Is the Professionalism of Doctors, Nurses Being Exploited?

Doctors, nurses often do what’s right by their patients, even if it comes at a high personal cost. Is their professional nature being exploited by those in charge?

As the corporatization of healthcare continues at a rapid pace and staffing shortages march on, are the professionals at the heart of the health industry being exploited for their work ethic and professionalism? An op-ed published in The New York Times by Danielle Ofri, MD, PhD, an attending physician at Bellevue Hospital in New York City, postulates this to be true.

The op-ed, which points out that doctors and nurses often do the right thing for their patients, even though it frequently comes at a high personal cost, casts a scathing light on higher-ups who manipulate this to their favor. “If doctors and nurses clocked out when their paid hours were finished, the effect on patients would be calamitous. Doctors and nurses know this, which is why they don’t shirk. The system knows it, too, and takes advantage,” Dr. Ofri says in the piece.

Dr. Ofri goes on to point a blaming finger at time-consuming EHR, calling it the “biggest culprit of the mushrooming workload” that has been thrust upon medical professionals in recent years.

“For most doctors and nurses, it is unthinkable to walk away without completing your work because dropping the ball could endanger your patients,” Dr. Ofri states, which is the conundrum at the heart of the op-ed. Real lives are at stake, but not just those of the patients—the lives and livelihoods of those who care for them, too.

Read the op-ed in its entirety here, and tell us if you agree or disagree in the comments below.

Disclaimer: The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.

VA Study Supports Advanced Practitioner Led Care

A new study has found no clinically important differences in patient outcomes, regardless of whether their provider is a physician, PA, or NP.

A study conducted by a Durham VA Health Care System has found that Veterans Affairs patients with diabetes have similar health outcomes, regardless of whether their care provider is a physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant.

Researchers examined the outcomes of more than 600,000 veterans with diabetes, a patient type that represents a large population within the VA, and who often have complex healthcare needs. Of the patients whose outcomes were studied, physicians were the usual provider for 77% of them, with the remaining patients under the care of a PA or NP. The researchers did not find any statistically significant differences in quality of care, nor any clinically important differences in patient outcomes, based on the discipline of the provider.

“Our study found that there were not clinically important differences in intermediate diabetes outcomes for patients with physicians, NPs, or PAs in both the usual and supplemental provider roles, providing additional evidence for the role of NPs and PAs as primary care providers,” said Dr. George Jackson, a research health scientist with the Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation (ADAPT) at the Durham VA Medical Center and author of the study.

A news release from the VA regarding the study goes on to state, “The fact that PAs and NPs had similar results for quality of care without sharing care with a physician suggests that using these providers in primary care may improve the efficiency of health care.”

Disclaimer: The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.

A Doctor Speaks Out About Ageism In Medicine

Doctors too often fail to appreciate older adults’ unique needs or to tailor treatments appropriately—one doctor envisions a different way of medicine.

Judith Graham, Kaiser Health News

Society gives short shrift to older age. This distinct phase of life doesn’t get the same attention that’s devoted to childhood. And the special characteristics of people in their 60s, 70s, 80s and beyond are poorly understood.

Medicine reflects this narrow-mindedness. In medical school, physicians learn that people in the prime of life are “normal” and scant time is spent studying aging. In practice, doctors too often fail to appreciate older adults’ unique needs or to tailor treatments appropriately.

Imagine a better way. Older adults would be seen as “different than,” not “less than.” The phases of later life would be mapped and expertise in aging would be valued, not discounted.

With the growth of the elder population, it’s time for this to happen, argues Dr. Louise Aronson, a geriatrician and professor of medicine at the University of California-San Francisco, in her new book, “Elderhood.”

It’s an in-depth, unusually frank exploration of biases that distort society’s view of old age and that shape dysfunctional health policies and medical practices.

In an interview, edited for clarity and length, Aronson elaborated on these themes.

Q: How do you define ”elderhood”?
Elderhood is the third major phase of life, which follows childhood and adulthood and lasts for 20 to 40 years, depending on how long we live.

Medicine pretends that this part of life isn’t really different from young adulthood or middle age. But it is. And that needs a lot more recognition than it currently gets.

Q: Does elderhood have distinct stages?
It’s not like the stages of child development — being a baby, a toddler, school-age, a teenager — which occur in a predictable sequence at about the same age for almost everybody.

