Logo

    202. How Many Doctors Does It Take to Start a Healthcare Revolution?

    en-usApril 09, 2015
    How do TV portrayals affect patient perceptions of treatment?
    What major findings came from the Oregon Health Insurance Experiment?
    Why are doctors portrayed as fallible on television?
    What does the study by Jaina reveal about invasive procedures?
    How does healthcare spending impact the current system's sustainability?

    • TV's Influence on Perceptions of Medical Treatment and OutcomesTV portrays patients dying more frequently and with more dramatic conditions, but doctors are now shown as fallible. Real-world issues like the Oregon Health Insurance Experiment and superutilizers require effective healthcare interventions.

      Our perceptions of medical treatment and outcomes can be significantly influenced by what we see on TV. A study by Israeli professor Amir Hitzroney and his students found that patients on TV die much more frequently than in real life, and their medical conditions are often more dramatic. However, doctors on TV are now portrayed as making mistakes and being fallible, reflecting the reality of the medical profession. Meanwhile, real-world medical issues like the Oregon Health Insurance Experiment and superutilizers highlight the need for more effective healthcare interventions. Despite the increasing use of randomized controlled trials, the overall healthcare system remains a complex issue that requires ongoing exploration and improvement.

    • Impact of Doctor Absence on Patient Outcomes during Cardiology ConferencesAbsence of cardiologists during conferences may lead to higher mortality rates for patients with acute conditions, emphasizing the need for adequate coverage during professional development events.

      The absence of doctors at major conferences may lead to worse health outcomes for patients with acute conditions, particularly in the field of cardiology. Researchers, including Anupam Jain, an assistant professor of healthcare policy and medicine at Harvard Medical School, analyzed Medicare data from a 10-year period to compare patient outcomes during cardiology conferences and the weeks before and after. They found that patients admitted during the conferences had higher mortality rates, suggesting that the absence of cardiologists may negatively impact patient care. This highlights the importance of ensuring adequate coverage during times when doctors are away for professional development.

    • Surprising Benefit of Cardiology Conferences in Teaching HospitalsDespite the absence of cardiologists during conferences, patients in teaching hospitals had better outcomes for high-risk cardiac arrest and heart failure cases, with lower mortality rates compared to other times.

      The absence of cardiologists during conferences at teaching hospitals paradoxically leads to better patient outcomes for high-risk patients with cardiac arrest or heart failure. This was discovered through an analysis of Medicare data covering tens of thousands of hospitalizations for these conditions over a decade. The researchers, led by Dr. Jaina, initially assumed that the decreased availability of doctors would worsen outcomes. However, they found that patients admitted during conferences had lower mortality rates compared to those admitted before or after. For instance, the mortality rate for patients with cardiac arrest was around 17-18% during conferences compared to 25% otherwise. This effect was more pronounced in teaching hospitals, where patients were 10 percentage points more likely to survive during a cardiology conference for cardiac arrest and 8 percentage points more likely to survive for high-risk heart failure. This finding challenges the conventional wisdom that the presence of top specialists is always necessary for optimal patient care. However, it's important to note that this effect is not as significant as the benefits of standard cardiology treatments like beta blockers, statins, aspirin, and blood thinners, which can reduce mortality by about 25-30%.

    • Reduction in angioplasty and stenting during cardiology conferencesDespite fewer invasive procedures during conferences, there's no difference in heart attack mortality, emphasizing the importance of careful decision-making in medical interventions.

      During cardiology conferences, there is a significant reduction in rates of angioplasty and stenting procedures by nearly a third, yet there is no difference in mortality for heart attack patients. This finding challenges the common belief that more invasive procedures equate to better health outcomes. The study's author, Jaina, admits that the exact cause is unknown but suspects that doctors who stay behind during conferences may be more cautious and making different clinical decisions, potentially improving outcomes for those least likely to benefit. The study highlights the importance of considering the potential risks and benefits of invasive procedures and the role of doctors' judgement in making informed decisions.

