Power Up Your Brain
Power Up Your Brain
by David Perlmutter, MD, FACN, ABIHM &
Albert Villoldo, Ph.D
Raise a Smarter Child by Kindergarten
Raise a Smarter Child by Kindergarten
by David Perlmutter, MD, FACN, ABIHM
The Better Brain Book


by David Perlmutter, MD, FACN, ABIHM
Read Dr. Perlmutter's
articles at

More doctors charging retainer fees to lower their caseloads

September 10th, 2008

From ajc.com

Eighty-nine-year-old Florence Day “felt abandoned” when her doctor told her that she’d have to pay $1,500 cash to keep seeing him.

“I’m on a fixed income, and just couldn’t afford it,” said Day, who lives in Sandy Springs and had to find another doctor. “It’s a terrible thing for people. I would have liked to have stayed, but I couldn’t. I was very disappointed.”

What happened to Day is occurring more and more with the rapid growth of concierge medicine, in which doctors charge patients an annual fee ranging from a few hundred dollars to $20,000 to stay in their practices.

Florida-based MDVIP, a company helping doctors run concierge practices, requires affiliating physicians to be accessible 24/7 by cell phone and e-mail, provide head-to-toe annual exams and build in time to allow for same-day visits.

Its doctors help patients who leave their practices find new physicians who accept their insurance.

Experts say such practices — also called “boutique,” “retainer,” “preventive” and “executive” medicine — are growing because doctors are seeking new ways to find more time for patients, and provide better care. Experts estimate there are about 1,100 concierge practices nationwide, most formed by small groups of doctors who generally follow the MDVIP model.

A few months ago, Tom G. Stanek, 60, of east Cobb, was told by his doctor he’d need to pay an annual fee of $1,600 or find a new physician.

“Even though it’s hard to leave somebody you’ve been with for so long — over 15 years — it’s just too much money,” Stanek said. “I told him it was the fee. He had 3,000 patients, and he’s going down to 600. I can see his point of view, but … I’ll lose that great relationship developed over the years.”

He and Day are among tens of thousands of people who’ve decided they can’t afford to pay more or don’t feel they need a closer relationship with their doctors.

But thousands of others, like Harriett Powell, 51, of Johns Creek, are concluding that it’s dangerous to put a price ceiling on health care. She’s paid the $1,500 fee requested by her doctor.

“The focus now is on wellness,” she said. “I love it. It’s almost a fear of what might be missed. Now, my visits aren’t rushed, I can call him 24/7, and when I call after hours, he answers his cell.”

Her physician, Dr. Kelly Ahn, 41, affiliated with MDVIP, which describes its practices as “personalized preventive care” models.

In MDVIP practices, in which doctors keep $1,000 of the fee, physicians are required to accept no more than 600 patients, rather than the 2,500 typical of family practices. It provides each person with a CD ROM containing their medical histories and creates Internet “portals” that can be visited via password for instant communication with doctors and their staffs.

MDVIP, which keeps records of the health of more than 80,000 people reports that preliminary data shows that patients in its practices — 16 in Atlanta, Roswell and Marietta and 250 nationally — are admitted to hospitals less often, that diseases are detected earlier and that overall health is better.

“Patients get a level of care that is not possible in a traditional primary care practice of 2,500 patients,” said Dr. Edward Goldman, co-founder and CEO of MDVIP.

For the fee, patients in MDVIP practices get a comprehensive annual evaluation, which includes the identification of risk factors that predict the diseases a person is most likely to develop, based upon personal and family history, genetics, lifestyle, habits and occupation.

Ahn said he chose to join because he was frustrated that he had so many patients he couldn’t “take care of them” like he wanted.

“I could see them for eight to 10 minutes,” he said. “Now, it’s as long as it takes. I talk personally over the phone. And it’s really neat to be able to hear the appreciation of a patient you can see on the same day they call, when a person calling can get me and not the nurse.”

But he added, “to have to say goodbye to patients was very, very hard.”

Dr. Reginald Fowler, 55, of Atlanta, said many patients told him they wanted to stay, but couldn’t afford the price.

Before, he said, “patients could have read [the novel] “War and Peace” in the waiting room. But now I’m not working ‘till 8:30 in the evenings. And patient care is better.”

Since converting in June, he has caught one case of lung cancer that might have been missed before.

The trend is catching on at a time when the number of doctors going into primary care is dropping. Last year, only 7 percent of medical school graduates chose family practice, a field with a median income of $150,000, according to the American Academy of Family Physicians. The American Medical Association reports that there are about 250,000 practicing family physicians, internists and general practitioners, compared to about 472,000 specialists.

