MedicalNewsToday.com
Originally published January 12, 2013
Here are some excerpts:
A new study in Biological Psychiatry suggests that reductions in ECT treatment have an economic basis. From 1993 - 2009, there was a progressive decline in the number of hospitals offering ECT treatment, resulting in an approximately 43% drop in the number of psychiatric inpatients receiving ECT.
Using diagnostic and discharge codes from survey data compiled annually from US hospitals, researchers calculated the annual number of inpatient stays involving ECT and the annual number of hospitals performing the procedure.
Lead author Dr. Brady Case, from Bradley Hospital and Brown University, said, "Our findings document a clear decline in the capacity of US general hospitals - which provide the majority of inpatient mental health care in this country - to deliver an important treatment for some of their most seriously ill patients. Most Americans admitted to general hospitals for severe recurrent major depression are now being treated in facilities which do not conduct ECT."
This is the consequence of an approximately 15 year trend in which psychiatric units appear to be discontinuing use of the procedure. The percentage of hospitals with psychiatric units which conduct ECT dropped from about 55% in 1993 to 35% in 2009, which has led to large reductions in the number of inpatients receiving ECT.
The entire story is here.
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Monday, January 14, 2013
Vignette 21: A Phone Call from a Friend
Dr. Goodfriend receives a call from Buddy, his very close high school friend. Dr. Goodfriend speaks with Buddy about once every six to nine months. During those calls, the conversations typically focus on careers, family members, and the whereabouts about other classmates.
Buddy phoned Dr. Goodfriend in an apparent emotional anguish by the tone of his voice. Buddy states that he has been feeling "stressed" over the last month. He explains that he recently lost his job and has been worrying about the financial impact that this is having on his family. Buddy adds that he has had trouble sleeping, has stopped exercising, has little energy, and fleeting thoughts of hurting himself. Buddy also shares that he has been short tempered with his wife and kids.
During the 90-minute call, Dr. Goodfriend tries to be a good listener, empathizes with Buddy's difficult situation, offers advice on ways that Buddy can better manage his stress, provides him with general encouragement, and suggests a book that outlines stress management and anxiety reduction strategies.
At the end of the call, Buddy tells Dr. Goodfriend that he is feeling much better. Just as he is about to hang up, Buddy says, "Thanks. My wife told me that I should see a therapist but I told her that I could talk with you and that it would be much cheaper."
Dr. Goodfriend is unclear whether Buddy is serious or joking.
If you were Dr. Goodfriend, how do you feel about the phone call?
Does Dr. Goodfriend need to phone his high school friend to clarify his last comment?
Does Dr. Goodfriend need to encourage Buddy to become involved in therapy if symptoms persist?
Should Dr. Goodfriend call Buddy and offer a few referrals?
What factors influence this decision?
Is college football doing enough about head injuries to protect players?
By Jon Solomon | jsolomon@al.com
on January 03, 2013
Alabama.com
Some chilling images of head injuries loom over this college football season.
There was the huge hit USC wide receiver Robert Woods took against Utah while blocking for a teammate. Woods got up, staggered around and fell to the ground. He was checked on the sideline and returned after missing one play.
There were two hits to the head Arizona quarterback Matt Scott received on one play against USC. He vomited on the field as the television announcers almost pleaded for Scott to be taken out. Scott stayed in the game to throw the winning touchdown.
There was the hit Connecticut quarterback Chandler Whitmer sustained against Cincinnati that he would later describe as a "bullet to the head." Whitmer, who had suffered a concussion the previous week, missed one play. He soon took another hit, needed help getting to the Connecticut sideline, and this time his day was over.
As college football reaches its national championship game Monday night, a question is being asked publicly with more frequency: Is college football doing enough to keep players safe?
The entire article is here.
on January 03, 2013
Alabama.com
Some chilling images of head injuries loom over this college football season.
