Category Archives: Practice Management

You Need a Plan for Corona virus in your Facility

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you have been hearing about the threat of a Corona virus pandemic. Every day, the evening news anchor breathlessly gives an update of the number of new cases, the number of new countries affected and the number of new deaths.  You probably already know that this disease was originally found in China.  What you may not know (but you should if you work in corrections) is that Chinese prisons were especially hard hit.  This disease spreads most rapidly where people are enclosed together, like nursing homes, cruise ships and prisons.  If this disease gets a foothold in the United States, correctional institutions are likely to suffer. 

Continue reading

Oral Testing of Reported Penicillin Allergies?

Penicillin is miraculous.  It was discovered in 1928 by Alexander Fleming (founding the modern era of antibiotic medicine) and is still the most common antibiotic prescribed in my jails.  The dentist and I use Penicillin VK as our preferred initial agent for dental infections.  I prescribe PCN VK, as well, for strep throats.  I use amoxicillin occasionally for sinus infections and UTIs and even amoxicillin/clavulanate (Augmentin) occasionally. 

Because penicillin is so useful (and inexpensive), I hate to hear the words “I’m allergic to penicillin.” If a patient with a dental infection can’t take penicillin, for example, the dentist commonly prescribes clindamycin, which is expensive, a pain to administer three times a day and has potentially bad side effects.  I have seen more than one patient who developed C. difficile after getting a broad-spectrum antibiotic because of a reported penicillin allergy–probably unnecessarily!

This problem is pretty common since about 10% of the adult population will report a penicillin allergy.  However, research has shown that, when tested, more than 90-95% of patients who state that they have a penicillin allergy really do not. These patients can be harmed by giving them an inferior antibiotic more likely to cause them harm than plain old penicillin.

The test most commonly used to gauge true allergic status is Penicillin Skin Testing (PST). No jail or prison that I know of does skin prick tests.  We also don’t refer patients reporting penicillin allergy to an allergist for testing.  We just groan and prescribe an inferior antibiotic. 

However, this could potentially change based on research published this year on the safety and efficacy of “Direct Challenge” penicillin allergy testing.  Direct challenge means giving a low-risk (this is important) patient an oral dose of whatever penicillin you want to prescribe and observing them for an hour for an allergic reaction. This has been done in studies and has been reported to be safe and effective.

Continue reading

Reducing NSAID Use PLUS NSAID Prescribing Guideline

Through many years of experience in correctional medicine, I occasionally have come up with a speech or dialogue that works especially well with patients; a speech which I then use over and over again. One of these speeches is one I use to get patients to take fewer NSAIDs.

Continue reading

Do You Understand the Requirements for Multiple DEA Licenses?

I have found that many correctional practitioners, especially in jails, do not understand the license requirements of the federal Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and, as a result, do not have all of the DEA licenses that they are legally obligated to obtain. 

Take, for example, a correctional physician that we will call Dr. K who is employed full time a a large urban jail and has had a DEA license for that jail for many years.  On the side, she also provides medical services to three other smaller jails, where she does clinics once a week. The question is whether her one DEA license covers her activities at the other jails.  Dr. K has always thought that she only needs one DEA license—just like she only needs one Driver’s License—and it will cover all of her activities. 

But the real answer is, “No,” Dr. K is not in compliance with DEA regulations.

Continue reading

The Art Of Meeting New Patients in a Jail

I will be meeting a new jail patient with multiple medical problems today in my clinic.  I know this much before I even meet him:  He will almost certainly be scared, especially if this is the first time he has ever been to jail.  He will likely be suspicious of me. He may even be downright hostile. I know this because this is the norm for correctional medicine. I can’t be an effective doctor unless I can turn this attitude around.

Consider the situation from my patient’s perspective.  Prior to seeing me, he was arrested, handcuffed and driven to jail in a police car.  Once at the jail, he was thoroughly searched (spread-eagle against the wall), fingerprinted and had his “mug shot” taken.  His clothes were taken away and he was given old jail clothes (including used underwear).  He was placed in a concrete cell.  Now he is summoned by a correctional deputy and told (not asked) to go to the medical clinic.

He did not choose me to be his doctor.  Though he doesn’t know anything about me, he has no choice but to see me for his medical care. Not only did he did not choose me; he cannot fire me or see anyone else.  He may fear that I am not a competent doctor; otherwise why would I be practicing in a jail?

