.
Run away, run away while you still have time.
But I suspected that the medical student on the the other side of the mobile would have been traumatized. She was just trying to find an attending to shadow. How was she supposed to know that at that exact moment the nursing home administrator had pulled out thousands of computer generated order sheets. Each bearing my hand written signature but apparently now needed to be dated. For ten years I had signed these documents without dating them. But all the sudden some distant regulation had changed, and I was on the hook.
Certainly annoying, but no big deal. At least, no big deal unless taken in context of the rest of my day. It started at 6AM with a phone call from the nursing home announcing a skin tear.
Sorry to wake you doc, we are following the wound care protocol, but its regulations, you know!
Then there was the discharge from the hospital. After seeing the patient and documenting appropriately, a new litany of computer/paperwork: med-reconciliation, continuity of care form, discharge instructions, and a face to face eval.
The office was no better. The papers on my desk had stacked up over the last twenty four hours. I plowed through the hand written narcotic scripts, assisted living history and physical forms, duplicate death certificates, FMLA, and disability questionaires. Of course, the power wheel chair application for my paraplegic patient was denied because I forgot to strike a pertinent negative from the review of systems.
All of this before seeing my first patient and contending with the futility of meaningful use and all those pointless clicks.
The primary care physician is being slowly picked to the bone.
Better to not say a word to the medical student.
Let her shadow me. The facts will speak for themselves.
Another budding radiologist/dermatologist/allergist in the making.
Thursday, May 30, 2013
The Fallacy Of Big Medicine
If you listen to the pundits, the future of medicine is big: big medicine, big data. And indeed the healthcare policy of our nation is couched in the promise of what is to come. Many dictates of the accountable care act focus on the ability to aggregate and consume a variety of inputs. ICD-10, EMRs, and meaningful use all tie nicely into a beautiful computational orgy.
Big data, however, has it drawbacks. One wonders if in usual fashion, politicians and pundits will do more harm then good.
Correlation and Causation
There is a hierarchy in medical data. Every clinician knows that prospective, randomized, double blind studies are the gold standard. The reason why, is that lesser models (retrospective and case study), often are only able to show correlation. Time and time again, we find that clinical decisions based on correlation are faulty. High homocysteine levels are associated with coronary artery disease but bringing them down with folic acid can be harmful. Poor dental health may be related to cardiac disease, but good hygiene has little effect on the risk of heart attack. In a world where the LDL and HDL hypotheses are quickly being disproven, one loses a taste for relying on such logic.
Yet, big data is clearly a correlational model. One can only compare it to the weakest forms of evidence (case control, open label). There is no ability to use it in a prospective randomized manner.
Poor studies lead to poor medicine.
Period.
Garbage In, Garbage Out
I am not a big fan of meta-analysis. The reason why, is often the bias of the investigator clouds the results. If you want certain answers, you ask certain questions. Inclusion criteria can be tricky and bend to the will of those crunching the numbers.
Big data suffers from the same fundamental issues. Who knows the political pressures that will be placed on scientists. If you don't get the answer you want, maybe you have to ask the question differently, query the database more delicately.
Anyone can produce results, but will they be meaningful.
Faulty Inputs
For years scientists have relied on death certificates to understand causes of death in America. But as almost any signer of such documents knows, they are often completed in a hurried, haphazard way. As a physician, I have no reason to care if the cause of death is correct. Often, in fact, I don't even know the answer. It's just another paper to fill out: cardiovascular collapse (whatever that means). A grand majority of times when I review these documents as a medical expert, the cause of death on the certificate is inaccurate.
Big data relies heavily on ICD-9 and CPT codes. Providers often manipulate these codes, however, for a variety of reasons. Want the venous doppler to be covered, say the patient has a DVT (of course you don't know yet because you haven't done the test). Want the blood tests to be paid for by insurance, say the patient has fatigue. The EMR doesn't have a code the suitably fits the situation, just use another, who cares if it's not accurate?
Most of the time these data inputs have no real meaning to the clinician and thus only receive a passing thought. They are another hurdle to providing care, they are to be dispensed with as quickly as possible.
Keeping Our Eye On The Ball
The great task of big data is falling squarely on the shoulders of overburdened clinicians.
ICD-10, CPT, EMR, Meaningful Use, PQRI
Inputting all this data takes huge amounts of time, time that is being taken away from patient care. Years of practice and training has formed clinicians who strive towards perfection. These distractions destroy our attempts at mastery.