People age differently — in different ways and at different rates. Sometimes people skip stages. Or they move from an earlier stage to a later stage but then move back again.

Let’s say someone in their 70s with cancer gets really aggressive treatment for a year. Before, this person was vital and robust. Now, he’s gaunt and frail. But say the treatment works and this man starts eating healthily, exercising and getting lots of help from a supportive social network. In another year, he may feel and look much better, as if time had rolled backwards.

Q: What might the stages of elderhood look like for a healthy older person?
In their 60s and 70s, people’s joints may start to give them trouble. Their skin changes. Their hearing and eyesight deteriorate. They begin to lose muscle mass. Your brain still works, but your processing speed is slower.

In your 80s and above, you start to develop more stiffness. You’re more likely to fall or have trouble with continence or sleeping or cognition — the so-called geriatric syndromes. You begin to change how you do what you do to compensate.

Because bodies alter with aging, your response to treatment changes. Take a common disease like diabetes. The risks of tight blood sugar control become higher and the benefits become lower as people move into this “old old” stage. But many doctors aren’t aware of the evidence or don’t follow it.

Q: You’ve launched an elderhood clinic at UCSF. What do you do there?
I see anyone over age 60 in every stage of health. Last week, my youngest patient was 62 and my oldest was 102.

I’ve been focusing on what I call the five P’s. First, the whole person — not the disease — is my foremost concern.

Prevention comes next. Evidence shows that you can increase the strength and decrease the frailty of people through age 100. The more unfit you are, the greater the benefits from even a small amount of exercise. And yet, doctors don’t routinely prescribe exercise. I do that.

It’s really clear that purpose, the third P, makes a huge difference in health and wellness. So, I ask people, “What are your goals and values? What makes you happy? What is it you are doing that you like best or you wish you were doing that you’re not doing anymore?” And then I try to help them make that happen.

Many people haven’t established priorities, the fourth P. Recently, I saw a man in his 70s who’s had HIV/AIDS for a long time and who assumed he would die decades ago. He had never planned for growing older or done advance care planning. It terrified him. But now he’s thinking about what it means to be an old man and what his priorities are, something he’s finally willing to let me help him with.

Perspective is the fifth P. When I work on this with people, I ask, “Let’s figure out a way for you to keep doing the things that are important to you. Do you need new skills? Do you need to change your environment? Do you need to do a bit of both?”

Perspective is about how people see themselves in older age. Are you willing to adapt and compensate for some of the ways you’ve changed? This isn’t easy by any means, but I think most people can get there if we give them the right support.

Q: You’re very forthright in the book about ageism in medicine. How common is that?
Do you know the famous anecdote about the 97-year-old man with the painful left knee? He goes to a doctor who takes a history and does an exam. There’s no sign of trauma, and the doctor says, “Hey, the knee is 97 years old. What do you expect?” And the patient says, “But my right knee is 97 and it doesn’t hurt a bit.”

That’s ageism: dismissing an older person’s concerns simply because the person is old. It happens all the time.

On the research side, traditionally, older adults have been excluded from clinical trials, although that’s changing. In medical education, only a tiny part of the curriculum is devoted to older adults, although in hospitals and outpatient clinics they account for a very significant share of patients.

The consequence is that most physicians have little or no specific training in the anatomy, physiology, pharmacology and special conditions and circumstances of old age — though we know that old people are the ones most likely to be harmed by hospital care and medications.

Q: What does ageism look like on the ground?
Recently, a distressed geriatrician colleague told me a story about grand rounds at a major medical center where the case of a very complex older patient brought in from a nursing home was presented. [Grand rounds are meetings where doctors discuss interesting or difficult cases.]

When it was time for comments, one of the leaders of the medical service stood up and said, “I have a solution to this case. We just need to have nursing homes be 100 miles away from our hospitals.” And the crowd laughed.

Basically, he was saying: We don’t want to see old people; they’re a waste of our time and money. If someone had said this about women or people of color or LGBTQ people, there would have been outrage. In this case, there was none. It makes you want to cry.

Q: What can people do if they encounter this from a doctor?
If you put someone on the defensive, you won’t get anywhere.

You have to say in the gentlest, friendliest way possible, “I picked you for my physician because I know you’re a wonderful doctor. But I have to admit, I’m pretty disappointed by what you just said, because it felt to me that you were discounting me. I’d really like a different approach.”

