Seeking a second medical opinion: composition, reasons and perceived outcomes in Israel.

Background: Seeking a second-opinion (SO) is a common clinical practice that can optimize treatment and reduce unnecessary procedures and risks. We aim to characterize the composition of the population of SO seekers, their reasons for seeking a SO and choosing a specific physician, and their perceived outcomes following the SO. Methods: A cross-sectional national telephone survey, using a representative sample of the general Israeli population (n = 848, response rate = 62%). SO utilization was defined as seeking an additional clinical opinion from a specialist within the same specialty, for the same medical concern. We describe the characteristics of respondents who obtained SOs, their reasons for doing so and their perceived outcomes: (1) Satisfaction with the SO; (2) Experiencing health improvement after receiving a SO; (3) A difference in the diagnosis or treatment suggested in the first opinions and the second opinions; (4) Preference of the SO over the first one. Results: Most of the respondents who sought a SO (n = 344) were above 60 years old, secular, living with a partner, perceived their income to be above average and their health status to be not so good. For the patients who utilized SOs, orthopedic surgeons were sought out more than any other medical professional.Reasons for seeking a SO included doubts about diagnosis or treatment (38%), search for a sub-specialty expert (19%) and dissatisfaction with communication (19%). SO seekers most frequently chose a specific specialist based on a recommendation from a friend or a relative (33%). About half of the SO seekers also searched for information on the internet. Most of the respondents who sought a SO mentioned that they were satisfied with it (84%), felt health improvement (77%), mentioned that there was a difference between the diagnosis or treatment between the first opinion and the SO (56%) and preferred the SO over the first one (91%). Conclusions: Clinical uncertainty or dissatisfaction with patient-physician communication were the main reasons for seeking a SO. Policy makers should be aware that many patients choose a physician for a SO based on recommendations made outside the medical system. We recommend creating mechanisms that help patients in the complicated process of seeking a SO, suggest specialists who are suitable for the specific medical problem of the patient, and provide tools to reconcile discrepant opinions

Patient-initiated second medical consultations: patient characteristics and motivating factors, impact on care and satisfaction: A systematic review

Objectives: To review the characteristics and motivations of patients seeking second opinions, and the impact of such opinions on patient management, satisfaction, and cost-effectiveness. Data sources: Embase, Medline, PsycINFO and HMIC databases. Study design: A systematic literature search was performed for terms related to second opinion and patient characteristics. Study quality was assessed using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Data collection / Extraction methods: We included articles focused on patient-initiated second opinions, which provided quantitative data on their impact on diagnosis, treatment, prognosis or patient satisfaction, described the characteristics or motivating factors of patients who initiated a second opinion, or the cost-effectiveness of patient-initiated second opinions. Principal findings: Thirty-one articles were included in the review. 27 studies considered patient characteristics, 18 patient motivating factors, 10 patient satisfaction, and 17 clinical agreement between the first and second opinion. Seeking a second opinion was more common in women, middle age patients, more educated patients; and in people having a chronic condition, with higher income or socioeconomic status or living in central urban areas. Patients seeking a second opinion sought to gain more information or reassurance about their diagnosis or treatment. While many second opinions confirm the original diagnosis or treatment, discrepancies in opinions had a potential major impact on patient outcomes in up to 58% of cases. No studies reporting on the cost-effectiveness of patient initiated second opinions. Conclusions: Seeking a second opinion was more common in women, middle-age patients, and more educated patients, and in people having a chronic condition, with higher income or socioeconomic status or living in central urban areas. Patients seeking a second opinion sought to gain more information or reassurance about their diagnosis or treatment

Population Health Solutions for Assessing Cognitive Impairment in Geriatric Patients.

In December 2017, the National Academy of Neuropsychology convened an interorganizational Summit on Population Health Solutions for Assessing Cognitive Impairment in Geriatric Patients in Denver, Colorado. The Summit brought together representatives of a broad range of stakeholders invested in the care of older adults to focus on the topic of cognitive health and aging. Summit participants specifically examined questions of who should be screened for cognitive impairment and how they should be screened in medical settings. This is important in the context of an acute illness given that the presence of cognitive impairment can have significant implications for care and for the management of concomitant diseases as well as pose a major risk factor for dementia. Participants arrived at general principles to guide future screening approaches in medical populations and identified knowledge gaps to direct future research. Key learning points of the summit included: recognizing the importance of educating patients and healthcare providers about the value of assessing current and baseline cognition;emphasizing that any screening tool must be appropriately normalized and validated in the population in which it is used to obtain accurate information, including considerations of language, cultural factors, and education; andrecognizing the great potential, with appropriate caveats, of electronic health records to augment cognitive screening and tracking of changes in cognitive health over time