    • No Significant Increase in Mortality During Cardiology ConferencesStudy finds no cause-and-effect relationship between healthcare conferences and mortality, but more research is needed to understand why this phenomenon occurs and ensure lower risk at all times.

      The relationship between healthcare conferences and patient outcomes is complex and not black and white. A study found that there is no significant increase in mortality during cardiology conferences, but it's unclear if this is due to the absence of high-risk doctors or the presence of better coverage. The American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association have responded, stating that there is no cause-and-effect relationship and that the study should be viewed as a calendar analysis. It's important to note that the findings do not suggest a change in clinical practice. The study's authors suggest that further research is needed to understand why this phenomenon occurs and how it can be addressed to ensure lower risk at all times. Similar research has not been conducted on mental health professionals, but it's an interesting area for exploration.

    • The July Effect and Its Impact on Healthcare OutcomesThe July Effect suggests worse healthcare outcomes for patients admitted during certain times of the year, possibly due to clinical decisions influenced by factors like risk assessment, resource availability, and economics.

      The quality of healthcare outcomes can be influenced by various factors beyond just clinical decisions. The July effect, which suggests worse outcomes for patients hospitalized during certain times of the year, is a good example. While the effect is small for most patients, it can be significant for those with severe conditions. The contradiction lies in the clinical decisions being made, possibly due to differences in risk assessment and availability of resources. Economics may also play a role, as the high demand for healthcare services in the US, despite being the most expensive healthcare system globally, can lead to overuse of procedures. However, it's essential to consider the underlying factors shaping physicians' decisions, such as their training, risk aversion, and past experiences, which can influence their clinical practice significantly.

    • Fewer deaths at medical conferencesA study found fewer deaths during major medical conferences, questioning if less access to technology and slower approach to care could lead to better outcomes

      Many routine practices in healthcare may have little evidence to support them, and the training of doctors to be critical thinkers is a deep-rooted issue. A study published in the JAMA Journal Internal Medicine found that during major medical conferences, there were actually fewer deaths. This goes against the common assumption that less access to a physician would lead to more deaths. However, it's important to note that this association does not prove causation. The findings make us question if sometimes, less access to technology and a slower approach to care could potentially lead to better outcomes. The study has sparked curiosity among cardiologists, leaving some wondering if it might be beneficial for doctors to stay at conferences to improve hospital care.

    • Healthcare prioritizes growth and profit over patient careHealthcare system needs to prioritize patient care and communication, and invest in generating and implementing evidence-based medicine.

      The current healthcare business model prioritizes growth and profit over quality patient care and communication. This creates an incentive structure that discourages doctors from spending time with patients, leading to misunderstandings, safety errors, and medication confusion. Additionally, the generation and implementation of evidence-based medicine is a complex and lengthy process, with a significant amount of information overload for doctors. Despite the potential benefits of evidence-based medicine, many practices in healthcare are based on habit rather than evidence. The healthcare system needs to shift its focus towards prioritizing patient care and communication, as well as investing in generating and implementing evidence-based medicine.

    • The lack of critical thinking skills among physiciansDoctors need to be trained not only in interpreting evidence but also in effective communication skills to make informed decisions and convey important information to patients in a clear and unbiased manner.

      The current state of medical education and practice is facing a significant issue due to the lack of critical thinking skills and understanding of scientific methods among physicians. This problem can be traced back to the traditional Greek pedagogy of memorization and fealty to authority, which has persisted in medical training. As a result, doctors are not adequately equipped to interpret vast amounts of data and communicate complex concepts like risk to patients. This can lead to misunderstandings and misinterpretations, as exemplified by the ongoing debate over mammograms for women aged 40 to 50. The consequences of this issue reach far back in medical history, with examples such as the delayed acceptance of hand washing and the continued use of non-evidence based treatments. To address this, it's essential to not only train doctors in interpreting evidence but also in effective communication skills. This will enable them to make informed decisions and convey important information to their patients in a clear and unbiased manner.

    • Market inefficiencies and overcapacity in healthcareThe healthcare system's unsustainability stems from asymmetries of knowledge, leading to unprofitability for smaller providers and an oversupply of hospital beds. This brittle system relies heavily on public funding, making reform or collapse a significant financial and political challenge.