This is the attitude that I have to overcome.  How to do this is an essential skill for correctional practitioners. And, of course, the single most important encounter is the first one. A negative first impression is hard to overcome–and I am already starting out at a disadvantage.  What I have to do in only a few minutes is convince my patient that I am a legitimate medical doctor and that I care about him. I have learned in many years of doing this that these things are essential:

Continue reading

Reader Question: Don’t Be the Decider

I work at a prison and your blog has been such a resource for our unique niche of medicine. There’s nothing like practicing “behind the walls!” . . .
Recently I’ve been incorporating more conversations about functionality and short-term/long-term goals and visits are mostly positive. However, there are the difficult patients . . . wanting to bargain “well if you’re not going to do anything, can I have an extra mat?” Or “Can I have a bottom floor restriction?” “Transfer me then!” “Give me insoles.” …and other requests like this. How do you recommend I come to an agreement with these patients that are difficult to have conversations with? . . . If by the end of the appointment we do not come to some sort of agreement, they end up right back in sick call with the same complaint. Then the cycle repeats. KR

Continue reading

Why Correctional Medicine is often Driven by Lawsuits

Imagine, if you will, a nurse who is assigned to take care of 50 patients on a medical floor—by herself. Clearly, this is an impossible task.  There are just too many patients for one nurse to adequately monitor.  But this nurse gamely does her best.  Now let’s say that there is a bad outcome and an investigation.  Even if the understaffing problem is recognized, it would be easy—and tempting–to scapegoat the nurse, especially if there was no intention of fixing the staffing problem (“We can’t afford to hire more nurses!”)  Instead, the scapegoated nurse would be replaced by a new nurse, who, once again, would be expected to care for 50 patients.

Such were my thoughts when I read this article about the problems with the medical care for inmates in the Illinois prison system (found here):  https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-illinois-prison-health-lawsuit-20190103-story.html. The article says that there have been so many problems with medical care in the Illinois prison system that a class action lawsuit has successfully forced Illinois to make sweeping changes to the prison medical system.  What is not mentioned in the article is that similar lawsuits have happened before in other states and will happen again. 

Continue reading

How to Write an ATP (Alternative Treatment Plan)

Many of us in supervisory positions in correctional medicine have Utilization Management (UM) duties. One common duty is to review requests from primary care practitioners for patient care procedures like a referral or, say, an MRI. We must then decide whether to approve the request or write an Alternative Treatment Plan (ATP). This process is loosely based on a similar practice done in HMOs in free world medicine, but there are important differences. In an HMO, the evaluator is deciding whether the HMO will pay for the procedure. If the requested procedure does not meet HMO criteria, the evaluator will deny the request. The procedure can still be done, but the patient and her physician will have to find an alternative method of paying for it. Also, the HMO evaluator does not offer opinions on whether the procedure is appropriate nor does she offer suggestions as to what could or should be done instead.

Many of us in supervisory positions in correctional medicine have Utilization Management (UM) duties. One common duty is to review requests from primary care practitioners for patient care procedures like a referral or, say, an MRI. We must then decide whether to approve the request or write an Alternative Treatment Plan (ATP). This process is loosely based on a similar practice done in HMOs in free world medicine, but there are important differences. In an HMO, the evaluator is deciding whether the HMO will pay for the procedure. If the requested procedure does not meet HMO criteria, the evaluator will deny the request. The procedure can still be done, but the patient and her physician will have to find an alternative method of paying for it. Also, the HMO evaluator does not offer opinions on whether the procedure is appropriate nor does she offer suggestions as to what could or should be done instead.

Correctional Medicine UM is different. Those of us doing these evaluations are not being asked about payment; we are being asked for permission to do the procedure at all. We cannot simply deny the request like an HMO can. If we do not think the procedure should be done, then we must say what should be done instead: The Alternative Treatment Plan.

When done poorly, the ATP can irritate the primary care practitioner and even create an adversarial relationship between the practitioner at the site and the UM evaluator. When done well, the ATP is a written conversation between two equal colleagues and the ATP process can actually improve patient care.

Doing it wrong

Like any other bit of writing, it is important at the outset to define who your audience is. The ATP should be written with three potential readers in mind. The first is the site practitioner who made the initial request. A bad ATP will leave the PCP feeling underappreciated, threatened and disrespected: “I don’t trust you and you are stupid.” A good ATP will leave the PCP feeling like you are on the same team and that you have their back: “You’re doing great! Let me help you.”

