Study Finds Why Some Patients Do Poorly with Spinal Cord Stimulators

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Spinal cord stimulators (SCSs) are often considered the treatment of last resort for people with severe back or leg pain, who don’t respond well to more conventional ways of treating pain.

The neuromodulation devices are surgically placed near the spine and send out mild electrical impulses to mask pain signals. Because stimulators are invasive and have poor success rates, it’s customary for patients to go through a short trial period before having the devices surgically implanted.

A new study has documented why some patients do well with stimulators and others don’t.

In a retrospective analysis, researchers at the University of Kansas Medical Center looked at 237 patients who received SCSs, about a third of them considered “nonresponders.” They found that people with severe pain and disability who fear physical activity because of the pain it might cause – a condition known as kinesiophobia – are significantly less likely to respond to the devices.

The study is being presented this month at the annual meeting of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA).

Researchers analyzed several patient characteristics, such as their age, gender, body mass index, history of spinal surgery, diabetes, alcohol and tobacco use, psychiatric illness, and use of opioids. None appeared to have an association with how a patient responds to SCS.

But researchers found that three out of four (76%) nonresponders had clinically high levels of kinesiophobia, compared to about half (56%) of those who did respond to SCS treatment. Nonresponders were also more likely to have severe pain, disability, and to complain or worry about their pain – a condition known as “catastrophizing.”

“Collectively, our findings indicate a clinically relevant association of high levels of kinesiophobia, greater disability, severe pain intensity and pain catastrophizing, as subtle indicators, and possible predictive factors to nonresponders,” researchers said.

“As such, it may be appropriate to utilize preoperative screening tools for these factors to help optimize patient selection and predict a patient’s response to neuromodulation. Furthermore, if risk factors are present, it might be prudent to consider a pre-rehabilitation program with pain neuroscience patient education prior to SCS therapy to address these modifiable risk factors and potentially enhance outcomes in neuromodulation.”

About 50,000 spinal cord stimulators are implanted annually in the U.S. The devices are often touted as a safer alternative to opioid pain medication, although a growing number of studies have questioned their safety and efficacy.

A recent Cochrane review of SCSs concluded the devices work no better than a placebo for treating chronic low back pain, and provide little to no benefit in improving quality of life. That negative review led some doctors who perform the surgeries to demand a retraction from Cochrane because of “striking errors in the methodology, execution and conclusions” of the study.

Meanwhile, a 2018 investigation found that SCSs have some of the worst safety records of medical devices and called for better FDA oversight of their growing use in pain management. A subsequent FDA review of complaints involving stimulators found that nearly a third were reports of unsatisfactory pain relief.

Yet another recent study found that many patients given stimulators did not reduce their use of opioids, and continued getting procedures such as epidurals, corticosteroid injections and radiofrequency ablation to relieve their pain.

Let’s End the Silence About Endometriosis

By Dr. Kristina Brown, Adler University

Endometriosis causes physical, sexual and emotional pain. About 190 million people around the globe have endometriosis, including one in 10 American women, but there has historically been a deafening silence about the disease and the pervasive impact it can have on a person’s life.

While endometriosis is a chronic gynecological illness that can affect anyone with a uterus – women, transgender men and nonbinary individuals – it often goes undiagnosed because its symptoms can be attributed to other physical or psychological concerns. Patients presenting with this pain are often told it is “all in your head.”

However, endometriosis is becoming a more visible illness, thanks in part to celebrities such as Lena Dunham, Chrissy Teigen, Amy Schumer, Whoopi Goldberg and others who have begun sharing their stories publicly.

After going undiagnosed for 23 years, Padma Lakshmi, a popular cookbook author, actress and host of the TV show “Top Chef,” founded EndoFund, previously Endometriosis Foundation of America, in 2009 so that others do not have to go through what she did.

I am a couple and family therapy professor, clinician and researcher. My own endometriosis diagnosis at the age of 19 has inspired my work exploring how this illness affects others beyond the physical symptoms.

To better understand the impact of endometriosis on relationships, I interviewed 10 couples about their experiences of diagnosis, treatment and living with this disease. Through their stories of how endometriosis-related pain can affect every aspect of daily life, including their intimate relationships, I provide some specific recommendations. The quotes I have included in this article are from my doctoral dissertation research.

Basics of Endometriosis

When a person has endometriosis, the endometrial cells that line their uterus “implant” in places outside the uterus, such as the ovaries, fallopian tubes and the lining of the abdomen — called the peritoneum. At the end of each menstrual cycle, the uterus sheds its lining, which exits the body via the cervix and vagina. The “misplanted” endometrial cells also shed, but they have no place to go – resulting in internal bleeding, inflammation and pain.

An endometriosis diagnosis is described in stages related to the visual presence of the disease, from minimal, or Stage 1, to severe, or Stage 4. However, there is no connection between the stage and the experience of pain.

One symptom of endometriosis is intense pain during the menstrual cycle. Another is pain with sex. Because pain with menses or sex can be attributed to “normal” pain, a history of sexual abuse or psychiatric reasons such as a dislike of sex, some people with endometriosis wait an average of seven years for diagnosis, which can be visually confirmed only through a procedure called laparoscopy.

In addition to these and other types of severe pain, endometriosis can also cause infertility, and patients who want to have children must often undergo medical or surgical interventions to conceive.

Impact on School, Work and Sex

Physical pain from endometriosis can be debilitating. Adolescents with endometriosis may struggle to keep up with their classes, friends, homework or extracurricular activities when the pain becomes too severe. They may shift to home-schooling or virtual learning to complete their studies.

The pain can also deeply affect a career trajectory. “I almost lost my job because of time off,” one interviewee told me. “In fact, when I had to get my hysterectomy, I walked in to tell my manager and he goes, ‘Well, I hope you’re not going to tell me that you have to have a hysterectomy and have to be out for six weeks!’ And I just broke down in tears.”

All of my participants shared experiences where doctors dismissed complaints of sexual pain – called dyspareunia – from endometriosis. This can delay diagnosis and treatment.

Sex and intimacy often become nonexistent, while some couples shared that they have come to accept that pain is part of sex. One woman shared with me: “I don’t want to be touched or have my naked body seen because I feel bloated and ugly and I’m in horrible pain!”

Partners can also be affected emotionally. “I just feel horrible,” one told me. “There are times when we are having sex that I actually feel guilty that I know that I am hurting her and I know she is going to be in pain and it makes me unhappy.”

These experiences of pain, of not being believed by doctors and professionals, of negative effects on education and career and of intimacy destroyed create a heavy emotional burden on individuals and relationships.

Breaking the Silence

When I was diagnosed with endometriosis, it changed the course of my life. My partner and I learned to expand our definition of intimacy and to redistribute household responsibilities when I was incapacitated. As the risk of infertility only increases without intervention, we started conversations about having children earlier than anticipated. My diagnosis also led me to focus my professional identity as a medical family therapist to help others deal with endometriosis and chronic illnesses.

Based on this experience, here are some ways to break this silence:

• Learn about endometriosis. It directly helps when one’s support systems are educated.

• Separate the person from the disease. When the pain you are experiencing from endometriosis is debilitating, help those around you who are also affected to understand that it is because of your endometriosis and it is not personal.

• Speak from your own experience, saying, “I …” rather than “You …” When we do this, it decreases the other person’s defenses and opens up the communication, making space for connection.

My research participants shared their own recommendations with me, especially the importance of believing that their pain is real; accept that what they are sharing is their very real experience, and let them know that they are believed.

Bestselling author and social work researcher Brené Brown has said, “Empathy fuels connection, sympathy drives disconnection.” Approaching someone with endometriosis from a position of empathy sends a message that you want to work with them collaboratively.

By practicing these important relationship skills, we can break the silence around endometriosis.

Kristina S. Brown, PhD, is a Marriage and Family Therapist, and Professor and Chair of Couple and Family Therapy at Adler University in Chicago. Dr. Brown is the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Feminist Family Therapy and also serves as the Director of Mental Health for Floating Doctors.

This article originally appeared in The Conversation and is republished with permission.

Experimental Fiber Implants Block Nerve Pain with Light

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have developed experimental fiber implants that could potentially be used to deliver pulses of light from inside the body to inhibit nerve pain. Unlike other implants, the hydrogel fibers are flexible and stretch with the body during movement.     

“Current devices used to study nerve disorders are made of stiff materials that constrain movement, so that we can’t really study spinal cord injury and recovery if pain is involved,” said co-author Siyuan Rao, PhD, now an assistant professor of biomedical engineering at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. “Our fibers can adapt to natural motion and do their work while not limiting the motion of the subject. That can give us more precise information.”

In tests on laboratory mice with genetically modified nerves, researchers used the fiber implants to deliver blue light to the sciatic nerve, which activated the animals’ hind limb muscles.

When pulses of yellow light were used, the light inhibited neuropathic pain in the mice.

For now, MIT engineers see the fibers primarily as a research tool that can help them study the causes and potential treatments of peripheral nerve disorders in animals.