      The current healthcare system, as described in the discussion, is unsustainable due to market inefficiencies and overcapacity. These issues are rooted in asymmetries of knowledge, where customers lack perfect price and product knowledge, leading to unprofitability for smaller providers and an oversupply of hospital beds. The system's brittleness and over-reliance on public funding make it vulnerable to collapse, with potential consequences for the public and the economy. A shift in public sentiment and preferences could lead to significant changes in the aging medical care and dying institutions. However, with healthcare spending at around 20% of GDP, the financial and political implications of collapsing or reforming the system are substantial.

    • The healthcare system's complexity and eroding inputs may lead to its downfallThe healthcare system's complexity and the erosion of its sustaining inputs, including energy, money, and goodwill, may result in its eventual collapse, drawing comparisons to industries disrupted by America.

      Complex systems, such as the healthcare system, can undergo unpredictable shifts when the inputs that sustain them are undermined. These inputs include energy, money, and goodwill. The healthcare system's complexity and increasing burdens on individuals are eroding these inputs, leading to growing anger and potential collapse. The speaker suggests that America, known for disrupting industries, may eventually let go of the healthcare system when it no longer serves its original purposes. The healthcare system's increasing costs and the emotional toll it takes on individuals are significant concerns. The speaker also shares a personal anecdote about how winning a valuable diamond led to trouble, drawing a parallel to the potential consequences of holding on to a flawed system. In essence, the healthcare system's complexity and the erosion of its sustaining inputs may lead to its eventual downfall.

    Was this summary helpful?

    Recent Episodes from Freakonomics Radio

    603. Did the N.F.L. Solve Diversity Hiring? (Part 1)

    603. Did the N.F.L. Solve Diversity Hiring? (Part 1)

    The biggest sports league in history had a problem: While most of its players were Black, almost none of its head coaches were. So the N.F.L. launched a hiring policy called the Rooney Rule. In the first episode of a two-part series, we look at how the rule succeeded — until it failed.

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 19, 2024

    EXTRA: In Praise of Maintenance (Update)

    EXTRA: In Praise of Maintenance (Update)

    We revisit an episode from 2016 that asks: Has our culture’s obsession with innovation led us to neglect the fact that things also need to be taken care of? 

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Martin Casado, general partner at Andreessen Horowitz.
      • Ruth Schwartz Cowan, professor emerita of history and sociology of science at University of Pennsylvania.
      • Edward Glaeser, professor of economics at Harvard University.
      • Chris Lacinak, founder and president of AVPreserve.
      • Andrew Russell, provost of SUNY Polytechnic Institute.
      • Lawrence Summers, professor and president emeritus of Harvard University; former Secretary of the Treasury and former director of the National Economic Council.
      • Lee Vinsel, professor of science, technology, and society at Virginia Tech.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 16, 2024

    602. Is Screen Time as Poisonous as We Think?

    602. Is Screen Time as Poisonous as We Think?

    Young people have been reporting a sharp rise in anxiety and depression. This maps neatly onto the global rise of the smartphone. Some researchers are convinced that one is causing the other. But how strong is the evidence?

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 12, 2024

    601. Multitasking Doesn’t Work. So Why Do We Keep Trying?

    601. Multitasking Doesn’t Work. So Why Do We Keep Trying?

    Only a tiny number of “supertaskers” are capable of doing two things at once. The rest of us are just making ourselves miserable, and less productive. How can we put the — hang on a second, I've just got to get this.


    Come see Stephen Dubner live! 

    “A Questionable Evening: A strategic interrogation from two people who ask questions for a living,” featuring Stephen Dubner and PJ Vogt from Search Engine.