No one would think of asking the conductor of a symphony to also collect tickets at the front door in the middle of a performance.
What is gained in knowledge with big data, is lost many times over in faulty, distracted, and poor face to face care.
In Conclusion
We are left with one basic question.
Do we want big medicine, or good medicine?
I'm not sure we can have both.
Big data, however, has it drawbacks. One wonders if in usual fashion, politicians and pundits will do more harm then good.
Correlation and Causation
There is a hierarchy in medical data. Every clinician knows that prospective, randomized, double blind studies are the gold standard. The reason why, is that lesser models (retrospective and case study), often are only able to show correlation. Time and time again, we find that clinical decisions based on correlation are faulty. High homocysteine levels are associated with coronary artery disease but bringing them down with folic acid can be harmful. Poor dental health may be related to cardiac disease, but good hygiene has little effect on the risk of heart attack. In a world where the LDL and HDL hypotheses are quickly being disproven, one loses a taste for relying on such logic.
Yet, big data is clearly a correlational model. One can only compare it to the weakest forms of evidence (case control, open label). There is no ability to use it in a prospective randomized manner.
Poor studies lead to poor medicine.
Period.
Garbage In, Garbage Out
I am not a big fan of meta-analysis. The reason why, is often the bias of the investigator clouds the results. If you want certain answers, you ask certain questions. Inclusion criteria can be tricky and bend to the will of those crunching the numbers.
Big data suffers from the same fundamental issues. Who knows the political pressures that will be placed on scientists. If you don't get the answer you want, maybe you have to ask the question differently, query the database more delicately.
Anyone can produce results, but will they be meaningful.
Faulty Inputs
For years scientists have relied on death certificates to understand causes of death in America. But as almost any signer of such documents knows, they are often completed in a hurried, haphazard way. As a physician, I have no reason to care if the cause of death is correct. Often, in fact, I don't even know the answer. It's just another paper to fill out: cardiovascular collapse (whatever that means). A grand majority of times when I review these documents as a medical expert, the cause of death on the certificate is inaccurate.
Big data relies heavily on ICD-9 and CPT codes. Providers often manipulate these codes, however, for a variety of reasons. Want the venous doppler to be covered, say the patient has a DVT (of course you don't know yet because you haven't done the test). Want the blood tests to be paid for by insurance, say the patient has fatigue. The EMR doesn't have a code the suitably fits the situation, just use another, who cares if it's not accurate?
Most of the time these data inputs have no real meaning to the clinician and thus only receive a passing thought. They are another hurdle to providing care, they are to be dispensed with as quickly as possible.
Keeping Our Eye On The Ball
The great task of big data is falling squarely on the shoulders of overburdened clinicians.
ICD-10, CPT, EMR, Meaningful Use, PQRI
Inputting all this data takes huge amounts of time, time that is being taken away from patient care. Years of practice and training has formed clinicians who strive towards perfection. These distractions destroy our attempts at mastery.
No one would think of asking the conductor of a symphony to also collect tickets at the front door in the middle of a performance.
What is gained in knowledge with big data, is lost many times over in faulty, distracted, and poor face to face care.
In Conclusion
We are left with one basic question.
Do we want big medicine, or good medicine?
I'm not sure we can have both.
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Do Not Pass Go
I'll give you three nights in the hospital for a a hundred days in skilled nursing.
How bout a lung mass and a go directly to hospice minus room and board?
Oh... your stay was deemed an observation, do not pass go, do not collect a hundred dollars!
I sometimes don't know whether I'm doctoring or playing some insane nonsensical board game. The complexities of sickness and healing have been eclipsed by the administrative nightmare of our payment system. Providers no longer stress over diagnosis and treatment, we huddle with social workers and agonize over disposition. Families no longer sit at their loved one's bedside and hunker down stubbornly in the face of the ravages of disease, instead they pace lonely hallways hoping to bypass the phone tree and speak to an actual person at the insurance company.
Try as we may to manage our patients pathophysiology and psychology, we now attempt to manage their checkbooks. Not only the finances of our patients, but the economic well being of a nation is being placed at our doorstep.
We are not accountants. We are not economists.