Credit: Sabrina Urbina Villafranca

Neuropathic pain occurs when peripheral nerves are damaged, resulting in tingling, numbness and stinging sensations in the hands and feet. About 20 million Americans suffer from peripheral neuropathy, which can be caused by diabetes, chemotherapy, lupus, HIV, Lyme disease, celiac disease and many other disorders.

“Now, people have a tool to study the diseases related to the peripheral nervous system, in very dynamic, natural, and unconstrained conditions,” said co-author Xinyue Liu, PhD, who is now an assistant professor at Michigan State University. 

The MIT team’s study, recently published in the journal Nature Methods, grew out of a desire to expand the use of optogenetics -- a technique in which nerves are genetically engineered to respond to light. Exposure to specific light waves can either activate or inhibit a nerve, giving scientists a new way to study how nerves work. 

Scientists have used optogenetics in animals to trace nerves involved in a range of brain disorders, including addiction, Parkinson’s disease, and mood and sleep disorders.

Until now, optogenetics has primarily been used in the brain, an organ that lacks pain receptors, which allows for the relatively painless implantation of rigid devices. The MIT team wondered if optogenetics could be expanded to nerves outside the brain to study peripheral nerve pain.  

Because peripheral nerves undergo constant pushing and pulling from adjoining muscles and tissues, they needed more flexible devices that would not constrain movement or cause tissue damage.  

The new optical fibers are made with hydrogel — a rubbery mix of polymers and water – that is soft and flexible. The fiber has two layers; a core and an outer shell that funnel light through the fiber without escaping or scattering. 

When implanted in mice, researchers say the animals were still able to run freely on an exercise wheel. After two months, the fiber was still resistant to fatigue and could transmit light efficiently to trigger muscle contractions. 

“We are focusing on the fiber as a new neuroscience technology,” Liu says. “We hope to help dissect mechanisms underlying pain in the peripheral nervous system. With time, our technology may help identify novel mechanistic therapies for chronic pain and other debilitating conditions such as nerve degeneration or injury.”

Thousands of Artificial Knees and Hips Wear Out Prematurely

By Fred Schulte, KFF Health News

Ron Irby expected the artificial knee implanted in his right leg in September 2018 would last two decades — perhaps longer.

Yet in just three years, the Optetrak implant manufactured by Exactech in Gainesville, Florida, had worn out and had to be replaced — a painful and debilitating operation.

“The surgery was a huge debt of pain paid over months,” said Irby, 71, a Gainesville resident and retired medical technologist with the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Irby is one of more than 1,100 patients suing Exactech after it began recalling artificial knees, hips, and ankles, starting in August 2021. A letter Exactech sent to surgeons blamed a packaging defect dating back as far as 2004 for possibly causing the plastic in a knee component to wear out prematurely in about 140,000 implants.

Many patients argue in hundreds of lawsuits that they have suffered through, or could soon face, challenging and risky operations to replace defective implants that failed.

Although Exactech does not offer an express warranty on its products, the company stresses the durability of its implants in advertising, even suggesting they likely will outlive their human recipients.

RON IRBY

Exactech, which grew over three decades from a mom-and-pop device manufacturer into a global entity that sold for $737 million in 2018, declined comment, citing the “ongoing litigation,” said company spokesperson Tom Johnson. In court filings, Exactech has argued that its products are not defective and have “an excellent history.”

A KFF Health News review of thousands of pages of court filings in patient lawsuits, a pending whistleblower lawsuit, and other government records shows that the company is being accused of downplaying or concealing evidence of product failures from patients and federal regulators for years. In hundreds of instances, according to government records, the company took years to report adverse events to a federal database that tracks device failures.

In his suit, Irby alleges that Exactech “knew or should have known” that the Optetrak “had an unacceptable failure and complication rate.” He said Exactech used packaging materials of “an inferior grade or quality.”

“I think they were cutting corners to improve their bottom line,” Irby told KFF Health News.

Exactech denied the allegations in a legal filing in Irby’s suit, in which it described the Optetrak device as “safe and effective.”

‘Trailblazing’ Implant

Surgeon William “Bill” Petty chaired the orthopedics department at the University of Florida in Gainesville, when he, his wife, Betty, and Gary Miller, a biomedical engineer and fellow faculty member, formed Exactech in November 1985. The Pettys served in corporate roles until retiring in early 2020. Their first hire was their son David in 1988, who remains on Exactech’s board of directors.

Exactech’s fortunes started to take off in 1994, when it inked a major deal to license and market the Optetrak knee implant based on designs by surgeons and engineers at the prestigious Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City. That alliance won Exactech instant credibility in the fiercely competitive device industry.

So did its pedigree as a “surgeon-focused” business with a family-run vibe, small enough that surgeons considering its wares could meet the owners and tour its Florida plant.

Building on that goodwill, Exactech’s sales shot past $124 million in 2007, about half generated by the Optetrak knee system.

“It’s not just a road we’re on, it’s a trail we’re blazing,” the company boasted in sales literature aimed at surgeons.

Exactech’s corporate confidence belies years of warnings and doubts about the durability of the Optetrak, according to whistleblowers — one whistleblower called it an “open secret” inside the company.

Notably, there were concerns about the fragility of a finned tibial tray, one of the four pieces of the knee replacement that fits into the shin bone, according to the whistleblower lawsuit.

For starters, several surgeons complained that the knee implants loosened prematurely, causing patients pain and limiting their ability to move around, court records allege.

While 95% of artificial knees should last at least a decade, surgeons had to pull out and replace many Optetrak components — a complex operation known as revision surgery — much sooner, according to allegations in patient lawsuits.

Optetrak knee implant

Christopher Hutchins, a Connecticut orthopedic surgeon who relied on the Optetrak finned devices for more than 350 knee surgeries, said in a court deposition that some loosened in as little as two to three years. He called that “awfully premature” and “extraordinary.”

Hutchins vented his frustrations in a brief meeting with Exactech co-founder Bill Petty at a Rhode Island hospital in either 2006 or 2007, according to his deposition. Petty told him at the meeting he “realized that it was a problem” with the device, according to Hutchins.

“I was somewhat struck that if they knew there was a problem why it wasn’t being addressed and why the product wasn’t being pulled from the market,” Hutchins testified in the November 2021 deposition.

“There was no disclosure or transparency.”

Older patients not only suffered physical pain, but also felt an “emotional burden” from facing revision surgery in which results often are “not as good as the first go around,” Hutchins explained during his deposition testimony.“I’m in the business to try to make people better, and when things fail, I take it to heart.”

Hutchins was not the only surgeon alarmed by what he says were early failures of the Optetrak devices and the company’s tepid response.

‘Popping Out Right and Left’

In August 2005, Maine orthopedic surgeon Wayne Moody told company officials that Optetrak had loosened and needed to be revised in 25 out of 385 operations he had performed over the previous four years, according to meeting minutes filed in court.

One knee implant gave out in just nine months, Moody told the group, according to the minutes.

In a deposition, Robert Farley, a former Exactech sales agent who filed a whistleblower lawsuit in 2018 alleging fraud by the company, alleged that he heard two colleagues joke about Moody’s tribulations at a national sales conference.

Moody “probably had 50-something revisions. … They’re just popping out right and left,” the sales agent said, according to Farley’s suit.

Fellow whistleblower Manuel Fuentes, a former Exactech senior product manager, testified in a deposition that pulling the product off the market around 2008 “would have been the ethical and moral thing to do.”

At a meeting in early 2008 attended by the company’s top brass, including Bill Petty, the company’s marketing director at the time, Charley Rye, floated the idea of a recall, Fuentes said. Company executives shot that down as “financially detrimental,” Fuentes testified in a sworn declaration filed with the court.

Asked about the meeting during a December 2021 deposition, Petty replied, “I don’t recall that anyone suggested a recall.”

Exactech discussed the loosening problem in an internal memo that said between 2006 and 2009 the company “began to get some negative feedback” about the Optetrak “that was at times confounding and difficult to process,” court records show.

The discouraging reports ranged from complaints of early revisions from at least 10 U.S. surgeons and surgery practices in several of the more than 30 countries where Exactech sold the implant, court records show.

The results did little to dim Exactech’s prospects. From 1994 through April 2022, Exactech sold 58,763 Optetrak devices with finned trays for use by 514 surgeons nationwide, according to an affidavit by a company official.

Many lawsuits argue that instead of warning patients and surgeons about the loosening problem, Exactech replaced the finned tray component in its newest products, a strategy device industry critics refer to as a “silent recall.” Exactech denies that and said in a court filing that design changes it made were part of a “natural evolution” of the Optetrak.

Even as Exactech rolled out newer generations of the Optetrak, the company faced lawsuits and other criticism alleging it had failed to come clean about unusually high surgical revision rates.

Late Reporting to FDA

The Food and Drug Administration runs a massive, public, searchable databank called MAUDE to warn the public of dangers linked to medical devices and drugs.

Manufacturers must advise the FDA when they learn their device may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury, or malfunctioned in a way that might recur and cause harm.Those reports must be submitted within 30 days unless a special exemption is granted.

But court and government records show that reports of adverse reactions tied to Exactech’s implant sometimes took years to show up in the government database — if they were reported at all.

