(post below comes from the Health Sciences Institute)
Here's a curious dilemma...
Say you're in charge of the most prominent public health agency for a Big Country.
So a flu comes along that looks like Bad News. Most of the experts are predicting the Bad News Flu will be huge, maybe deadly.
What do you do? You fire up drug companies to develop a Bad News Flu vaccine, pronto. And to make sure they're motivated, you order 190 million doses of the vaccine.
Ka-ching! Now you've got their attention. And you've got the public's attention too. People start to get nervous. Will there be enough vaccines? Will they arrive in time to be useful? Do we need to get more than one dose? Is it safe for kids? Is it safe for everyone?
Funny thing. While you're busy answering all those questions, you find out the Bad News Flu doesn't really seem to be kicking in. In fact, your records show there's some other virus out there that isn't Bad News, but sort of seems like Bad News.
Well now. Would it be so bad to let everyone think it's Bad News? You've bought a gajillion vaccines. You can't let those go to waste. And you SURE can't admit you got it all wrong. So...
Roll up your sleeves, Big Country! Time for your shots.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bizarre behavior
-----------------------------------------------------------
Last July, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advised state health officials to do two things. 1) Stop testing patients for H1N1. 2) Stop counting cases of H1N1.
The official line from CDC went like this: We already know it's an epidemic. So we're not going to waste time running tests to tell us what we already know.
Still, someone at CBS news thought that was sort of odd. So they asked CDC officials to be more specific about why they took this unusual action at the very time H1N1 was being touted as a dangerous pandemic.
Seems like we'd want to keep close tabs on something like that!
The CDC didn't respond to CBS. So the network contacted health officials in all 50 states to get H1N1 statistics that had been gathered until July when the CDC told them to stop.
Here are H1N1 numbers from three states:
California tested 13,704 flu patients – 2% had H1N1
Alaska tested 722 flu patients – 1% had H1N1
Georgia tested 3,117 flu patients – 2% had H1N1
Hmmm. Does that sound like an out-of-control pandemic to you? And you have to wonder: What are the chances the CDC was unaware of these numbers?
But there's something else going on here. Most of those "flu patients" didn't have H1N1 or the seasonal flu. Health experts told CBS that the patients appear to have had some sort of upper respiratory infection that wasn't actually an influenza.
And here's where it gets downright fishy.
According to the CDC you're immune from H1N1 if you've already had a bout with the virus. But CDC officials are advising those who were told they had H1N1 to go ahead and get the H1N1 vaccine. The exception would be those patients who have confirmation from a lab that they actually did have H1N1. But, of course, many don't have lab confirmation because the CDC called off testing.
Amazing. If CDC officials had set out to purposely mismanage their "control" of H1N1, they couldn't have done a better job.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Monday, November 2, 2009
Wellness Care Evidence?
A recent article in a national publication offered advice on how to choose a chiropractor. [1]
The reader was admonished to "suspect brainwashing" if wellness or maintenance care was recommended. The author regurgitated the tired old bromide that "There is no scientific evidence..." This claim must be refuted.
The World Health Organization defines health as being "a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity." [2]
Given this broad definition of health, epistemological constructs borrowed from the social sciences may demonstrate health benefits not disclosed by randomized clinical trials. Health benefits such as improvement in self-reported quality-of-life, decreased health care costs, behaviors associated with decreased morbidity, and patient satisfaction may be evaluated using such methods.
Blanks, Schuster and Dobson [3] published the results of a retrospective assessment of subluxation-based chiropractic care on self-related health, wellness and quality of life.
This is, to my knowledge, the largest study of its kind ever undertaken regarding a chiropractic population.
After surveying 2,818 respondents in 156 practices, a strong connection was found between persons receiving Network care and self-reported improvement in health, wellness and quality-of life.
95% of respondents reported that their expectations had been met, and 99% wished to
continue care.
Coulter et al [4] performed an analysis of an insurance data base, comparing persons receiving chiropractic care with non-chiropractic patients. The study consisted of senior citizens over 75 years of age. It was reported that the persons receiving chiropractic care reported better overall health, spent fewer days in hospitals and nursing homes, used fewer prescription drugs, and were more active than the non-chiropractic patients.
Rupert, Manello, and Sandefur [5] surveyed 311 chiropractic patients, aged 65 years and older, who had received "maintenance care" for five years or longer. Chiropractic patients receiving maintenance care, when compared with US citizens of the same age, spent only 31% of the national average for health care services. There was a 50% reduction in medical provider visits.
The health habits of patients receiving maintenance care were better overall than the general population, including decreased use of cigarettes and decreased use of nonprescription drugs.
Furthermore, 95.8% believed the care to be either "considerably" or "extremely" valuable.