We neither created nor profited from the distorted system that we loosely call healthcare (to the extent that others have). Most of the time, we slunk around the edges trying to squeeze the fat to create a few drops of precious water for the parched.
Let the doctors doctor.
For God's Sake, that's what we were trained for.
How bout a lung mass and a go directly to hospice minus room and board?
Oh... your stay was deemed an observation, do not pass go, do not collect a hundred dollars!
I sometimes don't know whether I'm doctoring or playing some insane nonsensical board game. The complexities of sickness and healing have been eclipsed by the administrative nightmare of our payment system. Providers no longer stress over diagnosis and treatment, we huddle with social workers and agonize over disposition. Families no longer sit at their loved one's bedside and hunker down stubbornly in the face of the ravages of disease, instead they pace lonely hallways hoping to bypass the phone tree and speak to an actual person at the insurance company.
Try as we may to manage our patients pathophysiology and psychology, we now attempt to manage their checkbooks. Not only the finances of our patients, but the economic well being of a nation is being placed at our doorstep.
We are not accountants. We are not economists.
We neither created nor profited from the distorted system that we loosely call healthcare (to the extent that others have). Most of the time, we slunk around the edges trying to squeeze the fat to create a few drops of precious water for the parched.
Let the doctors doctor.
For God's Sake, that's what we were trained for.
Saturday, May 25, 2013
I Should Have
There's something strangely heart breaking in the You Should'ves:
You should've treated the infection sooner!
You should've made the diagnosis faster!
You should've done more!
These words uttered accusingly from a patient's mouth can cut to the core of a physician. We've all been there. No matter how rigorous your skills and training, there will be many bad outcomes. Unfortunately, from time to time, a patient or family will point the finger directly at you.
I don't blame them. How else to deal with death, destruction, and illness. Some turn inward. Some point to the heavens and ask why. And some look you in the eye and spit venom in your direction.
I always try to step back and appraise the situation as objectively as possible. I am not infallible. Humans make human mistakes. But often, I find, that bad things happen without adequate explanation. We are both wondrous machines with infinite intricacy and ticking time bombs all at the same time. If I thought accepting the burden of blame would ease the suffering, I would throw myself under the bus without question.
We all know this won't undue that which has already been done.
Yet, there is a menace, even more devastating to the psyche of those who have taken such sacred oaths. I am referring to none other then the havoc wreaked by the I should'ves. Every physician I know is haunted by the times when their skill fell just a little short, their insight was lacking, or their timing was imperfect.
These are the cases that make you toss and turn through sleepless nights. These are the faces you carry year after year.
So you walk into the room of the grieving patient or family. You look these people who love and trust you in the eye, and you tell them of your shortcomings. Mostly they shake their heads and forgive you quickly. It's of little consequence that you shamefully accept the comfort they bestow on you. You will not escape unscathed.
Over the coming months and years,
the wounds you inflict on yourself will do nothing but fester.
You should've treated the infection sooner!
You should've made the diagnosis faster!
You should've done more!
These words uttered accusingly from a patient's mouth can cut to the core of a physician. We've all been there. No matter how rigorous your skills and training, there will be many bad outcomes. Unfortunately, from time to time, a patient or family will point the finger directly at you.
I don't blame them. How else to deal with death, destruction, and illness. Some turn inward. Some point to the heavens and ask why. And some look you in the eye and spit venom in your direction.
I always try to step back and appraise the situation as objectively as possible. I am not infallible. Humans make human mistakes. But often, I find, that bad things happen without adequate explanation. We are both wondrous machines with infinite intricacy and ticking time bombs all at the same time. If I thought accepting the burden of blame would ease the suffering, I would throw myself under the bus without question.
We all know this won't undue that which has already been done.
Yet, there is a menace, even more devastating to the psyche of those who have taken such sacred oaths. I am referring to none other then the havoc wreaked by the I should'ves. Every physician I know is haunted by the times when their skill fell just a little short, their insight was lacking, or their timing was imperfect.
These are the cases that make you toss and turn through sleepless nights. These are the faces you carry year after year.
So you walk into the room of the grieving patient or family. You look these people who love and trust you in the eye, and you tell them of your shortcomings. Mostly they shake their heads and forgive you quickly. It's of little consequence that you shamefully accept the comfort they bestow on you. You will not escape unscathed.
Over the coming months and years,
the wounds you inflict on yourself will do nothing but fester.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)