Exactech failed to advise the FDA of dozens of Optetrak early revision complaints lodged by orthopedic surgeons Moody and Hutchins, a company representative acknowledged in a court filing.

KFF Health News downloaded the FDA data and found about 400 examples in which Exactech reported adverse events to the MAUDE database two years or more after learning of them.

FDA inspectors who combed through Exactech’s internal files in 2017 cited the company for failing to undertake an “adequate investigation” of complaints, according to FDA records cited in court filings.

In court filings, Exactech steadfastly denied Optetrak has any defects. Instead, it blamed the loosening problem on surgeons, saying they had failed to cement the knee implants into place correctly or misaligned them.

The company said it had no obligation to report poor outcomes tied to mistakes by surgeons — even though the FDA requires companies to report injuries involving “user error.” In 2022, a federal judge in the whistleblower case, in denying a motion to dismiss, found that Exactech was “hard-pressed” to claim it was not obligated to report the adverse events.

The three whistleblowers are accusing Exactech of fraud for allegedly selling defective products to Medicare and other federal health care programs. The case is pending in federal court in Alabama and Exactech has denied any wrongdoing. Exactech in mid-August filed a motion to dismiss the case.

Lawyers for more than 300 injured patients suing in Alachua County Circuit Court in Florida are pressing for full disclosure of 2,435 complaints to the company alleging deficiencies with Exactech knee products, which the company admits receiving as of the end of April.

Cutting Corners

In other pending lawsuits, patients argue the company pointedly ignored evidence of chronic safety issues to fuel profits.

Keith Nuzzo, of Litchfield, Maine, is one. He alleged that Exactech “cut corners, utilized inferior manufacturing practices … [and] only disclosed information or took corrective action if contacted by regulatory authorities.”

Nuzzo had a right knee replacement done by orthopedic surgeon Moody in February 2012 and a left knee implanted a week afterward.

His right knee became painful and wobbly about four years later and a second surgeon replaced it in August 2016. The left knee gave out in November 2020, also requiring replacement, according to the suit.

Despite the revisions, Nuzzo lives with “daily knee pain and discomfort,” which limits his “activities of daily living and recreation,” according to the suit. The case is pending. As of mid-September, Exactech had not filed an answer.

In advertising directed at surgeons, Exactech boasts about the long life of its implants.

One sales brochure states that the Optetrak “demonstrated 91-99 percent implant survival rates” over just under a decade. That is consistent with, if not superior to, industry standards, though as a rule of thumb many surgeons expect implants to last 15 to 20 years, sometimes longer.

The mounting legal claims allege many Exactech knee and hip implants have worn out well before their time.

The KFF Health News analysis of more than 300 pending cases in Alachua County found that surgeons removed about 200 implants after less than seven years. Some people in the sample, whose surgeries spanned more than two dozen states, were awaiting revision procedures. In the federal court sample, patients alleged that half of the 400 implants that were removed lasted less than six years.

Advertising materials aside, Exactech is circumspect in describing the reliability of its implants when it speaks to courts. In a 2021 filing, the company noted that the Optetrak comes with no express warranty.

How long it lasts “depends on a multitude of factors, including those pertaining to surgical technique and the particular patient,” the company said.

Consulting Fees

Exactech’s focus on its surgeon customers includes paying handsome consulting fees to some orthopedists who have used the company’s implants in the operating room or promoted them in advertising.

Exactech paid surgeon consultants $23.2 million combined from the start of 2013 through the end of 2022, the most recent year available, according to a government database called Open Payments.

In promoting the Optetrak in sales materials, Exactech touted “excellent results” achieved by orthopedic surgeon Raymond Robinson. Left unsaid: Exactech paid Robinson more than $900,000 in consulting fees and other payments from 2013 through 2022. In a court filing, Exactech denied any consultants “were compensated in exchange for product promotion.” Robinson could not be reached for comment.

Exactech’s sales brochures also boast that surgeons “around the world have documented excellent results with the Optetrak knee system.”

Yet Exactech bottled up a succession of sharply negative reports from other countries, while working to discredit others, according to internal company records filed in court by the whistleblowers.

One surgery group in France concluded in 2012 that nine of 110 Optetrak procedures required revision due to loosening in under three years, for instance. Exactech disputed the findings in a published response, and in a court filing said the conclusions were “based on incorrect information and a flawed understanding of the true causes.”

A hospital in Buenos Aires, Argentina, reported that 25% to 30% of Optetrak knees required revisions in under two years, according to whistleblower Fuentes.

The Australian implant registry criticized Optetrak’s reliability as early as 2007 and in several later years. In response, Exactech executives said in depositions and court filings that they traced many of the poor results to a single hospital and three surgeons who failed to align the implants correctly.

The Australian registry pegged Exactech’s revision rate at 19.4% at seven years and 22% at 10 years, the worst of any knee implant on the market, which led the government health system to stop purchasing it, court records allege. Exactech denied the allegations in a court filing.

James Brooks, a retired Texas orthopedic surgeon, said in a court affidavit that he believed Exactech had an obligation to tell surgeons about the poor outcomes overseas rather than touting rosy results tied to doctors on its payroll.

In the 2021 affidavit, Brooks recalled implanting the Optetrak knee in a Dallas man in 2011, only to confirm from X-rays that it was failing in 2017 and needed to be replaced two years later. Brooks said he would have steered clear of Optetrak had he known of its “much higher failure rate than comparable products.”

‘Dear Patient’

Laura Grandis is suing Ohio orthopedic surgeon and Exactech consultant Ian Gradisar, who received $132,720 from the company, including research payments, from 2013 through 2022, according to government records.

Gradisar’s father, Ivan, also an orthopedic surgeon, served on the original Optetrak design team. In 2008, Ian Gradisar helped his father with an audit of “patient outcomes” commissioned by Exactech. The audit showed that 12 of 47 Optetrak patients operated on over the course of 15 months required revisions, giving the son “first-hand knowledge of the failing and defective Optetrak,” Grandis alleges in her suit.

Ian Gradisar put an Exactech implant in Grandis’ left knee in Akron, Ohio, in November 2020.

In early 2021, she had “severe” pain in her knee and needed a cane or a walker to get around, according to the suit.

Gradisar told her the knee had failed, which he said was “very rare and only happened 5% of the time,” according to the suit.

Grandis had revision surgery in July 2021 with an Optetrak implant. Some seven months later, she felt pain that worsened throughout the day. She tried ice and rest, but that did not work. Her knee hurt when she put weight on it and started making a clicking sound when she moved, according to the suit.

In June 2022, Grandis received a “Dear Patient” form letter from the hospital where her surgery was performed notifying her of the Exactech recall.

Gradisar’s office told her the surgeon could not see her until October 2022 “as he was inundated with phone calls from patients about the Exactech recall,” according to the suit.

In response to the suit, Exactech denied the allegations, including that its knee implants had “increased failure rates.” The case is pending. Gradisar and his lawyer did not respond to requests for comment.

But in a court filing, Gradisar denied any defects in the implant and said he “provided quality care and treatment” to Grandis.

In December 2022, Grandis ended up having a second revision operation that kept her hobbling around on crutches for six weeks, according to her suit.

Total Recall

Two years after the initial recall, Exactech and its owners — past and present — face a rush of lawsuits demanding accountability for alleged patient injuries.

Most of the suits in the Alachua County group name Bill, Betty, and David Petty and Miller as defendants for their roles at Exactech. Their attorney did not respond to requests for comment, but in May, the defendants jointly filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the suits fail “to allege sufficient facts to impose liability.”

Many suits in the federal court cluster also name as a defendant TPG Capital, a Texas-based private equity firm that paid $737 million to acquire Exactech in February 2018. TPG declined to comment but has filed a motion to dismiss the cases.

In one recall letter sent to surgeons, Exactech acknowledged that the data from the Australian registry confirmed that Optetrak had “statistically significant” higher rates of revisions than knee implants made by other companies — a conclusion it had previously disputed.

The letter adds that Exactech is “uncertain” if the packaging defect is the “root cause” of Optetrak’s poor performance. An FDA “safety communication” issued in March said the agency is working with Exactech to assess whether other implants packaged in the defective bags pose similar risks.

Exactech lawyers say the company may not be to blame for every implant that wears out unexpectedly.

In a November 2022 hearing, Exactech attorney Michael Kanute said wear of polyethylene implant components is a “known risk no matter who makes them.” He said the patient’s size and activity level as well as the technique of the surgeons could also be factors.

“So every case is different,” he said.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Will Thinking About Chronic Pain Differently Help Reduce It?

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Want to make your chronic back pain go away?

Then stop thinking about the physical cause of your pain with words like accident, bad posture or disc bulge.

Start attributing the cause of your pain to your own emotions. Use words like anxiety, stress and fear.

That’s the conclusion of a new analysis of an old study that found pain reprocessing therapy (PRT) beneficial in a small group of patients with chronic back pain. PRT is based on the theory that patients can reduce or even stop their pain simply by changing the way they think about it, without the use of drugs, injections or physical therapy.

“Millions of people are experiencing chronic pain and many haven’t found ways to help with the pain, making it clear that something is missing in the way we’re diagnosing and treating people,” says lead author Yoni Ashar, PhD, assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.

