Opiod Addiction is a greater menace than Zeka virus or Ebola

WASHINGTON — While the attention on Capitol Hill this week has focused on Donald Trump’s visit, a quieter — and potentially more substantive — conversation is underway in Congress to address the opioid addiction crisis sweeping the country.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, after a morning meeting with Trump, is planning Thursday to continue pushing for passage of 18 initiatives to help stem the epidemic.

The legislation has been in the works for months, with the Massachusetts delegation at the forefront of shaping the national agenda for an issue that’s particularly potent in New England.

It’s one that Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker brought up on his first visit to the White House, and one that found its way into the presidential campaign during frequent candidate stops in New Hampshire.

“What today marks is the beginning of a very divided Congress coming together to tackle an issue that is a national epidemic and crisis,” said Representative Bill Keating, a Bourne Democrat who represents counties in southeastern Massachusetts and the Cape that have the highest per capita death rates from opioid overdoses in the state.

“Seeing Congress come together on this issue is a more important statement to make than watching them tomorrow being divided on the political campaign,” said Keating, referring to Trump’s first visit with Republican congressional leaders as a “political reality show.” “The real reality people are dealing with is the life and death nature of this epidemic.”

Ryan, at a press conference Wednesday highlighting congressional efforts to combat opioid abuse, acknowledged that the Trump show has overshadowed substantive policy matters of late.

“I know some of you are here about a meeting that’s happening tomorrow. I’d like to talk to you about a meeting that I had yesterday,” Ryan said before telling a story about a Marine corporal from Wisconsin who died from an opiate overdose while being treated for anxiety in a VA hospital.

The House on Tuesday evening had passed a bill that would reform the way VA hospitals monitor opiate prescriptions. The passage of a slew of opiate-related bipartisan legislation picked up Wednesday and is expected to continue Thursday — from protecting infants and stopping drug kingpins to closer monitoring of prescription data.

The Senate has already passed its own opioid legislation; both sides of Congress still must reconcile any differences in a final package before President Obama can sign it into law.

Ryan vowed to “take all of these ideas, pass them through the House” and work with the Senate to “put a bill on the president’s desk fast.”

“That is what this week is about,” the speaker said.

The reporters before him did not get the message, peppering him with questions only about Trump. (Ryan said he doesn’t really know Trump, having met him only once — in 2012. “We had a very good conversation in March, on the phone,” he added.)

Among the series of opioid-related bills and amendments being considered this week are several sponsored by members of the all-Democratic Massachusetts delegation, including representatives Keating, Katherine Clark of Melrose, and Joe Kennedy III of Brookline.

The passage of a slew of opiate-related bipartisan legislation picked up Wednesday and is set to continue on Thursday.

Kennedy’s bill updates federal guidelines for pain management and the prescription of painkillers. Keating’s amendment to that bill urges doctors to consider prescribing the overdose reversal drug naloxone along with painkillers.

Keating, a former district attorney who investigated his share of drug overdose deaths, also has sponsored legislation to expand federal grants to help communities collect leftover painkillers so they don’t end up in the wrong hands.

Clark’s bills would increase the availability of naloxone and ensure that infants born with opiate withdrawal get the help they need.

Her legislation would also reduce the number of unused painkillers by allowing pharmacists to partly fill prescriptions for opioid medications at the request of patients or doctors — something Baker had signed into law earlier this year, making Massachusetts the first state to allow the practice.

Clark said she hopes the flurry of opioid legislation this week will serve as a reminder to Trump about the focus of public service.

“This is why people run for office. This is the type of work we need to get back to,” Clark said. “We are not just speaking on the campaign trail about this but we’re actually providing families some solutions and hope for the future. That’s where our focus is in the House and I certainly hope that will be Donald Trump’s focus as he proceeds in this campaign.”

Trump himself talked a lot about addiction while campaigning in New Hampshire, where he addressed the state’s “tremendous problem with heroin and drugs.”

“You see this place and you say it’s so beautiful. You have a tremendous problem,” Trump said.

His solution? Build a wall.

