One of my favorite quotes comes from Abraham Maslow – "If you only have a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail."
Recently I saw a 74 year old man admitted for a GI bleed. We appropriately got a GI consult. The consultant scheduled a colonoscopy, but called (without letting us know) a cardiology consult. The reason for the consult was not his past medical history. He had no chest discomfort. The ER had ordered a cardiac panel, and the CK was normal (123), the troponin was undetectable, but the CK-MB % was slightly elevated.
So a cardiologist came and ordered a nuclear medicine stress test – which of course was normal. The colonoscopy did show a mass.
This situation frustrated me, because one consultant called another consultant. It frustrated me because cardiology ordered an unnecessary test.
Now no harm was done, but dollars were unnecessarily spent. As a taxpayer and an internist, this sequence offends my sense of medical decision making.
I hope some hospitalists will comment, and hopefully some others.
We do have a rule that consultants cannot call other consultants, but they break the rule often. Too often I see patients who are receiving visits from >3 consultants. Often no one is really coordinating the care.
This represents the danger of not having a conductor for the symphony. Each instrument plays their solo, and then picks another soloist, without regard for the composition, or the audience.
Related posts:
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
17 Responses to Only a hammer
bingo
May 29th, 2008 at 8:59 am
DB:
Very bad form on the part of your GI consultant. I am a specialist. Whether my consult takes place in the hospital or (more commonly) in my office I NEVER presume to personally call another consultant. Not only that but I routinely call the referring general specialist (owzat?!) and ask them to either personally order any significant tests and copy me, or grant approval for me to order said test.
IMO it is necessary for a single physician to function as the hub of the wheel, the conductor as you call it, for all of the care received by a patient. I think your GI consultant needs a reminder…
Robert W. Donnell
May 29th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Your point is well taken. This reminds me of a growing problem for hospitalists, and it was talked about a lot at SHM 2008: hospitalists are increasingly being asked to be the attending for patients outside their comfort zone who rightfully belong in the hands of the specialist. Under this model (the buzz word is co-management)the specialist is the primary decision maker yet is designated as a “consultant.” The rule about only attendings calling consultants breaks down under this model because the hospitalist is relegated to a messenger between closely related specialists (cardiology-CV surgery and general surgery-GI come to mind)who would better serve the patient by talking to each other directly. This may be a negative consequence of hospitalists trying to take ownership of too much in their quest to prove their “value.”
Dr. Bob (FP)
May 29th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Ugghh! We see this constantly. From last week, patient has a fall & breaks 4 ribs (right 2nd-5th). Trauma doc sees “A. Fib” on the diagnosis list and automatically consults cardiology. Never mind that he is adequately anticoagulated and his rate is well controlled. Echo echo is ordered (it’s been ordered previously, but not with this admission) by cardiology NP doing the consult so that it will be there when the cardiologist does show up. I’m not sure it’s possible to get a cardiology consult in my town without getting an echo ordered. Again, probably no harm done to the patient, but I’m sure the needless consult & echo added at least $500 to the bill.
Technically, the primary is supposed to order the consults, but how many specialists actually follow those rules? Not many.
ck
May 29th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Am I missing something? Why call a stress test when he has no pertinent history and a flat Tpn and overall CK? No ischemic event happened in the last 3 days (flat Tpn) and no significant tissue damage happened in the last 10 days (normal CK). Is there something that can knock down overall CK in the face of elevated CKMB?
Just a curious MS2…
The Happy Hospitalist
May 29th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
This drives me nutz. Hearing a specialist tell me we should get a hematology consult on an old man with a platelet count of 100K. Or having the cardiologist order a pulmonary consult, then sign off the case. It’s the equivalent of me consulting a second cardiologist on the same patient. I am a board certified internist. I know my limits. I know I don’t need a specialist telling me how to manage something outside of their expertise any more than I tell them how to do their job. If you have a problem with the care I am providing, you need to call me and discuss it.
#1 Dinosaur
May 29th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Welcome to my world.
anonymous
May 30th, 2008 at 8:00 am
would the gi guy/gal have done the procedure without the stress test? ours would not have. so perhaps the stress test was done because of the practice pattern of the gi specialist. are you going to insist the gi guy do the procedure when s/he is not comfortable proceeding without the stress test?
communication definitely broke down here. but frequently it is hard to get ahold of primary docs as well. and waiting to get a consult might increase the length of stay a day or more if that communication is delayed. i assume db has residents. maybe they were in one of their mandatory conferences somewhere or in clinic or just didn’t answer their page. even in private practice, the wait time to get ahold of the physician can be 15-20 minutes. do you want them pulled out of the room? i can’t make any progress seeing clinic patients if i am pulled out of the room every time someone wants to talk to me. i really prefer to be called for important messages only. i personally don’t like to get called when i send someone for a screening colonoscopy and the answer back is normal. just leave that message with the nurse.
anonymous
May 30th, 2008 at 8:04 am
as for rw’s comment, it is interesting since my experience has been so different. our hospitalists frequently refuse to admit for primary care docs and medicine subspecialties. they say they are too busy and are here for helping the surgeons. they are too busy (imo)only because they are trying to make their case that they need more bodies so they can fill their time off ‘requirements’ of 26 weeks off a year. otherwise they spend plenty of time huddling at the nurses stations complaining bitterly and being generally inefficient and unprofessional. (note-this is limited to my observation of my personal hospital, not a comment on hospitalists in general).
drsam
May 30th, 2008 at 8:35 am
Personally, I don’t mind too much when one specialist calls in another. That said, I’m a FP working in a small rural hospital without much specialist depth. We’ve got a handful of specialists and a handful of general internists and FPs.