The second potential reader of the ATP is The Adversary, like a plaintiff’s lawyer or an advocacy group. A bad ATP will indicate that you are denying the patient reasonable and necessary medical services. A good ATP will show that nothing was denied and will not imply that any medical service is off limits.

ATPs are also read by nurses, who have to transcribe and record the ATP in the official record. A good ATP will make their life easier. A bad ATP can result in many hours of needless, morale crushing busy work.

In my experience, it does not take much more time to write a good ATP instead of a crappy one.  Most UM evaluators, however, have never been taught how to write and ATP.  Here is how I write mine:

Step one: Restate what is being requested.

The first sentence of the ATP should briefly summarize the case and re-state what is being requested.

  • 56 yo male s/p colonoscopy done for guaiac positive stool. Request is for a routine post procedure FU with the gastroenterologist.
  • 63 yo male with reported gross hematuria.  Request is for CT of the abdomen.

Step two. Support your ATP.

The next section of the ATP contains the evidence that supports your ATP. This evidence can be pertinent positives, like x-rays, labs, previous visits. This evidence can also be pertinent negatives, like incomplete exams or missing data. Finally, this paragraph can also include pertinent research that supports your ATP, such as a quote from Uptodate, RubiconMD or InterQual.

  • The colonoscopy was negative except for a single sigmoid polyp. The pathology report on the sigmoid polyp is not attached to the report.
  • There is little clinical information accompanying the request.  I do not know if the patient has other medical problems, findings on physical exam, what medications he is one or what labs have been done.  Review of published treatment algorithms for the diagnostic work up of hematuria (Essential Evidence, Uptodate) show that CT is not the first diagnostic procedure that should be considered in most cases of hematuria.

Step 3. The ATP should defer the request; not deny it.

It is important to never (or rarely) use the word “denied.” Instead, you should restate what was requested and then say it is “deferred “pending whatever you want done instead, such as “Pending receipt of missing information,” “Pending complete evaluation of the patient at the site,” or “Pending case evaluation in a case review conference”

  • Routine post-procedure FU with GI is deferred, pending complete evaluation of the patient and colonoscopy findings at the site.
  • Abdominal CT is deferred pending complete evaluation of the patient at the scene.

Step four. Tell the Primary Care Practitioner what you want them to do instead.

The next sentence contains instructions to the site practitioner.  This is the “ATP” and should be labelled as such.  I also always date the ATP.

  • 3/11/2019 ATP: The site practitioner should obtain the pathology report on the sigmoid polyps and call me to discuss the case. The timing of follow colonoscopy will depend on the biopsy results.
  • 3/11/2019 ATP: The primary care practitioner should do a complete physical examination, appropriate labs and then discuss the case with me as to the next appropriate diagnostic procedure (ultrasound, cystography, etc).

Step five. State that whatever was requested can be reconsidered later.

I always add this last sentence as well, to reaffirm that I am not denying any medical care. “The request from the first paragraph” can be considered thereafter, if clinically appropriate or anytime if medically necessary.

  • Off-site GI visit can be considered thereafter, as clinically indicated–or at any time if appropriate.
  • CT can be considered thereafter, if clinically appropriate, or anytime if medically necessary.

Step six: Contact the PCP to let her know that her request was ATP’d.

I don’t think that PCPs should find out from a UM nurse that their request was ATP’d. They will feel much better about the process if you contact them. This also opens a method of communicating about the case if they have more questions. This can be accomplished with a simple email:

  • Hi Dr. X! Before we send this patient off-site to see the gastroenterologist, we need the biopsy report. If the adenoma is low risk, you can deliver the good news to the patient and tell him when his next colonoscopy will be scheduled. You’ll be seeing him in chronic care clinic in the meantime.
  • Hi Dr. Y!  I am attaching an algorithm for work up of hematuria.  As you can see, there are several things that should be done before we consider a CT.  Will you please call me to discuss this case?

