Published by
Stanford Medicine

Category

Pain

Behavioral Science, Emergency Medicine, Health Disparities, Pain, Patient Care, Pediatrics, Research

Blacks, Hispanics and low-income kids with stomach aches treated differently in ERs

Blacks, Hispanics and low-income kids with stomach aches treated differently in ERs

crying-613389_1280When a child arrives in the emergency room complaining of a stomach pain, appendicitis is the last thing you want to miss, says KT Park, MD, assistant professor of pediatrics.

“The question is, ‘Does this patient have appendicitis – yes or no?,” he said. It is the most common immediate emergency that could bring a child into the emergency room with abdominal pain. If not treated in a timely manner, the appendix can burst, leading to infection or a host of other serious complications.

But kids arrive in the emergency room complaining of stomach aches all the time; most with perfectly healthy appendices. And what if you’re a doctor who has seen seven kids with more minor stomach problems one day? It might be tricky to spot that first case of appendicitis.

Unfortunately, misdiagnosis happens more often when the pediatric patient is black, Hispanic or low-income, according to a study published today in PLOS ONE led by Park and Stanford medical student Louise Wang.

“Our goal in this study is getting the word out about abdominal pain and appendicitis and the importance of the decisions made in the emergency room,” Wang said.

The researchers analyzed national data from 2 million pediatric visits to emergency rooms between 2004 and 2011 complaining primarily of abdominal pain. They found that blacks, Hispanics and low-income children were less likely to receive imaging that could help their physicians diagnose serious conditions like appendicitis. These patients were also less likely to be admitted to the hospital, but more likely to suffer perforated appendicitis, a clue that perhaps they didn’t receive adequate treatment in time, Park said. For example, low-income blacks were 65 percent more likely to have a perforated appendix compared to other children.

The study was not able to precisely determine why these disparities exist, Wang said. “What is the driving influence of these outcomes? Are these kids being mismanaged in the emergency department, or are they presenting at a later time in a more serious condition?,” she asked.

She and Park have a few ideas, based on other findings and their personal experience. Minorities and low-income families are more likely to use the emergency room as a first-stop for more minor conditions, rather than visiting their primary care doctor or pediatrician.

“This is a very delicate topic,” Park said. “Physicians are humans and there is potentially some intuitive thinking that goes on about the probabilities of various diagnoses more common in certain patient groups, potentially leading to differences in how clinicians perceive the acuity of a patient’s status.”

Appendicitis can be tricky to diagnose, a task made even harder when patients are young and unable to clearly describe their pain, Park said.

“The psychology of physicians is an area needing further evaluation,” Park said. “We have internal biases that we often are not even aware of. We want to be objective, but it’s never a black-and-white decision making tree.”

Previously: A young child, a falling cabinet, and a Life Flight rescue, New test could lead to increase of women diagnosed with heart attack and Exploring how the Affordable Care Act has affected number of young adults visiting the ER
Photo by amandacatherine

Addiction, Aging, Chronic Disease, Pain

National survey reveals extent of Americans living with pain

National survey reveals extent of Americans living with pain

4129400323_03d17b79b0_z

Yesterday, the NIH announced a new analysis of data that examined how much pain people in America suffer. The findings, published in The Journal of Pain, were based on data from the 2012 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), an annual survey that asks a random sample of U.S. residents a wide variety of questions about their health.

The survey results are staggering: More than half of the adults in the country (126 million) had some kind of pain, minor to severe, in the three months before the survey. About 25 million had pain every day for that time frame and about 40 million suffer from severe pain. Those with the worst pain were also most likely to have worse health in general, use more health services and have more disabilities.

The survey also looked at complementary medicine approaches people take to dealing with their pain. Natural dietary supplements topped the list, followed by deep breathing and physical exercise such as yoga, tai chi or qi gong.

Joseph Briggs, director of the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health was quoted in an article about the new study in the Washington Post:

The number of people who suffer from severe and lasting pain is striking. . . This analysis adds valuable new scope to our understanding of pain … It may help shape future research, development and targeting of effective pain interventions, including complementary health approaches.

Another topic the WaPo article touched on, which we’ve written about here at Scope, is the link between chronic pain and prescription painkiller abuse:

The prevalence of chronic pain in America also lies at the root of an ongoing epidemic of prescription painkiller abuse. Since 1999, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the amount of painkillers such as oxycodone and hydrocodone sold in the United States has nearly quadrupled.

Here at Stanford, the Division of Pain Medicine is sponsoring a free back pain education day on Saturday September 13. You can find out more details here.