“Our study shows that discussing pain attributions with patients and helping them understand that pain is often ‘in the brain’ can help reduce it.”

Ashar and his colleagues were early proponents of PRT. In a 2021 clinical study, they recruited 151 people with moderate back pain, with an intensity of at least four on a pain scale of zero to 10. Participants assigned to PRT were encouraged to reappraise the severity of their pain and to think about it differently by engaging in movements they were afraid to do. About two-thirds found that helpful in reducing or even eliminating their pain.

In their new study, published in JAMA Network Open, researchers doubled down on their previous study by performing a “secondary analysis” of those same 151 people. Did they attribute their pain to a physical or emotional cause? What words did they use to describe it?

Before PRT treatment, only 10% of participants’ thought their back pain was mind or brain-related. After PRT, about half of them did. And the more they thought about their pain as a mind or brain process, the greater the reduction in pain they reported.

The graphic below demonstrates how participants thought about their pain differently before and after PRT. In a word cloud text analysis of their responses, PRT recipients were more likely to use words like stress and anxiety, and less likely to use words like muscles and injury.

Words Associated with Chronic Pain Before and After PRT

JAMA NETWORK OPEN

“These results show that shifting perspectives about the brain’s role in chronic pain can allow patients to experience better results and outcomes,” Ashar said.

“This study is critically important because patients’ pain attributions are often inaccurate. We found that very few people believed their brains had anything to do with their pain. This can be unhelpful and hurtful when it comes to planning for recovery since pain attributions guide major treatment decisions, such as whether to get surgery or psychological treatment.”

There are a number of caveats to this study. First is the small size. Second, participants had only low to moderate back pain, not the severe intractable pain caused by a spinal injury or disease. Thinking about your pain differently isn’t going to do much good for someone with arachnoiditis or Ehlers Danlos syndrome – and it is worrisome that studies like these are often used to deny patients with severe pain access to effective treatment such as opioid medication.

Third, pain reattribution was only modestly effective (about 9% on average) in relieving pain. Some participants who bought into the idea of thinking differently about their pain had no pain relief, leading the authors to admit that “reattribution alone is not sufficient for pain relief.”

Despite these weaknesses, researchers hope their study will encourage providers to talk to their patients more about the possible causes of their chronic pain.

“Often, discussions with patients focus on biomedical causes of pain. The role of the brain is rarely discussed,” said Ashar. “With this research, we want to provide patients as much relief as possible by exploring different treatments, including ones that address the brain drivers of chronic pain.”

You can learn more about PRT therapy by reading “The Way Out,” a book by psychotherapist Alan Gordon, who uses mindfulness and cognitive behavioral therapy to reduce the fear that many patients have about their pain and its triggers.

How Technology Could Improve Healthcare in Underserved Communities

By Barby Ingle, PNN Columnist 

This year I was fortunate to visit all 15 counties in Arizona, from large cities and rural areas to those considered “frontier” and tribal reservations. I talked to patients, providers and caregivers about the stress points in their access to healthcare. I was in towns with no EMS, no hospital, and no specialists.

Seeing these disparities in healthcare closeup was an eye-opener for me. Imagine being injured or needing surgery, and you must take a helicopter to get immediate care. It’s like living on another planet.  

We can ensure that underserved communities have equal access to healthcare services, regardless of location, by providing remote and rural areas with access to telemedicine. Although the ability to access the internet is still difficult in some areas, services like Elon Musk's Star Link are being utilized to improve healthcare no matter where you live. 

With the recent pandemic, we were able to utilize telemedicine more often and see advancements in digital health solutions. Healthcare professionals can now remotely diagnose, treat and monitor patients from a distance. But will relaxed telehealth rules continue in the same form now that the pandemic has ended? Many of the details are still being worked out.

Mobile applications and wearable devices enable patients to monitor their vital signs and share the data with providers, allowing for remote monitoring and proactive intervention. They can also empower patients to more closely monitor their own health, receive medical advice, and manage chronic conditions from their homes.

With the increased availability of internet connectivity and mobile networks, technology has the potential to revolutionize healthcare delivery and improve health outcomes in remote and underserved regions. Several steps can be taken to address the digital divide in healthcare between urban and rural areas.

First, it is crucial to educate individuals about the benefits of technology and digital health tools. Technology can reduce transportation barriers, provide on-demand health advice, and minimize the risk of exposure to infectious diseases by enabling patients to stay at home.

Second, partnerships between stakeholders, such as academia, the private sector and government can help narrow the digital divide by leveraging resources to place healthcare technology where it is most needed. By building awareness, partnerships and targeting resources, it will be possible to bridge the digital divide and ensure that all communities have access to healthcare technology.

Here are some specific steps that can be taken:

• Conduct a comprehensive needs assessment in underserved communities to understand their unique healthcare challenges, cultural context and technological requirements. A needs assessment can involve surveys, interviews and focus group discussions with community members, healthcare providers and other stakeholders.

• Engage community members, healthcare professionals, and technology experts in a co-design approach. This means collaborating with the community to design and develop healthcare technology solutions that align with its needs, preferences and capabilities.  

• Adopt a user-centered design approach to make sure healthcare technology is user friendly.  Involve people from underserved communities in testing and interface design to ensure the technology is accessible, culturally appropriate and easy to operate.

• Consider the affordability and sustainability of healthcare technology by addressing cost barriers. ensuring compatibility with low-resource settings, and developing tools that can operate with limited infrastructure or connectivity.

• Provide training and support for people to utilize healthcare technology effectively. The training should include digital literacy programs, capacity-building workshops, and ongoing technical assistance.  

By involving underserved communities in the design process, healthcare technology can be tailored to their specific needs, leading to increased adoption and improved healthcare outcomes. It is crucial to prioritize the needs of these communities to ensure that they are included in the design and development of healthcare technology. By doing so, we can create more effective and sustainable solutions that genuinely address the healthcare challenges faced by underserved communities.

I am grateful for the opportunity to talk to patients, providers and caregivers in Arizona, thanks to a grant from HealtheVoices, Respond & Rescue, KB Companies and the International Pain Foundation. I look forward to continuing to gather feedback from underserved communities nationwide. By listening to patients and understanding their unique healthcare challenges, we can work towards creating meaningful solutions that improve access to care and overall health outcomes. 

Barby Ingle is a reality TV personality living with multiple rare and chronic diseases. She is a chronic pain educator, patient advocate, motivational speaker, and best-selling author on pain topics. You can follow Barby at www.barbyingle.com. 

FDA Recalls Abbott Stimulators for Technical Malfunction

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

After receiving reports of dozens of injuries, the Food and Drug Administration has issued a Class I recall for two models of implantable neurostimulators due to a technical malfunction. The recall affects over 155,000 of Abbott’s Proclaim and Infinity devices, which are primarily used in spinal cord and deep brain stimulation.

Although Class I recalls are the most serious type of recall because they may result in injuries or death, patients are not being advised at this time to have the devices surgically removed. The stimulators were implanted in some patients as far back as 2015.

The malfunction occurs when the devices are temporarily turned off when a patient is having magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). There have been 186 complaints of patients being unable to turn the devices back on once the MRI ends, resulting in a loss of therapy and 73 injuries. No deaths have been reported.

In July, Abbott sent an “urgent medical device correction” letter to healthcare providers who install the devices, to clarify instructions on how to exit MRI mode.

The letter also advises providers to tell patients not to delete their device controller’s connection to Bluetooth if a malfunction occurs, and to update their systems and consult with a physician before having an MRI scan.   

ABBOTT IMAGE

Abbott estimates that only about 0.06% of the recalled devices malfunctioned, with 0.03% of them resulting in loss of therapy and additional surgery.   

The following devices are included in the recall:

• Proclaim XR 5 IPG Model 3660 (previously known as the ‘Proclaim 5 Elite IPG Model 3660’)

• Proclaim XR 7 IPG Model 3662 (Previously known as the ‘Proclaim 7 Elite IPG Model 3662’)

• Proclaim Plus 5 IPG Model 3670

• Proclaim Plus 7 IPG Model 3672

• Proclaim DRG IPG Model 3664

• Infinity 5 IPG Model 6660

• Infinity 7 IPG Model 6662

Implantable neurostimulators are an invasive treatment of last resort for people with chronic back, leg or head pain. The devices are surgically implanted near the spine or brain, and emit low-level electrical impulses to block pain signals.

About 50,000 spinal cord stimulators (SCSs) are implanted annually in the U.S. and their use is growing – in part because of the belief they’ll reduce the need for opioids and other pain therapies. A recent study found that many patients with stimulators did not reduce their use of opioids, epidurals, corticosteroid injections or radiofrequency ablation; and about one in five had complications so severe the devices had to be removed or revised.

A 2018 study found that SCSs have some of the worst safety records of medical devices tracked by the FDA. An FDA review of adverse events involving stimulators found that nearly a third were reports of poor pain relief. The review also identified nearly 500 deaths linked to the devices, along with nearly 78,000 injuries and 30,000 malfunctions.