Relational mobility predicts social behaviors in 39 countries and is tied to historical farming and threat

International audienc

Immunostimulation and Immunoinhibition of Premalignant Lesions

BACKGROUND: The immune reaction may be either stimulatory or inhibitory to tumor growth, depending upon the local ratio of immune reactants to tumor cells. HYPOTHESIS: A tumor-stimulatory immune response may be essential for survival of a neoplasm in vivo and for the biological progression from a premalignant lesion to a malignancy. Neither a positive nor a negative correlation between the magnitude of an immune-cell infiltrate and a cancer's prognosis can reveal whether the infiltrate was stimulating or inhibiting to the tumor's growth unless the position on the nonlinear curve that relates tumor growth to the magnitude of the immune reaction is known. DISCUSSION: This hypothesis is discussed in relation to the development of human malignant melanomas and colorectal cancers

Cancer immunotherapy by immunosuppression

We have previously suggested that the stimulatory effect of a weak immune reaction on tumor growth may be necessary for the growth of incipient tumors. In the present paper, we enlarge upon and extend that idea by collecting evidence in the literature bearing upon this new hypothesis that a growing cancer, whether in man or mouse, is throughout its lifespan, probably growing and progressing because of continued immune stimulation by a weak immune reaction. We also suggest that prolonged immunosuppression might interfere with progression and thus be an aid to therapy. While most of the considerable evidence that supports the hypothesis comes from observations of experimental mouse tumors, there is suggestive evidence that human tumors may behave in much the same way, and as far as we can ascertain, there is no present evidence that necessarily refutes the hypothesis

The Psychometric Properties of a Self-Administered, Open-Source Module for Valuing Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression Utilities.

Introduction Web surveys are often used for utility valuation. Typically, custom utility valuation tools that have not undergone psychometric evaluation are used. Objectives This study aimed to determine the psychometric properties of a metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) module run on a customizable open-source, internet-based, self-directed utility valuation platform (Self-directed Online Assessment of Preferences [SOAP]). Methods Individuals accompanying patients to the emergency department waiting room in Ottawa, Canada, were recruited. Participants made SOAP MESCC health state valuations in the waiting room and 48 h later at home. Validity, agreement reliability, and responsiveness were measured by logical consistency of responses, smallest detectable change, the interclass correlation coefficient, and Guyatt’s responsiveness index, respectively. Results Of 285 participants who completed utility valuations, only 113 (39.6%) completed the re-test. Of these 113 participants, 92 (81.4%) provided valid responses on the first test and 75 (66.4%) provided valid responses on the test and re-test. Agreement for all groups of health states was adequate, since their smallest detectable change was less than the minimal clinically important difference. The mean interclass correlation coefficients for all health states were > 0.8, indicating at least substantial reliability. Guyatt’s responsiveness indices all exceeded 0.80, indicating a high level of responsiveness. Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the first validated open-source, web-based, self-directed utility valuation module. We have demonstrated the SOAP MESCC module is valid, reproducible, and responsive for obtaining ex ante utilities. Considering the successful psychometric validation of the SOAP MESCC module, other investigators can consider developing modules for other diseases where direct utility valuation is needed.Hans K. Uthoff Fun

Determining value in health technology assessment: Stay the course or tack away?

The economic evaluation of new health technologies to assess whether the value of the expected health benefits warrants the proposed additional costs has become an essential step in making novel interventions available to patients. This assessment of value is problematic because there exists no natural means to measure it. One approach is to assume that society wishes to maximize aggregate health, measured in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Commonly, a single 'cost-effectiveness' threshold is used to gauge whether the intervention is sufficiently efficient in doing so. This approach has come under fire for failing to account for societal values that favor treating more severe illness and ensuring equal access to resources, regardless of pre-existing conditions or capacity to benefit. Alternatives involving expansion of the measure of benefit or adjusting the threshold have been proposed and some have advocated tacking away from the cost per QALY entirely to implement therapeutic area-specific efficiency frontiers, multicriteria decision analysis or other approaches that keep the dimensions of benefit distinct and value them separately. In this paper, each of these alternative courses is considered, based on the experiences of the authors, with a view to clarifying their implications