What drives me a little crazy is when some patient comes into the E.R. needing admission for some purely specialist oriented problem and the E.R. doc is told by the specialist “Admit it to drsam and consult me.”
That way, they can just buzz in and do less paperwork and get paid more as the consultant and for doing their procedures. Meanwhile, I get to do all the lower paying scut work on some patient where I really have nothing of substance to contribute to the case.
If I were a hospitalist, I don’t think I’d mind it so much, but I’m not a hospitalist. I have an outpatient clinic that is 12 miles away from the hospital. I don’t usually have many patients in the hospital, and most frequently have none. When I do, it means a lot of extra driving and time taken away from my clinic patients, personal life, etc.
When it is one of my established patients that gets admitted, or when there is a genuine need for my involvement, I don’t mind being the admitting physician. When this is not the case however, and I’m only being involved so the specialist can have less busy work, I do mind that. I didn’t become a family medicine physician simply to be a scut-monkey for the specialists.
Unfortunately, our hospital is too small to support a hospitalist program since Hurricane Katrina. It is slowly growing back as the community slowly returns and some day will be busy enough for a hospitalist program to be an option. I look forward to that day!
anonymous internist
May 30th, 2008 at 8:53 am
with the frequency of “cardiac rule-outs” etc. being admitted, and the overtesting that is OBVIOUSLY fueled by compensation (both inpatient and outpatient), perhaps the best solution is for medicare to either:
(1) capitate specialist procedure payments (does that 90-year-old really NEED another echo, even though one was done when they were admitted 3 months ago?)
(2) mandate that certain procedures (eg. echo, nuclear stress) cannot be ordered by a physician with a financial stake in performing the test (hello? where is pete stark on this one?). I don’t know how one would do this, perhaps have a limited number of medicare-certified facilities & a central databank with results?
But specialists “consulting” other specialists is just ripping off the system, and very short-sighted, ruining healthcare in the long run.
Chad
May 30th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
That was an excellent post. Just wanted to let you know that you were named as an honorable mention for the Scrubby award.
JaneMarieMD
May 30th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
I’m with the Happy Hospitalist and drsam; there’s no substitute for picking up the phone and calling to make the suggestion of another consult. This am a nephrologist called me to coordinate care on a mutual patient, whom he thought ought to have a cardiololy consult. I had considered it too, actually, and decided I agreed with him. It was the professional thing to do!! Sad to say, much unprofessional behavior is now the norm because it is not directly compensated.
Theresa
May 30th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
Common courtesy requires that the primary service doc be in the loop for all consultations. I work at a small hospital and most of our consultants toe the line. However, some of the surgeons will ask for “a hospitalist and intensivist consult” if their patient develops A Fib. I don’t know whether this is because they don’t realize how much overlap this entails, but I do notice that I get these types of requests when the surgeon is too busy to make rounds before 5pm and they have been harrassed by phone calls. Much easier to have the hospitalist (and intensivist) get involved than come in and figure out what’s going on, then choose the best consultant. (This is only a few of our surgeons. I’m not trying to make a sweeping generalization.)
When there is no one driving the boat, so to speak, there is so much more opportunity for error. I’ve been the hospitalist on cases in which there is a general surgeon, a nephrologist, an intensivist, and a cardiologist involved, and all the docs start writing orders that contradict each other. Potentially disastrous.
The Jobbing Doctor
May 31st, 2008 at 12:12 pm
This is just the kind of problem that I see far too often in the UK. Many specialists specialise in disease processes, and far too often resort to action in the face of uncertainty. The reductio ad absurdam of this process is the elegantly named Ulysses syndrome, that results from a lack of a generalist at the helm.
Stalwart Hospitalist
June 1st, 2008 at 2:58 am
As a hospitalist, part of my demonstration of value is in resource utilization and efficiency of care. In a complex patient, this is derived from close coordination of multiple consulting services.
If one of my clinical evaluation metrics is the average cost per case on the patient’s I admit, then I need to be the one making the final decision on whether additional consults need to be called or whether more tests need to be ordered.
Fun anecdote — I was once asked to consult for hypertension and diabetes on an orthopedic surgery patient. Two days later, I see in the chart that Ortho (the PRIMARY team) has decided to “sign off.”
Diora
June 5th, 2008 at 10:53 am
I am not qualified to comment on specific situation as I am not a doctor. However, I don’t understand how ordering unnecessary tests for “resource utilization” or other financial type of gain is different from plain fraud and theft.
If I am a patient, I may 1) have high deductible 2) I may have % co-insurance rather than a fixed co-payment 3) be really struggling to pay my bills and to feed my kids. How is taking my money for a test that is not indicated because Stalwart Hospitalist above wants to achieve better “resource utilization” is different from him stealing my money? If my insurance pays for it, how is it different from insurance fraud?
Additionally, I take exception to “no harm done” statement. All these tests have false positives. A false positive may lead to a more invasive test like, I don’t know, catherization that has 1/1000 chance of stroke. Sure this risk may be small, but if I don’t need the test, you have no right to subject me to it at least without my consent. A patient in an ER for, I don’t know, broken ribs is hardly in a position to object; nor is usually any time given to him to do so.
Really, pray explain me how a doctor ordering an unnecessary test for financial gain is different from a common thief.
Kevin D
June 5th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Diora,
I think you are in agreement with most of the comments and DB’s original rant. The “resource utilization” that Stalwart Hospitalist mentioned works in the opposite way that you’re thinking. Doctors are rewarded (or at least not reprimanded) for having LOWER costs/admission, not higher.
You are absolutely right that “no harm done” isn’t a good defense and I think DB would agree with you (correct me if I’m wrong). I think he was just saying that in this one case, nothing bad happened but we shouldn’t risk it.
In short, I agree with you and think most other doctors do too.