Virtual Reality Has Long-Term Benefits for Patients with Back Pain

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

A novel treatment that combines virtual reality with cognitive behavioral therapy significantly reduced pain levels and other symptoms in patients with chronic back or neck pain, according to results of a new study presented at the annual meeting of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons.

Unlike other therapies using virtual reality (VR) – which temporarily distract people from their pain – patients in this study had long term reductions in their pain, anxiety and depression. This suggests that combining VR with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) induces neuroplasticity, a “rewiring” of the brain and nervous system that reduces the impact of physical and emotional trauma.    

“What we found is it actually creates new neural pathways to form, what's called neuroplastic reprogramming or neuroplastic change, and that actually creates a more resilient patient,” said co-author Gerry Stanley, MD, Chief Medical Officer of Harvard MedTech, a medical device company that offers VR therapy.

“The patient who may be thinking about their pain 22 hours a day, and their pain (level) has always been eight or nine, now thinks about their pain one or two hours a day and their pain (level) is a three or four, because the brain is no longer fixating on it. So it allows for, I don't want to say permanent distraction, it’s really neuroplastic reprogramming.”

Stanley and his colleagues enrolled 145 patients with non-operative degenerative neck or back pain in Harvard MedTech’s Vx Therapy program, which included daily virtual reality sessions for 14 weeks and weekly telephone calls with a therapist trained in CBT.  

Unlike other VR therapies, which encourage physical activity, participants sat stationary in a chair while watching and listening to prerecorded programs with a headset and earphones. The VR programs come in four categories that emphasize education, meditation, distraction or entertainment, depending on the patient’s needs and goals.

HARVARD MEDTECH IMAGE

After 14 weeks, results showed that Vx Therapy reduced pain and anxiety during sessions by an average of 33% and 46%, respectively. The duration of pain relief also increased over time, from 2.5 hours in the first weeks of treatment to 4.5 hours in the final weeks.

The study has not been peer-reviewed or published yet, but Stanley says the findings mirror what his company has learned after treating about 4,000 patients. The benefits of Vx Therapy continue long after the treatment ends, with many patients still reporting improvement after two years.  

“They're often reporting the same level of resiliency. I think a lot of it is they start getting into better sleep patterns,” he told PNN.  “And they really get good at meditation. Most people fail in meditation because of distractions. But when they're doing it in the virtual reality, they get very good at it. So they really develop some nice, I'm going to say muscle memory, even though I know it's cognitive. But they do develop a little bit of muscle memory around the meditation.”

Because Vx Therapy is done remotely, it’s available to any patient regardless of location, as long as they have a prescription. Some worker compensation insurers cover the treatment.   

Previous studies have also suggested that virtual reality therapy has long-term benefits for people with chronic back pain. A 2022 study showed that people with moderate lower back pain reported improvements in pain, function, mood and sleep six months after treatment ended.  

ChatGPT Is Replacing Dr. Google

By Andrew Leonard, KFF Health News

As a fourth-year ophthalmology resident at Emory University School of Medicine, Riley Lyons’ biggest responsibilities include triage: When a patient comes in with an eye-related complaint, Lyons must make an immediate assessment of its urgency.

He often finds patients have already turned to “Dr. Google.” Online, Lyons said, they are likely to find that “any number of terrible things could be going on based on the symptoms that they’re experiencing.”

So, when two of Lyons’ fellow ophthalmologists at Emory came to him and suggested evaluating the accuracy of the AI chatbot ChatGPT in diagnosing eye-related complaints, he jumped at the chance.

In June, Lyons and his colleagues reported in medRxiv, an online publisher of health science preprints, that ChatGPT compared quite well to human doctors who reviewed the same symptoms — and performed vastly better than the symptom checker on the popular health website WebMD.

And despite the much-publicized “hallucination” problem known to afflict ChatGPT — its habit of occasionally making outright false statements — the Emory study reported that the most recent version of ChatGPT made zero “grossly inaccurate” statements when presented with a standard set of eye complaints.

The relative proficiency of ChatGPT, which debuted in November 2022, was a surprise to Lyons and his co-authors. The artificial intelligence engine “is definitely an improvement over just putting something into a Google search bar and seeing what you find,” said co-author Nieraj Jain, an assistant professor at the Emory Eye Center who specializes in vitreoretinal surgery and disease.

But the findings underscore a challenge facing the health care industry as it assesses the promise and pitfalls of generative AI, the type of artificial intelligence used by ChatGPT: The accuracy of chatbot-delivered medical information may represent an improvement over Dr. Google, but there are still many questions about how to integrate this new technology into health care systems with the same safeguards historically applied to the introduction of new drugs or medical devices.

The smooth syntax, authoritative tone, and dexterity of generative AI have drawn extraordinary attention from all sectors of society, with some comparing its future impact to that of the internet itself. In health care, companies are working feverishly to implement generative AI in areas such as radiology and medical records.

When it comes to consumer chatbots, though, there is still caution, even though the technology is already widely available — and better than many alternatives. Many doctors believe AI-based medical tools should undergo an approval process similar to the FDA’s regime for drugs, but that would be years away. It’s unclear how such a regime might apply to general-purpose AIs like ChatGPT.

“There’s no question we have issues with access to care, and whether or not it is a good idea to deploy ChatGPT to cover the holes or fill the gaps in access, it’s going to happen and it’s happening already,” said Jain. “People have already discovered its utility. So, we need to understand the potential advantages and the pitfalls.”

The Emory study is not alone in ratifying the relative accuracy of the new generation of AI chatbots. A report published in Nature in early July by a group led by Google computer scientists said answers generated by Med-PaLM, an AI chatbot the company built specifically for medical use, “compare favorably with answers given by clinicians.”

AI may also have better bedside manner. Another study, published in April by researchers from the University of California-San Diego and other institutions, even noted that health care professionals rated ChatGPT answers as more empathetic than responses from human doctors.

Indeed, a number of companies are exploring how chatbots could be used for mental health therapy, and some investors in the companies are betting that healthy people might also enjoy chatting and even bonding with an AI “friend.” The company behind Replika, one of the most advanced of that genre, markets its chatbot as, “The AI companion who cares. Always here to listen and talk. Always on your side.”

“We need physicians to start realizing that these new tools are here to stay and they’re offering new capabilities both to physicians and patients,” said James Benoit, an AI consultant. While a postdoctoral fellow in nursing at the University of Alberta in Canada, he published a study in February reporting that ChatGPT significantly outperformed online symptom checkers in evaluating a set of medical scenarios. “They are accurate enough at this point to start meriting some consideration,” he said.

A ’Band-Aid’ Solution

Still, even the researchers who have demonstrated ChatGPT’s relative reliability are cautious about recommending that patients put their full trust in the current state of AI. For many medical professionals, AI chatbots are an invitation to trouble: They cite a host of issues relating to privacy, safety, bias, liability, transparency, and the current absence of regulatory oversight.

The proposition that AI should be embraced because it represents a marginal improvement over Dr. Google is unconvincing, these critics say.

“That’s a little bit of a disappointing bar to set, isn’t it?” said Mason Marks, a professor and MD who specializes in health law at Florida State University. He recently wrote an opinion piece on AI chatbots and privacy in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

“I don’t know how helpful it is to say, ‘Well, let’s just throw this conversational AI on as a band-aid to make up for these deeper systemic issues,’” he said to KFF Health News.

The biggest danger, in his view, is the likelihood that market incentives will result in AI interfaces designed to steer patients to particular drugs or medical services. “Companies might want to push a particular product over another,” said Marks. “The potential for exploitation of people and the commercialization of data is unprecedented.”

OpenAI, the company that developed ChatGPT, also urged caution.

“OpenAI’s models are not fine-tuned to provide medical information,” a company spokesperson said. “You should never use our models to provide diagnostic or treatment services for serious medical conditions.”

John Ayers, a computational epidemiologist who was the lead author of the UCSD study, said that as with other medical interventions, the focus should be on patient outcomes.

“If regulators came out and said that if you want to provide patient services using a chatbot, you have to demonstrate that chatbots improve patient outcomes, then randomized controlled trials would be registered tomorrow for a host of outcomes,” Ayers said.

He would like to see a more urgent stance from regulators.

“One hundred million people have ChatGPT on their phone,” said Ayers, “and are asking questions right now. People are going to use chatbots with or without us.”

At present, though, there are few signs that rigorous testing of AIs for safety and effectiveness is imminent. In May, Robert Califf, the commissioner of the FDA, described “the regulation of large language models as critical to our future,” but aside from recommending that regulators be “nimble” in their approach, he offered few details.

In the meantime, the race is on. In July, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Mayo Clinic was partnering with Google to integrate the Med-PaLM 2 chatbot into its system. In June, WebMD announced it was partnering with a Pasadena, California-based startup, HIA Technologies Inc., to provide interactive “digital health assistants.” And the ongoing integration of AI into both Microsoft’s Bing and Google Search suggests that Dr. Google is already well on its way to being replaced by Dr. Chatbot.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Shrinking Number of Primary Care Doctors Reaches Tipping Point

By Elisabeth Rosenthal, KFF Health News

I’ve been receiving an escalating stream of panicked emails from people telling me their longtime physician was retiring, was no longer taking their insurance, or had gone concierge and would no longer see them unless they ponied up a hefty annual fee.