“I’m going to create borders. No drugs are coming in,” he said in a video he posted on Facebook in February. “Believe me, I will solve the problem. They will stop coming to New Hampshire. They will stop coming to our country.”

Tracy Jan can be reached at tracy.jan@globe.com. Follow her on Twitter @TracyJan.

SHOW 7 COMMENTS

Stay updated, right in your news feed.

WASHINGTON — While the attention on Capitol Hill this week has focused on Donald Trump’s visit, a quieter — and potentially more substantive — conversation is underway in Congress to address the opioid addiction crisis sweeping the country.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, after a morning meeting with Trump, is planning Thursday to continue pushing for passage of 18 initiatives to help stem the epidemic.

The legislation has been in the works for months, with the Massachusetts delegation at the forefront of shaping the national agenda for an issue that’s particularly potent in New England.

It’s one that Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker brought up on his first visit to the White House, and one that found its way into the presidential campaign during frequent candidate stops in New Hampshire.

“What today marks is the beginning of a very divided Congress coming together to tackle an issue that is a national epidemic and crisis,” said Representative Bill Keating, a Bourne Democrat who represents counties in southeastern Massachusetts and the Cape that have the highest per capita death rates from opioid overdoses in the state.

“Seeing Congress come together on this issue is a more important statement to make than watching them tomorrow being divided on the political campaign,” said Keating, referring to Trump’s first visit with Republican congressional leaders as a “political reality show.” “The real reality people are dealing with is the life and death nature of this epidemic.”

Ryan, at a press conference Wednesday highlighting congressional efforts to combat opioid abuse, acknowledged that the Trump show has overshadowed substantive policy matters of late.

“I know some of you are here about a meeting that’s happening tomorrow. I’d like to talk to you about a meeting that I had yesterday,” Ryan said before telling a story about a Marine corporal from Wisconsin who died from an opiate overdose while being treated for anxiety in a VA hospital.

The House on Tuesday evening had passed a bill that would reform the way VA hospitals monitor opiate prescriptions. The passage of a slew of opiate-related bipartisan legislation picked up Wednesday and is expected to continue Thursday — from protecting infants and stopping drug kingpins to closer monitoring of prescription data.

The Senate has already passed its own opioid legislation; both sides of Congress still must reconcile any differences in a final package before President Obama can sign it into law.

Ryan vowed to “take all of these ideas, pass them through the House” and work with the Senate to “put a bill on the president’s desk fast.”

“That is what this week is about,” the speaker said.

The reporters before him did not get the message, peppering him with questions only about Trump. (Ryan said he doesn’t really know Trump, having met him only once — in 2012. “We had a very good conversation in March, on the phone,” he added.)

Among the series of opioid-related bills and amendments being considered this week are several sponsored by members of the all-Democratic Massachusetts delegation, including representatives Keating, Katherine Clark of Melrose, and Joe Kennedy III of Brookline.

The passage of a slew of opiate-related bipartisan legislation picked up Wednesday and is set to continue on Thursday.

Kennedy’s bill updates federal guidelines for pain management and the prescription of painkillers. Keating’s amendment to that bill urges doctors to consider prescribing the overdose reversal drug naloxone along with painkillers.

Keating, a former district attorney who investigated his share of drug overdose deaths, also has sponsored legislation to expand federal grants to help communities collect leftover painkillers so they don’t end up in the wrong hands.

Clark’s bills would increase the availability of naloxone and ensure that infants born with opiate withdrawal get the help they need.

Her legislation would also reduce the number of unused painkillers by allowing pharmacists to partly fill prescriptions for opioid medications at the request of patients or doctors — something Baker had signed into law earlier this year, making Massachusetts the first state to allow the practice.

Clark said she hopes the flurry of opioid legislation this week will serve as a reminder to Trump about the focus of public service.

“This is why people run for office. This is the type of work we need to get back to,” Clark said. “We are not just speaking on the campaign trail about this but we’re actually providing families some solutions and hope for the future. That’s where our focus is in the House and I certainly hope that will be Donald Trump’s focus as he proceeds in this campaign.”