There was the huge hit USC wide receiver Robert Woods took against Utah while blocking for a teammate. Woods got up, staggered around and fell to the ground. He was checked on the sideline and returned after missing one play.
There were two hits to the head Arizona quarterback Matt Scott received on one play against USC. He vomited on the field as the television announcers almost pleaded for Scott to be taken out. Scott stayed in the game to throw the winning touchdown.
There was the hit Connecticut quarterback Chandler Whitmer sustained against Cincinnati that he would later describe as a "bullet to the head." Whitmer, who had suffered a concussion the previous week, missed one play. He soon took another hit, needed help getting to the Connecticut sideline, and this time his day was over.
As college football reaches its national championship game Monday night, a question is being asked publicly with more frequency: Is college football doing enough to keep players safe?
The entire article is here.
Sunday, January 13, 2013
Aaron Swartz, Reddit Co-founder, commits suicide
By Anne Cai
The Tech, Online Edition
Originally posted January 12, 2013
Computer activist Aaron H. Swartz committed suicide in New York City yesterday, Jan. 11, according to his uncle, Michael Wolf, in a comment to The Tech. Swartz was 26.
“The tragic and heartbreaking information you received is, regrettably, true,” confirmed Swartz’ attorney, Elliot R. Peters of Kecker and Van Nest, in an email to The Tech.
Swartz was indicted in July 2011 by a federal grand jury for allegedly downloading millions of documents from JSTOR through the MIT network — using a laptop hidden in a basement network closet in MIT’s Building 16 — with the intent to distribute them. Swartz subsequently moved to Brooklyn, New York, where he then worked for Avaaz Foundation, a nonprofit “global web movement to bring people-powered politics to decision-making everywhere.” Swartz appeared in court on Sept. 24, 2012 and pleaded not guilty.
The story is here.
The Tech, Online Edition
Originally posted January 12, 2013
Computer activist Aaron H. Swartz committed suicide in New York City yesterday, Jan. 11, according to his uncle, Michael Wolf, in a comment to The Tech. Swartz was 26.
“The tragic and heartbreaking information you received is, regrettably, true,” confirmed Swartz’ attorney, Elliot R. Peters of Kecker and Van Nest, in an email to The Tech.
Swartz was indicted in July 2011 by a federal grand jury for allegedly downloading millions of documents from JSTOR through the MIT network — using a laptop hidden in a basement network closet in MIT’s Building 16 — with the intent to distribute them. Swartz subsequently moved to Brooklyn, New York, where he then worked for Avaaz Foundation, a nonprofit “global web movement to bring people-powered politics to decision-making everywhere.” Swartz appeared in court on Sept. 24, 2012 and pleaded not guilty.
The story is here.
Intellectual property law and the psychology of creativity
By Jessica Bregant, JD, and Jennifer K. Robbennolt, JD, PhD, University of Illinois
The Monitor on Psychology - The Judicial Notebook
January 2013, Vol 44, No. 1
Print version: page 21
Creativity and the process of innovation are fertile grounds for psychological research, with applications spanning education, the arts, business and science. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court took up the topic of creativity in the context of patent law. The case, Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., revisited a long-observed legal prohibition on patenting the "laws of nature" and illustrates one of the many ways in which law, particularly intellectual property law, can be informed and shaped by psychological principles.
(cut)
The court, in Mayo, identified the competing incentives created by the availability of patents: The rights granted by patents are intended to provide an economic incentive for innovation but may also restrict the flow of information and cross-fertilization of ideas among inventors. To balance these interests, patents are generally issued only for inventions that are novel, not obvious and useful. The court also recognized the breadth of the fields to which patent law (and, more broadly, intellectual property law) applies. Different types of creative activities may involve different aspects of creativity.
Psychologists have much to contribute to an understanding of the cognitive processes by which people engage in creative activity, how those processes are similar and different across substantively different fields, what motivates creative activity, whether and how the rules of intellectual property can encourage or stifle innovation, and what else might be done to cultivate innovation.