    Thursday, Sept. 26th, at the Bell House in Brooklyn, NY. 

    https://www.eventbrite.com/e/a-questionable-evening-evening-with-stephen-dubner-and-pj-vogt-tickets-1002544747327

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Olivia Grace, senior product manager at Slack.
      • Gloria Mark, professor of computer science at the University of California, Irvine.
      • David Strayer, professor of cognition and neural science at the University of Utah.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 05, 2024

    What Is the Future of College — and Does It Have Room for Men? (Update)

    What Is the Future of College — and Does It Have Room for Men? (Update)

    Educators and economists tell us all the reasons college enrollment has been dropping, especially for men, and how to stop the bleeding. (Part 3 of our series from 2022, “Freakonomics Radio Goes Back to School.”)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Zachary Bleemer, assistant professor of economics at Princeton University and faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
      • D'Wayne Edwards, founder and President of Pensole Lewis College.
      • Catharine Hill, former president of Vassar College; trustee at Yale University; and managing director at Ithaka S+R.
      • Pano Kanelos, founding president of the University of Austin.
      • Amalia Miller, professor of economics at the University of Virginia.
      • Donald Ruff, president and C.E.O. of the Eagle Academy Foundation.
      • Morton Schapiro, professor of economics and former president of Northwestern University.
      • Ruth Simmons, former president of Smith College, Brown University, and Prairie View A&M University.
      • Miguel Urquiola, professor of economics at Columbia University.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 29, 2024

    EXTRA: Why Quitting Is Usually Worth It

    EXTRA: Why Quitting Is Usually Worth It

    Stephen Dubner appears as a guest on Fail Better, a new podcast hosted by David Duchovny. The two of them trade stories about failure, and ponder the lessons that success could never teach.

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 26, 2024

    The University of Impossible-to-Get-Into (Update)

    The University of Impossible-to-Get-Into (Update)

    America’s top colleges are facing record demand. So why don’t they increase supply? (Part 2 of our series from 2022, “Freakonomics Radio Goes Back to School.”)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Peter Blair, professor of education at Harvard University and faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
      • Zachary Bleemer, assistant professor of economics at Princeton University and faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
      • Amalia Miller, professor of economics at the University of Virginia.
      • Morton Schapiro, professor of economics and former president of Northwestern University.
      • Miguel Urquiola, professor of economics at Columbia University.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 22, 2024

    What Exactly Is College For? (Update)

    What Exactly Is College For? (Update)

    We think of them as intellectual enclaves and the surest route to a better life. But U.S. colleges also operate like firms, trying to differentiate their products to win market share and prestige points. In the first episode of a special series originally published in 2022, we ask what our chaotic system gets right — and wrong. (Part 1 of “Freakonomics Radio Goes Back to School.”)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Peter Blair, faculty research Fellow of the National Bureau of Economic Research and professor of education at Harvard University.
      • Catharine Hill, former president of Vassar College; trustee at Yale University; and managing director at Ithaka S+R.
      • Morton Schapiro, professor of economics and former president of Northwestern University.
      • Ruth Simmons, former president of Smith College, Brown University, and Prairie View A&M University.
      • Miguel Urquiola, professor of economics at Columbia University.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 15, 2024

    EXTRA: Here’s Why You’re Not an Elite Athlete (Update)

    EXTRA: Here’s Why You’re Not an Elite Athlete (Update)

    There are a lot of factors that go into greatness, many of which are not obvious. As the Olympics come to a close, we revisit a 2018 episode in which top athletes from a variety of sports tell us how they made it, and what they sacrificed.

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 12, 2024

    600. “If We’re All in It for Ourselves, Who Are We?”

    600. “If We’re All in It for Ourselves, Who Are We?”

    Tania Tetlow, a former federal prosecutor and now the president of Fordham University, thinks the modern campus could use a dose of old-fashioned values.

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 08, 2024

    Related Episodes

    The COVID-19 Shot: Turbo Cancers and Immune System Issues

    The COVID-19 Shot: Turbo Cancers and Immune System Issues

    Join us as Dr. Odell delves into the detrimental immunological effects of the COVID-19 shot, specifically Vaccine Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (VAIDS) in children, alarming increases in turbo cancers, and rises in all-cause mortality rates. He references pathologists and other scientists and offers hypotheses on how the inoculations may be causing immune system dysregulations. Lastly, he lists supplements you can take to mitigate the detrimental effects of these inoculations.