They have said they couldn’t find another primary care doctor who could take them on or who offered a new-patient appointment sooner than months away.

Their individual stories reflect a larger reality: American physicians have been abandoning traditional primary care practice — internal and family medicine — in large numbers. Those who remain are working fewer hours. And fewer medical students are choosing a field that once attracted some of the best and brightest because of its diagnostic challenges and the emotional gratification of deep relationships with patients.

The percentage of U.S. doctors in adult primary care has been declining for years and is now about 25% — a tipping point beyond which many Americans won’t be able to find a family doctor at all.

Already, more than 100 million Americans don’t have usual access to primary care, a number that has nearly doubled since 2014. One reason our coronavirus vaccination rates were low compared with those in countries such as China, France, and Japan could be because so many of us no longer regularly see a familiar doctor we trust.

Another telling statistic: In 1980, 62% of doctor’s visits for adults 65 and older were for primary care and 38% were for specialists, according to Michael L. Barnett, a health systems researcher and primary care doctor in the Harvard Medical School system.

By 2013, that ratio had exactly flipped and has likely “only gotten worse,” Barnett said, noting sadly: “We have a specialty-driven system. Primary care is seen as a thankless, undesirable backwater.” That’s “tragic,” in his words — studies show that a strong foundation of primary care yields better health outcomes overall, greater equity in health care access, and lower per capita health costs.

Practices Sold

One explanation for the disappearing primary care doctor is financial. The payment structure in the U.S. health system has long rewarded surgeries and procedures while shortchanging the diagnostic, prescriptive, and preventive work that is the province of primary care. Furthermore, the traditionally independent doctors in this field have little power to negotiate sustainable payments with the mammoth insurers in the U.S. market.

Faced with this situation, many independent primary care doctors have sold their practices to health systems or commercial management chains (some private equity-owned) so that, today, three-quarters of doctors are now employees of those outfits.

One of them was Bob Morrow, who practiced for decades in the Bronx. For a typical visit, he was most recently paid about $80 if the patient had Medicare, with its fixed-fee schedule. Commercial insurers paid significantly less. He just wasn’t making enough to pay the bills, which included salaries of three employees, including a nurse practitioner.

“I tried not to pay too much attention to money for four or five years — to keep my eye on my patients and not the bottom line,” he said by phone from his former office, as workers carted away old charts for shredding.

Morrow finally gave up and sold his practice last year to a company that took over scheduling, billing, and negotiations with insurers. It agreed to pay him a salary and to provide support staff as well as supplies and equipment.

The outcome: Calls to his office were routed to a call center overseas, and patients with questions or complaining of symptoms were often directed to a nearby urgent care center owned by the company — which is typically more expensive than an office visit. His office staff was replaced by a skeleton crew that didn’t include a nurse or skilled worker to take blood pressure or handle requests for prescription refills. He was booked with patients every eight to 10 minutes.

He discovered that the company was calling some patients and recommending expensive tests — such as vascular studies or an abdominal ultrasound — that he did not believe they needed.

He retired in January. “I couldn’t stand it,” he said. “It wasn’t how I was taught to practice.”

‘Squeezed From All Sides’

Of course, not every practice sale ends with such unhappy results, and some work out well. But the dispirited feeling that drives doctors away from primary care has to do with far more than money. It’s a lack of respect for nonspecialists. It’s the rising pressure to see and bill more patients: Employed doctors often coordinate the care of as many as 2,000 people, many of whom have multiple problems.

And it’s the lack of assistance. Profitable centers such as orthopedic and gastroenterology clinics usually have a phalanx of support staff. Primary care clinics run close to the bone.

“You are squeezed from all sides,” said Barnett.

Many ventures are rushing in to fill the primary care gap. There had been hope that nurse practitioners and physician assistants might help fill some holes, but data shows that they, too, increasingly favor specialty practice. Meanwhile, urgent care clinics are popping up like mushrooms. So are primary care chains such as One Medical, now owned by Amazon. Dollar General, Walmart, Target, CVS Health, and Walgreens have opened “retail clinics” in their stores.

Rapid-fire visits with a rotating cast of doctors, nurses, or physician assistants might be fine for a sprained ankle or strep throat. But they will not replace a physician who tells you to get preventive tests and keeps tabs on your blood pressure and cholesterol — the doctor who knows your health history and has the time to figure out whether the pain in your shoulder is from your basketball game, an aneurysm, or a clogged artery in your heart.

Some relatively simple solutions are available, if we care enough about supporting this foundational part of a good medical system. Hospitals and commercial groups could invest some of the money they earn by replacing hips and knees to support primary care staffing; giving these doctors more face time with their patients would be good for their customers’ health and loyalty if not (always) the bottom line.

Reimbursement for primary care visits could be increased to reflect their value — perhaps by enacting a national primary care fee schedule, so these doctors won’t have to butt heads with insurers. And policymakers could consider forgiving the medical school debt of doctors who choose primary care as a profession.

They deserve support that allows them to do what they were trained to do: diagnosing, treating, and getting to know their patients.

The United States already ranks last among wealthy countries in certain health outcomes. The average life span in America is decreasing, even as it increases in many other countries. If we fail to address the primary care shortage, our country’s health will be even worse for it.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. 

Doctors and Patients Shame Insurers to Reverse Treatment Denials

By Lauren Sausser, KFF Health News

Sally Nix was furious when her health insurance company refused to pay for the infusions she needs to ease her chronic pain and fatigue.

Nix has struggled with a combination of autoimmune diseases since 2011. Brain and spinal surgeries didn’t ease her symptoms. Nothing worked, she said, until she started intravenous immunoglobulin infusions late last year. Commonly called IVIG, the treatment bolsters her compromised immune system with healthy antibodies from other people’s blood plasma.

“IVIG turned out to be my great hope,” she said.

That’s why, when Nix’s health insurer started denying payment for the treatment, she turned to Facebook and Instagram to vent her outrage.

“I was raising Cain about it,” said Nix, 53, of Statesville, North Carolina, who said she was forced to pause treatment because she couldn’t afford to pay more than $13,000 out of pocket every four weeks.

“There are times when you simply must call out wrongdoings,” she wrote on Instagram. “This is one of those times.”

Prior authorization is a common cost-cutting tool used by health insurers that requires patients and doctors to secure approval before moving forward with many tests, procedures, and prescription medications.

SALLY NIX

Insurers say the process helps them control costs by preventing medically unnecessary care. But patients say the often time-consuming and frustrating rules create hurdles that delay or deny access to the treatments they need. In some cases, delays and denials equal death, doctors say.

That’s why desperate patients like Nix — and even some physicians — say they have turned to publicly shaming insurance companies on social media to get tests, drugs, and treatments approved.

“Unfortunately, this has become a routine practice for us to resort to if we don’t get any headway,” said Shehzad Saeed, a pediatric gastroenterologist at Dayton’s Children’s Hospital in Ohio. In March, he tweeted a photo of an oozing skin rash, blaming Anthem for denying the biologic treatment his patient needed to ease her Crohn’s disease symptoms.

In July, Eunice Stallman, a psychiatrist based in Idaho, joined X, formerly known as Twitter, for the first time to share how her 9-month-old daughter, Zoey, had been denied prior authorization for a $225 pill she needs to take twice a day to shrink a large brain tumor. “This should not be how it’s done,” Stallman said.

Prior Authorization Reform

The federal government has proposed ways to reform prior authorization that would require insurance companies to provide more transparency about denials and to speed up their response times. If finalized, those federal changes would be implemented in 2026.

But even then, the rules would apply only to some categories of health insurance, including Medicare, Medicare Advantage, and Medicaid plans, but not employer-sponsored health plans. That means roughly half of all Americans wouldn’t benefit from the changes.

The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act prohibits health insurance plans from denying or canceling coverage to patients due to their preexisting conditions.

AHIP, an industry trade group formerly called America’s Health Insurance Plans, did not respond to a request for comment.

“They just delay and delay and delay until you die. And you’re absolutely helpless as a patient.”

— Linda Peeno, Healthcare Consultant

But some patient advocates and health policy experts question whether insurers are using prior authorization as “a possible loophole” to this prohibition, as a way of denying care to patients with the highest health care costs, explained Kaye Pestaina, a KFF vice president and the co-director of its Program on Patient and Consumer Protections.

“They take in premiums and don’t pay claims. That’s how they make money,” said Linda Peeno, a health care consultant and retired Kentucky physician who was employed as a medical reviewer by Humana in the 1980s and later became a whistleblower. “They just delay and delay and delay until you die. And you’re absolutely helpless as a patient.”

But there’s reason to hope things may get marginally better. Some major insurers are voluntarily revamping their prior authorization rules to ease preapproval mandates for doctors and patients. And many states are passing laws to rein in the use of prior authorization.

“Nobody is saying we should get rid of it entirely,” said Todd Askew, senior vice president for advocacy at the American Medical Association, in advance of the group’s annual meeting in June. “But it needs to be right-sized, it needs to be simplified, it needs to be less friction between the patient and accessing their benefits.”

