Medical Monday: Breaking News from the World of Obstetrics and Gynecology

POLICY NEWS 

Good Monday. The media continues to focus on the Trump administration’s Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Policy of promoting “ abstinence only” to reduce teen pregnancy rates. Physicians like me deplore this scientifically disproven strategy. My governing body, ACOG, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology espouses and promotes access to evidence based contraception as fundamental to women’s health care. 

However there is more to the story. There is nothing wrong with the choice of abstinence. There is no problem if a patient choses abstinence as her birth control method. But to offer abstinence “only” in the context of a health care or teen pregnancy prevention setting, is folly. Similarly, there is no problem with discussing the “ benefits of avoiding sex” as the administration proposes. Furthermore, health care providers in particular would be happy to support the DHHS in avoiding the normalization of “ sexual risk behaviors”. I am assuming that they mean high risk sexual behaviors. All of this would be fine if it were not for the deal breaker clause “ abstinence only”, and, oh yes, defunding those who do not march in step with it. The NY Times has published an editorial exposing the shift to Title X funding priorities to abstinence only programs under the direction of Valerie Huber, a longtime advocate of abstinence only birth control. 

There’s more. The latest healthcare budget proposal not only seeks to redirect Title X funds, it also seeks to defund Planned Parenthood and other family planning programs altogether, as well as scrap, not just reduce, the budget for the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program. Democrats plan to block this budget proposal. ACOG has stated that half of all pregnancies are unintended and this is a major public health problem.  41% of teens have had sex in high school. 

Scrutiny of drug prices is increasing in this administration. FDA administrator Scott Gottlieb as criticized drug pricing constructs used by the big drug companies which result in large OOP ( out of pocket expenditures) for patients. He was quoted as saying “ sick people aren’t supposed to be subsidizing the healthy”. Of course this sounds very pro-patient, but the bottom line is that the government current insures a great many people through Medicare, Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act, and it wants to pay less for drugs. 

Many of you know that I believe data should be free. Accordingly, I believe patients should have access to all their medical information and it should be complete, digital and portable to other providers. The Trump administration has indicated an interest is facilitating this trend. While access to complete digital medical records has many patient and caregiver advantages, it also makes it easier for insurers and regulators to determine eligibility and reimbursement, or lack thereof. For the time being, I think I’d trust Amazon, Google or Apple with my data more than I would trust a government medical database. Although theoretically, de-identified data would make it possible to do a lot of helpful population based research like they do in the Scandinavian Countries which have Universal Health Care. 

Work requirements for Medicaid recipients sounds like a good idea. However, Medicaid recipients are often pregnant single mothers. Arkansas has approved such regulations. Alabama is examining the idea. Children’s advocates are concerned that work requirements will take these parents away from children, while providing no daycare to supplant them. Single unemployed people on Medicaid rarely can afford daycare or even transportation to and from a job. Why is this not obvious ? My idea: Given these people a computer with internet access and require them to take an online class toward a certification. Make passing required and grades count. This could be done from home and the need for a car or daycare would go away. Maybe I will write my elected officials. 

The Trump administration wants to test work requirements to see if they improve patient care or reduce costs. ( Who decided those endpoints ? ) However the GAO (General Accounting Office) has asserted that such analyses in the past have not been rigorously conducted, and their results have-not been published, limiting their utility.

I thought Republicans wanted less government intrusion into our lives. Senate Bill 1394 in Arizona would require hospitals or clinics to report if a woman had an abortion and to report the REASON she had it. Seriously ? As if these reasons weren’t personal and complicated and no business of our elected officials ? It would also require that hospitals require reporting to the State in the event of any abortion complications, though this is not the case for complications of any other procedures. Arizona ACOG has come out in force against this. 

MEDICAL NEWS

Preterm birth has been an unmitigated scourge in the US. It is twice as much so for women soldiers recently returned from duty. Preterm birth is poorly understood, but its many associations point to various forms of stress, such as socioeconomic deprivation, racism and abuse. I interpret this to mean anything that makes the women’s body a hostile environment for the fetus. It makes sense that a military environment would meet this criteria. 

On the other hand, exercise is an entirely different kind of stress, a good stress. Recent research has confirmed not only that pregnancy women may exercise, but that they may safely exercise in warm weather. They may also take hot baths and short saunas. That said, it is critical that patients considering these activities check with their doctor first as there may be caveats. 

Nurx. My new company crush. Go to Nurx.com. This is a San Francisco startup offering doctor prescribed brith control online, with or without insurance. It currently operates in 18 States and they are looking to hire more docs in more states. Teens are welcome. 

In the “ olden days”,  male medical students generally entered surgical specialties and female medical students entered non-surgical specialties. The crossover came with Ob/Gyn which is surgical. Women had a natural affinity for the field, and patients almost always prefer them. When I entered the field, it had already become half and half. However, now, 25 some years later, only 17% of Ob/Gyns are men. Male doctors are worried about getting into the field, and women in the field are worried about the demonstrated historical monetary devaluation of a field once it is predominantly filled by women. The big picture is this: Ob/Gyns are in short supply and the supply is growing smaller by the year. We should welcome and properly reimburse any docs of any gender willing to take on the vicissitudes of the profession. New data suggests bolstering the ranks of Certified Nurse Midwives could also help to address the shortage of skilled Obstetrics care providers, and together improve our deplorable maternal morbidity and mortality statistics.  

Good news ! A new study has indicated that probiotics and fish oil in pregnancy are associated with reduced allergies and eczema children. The study is of very high quality since it is a meta-analysis, a compilation of 19 other high quality studies onto same subject. That may warrant a policy change in the office. 

Stay tuned more more news from the world of Obstetrics and Gynecology, here next week, on Medical Monday. 