Putting it all together, here are the full ATPs:

  • 56 yo male s/p colonoscopy done for guaiac positive stool. Request is for a routine post procedure FU with the gastroenterologist. The colonoscopy was negative except for a single sigmoid polyp. The pathology report on the sigmoid polyp is not attached to the report. 3/11/2019 ATP: Routine post-procedure FU with GI is deferred, pending complete evaluation of the patient and colonoscopy findings at the site. The site practitioner should obtain the pathology report on the sigmoid polyps and call me to discuss the case. The timing of follow colonoscopy will depend on the biopsy results. Off-site GI visit can be considered thereafter, as clinically indicated–or at any time if appropriate. Email to PCP: Hi Dr. X! Before we send this patient off-site to see the gastroenterologist, we need the biopsy report. If the adenoma is low risk, you can deliver the good news to the patient and tell him when his next colonoscopy will be scheduled. You’ll be seeing him in chronic care clinic in the meantime.
  • 63 yo male with reported gross hematuria.  Request is for CT of the abdomen. There is little clinical information accompanying the request.  I do not know if the patient has other medical problems, findings on physical exam, what medications he is one or what labs have been done.  Review of published treatment algorithms for the diagnostic work up of hematuria (Essential Evidence, Uptodate) show that CT is not the first diagnostic procedure that should be considered in almost all cases of hematuria. 3/11/2019 ATP: Abdominal CT is deferred pending complete evaluation of the patient at the scene.  The primary care practitioner should do a complete physical examination, appropriate labs and then discuss the case with me as to the next appropriate diagnostic procedure (ultrasound, cystography, etc).  CT can be considered thereafter, if clinically appropriate, or anytime if medically necessary. Email to PCP: Hi Dr. Y!  I am attaching an algorithm for work up of hematuria.  As you can see, there are several things that should be done before we consider a CT.  Will you please call me to discuss this case?

Two more examples (minus email):

53 yo s/p treatment for tongue cancer in remission. Request is for routine FU with ENT at six months from last visit.
The patient has finished all of his radiation sessions. ENT note from 7/17 states that the patient is in remission and that the six-month FU visit is “prn.” The consult request notes no new symptoms.
3/11/2019 ATP: ENT consultation deferred. Per last visit with ENT, further visits are to be “prn.” The site PCP should evaluate the patient at 6 months from the last visit and again at one year from the last visit. Off-site visit with ENT can be considered thereafter, as needed–or anytime if clinically necessary.

62 yo who had a liver ultrasound as part of Hepatitis C staging. The ultrasound showed a hypoechogenic polyp or cyst at the neck of the gall bladder. The radiologist says “A CT may be of value.” There is no report that the patient is symptomatic. I submitted the case to a RubiconMD radiologist, who thinks this is an incidental finding and repeat ultrasound in 6 months is a better methodology to follow this incidental finding.
3/11/2019 ATP: Abdominal CT is deferred. Per RubiconMD radiologist’s recommendation, the site PCP should order a follow up ultrasound at ~6 months. CT may be considered thereafter as clinically appropriate (or anytime if necessary).

As always, what I have written here is my opinion based on my training, experience and research.  I could be wrong! If you disagree, please say why in comments.

A previous version of this article was published in CorrDocs, the Journal of the American College of Correctional Physicians

Medical plan

Utilization Management is Different in Corrections

This is an important fact that I have learned from many years working in prisons and jails: Most correctional practitioners do not understand how Utilization Management in a prison system works. They misunderstand what the goal of the UM process is. They misunderstand the process of submitting requests. And they misunderstand how decisions are made. It took me a full three years of working in a prison system before I wrapped my head around how UM was supposed to function. This is because UM within a correctional system is fundamentally different than UM in the outside world and also new incoming correctional practitioners are not taught how prison Utilization Management works or how to make UM requests properly.

To show how a prison is different than Utilization Management in a typical Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) in the outside world, let’s say that I am a primary care practitioner in the community who wants to order an MRI on one of my patients. As we all know from long experience, I can’t just order the MRI. I have to get it pre-authorized. To do that, I have to submit paperwork to the patient’s insurance company explaining why I want to do the procedure. Someone will review my request, but I will have no idea who this person is or what their qualifications are. The reviewer could be a physician, or it could be a nurse referring to UM guidelines.  I just don’t know and never will. Whoever that person is, they will either approve payment for the procedure or deny it.

Notice several important things about this interaction: Continue reading

Is My Patient Faking?

This article was initially published on MedPageToday, found here.

I remember walking into one of my jails and seeing a patient on the floor of his cell twitching and shaking. “Don’t worry about him,” said the sergeant on duty. “He’s faking it.”
Boy, that spun me up! Nothing will make me more anxious than hearing “he’s faking” or its close cousin, “he’s malingering.” I hate and fear those words. Now, I know that medical personnel, both in my jails and in the emergency departments where I used to work, get upset when they think that they are being deceived or manipulated by a histrionic patient. But charging a patient with “faking it” is almost always a bad and dangerous idea. Continue reading