The entire article is here.
Saturday, January 12, 2013
State reprimands psychologist David T. Bice over "touch"
Psychiatric Crimes Database
Originally posted January 3, 2012
On October 8, 2012, the Oregon Board of Psychologist Examiners reprimanded David T. Bice, Ph.D. for unprofessional conduct; failure to avoid harm; failure to obtain informed consent and exceeding the boundaries of competence with regard to a teenage female patient.
According to the Board’s document, Bice engaged in “comforting touch” with the patient, which made her uncomfortable to the extent that “she will never see a male counselor again.” Bice additionally failed to make entries in the patient’s chart when he touched her, the rationale for touching, how the patient reacted, etc.; failed to get the patient’s full informed consent, relative to the use of touch in that the did not address the use of touch with the patient nor did he address it in his informed consent documents or the patient’s chart notes; exceeding the boundaries of competence by engaging in touch with the patient “without first establishing a strong therapeutic alliance and [failing] to monitor [the patient’s] reactions…and to make a corresponding chart note.”
In addition to the reprimand, Bice must successfully complete coursework in the areas of informed consent, patient charting and the use of touch during therapy and is also required to practice for a minimum of one year under the supervision of a licensed psychologist, among other things.
Originally posted January 3, 2012
On October 8, 2012, the Oregon Board of Psychologist Examiners reprimanded David T. Bice, Ph.D. for unprofessional conduct; failure to avoid harm; failure to obtain informed consent and exceeding the boundaries of competence with regard to a teenage female patient.
According to the Board’s document, Bice engaged in “comforting touch” with the patient, which made her uncomfortable to the extent that “she will never see a male counselor again.” Bice additionally failed to make entries in the patient’s chart when he touched her, the rationale for touching, how the patient reacted, etc.; failed to get the patient’s full informed consent, relative to the use of touch in that the did not address the use of touch with the patient nor did he address it in his informed consent documents or the patient’s chart notes; exceeding the boundaries of competence by engaging in touch with the patient “without first establishing a strong therapeutic alliance and [failing] to monitor [the patient’s] reactions…and to make a corresponding chart note.”
In addition to the reprimand, Bice must successfully complete coursework in the areas of informed consent, patient charting and the use of touch during therapy and is also required to practice for a minimum of one year under the supervision of a licensed psychologist, among other things.
Friday, January 11, 2013
State of Pennsylvania suspends psychologists
Psychiatric Crimes Database
Originally published January 2, 2013
On July 31, the Pennsylvania Department of State (DoS) suspended psychologist John H. Edgette, pursuant to the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of York County dated July 17, 2012, which the court issued under section 4355 of the Domestic Relations Code, which regards issues of custody, visitation and support.
On November 5, 2012, the DoS suspended psychologist Scott Adam Merritt for a period of no less than one year and placed a public reprimand in his permanent disciplinary record with the board because he is unable to practice psychology with reasonable skill and safety by reason of illness or as a result of mental or physical condition.
On November 13, 2012, the DoS ordered psychologist Jennifer Hope Bullock to pay a civil penalty of $500 because she practiced as a licensed professional counselor while her license was lapsed.
Originally published January 2, 2013
On July 31, the Pennsylvania Department of State (DoS) suspended psychologist John H. Edgette, pursuant to the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of York County dated July 17, 2012, which the court issued under section 4355 of the Domestic Relations Code, which regards issues of custody, visitation and support.
On November 5, 2012, the DoS suspended psychologist Scott Adam Merritt for a period of no less than one year and placed a public reprimand in his permanent disciplinary record with the board because he is unable to practice psychology with reasonable skill and safety by reason of illness or as a result of mental or physical condition.