Previously: Assessing the opioid overdose epidemicChronic pain: Getting your head around itFinding relief from lower back pain and Stanford researchers address the complexities of chronic pain
Photo by Steven Depolo

Cancer, Clinical Trials, Dermatology, Genetics, Pain, Pediatrics, Research, Stanford News

The worst disease you’ve never heard of: Stanford researchers and patients battle EB

The worst disease you've never heard of: Stanford researchers and patients battle EB

EB patient and docsI’m often humbled by my job. Well, not the job, exactly, but the physicians, researchers, and especially patients who take the time to speak with me about their goals and passions, their triumphs and fears. Their insight helps me as I struggle to interpret what goes on here at the Stanford University School of Medicine for others across the university and even around the world.

But every once in a while, an article comes along that brings me to my (emotional) knees. My article “The Butterfly Effect” in the latest issue of Stanford Medicine magazine describes the toll of a devastating skin disease called epidermoloysis bullosa on two young men and their families, as well as the determined efforts of a dedicated team of doctors and scientists to find a treatment. As a result, Stanford recently launched the world’s first stem-cell based trial aimed at correcting the faulty gene in the skin cells of patients with a severe form of the condition, which is often called EB.

I trace the path of one family as they learn, mere hours after his birth, that their son, Garrett Spaulding, has EB, which compromises the ability of the outer layers of the to stick together during friction or pressure. Patients develop large blisters and open wounds over much of their bodies. It’s incurable, fatal, and nearly indescribably painful. Paul Khavari, MD, PhD, now the chair of Stanford’s Department of Dermatology, was a young doctor at the time newborn Garrett was admitted to Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital Stanford in 1997.

“His whole body, his skin was blistered and falling off everywhere someone had touched him,” Khavari recalls in the article. “His parents were devastated, of course, at a time that was supposed to be one of the most joyful of their lives.”

Garrett’s now 18 years old, but the disease is taking its toll.

You’ll also meet Paul Martinez, one of the first participants in Stanford’s new clinical trial. He’s 32, which makes him an old man in the EB community. Unlike many EB patients, he has finished high school and completed a college degree in business marketing with a dogged determination that makes me ashamed of my petty complaints about my minor life trials. And he’s done it without relying on the pain medications essential for most EB patients. As he explains in the article:

We don’t know what it is like to not be in pain. It’s just normal for us. […] I have a very high tolerance, and don’t take any pain medication. I cherish my mind a lot. Rather than feel like a zombie, I prefer to feel the pain and feel alive.

Continue Reading »

Addiction, Mental Health, Pain, Public Health, Technology

Student engineers unveil tamper-proof pill bottle

Student engineers unveil tamper-proof pill bottle

Pill-dispenserThe United States has been battling a prescription painkiller epidemic for years. The statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are chilling: The number of painkillers prescribed has quadrupled since 1999; more than two million people abused painkillers in 2013; every day, 44 people die from a prescription opioid overdose.

In response, faculty at the Center for Injury Research and Policy at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health issued a challenge to seniors in the university’s mechanical engineering program: build a pill bottle that would protect against theft and tampering.

One team of students came up with a design that worked so well that their team’s mentors Andrea Gielen, ScD, and Kavi Bhalla, PhD, submitted a proposal to the National Institutes of Health for further testing.

The device is about the size of a can of spray paint, much larger than the average pill bottle. It can only be opened with a special key, which pharmacists can use to refill with a month’s supply of OxyContin. A fingerprint sensor ensures only the prescribed patient can access the pills at prescribed intervals and doses. In a story on the Johns Hopkins website earlier this month, Megan Carney, one of the student engineers described how the pill dispenser works:

The device starts to work when the patient scans in his or her fingerprint. This rotates a disc, which picks up a pill from a loaded cartridge and empties it into the exit channel. The pill falls down the channel and lands on a platform where the patient can see that the pill has been dispensed. The patient then tilts the device and catches the pill in their hand.

A short video about the pill dispenser shows it in action, too. The dispenser still has to undergo additional testing, but the team hopes to bring it to market soon — and help prevent future opioid overdoses.

Previously: Unmet expectations: Testifying before Congress on the opioid abuse epidemic, The problem of prescription opioids: “An extraordinarily timely topic”, Assessing the opioid overdose epidemic, Why doctors prescribe opioids to patients they know are abusing them and Stanford addiction expert: It’s often a “subtle journey” from prescription-drug use to abuse
Photo courtesy of Johns Hopkins University

Chronic Disease, In the News, Pain, Research, Science, Stanford News

Scientific discovery could lead to treatments for chronic pancreatitis

Scientific discovery could lead to treatments for chronic pancreatitis

Pancreatitis is one of the most common gastrointestinal hospital admissions-related illness. Patients with the acute form of the disease show up at hospitals doubled over with severe abdominal pain, a swollen belly that’s tender to the touch, nausea, and vomiting.