Rupert [6] reports that 79% of chiropractic patients have maintenance care recommended to them, and nearly half of those comply. In an online survey with 3018 respondents by Miller, [7] 62% responded affirmatively when asked, "Although you feel healthy, would you follow your family member's lead and visit a doctor who focuses on wellness and prevention just so you can stay feeling that way?"
Clearly, there is a growing body of evidence that wellness care provided by doctors of chiropractic may reduce health care costs, improve health behaviors, and improve patient perceived quality of- life.
I just love this article as it is a clear, non-emotional, straight forward, factual representation of what is possible with wellness. Now more than ever, I see that people want something that works, and we are grateful to share that the results at Chiropractic Today are better than ever.
We thank you for being the type of people who choose pro-activity over fear; and choice over circumstance. I know that is what we want for our family, and for you and your family as well.
We appreciate you.
References
1. Andersen GD: "Food for thought 2002: how to choose a chiropractor." Dynamic Chiropractic
2002;20(3).
2. World Health Organization: The first ten years of the World Health Organization. Geneva:
WHO, 1958.
3. Blanks RHI, Schuster TL, Dobson M: "A retrospective assessment of Network care using a
survey of self-reported health, wellness and quality of life." Journal of Vertebral Subluxation
Research 1997;1(4):15.
4. Coulter ID, Hurwitz EL, Aronow HU, et al: "Chiropractic patients in a comprehensive homebased
geriatric assessment, follow-up and health promotion program." Topics in Clinical
Chiropractic 1996;3(2):46.
5. Rupert RL, Manello D, Sandefur R: "Maintenance care: health promotion services administered
to US chiropractic patients aged 65 or older, Part II." Journal of Manipulative and Physiological
Therapeutics 2000;23(1):10.
6. Rupert RL: "A survey of practice patterns and the health promotion and prevention Attitudes of
US chiropractors. Maintenance care: Part I." Journal of Manipulative and Physiological
Therapeutics 2000;23(1):1.
7. Miller S: chiroviewpresents.com. Survey says? 2/6/02.
The reader was admonished to "suspect brainwashing" if wellness or maintenance care was recommended. The author regurgitated the tired old bromide that "There is no scientific evidence..." This claim must be refuted.
The World Health Organization defines health as being "a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity." [2]
Given this broad definition of health, epistemological constructs borrowed from the social sciences may demonstrate health benefits not disclosed by randomized clinical trials. Health benefits such as improvement in self-reported quality-of-life, decreased health care costs, behaviors associated with decreased morbidity, and patient satisfaction may be evaluated using such methods.
Blanks, Schuster and Dobson [3] published the results of a retrospective assessment of subluxation-based chiropractic care on self-related health, wellness and quality of life.
This is, to my knowledge, the largest study of its kind ever undertaken regarding a chiropractic population.
After surveying 2,818 respondents in 156 practices, a strong connection was found between persons receiving Network care and self-reported improvement in health, wellness and quality-of life.
95% of respondents reported that their expectations had been met, and 99% wished to
continue care.
Coulter et al [4] performed an analysis of an insurance data base, comparing persons receiving chiropractic care with non-chiropractic patients. The study consisted of senior citizens over 75 years of age. It was reported that the persons receiving chiropractic care reported better overall health, spent fewer days in hospitals and nursing homes, used fewer prescription drugs, and were more active than the non-chiropractic patients.
Rupert, Manello, and Sandefur [5] surveyed 311 chiropractic patients, aged 65 years and older, who had received "maintenance care" for five years or longer. Chiropractic patients receiving maintenance care, when compared with US citizens of the same age, spent only 31% of the national average for health care services. There was a 50% reduction in medical provider visits.
The health habits of patients receiving maintenance care were better overall than the general population, including decreased use of cigarettes and decreased use of nonprescription drugs.
Furthermore, 95.8% believed the care to be either "considerably" or "extremely" valuable.
Rupert [6] reports that 79% of chiropractic patients have maintenance care recommended to them, and nearly half of those comply. In an online survey with 3018 respondents by Miller, [7] 62% responded affirmatively when asked, "Although you feel healthy, would you follow your family member's lead and visit a doctor who focuses on wellness and prevention just so you can stay feeling that way?"
Clearly, there is a growing body of evidence that wellness care provided by doctors of chiropractic may reduce health care costs, improve health behaviors, and improve patient perceived quality of- life.
I just love this article as it is a clear, non-emotional, straight forward, factual representation of what is possible with wellness. Now more than ever, I see that people want something that works, and we are grateful to share that the results at Chiropractic Today are better than ever.
We thank you for being the type of people who choose pro-activity over fear; and choice over circumstance. I know that is what we want for our family, and for you and your family as well.
We appreciate you.
References
1. Andersen GD: "Food for thought 2002: how to choose a chiropractor." Dynamic Chiropractic
2002;20(3).