Doctors are human beings, and we live in a super ageist society. They may have unconscious biases, but they may not be malicious. So, give them some time to think about what you said. If after some time they don’t respond, you should definitely change doctors.

Q: Do you see signs of positive change?
Absolutely. There’s a much larger social conversation around aging than there was five years ago. And that is making its way to the health system.

Surgeons are thinking more and more about evaluating and preparing older adults before surgery and the different kind of care they need after. Anesthesiologists are thinking more about delirium, which has short-term and long-term impact on older adults’ brains. And neurologists are thinking more about the experience of illness as well as the pathophysiology and imaging of it.

Then you have the age-friendly health system movement, which is unquestionably a step in the right direction. And a whole host of startups that could make various types of care more convenient and that could, if they succeed, end up benefiting older people.


Disclaimer: The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.

Physicians Enthusiastic about How AI Can Help Them with Digital Diagnostics

AI has the ability to change the landscape of modern medicine, and take some of the burden off of physicians, if used correctly.

by Alex Tate

AI can improve all aspects related to diagnostics of a practice easily. They can improve and assess results more practically and feasibly for practices and track disease and treatment response more accurately. This will assess and measure patient outcomes, and can free up doctor’s time and help with burnout. If the change is resisted it is because roles of clinicians will change.

AI can not only further digital diagnostics, but create new workflows that will change the current pace of diagnoses, prognoses and medical documentation. With accurate results, the less room for human error, and churning out a faster diagnosis can mean treating patients with care and better facilities. You can imagine why this may be met with enthusiasm for anyone in a white coat.

What will AI do in diagnostics?

  1. Increase lab report results.
  2. Overcome the current shortage of trained lab workers.
  3. Give accurate diagnosis in real time, without having to go through recurrent tests to rule out different diseases, illnesses, and diagnosis.
  4. Catch symptoms faster
  5. Cut down physician’s time spent looking at medical tests, scans, and spend more time treating a patient based on AI diagnosis.

AI is known to make significant contributions in radiology and pathology diagnostics. 75% of physicians are excited about advancements according to a research published in Digital Medicine (A. D. Shihab Sarwar, 2019). AI is beneficial for workflow efficiency and quality assurance in pathology. In the same research many physicians were welcoming towards training and other implications before AI can be used wholly in a practice. Pathology and radiology are image-focused and diagnostic-focused, and constant improvements in the computational algorithms for these specifications have been developed and powered for best outcomes. AI carries the potential to transform the clinical practice of physicians. In Pathology, AI diagnostics may perform image analysis for tissue histology, analysis of molecular outputs and predict the prognosis accurately.

Medical diagnostics are a category of medical tests designed to detect infections, conditions and diseases. AI is playing an integral role in the evolution of the field of medical diagnostics. Pathologists manually go through all blood types for diagnosis. AI in medical diagnostics is still a relatively new approach. Clinicians need convincing about how reliable, sensitive, and integrated it is in diagnostics. Why is that? A lot of reading, rigorous testing, and attention to detail is required in medical diagnostics. A mistake can be fatal. AI applications are created with precise computational algorithms that can effectively produce diagnostics in clinical practices.

Some clinicians are worried about what it means to them if a machine can read blood tests. It is likely to do a lot more. AI using neural networks can train diagnostic machines to understand the image. Pooled data is the way forward. Machine learning ensure that the machine picks up more information through pattern recognition.

AI can cut down time a physician spends on an EHR. Digital diagnostics can increase physician’s “pajama time” (late evening time spent with family or otherwise) if it performs all tasks. It also leads to a standardization in how data is interpreted by monitoring all lab information in real time. How does this do that? According to Mark Benjamin, the CEO of Nuance, the job of AI is not just to transfer voice text into written text, but it should also have the means to decipher text. That is the added advantage of Conversational AI. He explicates the four uses of healthcare industry; an evident improvement in a physicians’ life, enhanced quality of care and a discernibly healthier population, and a diminishing healthcare cost. Without technology (and AI), these goals cannot be actualized.

Physicians’ enthusiasm for improvements in AI functions in healthcare means that all manual readings and errors will visibly decrease. Saving possible time, lab use, money and easing compliance with government regulations is favorable to them. Virtual assistants are no longer a thing seen in Sci-Fi movies either. There are fast advances in AI. Every physician might be able to have their own “Jarvis” like Iron Man. Their job will be to save patients’ lives, like Tony Stark saves the planet. You don’t even have to imagine a “Jarvis” that is yours; the question is when will AI be yours.