For some patients the disease flares up then disappears. For others, it develops into an ongoing, chronic form of the disease with no known cure. Not only is it extremely painful, it also causes malnutrition and carries with it a high risk of leading to pancreatic cancer. Treatment options are pretty much limited to prescription pain killers.

This has great implication in a disease that has no active therapy with no known agents that can alter its natural devastating course

It’s known that chronic pancreatitis is marked by the uncontrolled growth of scar tissue in the pancreas known as fibrosis, which slowly destroys the organ’s ability to function. Since the pancreas is in charge of excreting enzymes to digest food, patients begin to suffer malnutrition. It’s also known that excessive alcohol consumption is the leading cause of pancreatitis but just what is happening at a molecular level to cause the fibrosis is less clear.

Now, Stanford researcher and gastroenterologist Aida Habtezion, MD, and colleagues here and at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center have published research that sheds light on what exactly is happening and could lead to treatments for the severe disease. In a story I wrote on the study, Habtezion discusses their discovery of a new molecular pathway that when blocked by an experimental pharmacological drug can slow the progression of pancreatitis in animal models and in human cells.

As Habtezion told me, her lab’s research into just how the immune cells of the pancreas behave when inflamed with pancreatitis unveiled the new pathway:

“For the first time we can show that macrophages interact with pancreatic stellate cells via a particular immune pathway, and by targeting this pathway we show a decrease in chronic pancreatitis/fibrosis progression,” she said. “This has great implication in a disease that has no active therapy with no known agents that can alter its natural devastating course.”

The hope is that researchers will now be able to develop a form of the experimental pharmacological agent used in the study to block the molecular pathway that can be given to humans. Blocking the pathway will block the scar tissue growth, and hopefully either slow the progression of the disease or reverse it altogether.

Addiction, Health Policy, Pain, Public Health

Unmet expectations: Testifying before Congress on the opioid abuse epidemic

Unmet expectations: Testifying before Congress on the opioid abuse epidemic

capitol and Rayburn - 560

My recent trip to Washington D.C. to speak before a congressional subcommittee on the problem of opioid misuse was all about unmet expectations.

First of all, I never expected to get invited to testify for the U.S. Congress. A 2012 article I wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine on the problem of doctors over-prescribing opioids to patients was picked up by Washington Post journalist Charles Lane in a piece he did, “The legal drug epidemic,” which was subsequently read by Alan Slobodin, chief investigative counsel for the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Slobodin then sent a message to my in-box asking to “discuss the opioid abuse problem.” I almost deleted it as a hoax. But Keith Humphreys, PhD, my mentor and chief of the mental health policy section in our department, assured me it was real.

Second, not really understanding how government works beyond what I learned from the animated musical cartoon “I’m Just a Bill” when I was seven years old, and being a regular reader of the New York Times, which has almost convinced me that everyone in Washington is against everyone else and nothing ever gets done, I prepared myself for the possibility that various members of the committee might just be looking for sound bites to support their pre-ordained opinions. I was wrong.

Slobodin and his staff were curious, earnest, intelligent, and dedicated to understanding the opioid problem at the deepest level. At the hearing itself, where I and other experts testified on the problem of opioid misuse, overdose, and addiction, Congressman Tim Murphy (R-PA), and Congresswoman Diana DeGette  (D-CO) didn’t go for each other’s jugular like a couple of vampires out of Twilight, which I thought might happen. Instead, they were courteous, collegial, and again, struck me as truly dedicated to ameliorating the problem of addiction in this country.

Third and finally, I didn’t imagine that my testimony would make much of a difference, yet some of my suggestions were picked up by members of the committee, including Bridgette DeHart, a senior policy advisor for Congresswoman Yvette D. Clarke (D-NY). DeHart is a whip-smart young woman who in ten minutes of conversation conveyed to me her sophisticated understanding of the opioid epidemic. She talked about incorporating one of my suggestions – mandating physician education on the use of Prescription Drug Monitoring Databases (PDMDs) at the time of DEA-licensure – into a larger bill that Clarke and her team are working on.