2. World Health Organization: The first ten years of the World Health Organization. Geneva:
WHO, 1958.
3. Blanks RHI, Schuster TL, Dobson M: "A retrospective assessment of Network care using a
survey of self-reported health, wellness and quality of life." Journal of Vertebral Subluxation
Research 1997;1(4):15.
4. Coulter ID, Hurwitz EL, Aronow HU, et al: "Chiropractic patients in a comprehensive homebased
geriatric assessment, follow-up and health promotion program." Topics in Clinical
Chiropractic 1996;3(2):46.
5. Rupert RL, Manello D, Sandefur R: "Maintenance care: health promotion services administered
to US chiropractic patients aged 65 or older, Part II." Journal of Manipulative and Physiological
Therapeutics 2000;23(1):10.
6. Rupert RL: "A survey of practice patterns and the health promotion and prevention Attitudes of
US chiropractors. Maintenance care: Part I." Journal of Manipulative and Physiological
Therapeutics 2000;23(1):1.
7. Miller S: chiroviewpresents.com. Survey says? 2/6/02.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Medical Error
Found this article today....... READ IT! (eye opening info from inside the medical profession)
Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)
Dr. Barbara Starfield of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health describes how the US health care system may contribute to poor health.
ALL THESE ARE DEATHS PER YEAR:
12,000 -----unnecessary surgery (8)
7,000 -----medication errors in hospitals (9)
20,000 -----other errors in hospitals (10)
80,000 -----infections in hospitals (10)
106,000 ----non-error, negative effects of drugs (2)
These total to 250,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes!!
What does the word "iatrogenic" mean? This term is defined as induced in a patient by a physician's activity, manner, or therapy. Used especially of a complication of treatment.
Dr. Starfield offers several warnings in interpreting these numbers: First, most of the data are derived from studies in hospitalized patients. Second, these estimates are for deaths only and do not include negative effects that are associated with disability or discomfort. Third, the estimates of death due to error are lower than those in the IOM report.
[Remember, only 60,000 Americans lost their life in the entire Vietnam war!- KSM] (1)
If the higher estimates are used, the deaths due to iatrogenic causes would range from 230,000 to 284,000. In any case, 225,000 deaths per year constitutes the third leading cause of death in the United States, after deaths from heart disease and cancer. Even if these figures are overestimated, there is a wide margin between these numbers of deaths and the next leading cause of death (cerebrovascular disease).
Another analysis (11) concluded that between 4% and 18% of consecutive patients experience negative effects in outpatient settings, with:
116 million extra physician visits
77 million extra prescriptions
17 million emergency department visits
8 million hospitalizations
3 million long-term admissions
199,000 additional deaths
$77 billion in extra costs
The high cost of the health care system is considered to be a deficit, but seems to be tolerated under the assumption that better health results from more expensive care. However, evidence from a few studies indicates that as many as 20% to 30% of patients receive inappropriate care. An estimated 44,000 to 98,000 among them die each year as a result of medical errors. (2) This might be tolerated if it resulted in better health, but does it?
Of 13 countries in a recent comparison, the United States ranks an average of 12th (second from the bottom) for 16 available health indicators. More specifically, the ranking of the US on several indicators was:
13th (last) for low-birth-weight percentages
13th for neonatal mortality and infant mortality overall 14
11th for post neonatal mortality
13th for years of potential life lost (excluding external causes)
11th for life expectancy at 1 year for females, 12th for males
10th for life expectancy at 15 years for females, 12th for males
10th for life expectancy at 40 years for females, 9th for males
7th for life expectancy at 65 years for females, 7th for males
3rd for life expectancy at 80 years for females, 3rd for males
10th for age-adjusted mortality
The poor performance of the US was recently confirmed by a World Health Organization study, which used different data and ranked the United States as 15th among 25 industrialized countries. There is a perception that the American public "behaves badly" by smoking, drinking, and perpetrating violence." However the data does not support this assertion. The proportion of females who smoke ranges from 14% in Japan to 41% in Denmark; in the United States, it is 24% (fifth best). For males, the range is from 26% in Sweden to 61% in Japan; it is 28% in the United States (third best). The US ranks fifth best for alcoholic beverage consumption. The US has relatively low consumption of animal fats (fifth lowest in men aged 55-64 years in 20 industrialized countries) and the third lowest mean cholesterol concentrations among men aged 50 to 70 years among 13 industrialized countries. These estimates of death due to error are lower than those in a recent Institutes of Medicine report (and as said if higher estimates are used, deaths due to iatrogenic causes would range from 230,000 to 284,000).