Strong AI is still in the experimental stage. Documentation via voice recognition, and conversational AI prevents physician burnout and prevents it from relapsing. Clinical documentation will soon be able to write for itself, and have enough machine learning to predict text, symptoms and even diagnostics intelligently to cut further documentation time and perform data retrieval from EHRs quickly. AI is a workforce productivity tool and should be used as such to reduce time-intensive workflows. AI is also supposed to provide insights through Predictive and Prescriptive Analytics. Machine learning and Deep Learning (a distinct usage of machine learning) are method to achieve Artificial Intelligence.

Currently, physicians spend more time with their EHR charts than with patients. Even AI is no substitute for human touch or eye contact between caregiver and receiver. Medicine is an evidence-based profession and is rigid to change unless it does not see vast improvements in caregiving.

AI improves operations, with automating scheduling and billing. Clinical outcomes and decisions will still lie with the practice managers. Clinicians also like to see evidence before they believe how impactful AI is in their practice without taking away control. The idea for using AI in healthcare has never been to replace doctors, but rather to bring about support to health care delivery.

If AI can assist in diagnostics, robotic assisted surgery is not so far away. AI will be able to perform these tasks and many more with time. The only question is when. mHealth is joining in, and AI researchers say that it is only a matter of time until HQ mobile phone cameras will be able to understand images and send them to a database for further consideration.


Alex Tate is a Healthcare IT Researcher and freelance writer who focus various engaging and informative topics related to the health IT industry. He loves to research and write about topics such as Affordable Care Act, EHR, revenue cycle management, privacy and security of patient health data. You can reach him via email

Find out more about her company here: https://oxfordhousetherapy.com/

Disclaimer: The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.

“Physician Misery Index” Climbs to 3.94/5

Despite efforts being made to raise awareness of physician burnout, a healthcare analytics company has announced their Physician Misery Index is now a 3.94 out of 5.

Last week, Geneia, a healthcare analytics company, revealed their Physician Misery Index, a tool the company created to measure national physician satisfaction, has increased to 3.94 out of 5, up from January 2015’s score of 3.78, despite the efforts being made to raise awareness of physician burnout.

To determine the score, the company conducted a nationwide survey in July of 2018 of 300 full-time physicians, all of which have been practicing post-residency medicine for more than four years.

The survey’s findings, which contributed to the bump in the Index, include:

  • 80% of surveyed physicians said they feel they are personally at risk for burnout at some point in their career.
  • Nearly all respondents (96%) reported they have personally witnessed or personally experienced negative impacts as a result of physician burnout.
  • 66% said the challenges of practicing medicine in today’s environment have caused them to consider career options outside of clinical practice.
  • 89% said the “business and regulation of healthcare” has changed the practice of medicine for the worse.

Disclaimer: The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.

Physicians Take a Stand Against Gun Violence

Three days before a physician became a victim of the 372nd mass shooting in the U.S. in 2018, the American College of Physicians updated its position on firearms.

Three days before Nancy Van Vessem, MD would become a victim of the 372nd mass shooting in the United States in 2018, the American College of Physicians updated its position on firearms in an effort to prevent further gun violence in a policy paper published on October 30th in Annals of Internal Medicine.

The organization, which has advocated for the need to address firearm-related injuries and death for over 20 years, first published its policy on gun violence in 2014, which included nine evidence-based methods to reduce firearm-related injuries and deaths—the 2018 update retains six of the original recommendations, as well as suggesting new strategies.

Updates to the policy include:

  • Strengthening and enforcing state and federal laws to prohibit domestic violence offenders, including dating partners, cohabitants, stalkers, and those who victimize other family members, from purchasing or possessing firearms.
  • Supporting legislation to regulate and limit the manufacture, sale, transfer, and possession of firearms designed to increase rapid killing capacity, including large-capacity magazines and devices such as bump stocks.
  • Supporting extreme risk protection order laws which allow family members and law enforcement to petition a court to temporarily remove firearms from individuals who are at risk of harming themselves or others while providing due process protections.

“The U.S. has one of the highest rates of gun violence in the world, and as physicians, we have a responsibility to advocate for firearms measures that will keep our patients and their families safe and healthy,” ACP President Ana María López, MD, said in a press release.

To read the policy in its entirety, please click here.

Disclaimer: The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.