Online Venting

Customers are increasingly using social media to air their complaints across all industries, and companies are paying attention. Nearly two-thirds of complainants reported receiving some sort of response to their online post, according to the 2023 “National Consumer Rage Survey,” conducted by Customer Care Measurement & Consulting in collaboration with Arizona State University.

Some research suggests companies are better off engaging with unhappy customers offline, rather than responding to public social media posts. But many patients and doctors believe venting online is an effective strategy, though it remains unclear how often this tactic works in reversing prior authorization denials.

“It’s not even a joke. The fact that that’s how we’re trying to get these medications is just sad,” said Brad Constant, an inflammatory bowel disease specialist who has published research on prior authorization. His work found that prior authorizations are associated with an increased likelihood that children with inflammatory bowel disease will be hospitalized.

Saeed said the day after he posted the picture of the skin rash, the case was marked for a peer-to-peer review, meaning the prior authorization denial would get a closer look by someone at the insurance company with a medical background. Eventually, the biologic medicine Saeed’s patient needed was approved.

Stallman, who is insured through her employer, said she and her husband were prepared to pay out of pocket if Blue Cross of Idaho didn’t reverse the denial for the drug Zoey needed.

Bret Rumbeck, a spokesperson for the insurer, said Zoey’s medication was approved on July 14 after the company consulted an outside specialist and obtained more information from Zoey’s doctor.

Stallman posted details about the ordeal online only after the insurer approved the drug, in part, she said, to prevent them from denying the treatment again when it comes up for a 90-day insurance review in October. “The power of the social media has been huge,” she said.

Nix had been insured by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois through her husband’s employer for almost two decades. Dave Van de Walle, a spokesperson for the company, did not specifically address Nix’s case. But in a prepared statement, the company said it provides administrative services for many large employers who design and fund their own health insurance plans.

Nix said an “escalation specialist” from the insurance company reached out after she posted her complaints on social media, but the specialist couldn’t help.

Then, in July, after KFF Health News contacted Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois, Nix logged in to the insurer’s online portal and found that $36,000 of her outstanding claims had been marked “paid.” No one from the company had contacted her to explain why or what had changed. She also said she was informed by her hospital that the insurer will no longer require her to obtain prior authorization before her infusions, which she restarted in late July.

“I’m thrilled,” she said. But “it just should never have happened this way.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.  

Medicare May Cover Training for Family Caregivers

By Judith Graham, KFF Health News

Even with extensive caregiving experience, Patti LaFleur was unprepared for the crisis that hit in April 2021, when her mother, Linda LaTurner, fell out of a chair and broke her hip.

LaTurner, 71, had been diagnosed with early-onset dementia seven years before. For two years, she’d been living with LaFleur, who managed insulin injections for her mother’s Type 1 diabetes, helped her shower and dress, dealt with her incontinence, and made sure she was eating well.

In the hospital after her mother’s hip replacement, LaFleur was told her mother would never walk again. When LaTurner came home, two emergency medical technicians brought her on a stretcher into the living room, put her on the bed LaFleur had set up, and wished LaFleur well.

That was the extent of help LaFleur received upon her mother’s discharge.

She didn’t know how to change her mother’s diapers or dress her since at that point LaTurner could barely move. She didn’t know how to turn her mother, who was spending all day in bed, to avoid bedsores.

Even after an occupational therapist visited several days later, LaFleur continued to face caretaking tasks she wasn’t sure how to handle.

“It’s already extremely challenging to be a caregiver for someone living with dementia. The lack of training in how to care for my mother just made an impossible job even more impossible,” said LaFleur, who lives in Auburn, Washington, a Seattle suburb. Her mother passed away in March 2022.

LINDA AND PATTI LAFLEUR

A new proposal from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services addresses this often-lamented failure to support family, friends, and neighbors who care for frail, ill, and disabled older adults. For the first time, it would authorize Medicare payments to health care professionals to train informal caregivers who manage medications, assist loved ones with activities such as toileting and dressing, and oversee the use of medical equipment.

The proposal, which covers both individual and group training, is a long-overdue recognition of the role informal caregivers — also known as family caregivers — play in protecting the health and well-being of older adults. About 42 million Americans provided unpaid care to people 50 and older in 2020, according to a much-cited report.

“We know from our research that nearly 6 in 10 family caregivers assist with medical and nursing tasks such as injections, tube feedings, and changing catheters,” said Jason Resendez, president and CEO of the National Alliance for Caregiving. But fewer than 30% of caregivers have conversations with health professionals about how to help loved ones, he said.

Even fewer caregivers for older adults — only 7% — report receiving training related to tasks they perform, according to a June 2019 report in JAMA Internal Medicine.

Nancy LeaMond, chief advocacy and engagement officer for AARP, experienced this gap firsthand when she spent six years at home caring for her husband, who had amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, a neurological condition also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease. Although she hired health aides, they weren’t certified to operate the feeding tube her husband needed at the end of his life and couldn’t show LeaMond how to use it. Instead, she and her sons turned to the internet and trained themselves by watching videos.

“Until very recently, there’s been very little attention to the role of family caregivers and the need to support caregivers so they can be an effective part of the health delivery system,” she told me.

Training Coverage Could Begin Next Year

Several details of CMS’ proposal have yet to be finalized. Notably, CMS has asked for public comments on who should be considered a family caregiver for the purposes of training and how often training should be delivered.

If you’d like to let CMS know what you think about its caregiving training proposal, you can comment on the CMS site until 5 p.m. ET on Sept. 11. The expectation is that Medicare will start paying for caregiver training next year, and caregivers should start asking for it then.

Advocates said they favor a broad definition of caregiver. Since often several people perform these tasks, training should be available to more than one person, Resendez suggested. And since people are sometimes reimbursed by family members for their assistance, being unpaid shouldn’t be a requirement, suggested Anne Tumlinson, founder and chief executive officer of ATI Advisory, a consulting firm in aging and disability policy.

As for the frequency of training, a one-size-fits-all approach isn’t appropriate given the varied needs of older adults and the varied skills of people who assist them, said Sharmila Sandhu, vice president of regulatory affairs at the American Occupational Therapy Association.

Some caregivers may need a single session when a loved one is discharged from a hospital or a rehabilitation facility. Others may need ongoing training as conditions such as heart failure or dementia progress and new complications occur, said Kim Karr, who manages payment policy for AOTA.

When possible, training should be delivered in a person’s home rather than at a health care institution, suggested Donna Benton, director of the University of Southern California’s Family Caregiver Support Center and the Los Angeles Caregiver Resource Center. All too often, recommendations that caregivers get from health professionals aren’t easy to implement at home and need to be adjusted, she noted.

Nancy Gross, 72, of Mendham, New Jersey, experienced this when her husband, Jim Kotcho, 77, received a stem cell transplant for leukemia in May 2015.

Once Kotcho came home, Gross was responsible for flushing the port that had been implanted in his chest, administering medications through that site, and making sure all the equipment she was using was sterile.

Although a visiting nurse came out and offered education, it wasn’t adequate for the challenges Gross confronted.

“I’m not prone to crying, but when you think your loved one’s life is in your hands and you don’t know what to do, that’s unbelievably stressful,” she told me.

NANCY AND JIM KOTCHO

For her part, Cheryl Brown, 79, of San Bernardino, California — a caregiver for her husband, Hardy Brown Sr., 80, since he was diagnosed with ALS in 2002 — is skeptical about paying professionals for training. At the time of his diagnosis, doctors gave Hardy five years, at most, to live. But he didn’t accept that prognosis and ended up defying expectations.

HARDY AND CHERYL BROWN

Today, Hardy’s mind is fully intact, and he can move his hands and his arms but not the rest of his body. Looking after him is a full-time job for Cheryl, who is also chair of the executive committee of California’s Commission on Aging and a former member of the California State Assembly.

She said hiring paid help isn’t an option, given the expense. And that’s what irritates Cheryl about Medicare’s training proposal.

“What I need is someone who can come into my home and help me,” she told me. “I don’t see how someone like me, who’s been doing this a very long time, would benefit from this. We caregivers do all the work, and the professionals get the money? That makes no sense to me.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Can Peppermint Oil Help With Postoperative Pain?

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

In recent years, hospitals around the world have resorted to unconventional and novel methods to reduce the use of opioids by patients recovering from surgery. 

Some use “harp therapy” to help patients relax and forget about their postoperative pain while listening to live music played on a harp.  Others use virtual reality games to help distract patients.  And some German hospitals even played a recording of “positive suggestions” to surgery patients while they were under general anesthesia.

Aromatherapy may soon be added to the growing list of alternative treatments for postoperative pain. A small study in Iran suggests that aromatherapy with peppermint oil can reduce pain and improve sleep in patients recovering from surgery.    

Aromatherapy with concentrated extracts from plants – known as essential oils -- has been used for thousands of years to help reduce stress and treat infections. Peppermint essential oil is particularly useful because it has a pleasant smell, binds easily to nasal mucous, and enters the bloodstream quickly, where it promotes the release of endorphins that ease pain and improve mood.

Iranian researchers wanted to know if peppermint oil could also help patients recovering from open heart surgery, a major invasive procedure that requires breaking through the breastbone (sternum), as well as mechanical ventilation to help breathing. Patients waking up in intensive care following heart surgery often have high levels of pain, stress and difficulty sleeping.