Even at the lower estimate of 225,000 deaths per year, this constitutes the third leading cause of death in the US, following heart disease and cancer. Lack of technology is certainly not a contributing factor to the US's low ranking. Among 29 countries, the United States is second only to Japan in the availability of magnetic resonance imaging units and computed tomography scanners per million population. Japan, however, ranks highest on health, whereas the US ranks among the lowest. It is possible that the high use of technology in Japan is limited to diagnostic technology not matched by high rates of treatment, whereas in the US, high use of diagnostic technology may be linked to more treatment.
Supporting this possibility are data showing that the number of employees per bed (full-time equivalents) in the United States is highest among the countries ranked, whereas they are very low in Japan, far lower than can be accounted for by the common practice of having family members rather than hospital staff provide the amenities of hospital care. Journal American Medical Association, (Vol. 284), July 26, 2000 COMMENT: Folks, this is what they call a "Landmark Article". Only several ones like this are published every year. One of the major reasons it is so huge is that it is published in JAMA which is the largest and one of the most respected medical journals in the entire world. I did find it most curious that the best wire service in the world, Reuter's, did not pick up this article. I have no idea why they let it slip by.
I would encourage you to bookmark this article and review it several times so you can use the statistics to counter the arguments of your friends and relatives who are so enthralled with the traditional medical paradigm. These statistics prove very clearly that the system is just not working. It is broken and is in desperate need of repair. I was previously fond of saying that drugs are the fourth leading cause of death in this country. However, this article makes it quite clear that the more powerful number is that doctors are the third leading cause of death in this country killing nearly a quarter million people a year. The only more common causes are cancer and heart disease. This statistic is likely to be seriously underestimated as much of the coding only describes the cause of organ failure and does not address iatrogenic causes at all. Japan seems to have benefited from recognizing that technology is wonderful, but just because you diagnose something with it, one should not be committed to undergoing treatment in the traditional paradigm. Their health statistics reflect this aspect of their philosophy as much of their treatment is not treatment at all, but loving care rendered in the home.
Care, not treatment, is the answer. Drugs, surgery and hospitals are rarely the answer to chronic health problems. Facilitating the God-given healing capacity that all of us have is the key. Improving the diet, exercise, and lifestyle are basic. Effective interventions for the underlying emotional and spiritual wounding behind most chronic illness are also important clues to maximizing health and reducing disease.
Related Articles:
Medical Mistakes Kill 100,000 per year US Health Care System Most Expensive in the World Author/Article Information Author Affiliation: Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, Baltimore, Md. Corresponding Author and Reprints: Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, 624 N Broadway, Room 452, Baltimore, MD 21205-1996 (e-mail: bstarfie@jhsph.edu).
REFERENCES
1. Schuster M, McGlynn E, Brook R. "How good is the quality of health care in the United States?" Milbank Q. 1998;76:517-563.
2. Kohn L, ed, Corrigan J, ed, Donaldson M, ed. "To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System." Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999.
3. Starfield B. "Primary Care: Balancing Health Needs, Services, and Technology." New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1998.
4. World Health Report 2000. Available at: http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/report.htm. Accessed June 28, 2000.
5. Kunst A. "Cross-national Comparisons of Socioeconomic Differences in Mortality." Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Erasmus University; 1997.
6. Law M, Wald N. "Why heart disease mortality is low in France: the time lag explanation." BMJ. 1999;313:1471-1480.
7. Starfield B. "Evaluating the State Children's Health Insurance Program: critical considerations." Annu Rev Public Health. 2000;21:569-585.
8. Leape L. "Unecessarsary surgery." Annu Rev Public Health. 1992;13:363-383.
9. Phillips D, Christenfeld N, Glynn L. "Increase in US medication-error deaths between 1983 and 1993." Lancet. 1998;351:643-644.
10. Lazarou J, Pomeranz B, Corey P. "Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients." JAMA. 1998;279:1200-1205.
11. Weingart SN, Wilson RM, Gibberd RW, Harrison B. "Epidemiology and medical error." BMJ. 2000;320:774-777.
12. Wilkinson R. "Unhealthy Societies: The Afflictions of Inequality." London, England: Routledge; 1996.
13. Evans R, Roos N. "What is right about the Canadian health system?" Milbank Q. 1999;77:393-399.
14. Guyer B, Hoyert D, Martin J, Ventura S, MacDorman M, Strobino D. "Annual summary of vital statistics 1998." Pediatrics. 1999;104:1229-1246.
15. Harrold LR, Field TS, Gurwitz JH. "Knowledge, patterns of care, and outcomes of care for generalists and specialists." J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:499-511.
16. Donahoe MT. "Comparing generalist and specialty care: discrepancies, deficiencies, and excesses." Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:1596-1607.
17. Anderson G, Poullier J-P. "Health Spending, Access, and Outcomes: Trends in Industrialized Countries." New York, NY: The Commonwealth Fund; 1999.