Trump himself talked a lot about addiction while campaigning in New Hampshire, where he addressed the state’s “tremendous problem with heroin and drugs.”

“You see this place and you say it’s so beautiful. You have a tremendous problem,” Trump said.

His solution? Build a wall.

“I’m going to create borders. No drugs are coming in,” he said in a video he posted on Facebook in February. “Believe me, I will solve the problem. They will stop coming to New Hampshire. They will stop coming to our country.”

Tracy Jan can be reached at tracy.jan@globe.com. Follow her on Twitter @TracyJan.

Stay updated, right in your news feed.

 

UnitedHealth's state exchange exits: No big deal? -

UnitedHealth has started to exit some Affordable Care Act exchanges as threatened, but there's no reason to panic about the future of the individual marketplaces, according to a Los Angeles Times opinion piece.

The nation's largest for-profit insurer made waves late last year when its leaders said they would consider exiting the exchanges because of climbing losses on its ACA-compliant policies. This past Friday, news broke that it plans to pull out of the exchanges in Arkansas and in Georgia in 2017.

However, United was only a minor player in those states--as it had just 9,933 HMO enrollees in Georgia and was trying to build its individual market business in Arkansas from a very small base, writes L.A. Times business columnist Michael Hiltzik. The insurer also sought steep rate increases in both states, which did not help it compete with more dominant players, including Aetna and Blues plans.

Hiltzik points to an Urban Institute analysis that suggests United's approach to the exchanges was fundamentally flawed, as it often chose to enter less populous and less competitive marketplaces--a formula that didn't help it build a strong market presence. So its departure won't likely have a major effect on competition in the Georgia and Arkansas marketplaces.

United has been a reluctant participant in the ACA exchanges from the beginning. Itsat out the first year. And its CEO has said that perhaps it should have sat out two more.

Overall, only about 650,000 of United's 42 million medical customers are enrolled in ACA-compliant policies, FierceHealthPayer has reported.

To learn more:
- read the opinion piece

UnitedHealth's state exchange exits: No big deal? - FierceHealthPayer

Patient can't always access complete medical records, doctors say | Reuters

Technology makes it possible for patients to access medical records online, but a thicket of legal issues may still keep people from always seeing everything in their chart, some doctors say.

The accessibility of patient records for patients may introduce potential conflict with the care provider.  A completely open-access to a patient's electronic record may be counter-productive for patients who have little or no knowledge of medical jargon, or who may have an underlying psychiatric diagnosis, the knowledge of which may be harmful to the patient.

As usual the government steps in with a sledgehammer edict of all for HIPAA  without concern for parts of the record,such as behavioral health which could justify exclusion from interoperabiity without a patient's exclusive permission

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) gives U.S. patients the right to access their medical records and control who else has access to the information, physicians note in an essay in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

But in reality, the contents of electronic records may be limited by doctors’ concerns about disputes with patients about what the records say, fear of malpractice litigation, and questions about how much information to give certain individuals like minors and people with mental illness, these physicians argue.

“I think the default should be for patients to have complete access to their electronic medical records, and the benefits would likely greatly outweigh any harm,” said lead author Dr. Bryan Lee of Altos Eye Physicians in Los Altos, California, and the University of Washington in Seattle.

As patients increasingly read their medical records, they will disagree with content, find errors and request changes, Lee and colleagues point out. While doctors may have the final say over what they add to records, patients may want to add information of their own, and the legal status of patient-created content is unclear.

In another point of legal murkiness, parents generally have control over minors’ medical records and can prevent children from accessing online notes. Providers can deny parents access if they suspect abuse or think parental involvement isn’t in a child’s best interest – but this, too, is an area where laws vary and liability concerns may color doctors’ decisions, the authors argue.

With mental illness, HIPAA prevents patients from accessing psychotherapy notes in some circumstances, but some state laws allow broader access to these records, the authors note.

While patients can benefit from access to records in most cases, there are some exceptions, and psychotherapy notes may be one of them, said Ann Kutney-Lee, a health policy researcher at the University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing in Philadelphia, in email to Reuters Health.