    ChatGPT: Revolutionizing Healthcare with Dr. Robert Pearl | Why every physician will be using this technology to improve medical care | Redefining Society Podcast with Marco Ciappelli

    ChatGPT: Revolutionizing Healthcare with Dr. Robert Pearl | Why every physician will be using this technology to improve medical care | Redefining Society Podcast with Marco Ciappelli

    Guest: Dr. Robert Pearl

    On Linkedin | https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-pearl-m-d-32427b98/

    On Twitter | https://twitter.com/RobertPearlMD

    Host: Marco Ciappelli, Co-Founder at ITSPmagazine [@ITSPmagazine] and Host of Redefining Society Podcast

    On ITSPmagazine | https://www.itspmagazine.com/itspmagazine-podcast-radio-hosts/marco-ciappelli
    _____________________________

    This Episode’s Sponsors

    BlackCloak 👉 https://itspm.ag/itspbcweb

    Bugcrowd 👉 https://itspm.ag/itspbgcweb

    Devo 👉 https://itspm.ag/itspdvweb

    _____________________________

    Episode Introduction

    Welcome to another episode of the Redefining Society podcast with Marco Ciappelli. Today's guest is Dr. Robert Pearl, a professor at Stanford and former CEO at Kaiser Permanente. The topic of discussion is ChatGPT, a technology that has recently made waves in the healthcare industry. Dr. Pearl explains that ChatGPT is a generative pre-trained transformer, which means that it has access to vast amounts of pre-loaded information and can apply it to generate the next word or idea. He compares it to what doctors do when they learn a lot of facts and generate a diagnosis and treatment plan for their patients.

    Marco and Dr. Pearl discuss the potential applications of ChatGPT in healthcare and how it can help doctors find diagnoses they might have missed otherwise. While it's still in its early stages, ChatGPT has shown promise in improving patient care by allowing doctors to double-check their thinking and find the most problematic complications that could arise.

    The conversation also touches on the challenges of adopting new technologies in the medical profession. Dr. Pearl notes that while it's important to embrace new technologies, blindly following them is not the solution. He highlights the importance of doctors maintaining their expertise and knowledge while using new technologies to supplement their work.

    As the conversation continues, the possibilities of ChatGPT become more apparent. Medical knowledge doubles every 73 days, and it's difficult for any human to keep up with that pace. ChatGPT, on the other hand, has the potential to become exponentially more powerful with each passing year, meaning that the tool doctors and patients will have in a decade or two will be significantly more advanced than what we have today.

    If you're interested in learning more about ChatGPT and its potential applications in healthcare, then this is the podcast for you. Don't forget to share and subscribe to Redefining Society to keep up with the latest trends in technology and society.

    _____________________________

    Resources

    Dr. Pearl's Newsletter: 
    https://app.flashissue.com/newsletters/ce20648294065ec89cb69f1d6eebbb994bcb3fb0

    Dr. Pearl's Website: 
    https://robertpearlmd.com

    ____________________________

    To see and hear more Redefining Society stories on ITSPmagazine, visit:
    https://www.itspmagazine.com/redefining-society-podcast

    Watch the webcast version on-demand on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnYu0psdcllTUoWMGGQHlGVZA575VtGr9

    Are you interested in sponsoring an ITSPmagazine Channel?
    👉 https://www.itspmagazine.com/advertise-on-itspmagazine-podcast

    Definition of carcinogenic shock

    Definition of carcinogenic shock

    You can find more of our podcasts on our website: http://www.mdedge.com/podcasts

    This week in cardiology news:

    1. SCAI releases first definition of cardiogenic shock
    2. CABANA: Heart failure patients got biggest bang from AFib ablation
    3. Elderly concussion patients who used statins had lower dementia risk
    4. BMI in male teens predicts cardiomyopathy risk

    You can email the show at podcasts@mdedge.com and you can interact with us on Twitter at @MDedgeCardio

    Logo

    © 2024 Podcastworld. All rights reserved

    Stay up to date

    For any inquiries, please email us at hello@podcastworld.io