18. Mold J, Stein H. "The cascade effect in the clinical care of patients." N Engl J Med. 1986;314:512-514.
19. Shi L, Starfield B. "Income inequality, primary care, and health indicators." J Fam Pract. 1999;48:275-284
Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)
Dr. Barbara Starfield of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health describes how the US health care system may contribute to poor health.
ALL THESE ARE DEATHS PER YEAR:
12,000 -----unnecessary surgery (8)
7,000 -----medication errors in hospitals (9)
20,000 -----other errors in hospitals (10)
80,000 -----infections in hospitals (10)
106,000 ----non-error, negative effects of drugs (2)
These total to 250,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes!!
What does the word "iatrogenic" mean? This term is defined as induced in a patient by a physician's activity, manner, or therapy. Used especially of a complication of treatment.
Dr. Starfield offers several warnings in interpreting these numbers: First, most of the data are derived from studies in hospitalized patients. Second, these estimates are for deaths only and do not include negative effects that are associated with disability or discomfort. Third, the estimates of death due to error are lower than those in the IOM report.
[Remember, only 60,000 Americans lost their life in the entire Vietnam war!- KSM] (1)
If the higher estimates are used, the deaths due to iatrogenic causes would range from 230,000 to 284,000. In any case, 225,000 deaths per year constitutes the third leading cause of death in the United States, after deaths from heart disease and cancer. Even if these figures are overestimated, there is a wide margin between these numbers of deaths and the next leading cause of death (cerebrovascular disease).
Another analysis (11) concluded that between 4% and 18% of consecutive patients experience negative effects in outpatient settings, with:
116 million extra physician visits
77 million extra prescriptions
17 million emergency department visits
8 million hospitalizations
3 million long-term admissions
199,000 additional deaths
$77 billion in extra costs
The high cost of the health care system is considered to be a deficit, but seems to be tolerated under the assumption that better health results from more expensive care. However, evidence from a few studies indicates that as many as 20% to 30% of patients receive inappropriate care. An estimated 44,000 to 98,000 among them die each year as a result of medical errors. (2) This might be tolerated if it resulted in better health, but does it?
Of 13 countries in a recent comparison, the United States ranks an average of 12th (second from the bottom) for 16 available health indicators. More specifically, the ranking of the US on several indicators was:
13th (last) for low-birth-weight percentages
13th for neonatal mortality and infant mortality overall 14
11th for post neonatal mortality
13th for years of potential life lost (excluding external causes)
11th for life expectancy at 1 year for females, 12th for males
10th for life expectancy at 15 years for females, 12th for males
10th for life expectancy at 40 years for females, 9th for males
7th for life expectancy at 65 years for females, 7th for males
3rd for life expectancy at 80 years for females, 3rd for males
10th for age-adjusted mortality
The poor performance of the US was recently confirmed by a World Health Organization study, which used different data and ranked the United States as 15th among 25 industrialized countries. There is a perception that the American public "behaves badly" by smoking, drinking, and perpetrating violence." However the data does not support this assertion. The proportion of females who smoke ranges from 14% in Japan to 41% in Denmark; in the United States, it is 24% (fifth best). For males, the range is from 26% in Sweden to 61% in Japan; it is 28% in the United States (third best). The US ranks fifth best for alcoholic beverage consumption. The US has relatively low consumption of animal fats (fifth lowest in men aged 55-64 years in 20 industrialized countries) and the third lowest mean cholesterol concentrations among men aged 50 to 70 years among 13 industrialized countries. These estimates of death due to error are lower than those in a recent Institutes of Medicine report (and as said if higher estimates are used, deaths due to iatrogenic causes would range from 230,000 to 284,000).
Even at the lower estimate of 225,000 deaths per year, this constitutes the third leading cause of death in the US, following heart disease and cancer. Lack of technology is certainly not a contributing factor to the US's low ranking. Among 29 countries, the United States is second only to Japan in the availability of magnetic resonance imaging units and computed tomography scanners per million population. Japan, however, ranks highest on health, whereas the US ranks among the lowest. It is possible that the high use of technology in Japan is limited to diagnostic technology not matched by high rates of treatment, whereas in the US, high use of diagnostic technology may be linked to more treatment.
Supporting this possibility are data showing that the number of employees per bed (full-time equivalents) in the United States is highest among the countries ranked, whereas they are very low in Japan, far lower than can be accounted for by the common practice of having family members rather than hospital staff provide the amenities of hospital care. Journal American Medical Association, (Vol. 284), July 26, 2000 COMMENT: Folks, this is what they call a "Landmark Article". Only several ones like this are published every year. One of the major reasons it is so huge is that it is published in JAMA which is the largest and one of the most respected medical journals in the entire world. I did find it most curious that the best wire service in the world, Reuter's, did not pick up this article. I have no idea why they let it slip by.