Continue Reading »

Aging, Medicine and Society, Pain, Palliative Care, Patient Care, Stanford News, Videos

“Everybody dies – just discuss it and agree on what you want”

"Everybody dies - just discuss it and agree on what you want"

Earlier this week, my colleague pointed to a New York Times essay penned by VJ Periyakoil, MD. In it, Periyakoil calls for a role-reversal in talking about end-of-life issues and encourages patients to take the lead in starting such conversations with their doctors. “Without these conversations, doctors don’t know what the patients’ goals are for living their last days,” she writes. “What are their hopes, wants, needs and fears? Do they want to die at the hospital connected to a machine? Do they want to die at home? The current default is for doctors to give patients every possible treatment for their condition, regardless of its impact on the patient’s quality of life, the cost or the patient’s goals.”

Periyakoil goes on to describe a letter that she and her colleagues created to help facilitate these patient-doctor conversations. The video above expands upon the Stanford Letter Project, which helps patients map out what matters most to them at the end of life, and includes the candid thoughts of numerous older adults.

“If I’m brain-dead, unplug me,” one woman says matter-of-factly. “And I want to die painless. No pain – just put me to sleep and don’t let me wake up.”

In the doctor’s office, one man shares his reason for writing a letter and expressing his wishes: “One of the worst things in the world that you can have happen [is you’re on] your deathbed and you’re putting the burden of life-altering decisions on a family member that has no clue of what you really want or don’t want.”

Advises another older man: “Don’t be ashamed of it – everybody dies. Just discuss it and agree on what you want.”

Previously: How would you like to die? Tell your doctor in a letter, In honor of National Healthcare Decisions Day: A reminder for patients to address end-of-life issues, Study: Doctors would choose less aggressive end-of-life care for themselves, On a mission to transform end-of-life care and The importance of patient/doctor end-of-life discussions

Aging, Pain, Palliative Care, Research, Stanford News

How would you like to die? Tell your doctor in a letter

How would you like to die? Tell your doctor in a letter

writing a letterAsking patients how they would like to die is not a question that comes easy to most doctors. Not surprisingly, most of us – doctors and patients alike – prefer to avoid the topic completely. That’s not good, says VJ Periyakoil, MD, director of palliative care education and training at Stanford.

As I wrote in an Inside Stanford Medicine article on Periyakoil’s new study on end-of-life conversations:

End-of-life conversations help clarify for doctors what matters most to patients in their waning days of life… “What are their hopes, wants, needs and fears? Do they want to die at the hospital on a machine? Do they want to die at home? We can’t know unless we have a conversation,” she said.

Her study, published today in PLOS One, surveyed more than 1,000 medical residents and found that most balk at talking with seriously ill patients about what’s important to them in their final days, especially if the patient’s ethnicity is different than their own. Of those surveyed, 99.99 percent reported barriers, with 86 percent rating them as very challenging.

The upshot for Periyakoil, as she explains in a New York Times column published today, is that if we want to have a say in how we die, we should start that conversation ourselves.

To get these conversations started far and wide, she has launched the Stanford Letter Project – a campaign to empower all adults to take the initiative to talk to their doctor about what matters most to them at life’s end. The project’s website hosts templates for a letter about this to your doctor to get the conversation rolling. The templates are in Mandarin, Spanish and Tagalog as well as English – and Periyakoil says translations in additional languages will be available soon.

Previously: In honor of National Healthcare Decisions Day: A reminder for patients to address end-of-life issues, Study: Doctors would choose less aggressive end-of-life care for themselvesAsking the hardest questions: Talking with doctors while terminally ill, On a mission to transform end-of-life care and The importance of patient/doctor end-of-life discussions
Photo by Gioia De Antoniis

Addiction, Events, Pain, Patient Care, Public Health, Stanford News

The problem of prescription opioids: “An extraordinarily timely topic”

The problem of prescription opioids: "An extraordinarily timely topic"

photo (2) 2Suffer from pain? Or become an addict? Bemoan the epidemic of pain? Or decry the epidemic of opioid addiction?

At first glance, pain and addiction appear to conflict, to occupy distinct never-overlapping planes. But in reality, pain and addiction anchor two ends of a spectrum, with a lot of gray area in between, said Anna Lembke, MD, director of the Stanford Addiction Medicine Program.

Lembke and Sean Mackey, MD, PhD, chief of pain medicine, squared off in a good-natured debate of sorts moderated by chief communications officer Paul Costello last week at a Stanford Health Policy Forum on “The Problem of Prescription Opioids.”

“This is an extraordinarily timely topic,” Dean Lloyd Minor, MD, said in his introduction. “These issues really reflect a dilemma of wanting to bring the best compassionate care and science to our patients, yet also needing to respect the adverse effects that can occur.”