Many family doctors have upwards of 2,500 patients on their rolls, said William Custer, director of the Center for Health Services Research at Georgia State University. It makes sense, he added, to assume patients get better care in retainer practices.

Critics contend that concierge practices are elitist, dumping thousands of patients into longer lines in emergency rooms and in offices of family doctors who remain independent.

Arthur Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, said he has “sympathy for some of the doctors who are overwhelmed,” but that “concierge medicine can’t be done without excluding people.”

The AMA said in a policy statement that the practices could “raise ethical concerns” if they become so widespread as to threaten access to care, which hasn’t happened yet. Dr. Jim King, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, said retainer practices are “a symptom of a broken system, with a lot of physicians looking for a way to keep the light bill paid.”

But Goldman said such practices already are improving the lot of doctors and their patients. He said MDVIP provides 401(k) plans to member doctors and their staffs, arranges for vaccines to be delivered at “favorable terms,” and handles enough billing so that physicians need fewer people in the back office.

He said preliminary research on 14,000 people found that MDVIP patients had 53 percent fewer hospitalizations than those in traditional practices.

TCuster said “everybody is frustrated with the medical system, which is why it’s part of the presidential debate,” and that concierge medicine “is no more unfair than people driving BMWs while the rest of us drive Toyotas.”

Kathryn Unverzagt, 65, of Smyrna, agreed. She and her husband have their doctor’s personal phone numbers, which provide “peace of mind.”

“I would scrimp and save in other areas to stay with Dr. Ahn,” she said. “I would forego eating.”

Renegade Neurologist’s book now in China

February 29th, 2008

Dr. Perlmutter’s bestsellingRaise a Smarter Child by Kindergarten is now available worldwide. Latest release is the Chinese version:

Online house calls click with doctors

February 25th, 2008

With insurers starting to cover them, virtual office visits for minor ailments, follow-ups gain popularity

From Los Angeles Times

Consulting your family physician is finally moving into the 21st century and out of the doctor’s office.

Since the dawn of e-mail, patients have been pleading for more doctors to offer medical advice online. No traffic jams, no long waits, no germ-infested offices with outdated magazines and bad elevator music.

There was always one major roadblock: Most health insurers wouldn’t pay for it.

Until now.

In recent weeks, Aetna Inc., the nation’s largest insurer, and Cigna Corp. have agreed to reimburse doctors for online visits. Other large insurers are expected to follow, experts say.

These new online services, which typically cost the same as a regular office visit, are aimed primarily at those who already have a doctor.

The virtual visits are considered best for follow-up consultations and treatment for minor ailments such as colds and sore throats.

But some specialists, including cardiologists and gynecologists, also see these e-mail tete-a-tetes as ideal for periodic checkups that don’t require in-person visits.

“People can wait a long time to get in to see their primary-care doctor and longer for a specialist. . . . To have immediate access is huge,” said Dr. Melissa Welch, Aetna’s Northern California medical director.

As more doctors move online, others are looking further ahead and adding webcams to their online arsenal, even if the video quality remains spotty.

Dr. Christy Calderon, a family physician at Kaiser Permanente’s Whittier office, conducts as many as half her appointments over the phone or online with a 3-inch camera affixed to her desktop. “It adds a more personal touch,” she said.

Although actual doctor visits aren’t likely to disappear, the recent moves are evidence that long-delayed efforts to bring American medicine into the digital age may be gaining momentum, experts say.

“Paying doctors to do more patient care over the Internet is a small but important step in a good direction,” said David Cutler, a Harvard University healthcare economist. “It increases patient access and could significantly improve their satisfaction.”

If so, it comes at an auspicious time.

Doctor visits in the United States have surged 20% in the last five years to more than 1.2 billion visits annually, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Even as the population ages, the number of doctors is falling across the country, and experts predict that office wait times will increase in the coming years.

Meanwhile, at-home devices that remotely check patients’ blood pressure and diabetics’ sugar levels are becoming cheaper, and tech leaders Google Inc. and Microsoft Corp. are expected to introduce products this year to simplify patient care and put medical records online, although neither company plans to assist in online physician appointments.

Some in the medical community envision a day when patients take their vital signs each morning and send the results to their doctor by computer.

But can a doctor really diagnose patients via pixels?

Critics, including many doctors, contend that online medical care carries risks. Some worry that mistakes are bound to happen and that the practice raises several hard-to-answer ethical questions.

“It’s perfectly appropriate that we use 21st century technology in the 21st century,” said California Medical Assn. President Dr. Richard S. Frankenstein, an Orange County pulmonologist. “The concern I have is that [online visits] are simply not a substitute for an actual doctor.”