I would encourage you to bookmark this article and review it several times so you can use the statistics to counter the arguments of your friends and relatives who are so enthralled with the traditional medical paradigm. These statistics prove very clearly that the system is just not working. It is broken and is in desperate need of repair. I was previously fond of saying that drugs are the fourth leading cause of death in this country. However, this article makes it quite clear that the more powerful number is that doctors are the third leading cause of death in this country killing nearly a quarter million people a year. The only more common causes are cancer and heart disease. This statistic is likely to be seriously underestimated as much of the coding only describes the cause of organ failure and does not address iatrogenic causes at all. Japan seems to have benefited from recognizing that technology is wonderful, but just because you diagnose something with it, one should not be committed to undergoing treatment in the traditional paradigm. Their health statistics reflect this aspect of their philosophy as much of their treatment is not treatment at all, but loving care rendered in the home.
Care, not treatment, is the answer. Drugs, surgery and hospitals are rarely the answer to chronic health problems. Facilitating the God-given healing capacity that all of us have is the key. Improving the diet, exercise, and lifestyle are basic. Effective interventions for the underlying emotional and spiritual wounding behind most chronic illness are also important clues to maximizing health and reducing disease.
Related Articles:
Medical Mistakes Kill 100,000 per year US Health Care System Most Expensive in the World Author/Article Information Author Affiliation: Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, Baltimore, Md. Corresponding Author and Reprints: Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, 624 N Broadway, Room 452, Baltimore, MD 21205-1996 (e-mail: bstarfie@jhsph.edu).
REFERENCES
1. Schuster M, McGlynn E, Brook R. "How good is the quality of health care in the United States?" Milbank Q. 1998;76:517-563.
2. Kohn L, ed, Corrigan J, ed, Donaldson M, ed. "To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System." Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999.
3. Starfield B. "Primary Care: Balancing Health Needs, Services, and Technology." New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1998.
4. World Health Report 2000. Available at: http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/report.htm. Accessed June 28, 2000.
5. Kunst A. "Cross-national Comparisons of Socioeconomic Differences in Mortality." Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Erasmus University; 1997.
6. Law M, Wald N. "Why heart disease mortality is low in France: the time lag explanation." BMJ. 1999;313:1471-1480.
7. Starfield B. "Evaluating the State Children's Health Insurance Program: critical considerations." Annu Rev Public Health. 2000;21:569-585.
8. Leape L. "Unecessarsary surgery." Annu Rev Public Health. 1992;13:363-383.
9. Phillips D, Christenfeld N, Glynn L. "Increase in US medication-error deaths between 1983 and 1993." Lancet. 1998;351:643-644.
10. Lazarou J, Pomeranz B, Corey P. "Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients." JAMA. 1998;279:1200-1205.
11. Weingart SN, Wilson RM, Gibberd RW, Harrison B. "Epidemiology and medical error." BMJ. 2000;320:774-777.
12. Wilkinson R. "Unhealthy Societies: The Afflictions of Inequality." London, England: Routledge; 1996.
13. Evans R, Roos N. "What is right about the Canadian health system?" Milbank Q. 1999;77:393-399.
14. Guyer B, Hoyert D, Martin J, Ventura S, MacDorman M, Strobino D. "Annual summary of vital statistics 1998." Pediatrics. 1999;104:1229-1246.
15. Harrold LR, Field TS, Gurwitz JH. "Knowledge, patterns of care, and outcomes of care for generalists and specialists." J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:499-511.
16. Donahoe MT. "Comparing generalist and specialty care: discrepancies, deficiencies, and excesses." Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:1596-1607.
17. Anderson G, Poullier J-P. "Health Spending, Access, and Outcomes: Trends in Industrialized Countries." New York, NY: The Commonwealth Fund; 1999.
18. Mold J, Stein H. "The cascade effect in the clinical care of patients." N Engl J Med. 1986;314:512-514.
19. Shi L, Starfield B. "Income inequality, primary care, and health indicators." J Fam Pract. 1999;48:275-284
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Chiropractic care helps ADHD and child avoids Ritalin
Three-year old shows marked improvement after one month
Chiropractic Care Helps Child
With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
(5/113/09 Covington, WA). A recent article published in The Journal of Pediatrics, Maternal and Family Health, March 2009, reports the case study of a 3-year old male patient who had been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
The child’s mother indicated that her son’s birth was traumatic and complicated, including a fractured left clavicle during birthing. The boy showed signs of ADHD from the age of two, including falling out of bed as many as three times a night and having a history of ear infections and respiratory problems. The child’s pre-school teacher referred him to a psychologist because of temper tantrums and biting incidents with other children.