“Among complementary medicine treatments, particular attention should be given to essential oils, which are both pleasant and inexpensive and can be quite useful,” wrote lead author Dr. Ismail Azizi-Fini, MD, Kashan University of Medical Sciences. “There is some clinical scientific evidence in favour of using aromatherapy with essential oils in various phases of preoperative and postoperative treatment.”

For the study, 59 adults undergoing cardiac surgery were randomly divided into two groups. One group received a diluted solution of essential peppermint oil for 30 minutes before their breathing tube was removed, and six times afterward through a nebulizer, a small machine that turns liquids into a mist than can be easily inhaled. The control group breathed a placebo mist of distilled water.  

After 2 days of treatment, the average on a zero-to10 pain score was 3.22 in the aromatherapy group and 4.56 in the control group, a statistically significant difference. Average sleep scores were also better in the aromatherapy group, which used fewer opioid analgesics (morphine and fentanyl) than the control group.  

“The results show that inhalation of peppermint essential oil can reduce the pain intensity of patients after open heart surgery and consequently reduce the use of pain relievers by patients,” researchers reported in the journal BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care.

“Also, the use of this herbal product can improve the sleep quality of patients in the first nights after surgery and bring them more comfort. Considering the effect of peppermint essential oil inhalation on pain and sleep quality of patients after open-heart surgery, it can be concluded that this herbal product can be safely used as a complementary treatment in relieving pain and making patients comfortable after heart surgery.” 

It’s rare for a patient to become addicted or develop a dependence on opioids after surgery. One study finding that less than one percent of seniors were still taking opioids a year after major elective surgery.

A 2021 survey found that nearly 8 out of 10 U.S. adults believe opioids are sometimes necessary to manage postoperative pain. Most people are more worried about treating surgical pain than they are about becoming addicted.

Pain Patients Get ‘Substantial Relief’ from Scrambler Therapy

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

A little-known therapy for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) and other painful neuropathic conditions is finally getting some attention from a prominent medical journal.

“Scrambler therapy is the most exciting development I have seen in years — it’s effective, it’s noninvasive, it reduces opioid use substantially and it can be permanent,´ says Thomas Smith, MD, a professor of oncology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and co-author of a review recently published in The New England Journal of Medicine.

Scrambler therapy – also known as Calmare pain therapy -- sends mild electric signals through the skin via electrodes placed near areas where chronic nerve pain is felt. Similar to transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), the idea is to “scramble” pain signals being sent to the brain and reduce central sensitization.

Some patients get immediate relief after a 30-minute scrambler session, but most will have to undergo a series of treatments on successive days to have a prolonged analgesic effect. Smith says many patients “get really substantial relief.”

“The duration of relief usually increases with each day of treatment, and in contrast to TENS, analgesic effects have been reported to last for weeks, months, or even years after a treatment course,” wrote Smith, who reviewed 381 clinical trials of TENS and scrambler therapy with his co-author.

“The major limitation with respect to our understanding of electroanalgesia is the small number of well-designed, large, randomized, sham-controlled clinical trials of TENS and scrambler therapy.”

In one small study, patients getting scrambler therapy had a 91% reduction in pain and reduced their use of opioids and other pain relievers by 75 percent.

“If you can block the ascending pain impulses and enhance the inhibitory system, you can potentially reset the brain so it doesn’t feel chronic pain nearly as badly,” Smith says. “It’s like pressing Control-Alt-Delete about a billion times.”

Scrambler therapy seems to be most effective in patients with CRPS or those who develop neuropathic pain after chemotherapy. It’s also been used to treat fibromyalgia, shingles, diabetic neuropathy and post-operative pain.

Amanda Greening was bedridden by CRPS at the young age of 20, but was able to walk again after several sessions of scrambler therapy. Amanda’s father wrote a column for PNN on her recovery. So did a local TV station:

Although scrambler therapy was approved by the FDA in 2009 for patients with chronic or neuropathic pain, the procedure is still not widely available or covered by insurance. Only one company makes the scrambler device, which costs about $65,000, and practitioners have to undergo several days of training to use it. Treatments cost about $300 per session.

Like other pain treatments, scrambler therapy doesn’t work for everyone. About 10 to 20% of  patients have no analgesic response -- a risk many would be willing to take, if it means freeing themselves from a lifetime of pain.

How to Overcome Repetitive Negative Thinking

By Anna Andrianova, Laval University

Do you ever find yourself caught in a cycle of negative thoughts? Maybe you ruminate on past mistakes, worry excessively about the future, or imagine worst-case scenarios?

Do you sometimes have a great day, everything goes well, and then your brain says, “Hey, remember that time you embarrassed yourself in front of everyone? Let’s relive that moment for the next 20 minutes.” And suddenly, your good day turns into a cringe-fest.

If so, know that you’re not alone. Many people struggle with repetitive negative thinking, and this can have a serious impact on mental health and well-being.

As the coordinator of expertise in caregiving at the Centre for Research and Expertise in Social Gerontology and an associate member of the Centre for Study and Research on India, South Asia and its Diaspora, I would like to shed light on the negative impact of repetitive negative thinking on the mental and physical health of caregivers.

Repetitive negative thinking (RNT) is a cognitive process characterized by persistent and intrusive contemplation on past events, commonly known as rumination, and apprehensions about future possibilities, often referred to as worries.

RNT is a recurring, unwelcome, and difficult to dislodge pattern of thinking that has been implicated in the onset and perpetuation of diverse mental disorders, including depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Furthermore, RNT has been found to be associated with physical health and has been linked to an increased likelihood of future health issues. RNT may negatively impact one’s quality of sleep, decrease efficiency, and hinder decision-making abilities.

Recent studies have revealed that the severity of RNT is connected with changes in brain morphology, leading to a decline in general cognitive abilities and increasing the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease. Even at low levels, RNT can have detrimental effects on the cardiovascular, autonomic nervous, and endocrine systems.

The Power of Mindfulness

So, what would be the most effective strategy for managing repetitive negative thinking? Research has demonstrated a negative correlation between RNT and mindfulness, implying that a low level of mindfulness can increase one’s susceptibility to RNT.

Mindfulness can be seen as a mental faculty or skill that can be developed through regular practice. It entails cultivating a non-judgmental and non-reactive awareness of the present moment. The objective is to be fully engaged in what’s happening right now, rather than dwelling on the past or worrying about the future.

There are two main styles of mindfulness practice: focused attention meditation and open monitoring meditation. Focused attention meditation involves choosing a specific object, such as the breath, and bringing your full attention to it. Whenever the mind wanders, it is simply brought back to the object of focus.

In contrast, open monitoring meditation involves being aware of everything occurring in the present moment. Instead of trying to focus on a specific object, one simply observes whatever arises in the experience, including thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations.

But what’s happening in the brain during these practices? Recent studies have revealed that only during focused attention meditation, there is a deactivation of the “default mode network” — a network of brain areas that are typically active when we’re not focused on any particular task. This network is implicated in “resting-state” thinking, which involves repetitive negative thinking. By deactivating the “default mode network,” focused attention meditation can help reduce this harmful type of thinking.

An Intervention for Caregivers

As part of our project, we will develop and examine an intervention targeted at reducing RNT in family caregivers.

According to a recent report, over eight million Canadians aged 15 and older, or 25 per cent of the population, provide care to a family member or friend with a long-term health condition, disability, or aging-related needs.

While caregiving can be rewarding, it can also be challenging and stressful, particularly for those who provide extensive or complex care. Chronic stress is a common experience for family caregivers, and it can take a toll on their health and well-being. A survey of caregivers found that the top areas of need for caregivers were emotional health (58 per cent) and physical health (32 per cent). RNT is strongly associated with caregiver burden and predicts negative impacts on the physical and mental health of caregivers.

We will recruit 100 caregivers with high levels of RNT. The intervention will be presented to participants in the form of interactive videos that guide them through the practice of focused attention meditation. We will measure changes in RNT, stress, anxiety, depression, and quality of life before and after the intervention, as well as at a six-month follow-up.

If the intervention is effective, it could serve as the basis for the development of an innovative tool for monitoring and reducing RNT. This tool could be deployed as a mobile app or on virtual reality platforms, providing caregivers with access to an intervention that they can use at their convenience. This could significantly expand the reach of the intervention, making it more accessible and convenient for caregivers who may not have the time or resources to participate in traditional face-to-face interventions.

Overall, the potential of the focused attention meditation intervention to improve the mental and physical health of caregivers, as well as the development of new innovative tools, represents a promising avenue in the field of caregiver support services. Further research and implementation of such interventions could significantly improve the quality of life for caregivers and the people they care for.

After all, to echo the words of philosopher Marcus Aurelius, “the happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts.”

Anna Andrianova holds degrees in psychology and social work, and is currently a doctoral candidate in social work at Laval University in Quebec. As part of her doctoral thesis, she explores the impact of the practice of mindfulness on the reduction of repetitive negative thoughts on well-being and health.

This article originally appear in The Conversation and is republished with permission.