And experts caution that this may not be a money saver. Healthcare costs could increase if the new technology leads more patients to seek care more often.

By the time San Francisco consultant Meg Young got to Boston on a chilly night last winter, she was running a 102-degree fever. She considered going to the emergency room. Instead, she went online in her hotel room.

The 40-year-old technology expert booked a visit with her primary-care doctor at Stanford University Hospital. After Young filled out a form and described her symptoms, he diagnosed a bacterial infection, prescribed an antibiotic from a drugstore near the hotel and suggested she get some rest.

“I couldn’t have been happier to not sit in some hospital for half the night,” Young said.

Doctors and patients have many ways to communicate over the Internet. Some doctors and their office staffers already e-mail patients free of charge, especially when it involves minor questions or prescription refills.

Most of the new online consultations are far more structured than a simple e-mail. If insurance companies are expected to pay the bill, physicians need documentation of the event, including diagnosis and time spent.

As a result, companies have emerged to help doctors handle this. They typically arrange the online visits, maintain records and handle insurance reimbursements, patient co-payments and other payments.

To begin using these online services, patients visit a doctor’s website or go directly to one of the Internet companies that handle such services — for example, RelayHealth Inc. or Medem Inc.

Doctors are typically encouraged to respond to patients within a day; they receive an e-mail reminder if they haven’t, with a phone call on the second day. Prices can vary from $25 to $125, which patients pay with a credit card at the end of the session.

Allison Holt, 47, of Santa Ana said she was “completely sold” on online healthcare and didn’t plan to visit her doctor in person anymore if she could help it.

The former human resources manager began using online appointments in May, after a long-simmering back problem flared up.

Holt has had two full check-ups since then and occasionally e-mails her doctor with minor questions or to request a prescription refill.

The visits cost $25 and are not covered by her insurance.

“When I used to call his office, the staff would take a message, wait for a reply and then call me back when they had time,” she said. “Now I get an e-mail by the end of the day.”

Even with major insurers signing on, it remains to be seen whether a large share of the public will embrace Internet medicine. Surveys show that many patients and doctors remain uncertain whether the technology is right for them. Also still on the sidelines is the federal Medicare agency, which pays about half the nation’s doctor bills.

Recently, some smaller insurers that began reimbursing for online consultations stopped doing so because few members used the service.

But Young, the San Francisco technology consultant, predicts that routine doctor visits will eventually go the way of the locomotive or buying CDs at the store.

“It can take me an hour and 15 minutes to drive to my doctor’s office, longer in rush hour,” she said. “Why do I want to do that?”

Older Physicians Unhappy and Looking to Bail Out of Medicine

October 28th, 2007

From MedPage Today

Half of physicians from ages 50 to 65 are frustrated with their practices and plan to sharply cut back or abandon patient care within the next three years, according to a survey.

Fifty-two percent of these older physicians said they find medicine has become less satisfying over the past five years, according to a survey by Merritt Hawkins & Associates, a national physician search and consulting firm.

Only 10% of nearly 1,200 responding physicians said the practice of medicine is “very satisfying,” down from 20% in earlier surveys.

What’s more, 44% of the surveyed physicians said they wouldn’t choose medicine as a career if they were starting out today and 57% would discourage their children or other young people from doing so.

These doctors don’t intend to remain unhappy for much longer, though. Almost half of survey respondents said they will retire over the next three years, seek nonclinical jobs, work part time, close their practices to new patients (18% have already done so), or significantly reduce the number of patients they see.

If that trend continues, patient access to health care could be severely jeopardized. “Almost half the physicians in the United States are 50 years old or older,” said Mark Smith, executive vice-president of Merritt Hawkins. “An exodus of older doctors from medicine would be a disaster for patient care in this country.”

The Council on Graduate Medical Education (COGME), a panel of health care authorities, has endorsed a study predicting a shortage of 96,000 physicians by the year 2020. If only 20% of physicians in the 50 to 65 age bracket opt for retirement or nonclinical roles in the next three years, nearly 60,000 physicians would be removed from the clinical workforce, the survey noted.

“The tens of millions of patient encounters these physicians handle would have to be absorbed by younger physicians or by those older physicians remaining in clinical practice.”

Why do physicians claim to be so disgruntled? Reimbursement issues were cited by 33% of doctors as their greatest single source of professional frustration, followed by malpractice worries (18%) and long hours (15%).

That represents a significant shift. In the 2004 Merritt Hawkins survey, malpractice worries were the main source of frustration (28%). Reimbursement issues were cited by only 16%.