“There are certain clinical situations where providing access may cause more harm to the patient than good – e.g. psychotherapy notes for a patient that is suicidal,” said Kutney-Lee, who wasn’t involved in the essay.

For many patients, though, reviewing records may make them more proactive about their health, said Daniel Walker, a family medicine researcher at Ohio State University in Columbus who wasn’t involved in the study.

“It can make them feel more a part of the healthcare experience, and empower them to engage in shared decision making,” Walker said by email.

Preventing errors is another big advantage of electronic records, said Dr. Dean Sittig, a researcher at the University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston who wasn’t involved in the essay.

“Without an electronic health record, it is very difficult if not impossible to check whether the right medications were given at the right time, to the right patients,” Sittig said by email.

SOURCE: bit.ly/1i46lF7 Annals of Internal Medicine, online May 23, 2016.

Patient can't always access complete medical records, doctors say | Reuters

A dad created an app to help his son with autism. It saved another child's life.

When children with autism started losing their lives to wandering off alone, one dad used technology to save them.

Being a parent is a challenging job, but it's even more complex for those raising children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), a developmental disability that affects individuals socially and behaviorally. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates 1 in 68 children in America has been identified as having ASD. That is a significant number for a disorder that currently has no cure.

According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, wandering off or "eloping" is a major cause for concern for children with ASD.
Studies have shown that almost 50% of families dealing with ASD reported that their kids wandered off at least once between the ages of 4 and 17.

Many of these wandering cases don't end well. In 2015, the National Autism Association recorded 32 wandering deaths for the year, which was a new record. Many of these wandering children die due to drowning, walking into traffic, and hypothermia.

One dad with a son diagnosed with ASD decided to use technology to prevent wandering, and it saved a child's life.

Doron Somer is a co-founder of AngelSense, a GPS and voice-monitoring app designed for children with special needs.

There are a lot of GPS tracking apps out there. What makes this so special?

"AngelSense is much more than a tracker or child locater," Doron told Upworthy.

 According to the company, AngelSense is the only device designed for children with sensory sensitivities. It is attached to the inner part of the child's pants pocket and can only be removed by a parent with a special magnet key.

One of the coolest features about AngelSense is one that few people know about.

"Our entire customer care team is comprised of parents with autistic children," Doron said. "That allows them to have a flexible schedule with the ability to work from home."

source:: Upworthy
























A dad created an app to help his son with autism. It saved another child's life.

Health insurers not responsible for rising premiums, exec says

AddThis Sharing ButtonsTOOLS

•  
•  
•   

With just 10 percent of health insurance premiums going to health plans, blaming insurance companies for rising rates makes little sense, according to an opinion piecepublished in the Albany Business Review.
Physicians and hospitals account for 55 percent of health costs, while pharmaceuticals represent 22 percent--up 6 percent in the last year alone, writes John D. Bennett, M.D., president and CEO of Capital District Physicians' Health Plan. Meanwhile, the percentage going to plan administration has hit a historic low.

Insurers have taken significant financial hits on Affordable Care Act marketplace plans due to enrollees who have been sicker and more expensive than expected. At the same time, hospitals and drug companies have posted double-digit profits, according to Bennett. Government efforts to reduce health insurance costs without addressing rising hospital and drug costs have led to rising copays, narrow networks and limited choices for consumers and employers, he adds.
Insurers have strived to negotiate prices with pharmaceutical manufacturers, but these efforts can also alienate some consumers who find their medications excluded from their coverage, FierceHealthPayer has reported.
State and federal governments must take legislative action to "rein in the true drivers of healthcare costs" rather than focus solely on rising premiums as insurers go through rate request processes this summer, according to the article.
To learn more:
- read the opinion piece

Related Articles:
Insurers predict hefty premium hikes in 2017
BCBS members were sicker and more expensive following ACA expansion
The unintended consequences of health insurers' fight to lower drug prices
Survey: Specialty drug costs could rise 23% next year