“The usual medical treatment for children diagnosed with ADHD is a psycho-stimulant drug, like Ritalin,” said Covington-based Dr. Treye Hovinga, D.C. “This type of treatment is reported to be about 70% effective, but there are serious side-effects of these drugs, like stunted growth, insomnia, loss of appetite, dizziness, stomach aches, and, in some instances, heart and blood pressure problems.”
In the case of this 3-year old, the mother wanted to try chiropractic care as a way to avoid using the drug regimen usually prescribed. The examining chiropractor, using a non-intrusive device known as an Insight Subluxation Station, conducted thermal scans of the child’s spine and found the existence of a subluxation in the child’s upper cervical area.
“A subluxation is a misalignment of the spine that disturbs normal nervous system function,” said Dr. Hovinga. “Many chiropractors, including myself, have this technology that allows them to conduct thermal and Surface Electromyography (sEMG) tests to assist in locating where such conditions exist.”
The patient underwent chiropractic care, including spinal adjustments, with frequency of care initially set at three times per week for the first three weeks, then once a week, then once every two weeks. After one month, the mother and teacher noted improved attention and less hyperactivity. The patient’s thermal scans also showed improvement. The child remains on a twice-monthly plan of chiropractic care, with no drug therapy, and continues to show improvement.
“This is just one case study,” explained Dr. Hovinga, and more studies are needed before any absolute conclusions can be drawn.”
Dr. Hovinga’s chiropractic practice features the Insight Subluxation Station. This technology is certified by the Space Foundation, which was co-founded by NASA, and is used by 8,000 chiropractors worldwide to measure nervous system health and performance.
#
Editor’s note:
Anyone wishing more information may contact Dr. Treye Hovinga, whose office is located at 17039 SE 272nd St. STE 100, Covington, WA. 98042 (253) 639-9822.
Chiropractic Care Helps Child
With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
(5/113/09 Covington, WA). A recent article published in The Journal of Pediatrics, Maternal and Family Health, March 2009, reports the case study of a 3-year old male patient who had been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
The child’s mother indicated that her son’s birth was traumatic and complicated, including a fractured left clavicle during birthing. The boy showed signs of ADHD from the age of two, including falling out of bed as many as three times a night and having a history of ear infections and respiratory problems. The child’s pre-school teacher referred him to a psychologist because of temper tantrums and biting incidents with other children.
“The usual medical treatment for children diagnosed with ADHD is a psycho-stimulant drug, like Ritalin,” said Covington-based Dr. Treye Hovinga, D.C. “This type of treatment is reported to be about 70% effective, but there are serious side-effects of these drugs, like stunted growth, insomnia, loss of appetite, dizziness, stomach aches, and, in some instances, heart and blood pressure problems.”
In the case of this 3-year old, the mother wanted to try chiropractic care as a way to avoid using the drug regimen usually prescribed. The examining chiropractor, using a non-intrusive device known as an Insight Subluxation Station, conducted thermal scans of the child’s spine and found the existence of a subluxation in the child’s upper cervical area.
“A subluxation is a misalignment of the spine that disturbs normal nervous system function,” said Dr. Hovinga. “Many chiropractors, including myself, have this technology that allows them to conduct thermal and Surface Electromyography (sEMG) tests to assist in locating where such conditions exist.”
The patient underwent chiropractic care, including spinal adjustments, with frequency of care initially set at three times per week for the first three weeks, then once a week, then once every two weeks. After one month, the mother and teacher noted improved attention and less hyperactivity. The patient’s thermal scans also showed improvement. The child remains on a twice-monthly plan of chiropractic care, with no drug therapy, and continues to show improvement.
“This is just one case study,” explained Dr. Hovinga, and more studies are needed before any absolute conclusions can be drawn.”
Dr. Hovinga’s chiropractic practice features the Insight Subluxation Station. This technology is certified by the Space Foundation, which was co-founded by NASA, and is used by 8,000 chiropractors worldwide to measure nervous system health and performance.
#
Editor’s note:
Anyone wishing more information may contact Dr. Treye Hovinga, whose office is located at 17039 SE 272nd St. STE 100, Covington, WA. 98042 (253) 639-9822.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Ear Infections and Chiropractic
Chiropractic Care Helps Child With Headaches,
Chronic Ear and Sinus Infections
(April 30, 2009, Covington). An article published in Proceedings, a respected journal of the Council on Chiropractic Pediatrics of the International Chiropractors Association, reports the case study of an eight-year old female patient suffering from recurring headaches and chronic ear and sinus infections. The child had been through repeated rounds of antibiotic treatments and sinus surgery. Even the extreme procedure of two typanectomy surgeries to one of the child’s eardrums failed to alleviate her condition.
“Children are often plagued with sinus and ear conditions,” said Covington-based Dr. Treye Hovinga, D.C. “This case study illustrates that when medical treatment fails to bring about the desired results, chiropractic care may be an effective alternative. It is a non-invasive approach.”