“When Baby Boom doctors entered medicine, they had control over how they practiced and the fees they charged,” noted Smith. “But the rules changed on them in midstream and now many are looking for a ticket out.”

These older physicians don’t have much regard for the work ethic of their younger counterparts. More than two-thirds of respondents said physicians being trained today are less dedicated and hard-working than they are.

Recently trained physicians may put a higher premium on “quality of life” issues than senior physicians often do. “We find that younger physicians today generally prefer and expect fixed hours, a good call schedule with reliable coverage, and regular vacation time,” the survey report noted.

A much higher percentage of young physicians today are female than was the case in the past, and female physicians work 18% fewer hours per week than male physicians, according to the AMA. For these reasons, it may take two younger physicians to replace a more senior doctor.

On a more positive note, six in 10 older physicians said patient relationships are their single greatest source of professional satisfaction.

Also, 48% of physicians indicated that the quality of health care in the United States has generally improved over the last 20 years, compared with 33% who indicated it has generally declined.

So, the survey authors concluded, although the practice of medicine may have become problematic for many older physicians, patient care has generally improved.

The survey was mailed to 10,000 physicians across the nation and 1,175 participated, a 12% response rate. Surgical and internal medicine subspecialists comprised 47% of respondents, followed by primary care physicians (36%) and hospital-based doctors (17%).

Drug Companies’ Ties to Schools Common

October 18th, 2007

Dr. Perlmutter’s comment:

The following report comes from our “why am I not surprised” department.

From New York Times

Nearly two-thirds of academic leaders surveyed at U.S. medical schools and teaching hospitals have financial ties to industry, illustrating how pervasive these relationships have become, researchers say.

Serving as paid consultants or accepting industry money for free meals and drinks were among the most common practices reported by the heads of academic departments.

Drug companies and makers of medical devices often use these connections to influence doctors to use products that aren’t necessarily in the patient’s best interest, said Eric Campbell, the study’s lead author. He is a researcher at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School.

Since academic department heads set the tone for appropriate conduct at their institutions, their actions signal to medical students and others that this is appropriate behavior, Campbell said.

The survey went to all 125 accredited medical schools and the nation’s 15 largest teaching hospitals. About two-thirds of the department heads responded. The study gave no specific examples, nor did it name any institutions.

Many studies have examined doctor ties to drug companies. Campbell co-authored research last year that found company ties were common among hospital review boards that oversee experiments on patients.

The new study shows that drug companies “are involved in every aspect of medical care,” Campbell said.

Overall, 60 percent of department heads reported some type of personal financial relationship with industry. More than one-quarter — 27 percent — said they had recently served as a paid consultant. The same percentage reported serving on a company scientific advisory board; and 21 percent who headed departments of medical specialties closely related to patient care said they had served on speakers’ bureaus for industry.

The results appear in Wednesday’s Journal of the American Medical Association.

Alan Goldhammer of the industry group, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said the study results don’t mean these relationships are a problem. He said it makes sense to reach out to academic heads because they have the most expertise.

But Dr. Jerome Kassirer, a former New England Journal of Medicine editor and frequent critic of industry influence over doctors, called the study eye-opening.

“I was appalled by the results,” Kassirer said. “No one knew that so many chairs of medicine and psychiatry were paid speakers. We’ve never had that data before.”

He noted that financial ties can benefit patients when they are related to research or other scientific purposes that increase doctors’ education or lead to the development of better drugs or medical products.

But they are dangerous when doctors are so beholden to the company that they withhold safety concerns or push the newest or most expensive products when they aren’t necessarily best for the patient, Kassirer said.

The researchers sent surveys last year to 688 department heads at all 125 accredited U.S. medical schools and the 15 largest teaching hospitals. A total of 459 people responded, or 67 percent. Included were departments closely related to patient care, such as surgery or anesthesiology, and “nonclinical” departments more closely related to basic science.

Among those in charge of departments related to patient care, 65 percent said their departments had recently accepted industry money for continuing medical education; half reported recently getting industry money for food or drinks; 30 percent reported getting money for travel and meetings.

Overall, 67 percent said their departments had received some type industry money.

Fewer than 10 percent of chairs with personal financial relationships said those ties had any negative effects.

Dr. David Korn, a senior vice president at the Association of American Medical Colleges, which helped conduct the study, said the results aren’t surprising or necessarily cause for concern.

Medical schools generally have policies governing relationships with industry to “make sure that they remained principled,” Korn said.

“There is a real need to have good exchanges of information” between medical schools and industry, Korn said. “After all, when a new product is approved,” the maker “knows about it better than anyone else.”

Still, “gifting and favoring” are problematic, he said, and an association task force is examining the issue.