Physicians Top Yet Another “Highest Paid” List

There’s money in practicing medicine, or so says another top ten list, which ranks physicians and surgeons as top earners in the field.

Physicians and surgeons took the top spot on a new top ten list of high paying jobs in healthcare from CNBC, which indicated they are now earning salaries greater than or equal to $208,000, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Physician and surgeon annual salaries were noted as being $50,000 higher than their not-very-close second place competition, dentists, who ranked in the number two spot with a $158,120 median annual wage, and their salaries were more than $80,000 higher than podiatrists, who earn $127,740 on average, and rounded out the top three.

CNBC ties high wages for those on their list, in part, to high demand and relatively low competition in the job market for healthcare professionals.

Disclaimer: The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.

72% of Physicians Report Financial Ties to Drug, Device Industry

Since 2003, gifts and payments made to physicians by drug and device companies have been publicly reported–that doesn’t seem to slow them down too much.

Gifts and payments to physicians made by pharmaceutical and medical device companies have been publicly reported since 2003. Despite this breeding controversy among the public—and many changes made by both ends of the relationship as a result of said controversy—a new report by the Dartmouth Institute has found that nearly three quarters of physicians still have a financial tie to industry.

These findings came after physician-researchers Lisa Schwartz and Steven Woloshin conducted a national survey of 1,500 internists and internal medicine specialists. Those surveyed were asked ten yes-or-no style questions regarding “drug, device, or other methodically related company” interactions in the last year. These included receiving or being gifted any of the following: food inside or outside the workplace; free drug samples; pens, notepads, T-shirts; honoraria for speaking; payment for consulting services; payment for service on an advisory board; costs of personal expenses for attending meetings; free tickets to events; subsidized admission to meetings; or conferences for which Continuing Medical Education credits were awarded.

72% of respondents reported a financial tie to the industry, with the most popular benefits received being free drug samples (55%), followed by food and beverage inside (48%) or outside (30%) the workplace.

“What the survey revealed is that while financial industry ties have fallen some over the past decade, a majority of doctors still reported them. This is particularly concerning when you consider that free samples, which are among the most common financial tie reported, have been linked to the prescribing of high-cost brand-name drugs over lower-cost generic alternatives,” Professor Lisa Schwartz, MD, MS, a researcher on the study, is quoted as saying.

Disclaimer: The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.

PCPs ‘Not Doing Enough’ as STD Rates Skyrocket

There has been an “explosion in STD rates,” due, in part, to primary care physicians failing to screen their patients and discuss sexual activity.

Anna Gorman, Kaiser Health News

Julie Lopez, 21, has been tested regularly for sexually transmitted diseases since she was a teenager. But when Lopez first asked her primary care doctor about screening, he reacted with surprise, she said.

“He said people don’t usually ask. But I did,” said Lopez, a college student in Pasadena, Calif. “It’s really important.”

Lopez usually goes to Planned Parenthood instead for the tests because “they ask the questions that need to be asked,” she said.

As rates of sexually transmitted infections steadily rise nationwide, public health officials and experts say primary care doctors need to step up screening and treatment.

“We know that doctors are not doing enough screening for STDs,” said David Harvey, executive director at the National Coalition of STD Directors. The failure to screen routinely “is leading to an explosion in STD rates,” he said, adding that cutbacks in funding and a lack of patient awareness about the risks make it worse.

The federal government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has set guidelines for annual screening for sexually active individuals. Among them: women under 25 should be tested for gonorrhea and chlamydia, and men who have sex with men should get tested for syphilis, chlamydia and gonorrhea.

However, testing does not always happen as recommended. For example, only about half of sexually active women ages 16 to 24 with private health plans or Medicaid were screened for chlamydia in 2015. The rate was slightly better in California.

Nationally, reported cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis are at an all-time high, CDC data show. In one year, from 2016 to 2017, nationwide rates of chlamydia rose by 7 percent, gonorrhea by 19 percent and syphilis by 11 percent.

Rates of congenital syphilis, which passes from mother to baby during pregnancy or delivery, increased by 44 percent during that time. Nearly one-third of the congenital syphilis cases are from California. The state also saw a record number of STDs last year: more than 300,000 cases of gonorrhea, chlamydia and early syphilis among adults.

Because sexually transmitted infections are often asymptomatic, screening is essential. Untreated STDs can lead to serious health problems, such as chronic pain, infertility or even death.