Belated Medical Monday: Breaking News from the World of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Actual patient care through the weekend prevented a timely publication of Medical Monday. Thanks for your patience ! 

The health care sector’s initial responses to the Trump administration’s approach to health care policy ranged from shock to anger. Now people and corporations are starting to take action, especially in the face of the administration’s disarray and impotence. 

The Trump administration through the Department of Health and Human Services slashed $200 million from the Teen Pregnancy and Prevention Program. (Can anybody tell me the process that made this possible, or does the President just decide like a dictator ? ) The spokesperson of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy has spoken out and disputed the administration’s position which stated that there is “ very weak evidence of positive impact of these programs. “  Experts everywhere are dismayed since the programs are believed to have produced a 41% drop in the teen pregnancy rate since 2010. The CDC (Centers for Disease Control) and ACOG ( American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) both credit the declining teen birth rate to these programs. 

The Trump administration is bit by bit, trying to dismantle the ACA’s protections on reproductive health care. Most recently, the contraceptive mandate for employer sponsored programs is on the chopping block. ACOG has stated that the contraceptive mandate has driven the unintended pregnancy rate to a 30 year low, and eliminating this feature would be a threat to public health. 

The Trump administration has indicated its support for abstinence only sex education, which has no evidence to support its efficacy. However, the CDC has produced two meta-analyses which indicate that comprehensive sex education results in reduced overall levels of sexual activity and increased levels of protection among those that are sexually active. 

Indiana law classified the use of aborted fetal tissue as a felony. A group of Indiana researchers has challenged this legislation with a federal lawsuit. The group bringing the suit is from the National Institute of Health funded Alzheimers Disease Center where they do study brain tissue from aborted fetuses. 

A recent article in the Dallas Morning News has highlighted the new voice of corporate American in social policy. Corporate America needs a diverse and inclusive workforce, and it understand that inclusiveness is good for business. Accordingly, it has begun to stand up for diversity. From various quarters, highly placed business leaders have spoken out and defied the current administration’s divisive policies. Recent examples of these divisive policies and positions include the President’s reaction to the Charlottesville violence, as well as recent controversy regarding LGBT rights, i.e. the so-called bathroom bill. 

The writer of the Dallas Morning News editorial, Dr. Daniel Grossman of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of California, San Francisco, has called upon the business community to begin speaking out on women’s reproductive rights as well. He cites the fact that fully 70% of Americans support women’s access to full reproductive services including abortion, and this is also the position of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology and the American Medical Association. A broad based field of research has shown time and again that access to comprehensive and affordable reproductive health care for women leads to better health, higher levels of educational attainment, and improved economic stability for women, families and society at large. To learn more see https://www.ansirh.org, Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Heath, a division of the UCSF Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, http://bixbycenter.ucsf.edu. 

As mentioned in several past posts, States are starting to take matters into their own hands. They are, on their own State legislative calendars, enacting various bills that safeguard the requirements for insurance to cover various benefits such as birth control or prenatal care. The latest is Arkansas, which has passed a law which will require insurers in the State to cover indicated mammograms. 

In the good news department, we have word that there are bipartisan meetings planned in the first part of September, which will include Governors as well as State Insurance Commissioners. The goal of the meetings will be to stabilize existing insurance markets under the ACA. Things may actually start to get real. 

In medical news, the truth is starting to come out, as truth eventually does. New data published in a recent study shows that yearly mammograms starting at 40 (rather than every other year at 50) would prevent the most deaths due to breast cancer. According to this study out of Cornell and New York Presbyterian, for those aged 40-80, screening at 40 reduces breast cancer deaths by 40 % beyond current protocols. Those who read this column regularly already know that a whole segment of the health care world including ACOG, the American Cancer Society and the American College of Breast Surgeons among others, have always taken this view. They have taken serious issue with the short sighted recommendations of the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPTF) which has taken the position that mammograms in the 40s confer no benefit. 

All parties concerned recognize that this earlier and more frequent approach mammograms produces a higher number of false positives. However, actual clinicians ( doctors, nurses and nurse practitioners who see patients) do not take the position of the USPSTF(statisticians and epidemiologists largely)  that fear of mammograms, pain of mammograms, breast biopsies with benign results constituting a false positive, or even infected or bruised breast biopsies compare with a breast cancer death as a harm. In fact no number of these types of “harms” could ever add up to even one breast cancer death. 

The next item is in both the good news department and the we-already-knew-this department. A recent analysis published in the journal Menopause has indicated that vaginal estrogen does NOT confer increased cardiovascular risk. Vaginal estrogen does not appreciably enter systemic circulation. It stays local to the vagina, and does its job to relieve postmenopausal vaginal dryness. Vaginal estrogen was found to NOT increase risk for breast cancer or for any of these: colon cancer, uterus cancer, stroke, clots in the lung (pulmonary embolus) or deep vein thrombosis. Sheepish gynecologists should prescribe with confidence. 

A concerning new report published in the journal Pediatrics has brought to light that less than half of new moms are consistently putting their babies on their backs to sleep. Not doing so raises the risk of SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome). Three quarters state they “ usually" do so. Current guidelines clearly state that babies should be in their parents room, in their own bed, and on their back to sleep for the first six months of their life. 

Breast and ovarian cancer patients are not getting genetic testing at adequate rates. Genetic testing for these patients informs the care of their children. Moreover, it can also provide insight into their own treatment. Finally, it may ultimately provide information that could help us screen for and treat cancer in new and better ways. I look forward to the day when disease is understood and treated at a genetic level. To get there, we must as a society, contribute our personal genetic information in a meaningful way. 

That’s it for this week; Stay tuned next week for more news from the exciting world of Obstetrics and Gynecology.