On November 13, 2012, the DoS ordered psychologist Jennifer Hope Bullock to pay a civil penalty of $500 because she practiced as a licensed professional counselor while her license was lapsed.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
The year of the suicide
Suicide rates among Americans are steadily rising and have been for years. Why are we killing ourselves?
BY KERA BOLONIK
Salon.com
Originally published Decemeber 31, 2012
Let’s call 2012 the year of the suicide: On Friday, the Department of the Army released a report revealing that suicides continue to outnumber combat-related deaths among American soldiers —an average of one suicide a day— a number that’s increasing despite the fact that the armed forces have installed new training and awareness programs over the past few years. Stateside, suicide has become the leading cause of death by injury, and is the 10th leading cause of death overall. According to a CDC report released over the summer, suicide attempts by high-school students has risen to from 6.3 percent in 2009 to 7.8 percent in 2011, and accounts for 13 percent of all deaths among people between the ages of 10 and 24 — the third leading cause of death in that age group.
These are sobering statistics. And with the statistics comes more data to explain them: The Washington Post reported that “the stress on the force after more than a decade of lengthy and multiple deployments for many troops in support of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” while Defense Secretary Leon Panetta attributed the high rate to “substance abuse, financial distress and relationship problems … that will endure beyond war.” Among civilians, the number of suicides have been attributed to the recession — historically, there is a spike with every economic downturn. And 20 percent of high-school teenagers say they are being bullied — 16 percent say they’ve been cyber-bullied through texting, IM-ing, email, and Facebook or other social media.
The entire story is here.
BY KERA BOLONIK
Salon.com
Originally published Decemeber 31, 2012
Let’s call 2012 the year of the suicide: On Friday, the Department of the Army released a report revealing that suicides continue to outnumber combat-related deaths among American soldiers —an average of one suicide a day— a number that’s increasing despite the fact that the armed forces have installed new training and awareness programs over the past few years. Stateside, suicide has become the leading cause of death by injury, and is the 10th leading cause of death overall. According to a CDC report released over the summer, suicide attempts by high-school students has risen to from 6.3 percent in 2009 to 7.8 percent in 2011, and accounts for 13 percent of all deaths among people between the ages of 10 and 24 — the third leading cause of death in that age group.
These are sobering statistics. And with the statistics comes more data to explain them: The Washington Post reported that “the stress on the force after more than a decade of lengthy and multiple deployments for many troops in support of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” while Defense Secretary Leon Panetta attributed the high rate to “substance abuse, financial distress and relationship problems … that will endure beyond war.” Among civilians, the number of suicides have been attributed to the recession — historically, there is a spike with every economic downturn. And 20 percent of high-school teenagers say they are being bullied — 16 percent say they’ve been cyber-bullied through texting, IM-ing, email, and Facebook or other social media.
The entire story is here.
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Employers Must Offer Family Care, Affordable or Not
By ROBERT PEAR
The New York Times
Originally published: December 31, 2012
In a long-awaited interpretation of the new health care law, the Obama administration said Monday that employers must offer health insurance to employees and their children, but will not be subject to any penalties if family coverage is unaffordable to workers.
The requirement for employers to provide health benefits to employees is a cornerstone of the new law, but the new rules proposed by the Internal Revenue Service said that employers’ obligation was to provide affordable insurance to cover their full-time employees. The rules offer no guarantee of affordable insurance for a worker’s children or spouse. To avoid a possible tax penalty, the government said, employers with 50 or more full-time employees must offer affordable coverage to those employees. But, it said, the meaning of “affordable” depends entirely on the cost of individual coverage for the employee, what the worker would pay for “self-only coverage.”
The new rules, to be published in the Federal Register, create a strong incentive for employers to put money into insurance for their employees rather than dependents. It is unclear whether the spouse and children of an employee will be able to obtain federal subsidies to help them buy coverage — separate from the employee — through insurance exchanges being established in every state. The administration explicitly reserved judgment on that question, which could affect millions of people in families with low and moderate incomes.
The entire story is here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)