“Providers and primary care providers play a crucial role in combating these rising STD rates,” said Dr. Laura Bachmann, chief medical officer for the CDC division of STD prevention. “If providers don’t ask the questions and don’t apply the screening recommendations, the majority of STDs will be missed.”

State governments don’t have enough money to combat the rising number of cases, in part because federal STD funding for them has remained stagnant, Harvey said. Last year, he said, $152.3 million in federal funding was appropriated for prevention, the same as eight years earlier.

Experts cite several reasons primary care physicians don’t routinely diagnose and treat STDs. They may worry that they won’t be compensated for providing STD services, or they may not be familiar with the most up-to-date recommendations about testing and treatment. For example, the CDC in 2015 updated the medications it recommends to treat gonorrhea.

Perhaps most commonly, many family physicians are reluctant to discuss sexual health with their patients. One study showed that one-third of adolescents had annual visits that didn’t include any discussion about sexuality.

“We’re in this situation with health care providers and patients — each waiting for the other to start [the conversation],” said Dr. Edward Hook, professor at the University of Alabama-Birmingham School of Medicine. “Doctors worry if they ask patients about their sexual history that it will somehow be offensive to them.”

Dr. Michael Munger, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, said he remembers that his conversations around sexual health were uncomfortable at first. “There are a lot of challenging conversations you can have with patients,” he said. “But this is important. If we don’t do it, who will?”

Rob Nolan, a writer from Los Angeles, said he gets tested every six months, but he prefers to do so at the Los Angeles LGBT Center rather than during visits with his regular doctor, who rarely asks about sexual health.

Nolan, who said he has had experience with STDs, considers the clinic’s staff to be more knowledgeable about sexual health than those at a regular doctor’s office. “They just seem specialized in it,” he said. “And there is zero shame when you are in the clinic.”

Physicians also may have other, more immediate health issues to address during the short time they have with patients. Taking a sexual history and talking about sexual health falls to the bottom of many doctors’ priorities, said Dr. Leo Moore, acting medical director of the division of HIV and STD programs for the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.

Julia Brewer, a nurse practitioner at Northeast Community Clinic in Hawthorne, Calif., said she screens for STDs as a regular part of women’s health exams. But she said her colleagues frequently refer cases to her rather than having the conversations themselves. “The family providers are overwhelmed with diabetes and high blood pressure,” she said. Sexual health, she said, can end up being an “afterthought.”

The L.A. County public health department, which identified STDs as a key priority for the next five years, recently sent representatives to doctors’ offices to teach providers how to address sexually transmitted infections. They distributed information detailing screening recommendations, sample sexual history questions and treatment guidelines.

The Los Angeles County Medical Association also plans to get the word out to doctors through social media and other efforts. “It’s an epidemic and we have to treat it that way,” said CEO Gustavo Friederichsen. “Doctors have to feel a sense of urgency.”

Dr. Heidi Bauer, who heads the California Department of Public Health’s STD control branch, said the state also is trying to educate doctors so they will screen more routinely. The department provides both in-person and online training for doctors to learn about STDs, and publishes downloadable information with current guidelines.

At the same time, Bauer urged the federal government to make its screening recommendations more comprehensive. Outside of pregnancy, for example, there are no recommendations for routine syphilis screening for women. “We are seeing this huge re-emergence of syphilis,” she said. “We haven’t been testing and syphilis is very challenging to diagnose.”

The CDC plans to review the recommendations in the next year, Bachmann said.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation which is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

Disclaimer: The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.

Want to Take Your Mind Off Work? Volunteer.

Finding the time to volunteer your services to underserved populations or in times of crisis may be one way to help you escape from your day-to-day burdens.

After Hurricane Michael ravaged the Florida panhandle in early October, the American Red Cross and other relief organizations appealed for volunteer medical professionals, including physicians, to aid in relief efforts.

“Why would I want to do that? I’m already busy enough,” you may be saying to yourself.

However, physician volunteerism can have many positive impacts on your life and career, one of which can be to combat symptoms of burnout, such as stress and depression. In fact, a recent study on physician perceptions of volunteer service remarked, “Volunteering may serve as a crucial “escape hatch” from the stresses of their regular jobs—in other words, volunteering could have a valuable function in burnout prevention.”

There are many organizations with which physicians can volunteer their services—for disaster relief or otherwise. Some options to consider include:

Disclaimer: The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.