The statistics on both sides are sobering. The two experts told the audience that in the U.S., more than 16,000 people per year die of opioid overdose and 100 million people live in pain.

And both Lembke and Mackey shared harrowing tales of the suffering of their patients. Lembke once was called to consult on a women suffering from low back pain who had a opioid addiction identified by two previous psychiatrists. Yet in the exam room, the patient threatened to sue if she didn’t receive an opioid prescription, Lembke said. Cases like that prompted her to pen a provocative 2012 essay titled “Why doctors prescribe opioids to known opioid abusers.”

But Mackey treats patients who are suffering deeply, including a woman whose foot injury from a vehicle accident morphed into a pain syndrome affecting her upper extremities.

The current opioid addiction problem stems from a historical pattern of failing to treat pain, even in dying patients, Lembke said. Yet the pendulum swung too far and now doctors feel obligated to prescribe drugs such as opioids, she said.

At the Stanford Pain Management Center, teams of specialists work together to treat pain as a complex condition that affects many parts of the body and mind, Mackey said. Patients are treated with physical therapy, psychiatry and a variety of other specialties to try to allow them to participate in meaningful life activities, he said.

Although care at Stanford is top notch, it is an outlier and thousands of other patients are exposed to poor pain management practices. In addition, pain is now widely recognized as a disease, but addiction remains stigmatized, Lembke said.

When doctors recognize a opioid-seeking patient, they should treat the addiction, not boot the patient out of their practice.

Lembke and Mackey stressed that education about both pain and addiction ought to receive increased attention in medical schools. And patients need to take a role in treating both their own pain, and their addictions, they said. They do share common ground, Lembke said.

“All we think about every day is how we’re going to do it better,” Mackey said.

Previously: Assessing the opioid overdose epidemic, Stanford addiction expert: It’s often a “subtle journey” from prescription-drug use to abuse, Is a push to treat chronic pain pressuring doctors to prescribe opioids to addicts?, Why doctors prescribe opioids to patients they know are abusing them and Study shows prescribing higher doses of pain meds may increase risk of overdose
Photo by Becky Bach

In the News, Pain, Patient Care, Research

More benefit than bite: Potential therapies from “pest” animals

More benefit than bite: Potential therapies from "pest" animals

512px-Scary_scorpionA painful spider bite can make you question why such creatures exist. Yet just because “pests” like spiders, scorpions, and snakes lack the appeal that kittens and puppies possess, it doesn’t mean they aren’t important or useful.

Yesterday, an article from Medical News Today drove this message home by highlighting some of the medical benefits we derive from six of the creatures we tend to complain the most about. As writer Honor Whiteman explains in the story, scientists are exploring ways to use toxins and substances produced by so-called pest animals, such as spiders scorpions, and reptiles, to treat chronic pain, repair nerves, and develop new ways to kill the human immunodeficiency virus.

From the piece:

In 2013, MNT [Medical News Today] reported on a study published in Antiviral Therapy, in which researchers revealed how a toxin found in bee venom – melittin – has the potential to destroy human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

The investigators, from the Washington University School of Medicine, explained that melittin is able to make holes in the protective, double-layered membrane that surrounds the HIV virus. Delivering high levels of the toxin to the virus via nanoparticles could be an effective way to kill it.

A more recent study published in September 2014 claims bees may also be useful for creating a new class of antibiotics. Researchers from the Lund University in Sweden discovered lactic acid bacteria in fresh honey found in the stomachs of bees that has antimicrobial properties.

The story cites several other potential uses for venoms and animal-derived substances, such as my favorite example, Gila monster spit:

In 2007, a study by researchers from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine revealed how exenatide – a synthetic form of a compound found in the saliva of the Gila monster, called exendin-4 – may help people with diabetes control their condition and lose weight.

The compound works by causing the pancreas to produce more insulin when blood sugar is too high. In the study, 46% of patients who were given exenatide in combination with diabetes drug metformin had good control of their blood sugar, compared with only 13% of control participants.

As Whiteman explains in the article, many of these potential medical treatments are still in the early stages of development. Yet some therapies, such as the synthetic version of the compound found in Gila monster saliva, exenatide, are already in use, offering hope that other animal-derived medical treatments may be available in the future.

Previously: Tiny fruit flies as powerful diabetes modelFruit flies headed to the International Space Station to study the effects of weightlessness on the heartBiomedical Indiana Jones travels the world collecting venom for medical research and Tarantula venom peptide shows promise as a drug
Photo by H Dragon

Stanford Medicine Resources: