Throwaway05
12hr ago
However, I am not a medical doctor, so what am I missing?
Coming in way too hot.
The VA has had hiring freezes for the last two years, to my understanding. So no traditional shortage there.
Hiring extra VA physicians does nothing for the general problems we have in any case (which isn't a traditional shortage).
Throwaway05
12hr ago
I mean it's like comparing ships from the age of sail to modern battleships. Do they both suck and are too expensive? Quite possibly.
Are they totally different things? Also true.
The population is completely different in terms of age and health. What we can do for patients is also totally different - more patients are on more medications that are more effective.
If a given type of health plan increases the chance that patients actually take their diabetes medication that alone will have a radical impact on outcomes.
Those things didn't exist 40 years ago. Nor did the diabetes rates...
Apple to oranges, maybe the conclusion is the same, but still apples to oranges.
Throwaway05
12hr ago
Huh, interesting - definitely missed how much things have changed on this front, thank you for the update.
I don't support catastrophic plans anyway so it makes sense, yeah some of it is the healthy need to subsidize the sick, but also people struggle to understand if they are healthy or sick, and how quickly that can change and so on.
The young always think they are invincible and then you get diabetes and sit on it unmanaged for a decade and end up with a heart attack and bilateral knee amputations or no kidneys.
Preventative care saves people and money in the long run and is cheap as hell but people will refuse.
Throwaway05
13hr ago
I would hesitate to use a study from that far back because the American health landscape is so different now (in terms of population health, costs, and availability of interventions). Diabetes alone could fuck up the results (and almost certainly does).
I mean what you are asking for is available. Catastrophic plans are available on the marketplace and plenty of family practice doctors offer a practice sort of what you are suggesting. It is expensive but that's primarily because this model is a thing of independent practice which is dying outside of high tax brackets. Doctors aren't in charge when they are employed so they have to do what the employer says. Although my PCP is boring and they can do that (minus cash pay).
Ultimately nearly everything most people hate about healthcare is stuff that doctors don't have any control over and also hate, but we get blamed and people want to make our lives more miserable. It is very frustrating.
Throwaway05
14hr ago
If I were in charge of VA, I would make a rule that any doctor who got their license in any OECD country can work unsupervised (provisional on training on HIPPA or whatever other US-specific medical laws). Then get a whole bunch of H1 Visas for any doctor who wants to come work for VA for five years.
What do you gain from this? If the goal to decrease healthcare costs this doesn't do much. If it's to solve the shortage it also doesn't help that much.
Throwaway05
14hr ago
I think people in other fields fail to understand how egregiously poor a lot of NPs are. Most settings they are still supervised or deliberately have low complexity cases sent their way or have some other aspect of the environment that protects them (for instance inpatient NPs just consult specialists for everything and those specialists manage the patient even though the NP is on charge on paper).
Surely they must have some training, and they can't be that bad, right? Like who would let them practice if they are that bad?
They are that bad.
It's been hard to extract the data about this because of financial interests in NPs, and the general difficulty of doing medical research.
So much of medicine is opaque to those outside the field and even inside of it (I know nurses who have been working for 40 years and go "huh" when you tell them the resident has been working 24 hours in a row).
Fundamentally I see midlevels every week who make decisions that would make me go "holy shit you are the worst doctor in your specialty I've ever met," it's near constant.
It sounds histrionic and unbelievable but that's how so much nonsense in healthcare is.
Amazon, google, apple, tons of finances firms have all come into medicine and gone "damn that shit is run so poorly surely we can do better" and then run away screaming.
Throwaway05
14hr ago
If you want us to redesign the system you need to sacrifice something else, most likely increased paternalism - is that what you want?
There are no penalties for misusing the system now, inducing penalties for bad behavior is the primary way we correct things and make systems function.
Or do you want Urgent Care to be staffed by ED and FM? That would certainly address the issue but would dramatically increase expense.
Throwaway05
17hr ago
It's called the art and science of medicine for a reason, in psych it can be pretty evident to the lay man, in other specialties it's less but still present. This means experience, heuristics, gestalts, they lead doctors astray yes, but for a lot of things we don't have good guidelines or understanding.
Importantly, doctors can be sued - this causes all kinds of problems but it does serve as a feedback mechanism that assess for problems and gives patients recourse.
Let me give a specific example of how this happens, sticking with psych because it's more interesting than me mumbling about open vs lap vs conservative appendix management.
Most people are aware of Bipolar disorder, at least superficially. Lots of people say "I have mood swings" and tell that to healthcare workers with less training, these people dutifully write down Bipolar in the chart. Or they say "you ever like have mood swings and be unable to sleep?" Gets the diagnosis. Someone who actually has Bipolar 1 with a manic episode barely sleeps for a week of more, does illegal things, or spends ALL of their money in the bank account and all kinds of other stuff. The diagnosis is serious and life limiting without treatment. The medications are also serious - most patients get antipsychotics these days which increase all cause mortality. They are worth it if you actually have the disease. Put undertrained staff give the dx to people who don't have it and then suddenly...
NPs also do things like mix benzos and stimulants, put people with depression or anxiety on antipsychotics which will result in an early death....just all kinds of ridiculous stuff.
The skill ceiling in psych (and medicine) is very high, but if you don't work in healthcare you'll (hopefully) never see it come into play. Most medical work isn't your quick annual physical with your doctor but for many patients (especially young ones) that's all you see.
As for the second point, no the issue is that physician salaries are less than 10 percent of healthcare spending, and it's been decreasing every year. Cutting doctor salaries does not solve the problem and introduces all kinds of new problems.
Likewise NPs don't save money because they do more unnecessary testing and over consult, which drains the specialists and slows down care.
Throwaway05
17hr ago
For anyone wondering
Laparoscopic surgery is the other main issue on this front, but you'll have more of that available in Africa.
Throwaway05
19hr ago
Sounds like a design problem.
It's designed well, people just refuse to use it correctly and we can't force them. No amount of civil engineering is going to make up for disaffected young males who insist on driving around at 40 miles over the speed limit.
Society has mostly decided we can't force patients to use the systems correctly or take care of themselves. And I'm okay with that. Although this was a big part of what the ACA was about - health insurance only really works if everyone has it so you needed to force people to get.
I'm not saying all the regulations are good, many are emphatically not - physician salaries have been dropping for forever, so what's causing increased costs? Well a bunch of it is admin and other horseshit like that.
Think about how complex some of this system is, a huge percentage of costs, maybe even worth as much of 50% of doctors salaries, is healthcare workers and systems protecting themselves from getting sued. You want to drop healthcare costs and make access easier? Great make it so we can't get sued. I promise you that you will mostly get better quality care faster and for cheaper. But no, people don't want that, they want to be able to sue.
So healthcare is more expensive.
So much of what goes on is like that.
Throwaway05
22hr ago
PCPs have sick visits, you establish with a PCP and they'll schedule you urgently if something needs to be managed urgently, if you have an established relationship with a PCP they'll know how reliably you are and will do somethings over the phone. This is how it is supposed to work, Urgent Cares exist because people these days refuse to use the system how its designed (and it's because of incentives, I get it and have committed this crime also) but they aren't really designed for the care people ask of them.
Additionally, physician pay has decreased year after year for longer than the majority of the people in this forum have been alive. This has a number of important effects one of which is: most of the shit that annoys you most about doctors is not their fault, they are required to do it because they aren't in charge anymore (most people in most specialties are employed now and not in independent private practice).
-Can't do something simple over the phone has to be an appointment? It's because that doctor's employer requires it so they can bill.
-Appointment short and unrewarding? It's because that is how the employer wants appointments scheduled.
-Doctor pays mostly attention to the computer? It's because there is no admin time and if he wants to go home before 8pm he's gotta start charting in the room.
-Doctor asks you annoying repetitive questions? Someone has mandated they ask them in order to bill or satisfy regulatory requirements or some other annoying thing. Or some incompetent front desk staff person said you were a smoker or a drinker or are missing your appendix and it requires forms in triplicate to remove from your chart.
Doctors no longer work for themselves and are now required by law and by their employer to do things that annoy the hell out of patients and we hate it but its not our fault please dont blame us thank you.
Throwaway05
22hr ago
I mean you are always going to run into study design limitations. In this case most of the money in medicine wants NPs to look good so there isn't good funding for this. The VA (generally) has pretty much the worst healthcare in the country and the quality of care in the ED is also pretty much the worst in the hospital (because of how it gets misused). This is likely to flatten the curve a little bit - good doctors almost never work at the VA.
Psychiatry is a better example - psychiatric interviews and pharmacology are the most complicated in medicine. Mental health care NPs are terrible at both of these things, give people unnecessary medications and incorrect diagnoses and are legible experienced as lower quality by patients and staff with some regularity. In general hospital medicine nurses line up each other and that includes NPs but in most mental health care settings nurses will say they think the NPs are shit.
However the bad outcomes are mostly increased lifetime mortality and risk of side effects 20 years down the line when the patient is seeing someone else. This becomes effectively impossible to study so we don't.
Now you could argue that you don't really care about those problems and if its not obvious their is a skill difference in outcomes lets save money, who cares if people have the wrong medication or diagnosis. But that goes back to the ED stuff - you have a difference in mortality and morbidity, it may be small but most Americans value "the best possible" not "good enough."
Also, since this is why people normally bring it up - if you magically paid all doctors NPs salaries and didn't really change anything else......healthcare costs wouldn't go down at all in any substantive way.
Throwaway05
22hr ago
In order to learn the U.S. standard of care you must learn with a U.S. level of resources and training. Much of Europe can meet that standard but the third world cannot. This is magnified by the fact that the U.S. population is more challenging due to obesity and other factors.
Putting aside that general point, with surgery in specific we are talking about modern surgical modalities - I don't know how many da Vinci's are in the entire continent on Africa but I doubt it's more than a handful.
Throwaway05
1d ago
I mean a physical therapist is the appropriate medical professional for the issue you had. You went to the "am I dying" doctor and they said "shit I don't know, you aren't dying," if you were dying they would be able to help you. They have limited training in diagnosing MSK issues because that's not what they are for.
Routine issues and urgent care level emergencies are supposed to be managed through your primary care doctor who would say "this seems like an MSK problem, here's as prescription to go see a PT for that, as they are the experts in this area and can spend an hour with you twice a week and I can't do that without it being cost prohibitive."
We see this all the time, people go to the ED for non-emergent issues and get frustrated when they get what seems like poor quality care and it takes forever.
Furthermore patients don't like hearing this so you get some half-assed attempts at managing these issues in those settings instead of the correct response which is "no go see your PCP."
Ultimately if you say, go to your lawyer and ask for accounting help, they may charge you for it and try and help but they aren't an accountant.
Throwaway05
1d ago
I mean we (being doctors) mostly hate NPs and PAs unless we are benefiting from them financially.
They have very limited training (in the case of NPs excruciatingly limited) and yet think they have the same level of knowledge and expertise.
All of us have lost patients are seen catastrophic avoidable outcomes.
And they can't be sued in the way we can.
Throwaway05
1d ago
Ugh I bring this up every time and it gets ignored every time by people with axes to grind.
To further explain - common surgeries still happen (duh) but you have things like:
-Needing to experience complications, which happen less because we are better at stuff now.
-Stuff that used to be always or often a surgery being managed more conservatively leading to less cases.
-Changes to how surgeries work to be less invasive but more complicated to learn. Might take 100 open cases to be proficient and a 1000 robot cases or whatever.
-Duty hour restrictions. We used to work 100% of the fucking time. Now we get to sleep, but that means stuff happens without us.
This is pretty surgery specific but a number of other types of specialities have similar issues where you can't maintain training quality with increased residents.
Throwaway05
1d ago
I know this is an immensely frustrating experience as a patient but it is important to understand that this is not what urgent care is for.
If you saw a physiatrist (which is the specialty that handles this kind of problem) and they get it wrong....that person's license should maybe go away. A good PCP should get this right but these days we don't do nearly as much MSK work and hospital demands mean we aren't as good at this kind of thing as we used to, you may have PT be the replacement for managing it since it isn't really a medication issue.
But it's effectively out of scope of practice for Urgent Care and ED.
Patients go to UC and ED because it's more convenient than getting a PCP, but ED physicians don't handle these kinds of issues, their job is to triage and manage emergencies, which would likely involving turfing this back to a PCP or PM&R doctor for outpatient management.
There's all kinds of reasons why patients use UC and I get it, but ultimately it results in a lot of disastifiaction because it's generally not the right doctor for the problem.
Throwaway05
1d ago
preferably actual studies
This is an area of ongoing research, for a long time there was a bunch of non-inferiority type studies published by the nursing lobby which were apples to oranges comparison. Ex: NPs with simple cases and MDs with hard cases had similar outcomes.
Now that the NPs have made such a mess of things you have more research such as this: https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/scope-practice/3-year-study-nps-ed-worse-outcomes-higher-costs#:~:text=The%20study%20found%20the%20physician,complexity%20of%20the%20patient's%20condition.
It's important to keep in mind that NPs get effectively no training. Even if you think medicine is grossly simple (which....sigh), you should have some training.
I think people really struggle to understand how big the gap is no matter how often it's pointed out. You wouldn't trust Juan the day laborer working construction with designing a skyscraper, but that's a reasonably apt comparison in training differences and amounts.
NPs don't save the healthcare economy because while they do get paid less they do more unnecessary testing, it's just a wealth transfer from MDs to hospitals. They also stress the system more with unnecessary consults and admissions which only makes the doctor shortage issues worse.
Throwaway05
2d ago
Heard chief.
Throwaway05
2d ago
"Reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood."
The fence is not some abstract Platonic solid locked in time, it is a thought experiment to remind you to understand why the current state of affairs exists instead of some other possible state of affairs.
I have provided numerous questions whose answers may help explain the current states of affairs. You have quibbled over a fence like it is some sort of shamanic totem that if only you shake it in the right way argumentative success or understanding is reached.
This does nothing to address the issue at hand.
Throwaway05
2d ago
"(public policy) The principle that reforms should not be made until the reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood."
It is not literally a fence.
reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood
Throwaway05
2d ago
Great sure, some suggested avenues of exploration-
"How much has the number of drugs increased since then? How much has polypharmacy increased since then? How much has comorbidity increase since then? How much has personal behavior in response to healthcare changed since?"
Throwaway05
2d ago
You keep accusing me calling you stupid, I'm not. I'm saying you don't know what you are talking about...because you don't. These are not the same thing. Intelligence is not required to make a judgement on this, information is, and you haven't exhibited any evidence of training or knowledge that would address that absence.
Arguing in the way you are now may be evidence of lack of intelligence or character flaws...so don't do that.
Passion on a topic is not a substitute for information or understanding, I've given you a significant number of rabbit holes you could go down to educate yourself on considerations you seem unaware of, and you are resistant to doing that. I also simplified my argument to the bare bones premises and tellingly, you made no effort to engage with those.
Ultimately you've fallen into the same trap that the overwhelming majority of patients who bring up this kind of thing do you, you want to make your own decisions, damn the consequences, without awareness that consequences may even exist and when told "no, you must actually think about this" you become upset and sling mud.
It's fundamentally the same conversation I have every time a patient demands an antibiotic for a viral infection.
These conversations, for the record, are what establishes our stance - because most people become riotously upset when told they need to learn.
Throwaway05
2d ago
If you consider the answer to the questions I asked it will be clear.
Attempt to understand what you are advocating for.
I've never met a foreign trained doctor who came to the U.S. with Medical School and Residency training in Western Europe. We might actually have reciprocity agreements for those countries, I don't know, I've never encountered one. Scott did his Medical School in Ireland IIRC, which is note quite the same. The vast majority of foreign doctors I've met are from Asia (mostly India) and do absolutely need retraining and will generally admit as such, however frustrating it is.
Every time this comes up I have to drag out a few facts.
-There is actually a surplus of residency spots. Yes you heard me.
-We do have something of a shortage of some specialties, but this can't adequately be solved by increasing spots without decreasing training quality.
-Nobody wants to go into primary care because it pays significantly less, is one of the harder jobs, and has been made less attractive by regulatory burden and other factors.
-Most jobs are in primary care anyway, aka most doctors work in primary care.
-Even within primary care we have more of an allocation problem than a shortage. Doctors train very hard and start their adult life late. They want to be in desirable locations so Iowa has a shortage but NYC does not.
-NPs and PAs were meant to fix this but make it worse - they still want to go into specialties (and can since they have no specialty training, they can just do what they want) and they still hang around the same urban areas.
-You could hypothetically fix this by importing a ton of foreign doctors but you'd have to enslave them and force them to work in the undesirable locations long term or they would just leave immediately when given the option.
-You can fix this using the resources we have by raising salaries to what incentivizes the behavior you want. Nobody wants to do this, they just want to continue giving doctors the pay cuts they've been getting for the last 20-30 years, even though doctors are not a high percentage of healthcare costs.
More options
Context Copy link