In the case of this 8-year old, the parents had taken their child to several medical practitioners, but symptoms persisted. The child’s regular pediatrician was about to recommend another tympanectomy and a continued regimen of antibiotics. Before following that recommendation, the parents took their daughter to a chiropractor.
The examining chiropractor found the existence of a subluxation in the child’s upper cervical area and, using sEMG scanning technology, evidence of muscle hypertonicity, or tightness, in both the cervical and thoracic areas.
“A subluxation is a misalignment of the spine that disturbs normal nervous system function,” said Dr. Treye. “Many chiropractors, including myself, have technology that allows them to conduct Surface Electromyography (sEMG) tests to assist in locating where such conditions exist.”
The patient underwent chiropractic care, including spinal adjustments. After one month of such care, child and parents noted an absence of headaches, and sinus and ear pain had also decreased markedly. As a result, the planned third ear surgery was cancelled. The patient’s sEMG scans showed improvement, but chiropractic care was continued. After four months, the patient reported that headaches had ceased and that ear and sinus infections were absent. Her sEMG scans and x-rays were at, or near, normal.
“This is just one case study,” explained Dr. Treye, and more studies are needed before any absolute conclusions can be drawn.”
Dr. Treye’s chiropractic practice features the Insight Subluxation Station. This technology is certified by the Space Foundation, which was co-founded by NASA, and is used by 8,000 chiropractors worldwide to measure nervous system health and performance.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Chiropractor made my baby poo!!!
Chronic constipation second most frequent pediatric complaint
Study Shows Chiropractic Care Benefits Constipated Infants
Mar. 30, 2009 - Covington, WA. A very small study group—three infants, all under two years of age—was put into chiropractic care for periods of three weeks to three months in a controlled research project. Following the study, which was funded by the International Chiropractic Pediatric Association of Media, PA, all three children showed marked improvement in their condition.
“Chronic constipation afflicts the very young and the aged among our population with more frequency than the rest of us,” said Covington-based Dr. Treye Hovinga, D.C. “This problem accounts for 25% of all visits to pediatric gastroenterologists, but few formal studies have been conducted.”
Researchers chose three infants who were experiencing infrequent bowel movements of from once a week to once every 3 or 4 days. Parents of these infants had tried dietary changes and the use of cod liver oil and mineral oil, all under the direction of medical doctors. Nothing worked.
“The infants received full spinal chiropractic care,” said Dr. Hovinga, “for periods ranging from three weeks to three months. All three experienced almost immediate improvement, and by the end of the study, all three had bowel movements at least once every 1-2 days.”
“This study represents a very preliminary level of findings, and much more research is needed,” Dr. Hovinga added. “But the results should offer some encouragement for parents of children with this problem. In fact, I have had great results with infant constipation in my own office."
Anyone wishing more information may contact Dr. Hovinga, whose office is located at 17039 SE 272nd St, STE 100, Covington, WA. (253) 639-9822.
#
Reference:
“The successful chiropractic care of pediatric patients with chronic constipation: A case studay and selective review of the literature,” Clinical Chiropractic (2008) 11, 138-147.
Study Shows Chiropractic Care Benefits Constipated Infants
Mar. 30, 2009 - Covington, WA. A very small study group—three infants, all under two years of age—was put into chiropractic care for periods of three weeks to three months in a controlled research project. Following the study, which was funded by the International Chiropractic Pediatric Association of Media, PA, all three children showed marked improvement in their condition.
“Chronic constipation afflicts the very young and the aged among our population with more frequency than the rest of us,” said Covington-based Dr. Treye Hovinga, D.C. “This problem accounts for 25% of all visits to pediatric gastroenterologists, but few formal studies have been conducted.”
Researchers chose three infants who were experiencing infrequent bowel movements of from once a week to once every 3 or 4 days. Parents of these infants had tried dietary changes and the use of cod liver oil and mineral oil, all under the direction of medical doctors. Nothing worked.
“The infants received full spinal chiropractic care,” said Dr. Hovinga, “for periods ranging from three weeks to three months. All three experienced almost immediate improvement, and by the end of the study, all three had bowel movements at least once every 1-2 days.”
“This study represents a very preliminary level of findings, and much more research is needed,” Dr. Hovinga added. “But the results should offer some encouragement for parents of children with this problem. In fact, I have had great results with infant constipation in my own office."
Anyone wishing more information may contact Dr. Hovinga, whose office is located at 17039 SE 272nd St, STE 100, Covington, WA. (253) 639-9822.
#
Reference:
“The successful chiropractic care of pediatric patients with chronic constipation: A case studay and selective review of the literature,” Clinical Chiropractic (2008) 11, 138-147.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
