Medical culture encourages doctors to avoid admitting mistakes

Medical culture encourages doctors to avoid admitting mistakes

www.statnews.com/2017/01/13/medical-errors-doctors/

If you become the victim of a medical error, should you trust your doctor to be forthright about his or her role in the mistake? That could be a bad idea. An alarming new study says that most doctors would try to obscure their role in the mistake, and most wouldn’t even apologize.

The study, conducted by a national team of researchers, posed two hypothetical scenarios involving medical error to more than 300 primary care physicians and asked how they would react. The first scenario involved a delayed diagnosis of breast cancer; the second involved a delayed response to a patient’s symptoms due to a breakdown in the coordination of the patient’s care. Most (more than 70 percent) of the physicians surveyed said they would provide “only a limited or no apology, limited or no explanation, and limited or no information about the cause.” The report was published last fall in the journal BMJ Quality and Safety.

The researchers noted that the strongest predictors of disclosure were “perceived personal responsibility, perceived seriousness of the event and perceived value of patient-centered communication.” In other words, doctors decide whether a mistake is a big enough deal to reveal to their injured patients.

In reality, the factor that most influences doctors to hide or disclose medical errors should be clear to anyone who has spent much time in the profession: The culture of medicine frowns on admitting mistakes, usually on the pretense of fear of malpractice lawsuits.

But what’s really at risk are doctors’ egos and the preservation of a system that lets physicians avoid accountability by ignoring problems or shifting blame to “the system” or any culprit other than themselves.

The lengths to which some doctors will go to shirk their responsibility to be upfront about medical errors are astounding. I consulted with one patient who experienced this kind of blame-shifting firsthand.

After what was supposed to be a routine spinal fusion procedure, Natalie (not her real name) awoke in extreme pain. The neurosurgeon put her on steroids for pain relief. Two days later, a different neurosurgeon discovered in post-operative imaging that the surgeon who performed the procedure had put a screw inside Natalie’s spinal canal — far from where it should have been and a tiny distance from damaging her spinal cord.

The original surgeon’s explanation? “The screw migrated.” Buffalo and geese migrate. Medical screws placed properly and carefully into bone do not.

As patients, we are conditioned to assume that our doctors know best and always have our best interests in mind. When they refuse to own their mistakes, they betray that trust and foster an environment in which patient safety takes a backseat to doctors’ reputations.

The end result is a medical culture in which errors cause 250,000 deaths per year in the United States alone, making it the third leading cause of death, behind heart disease and cancer, according to research published last year by Dr. Marty Makary, a Johns Hopkins surgeon and outspoken patient safety advocate, and research fellow Michael Daniel.

What is a patient to do in this environment? The first thing is to be aware of your own predisposition to take everything your doctor says at face value. Listen closely and you may hear cause for more intense questioning.

You will likely never hear the terms negligence, error, mistake, or injury in a hospital. Instead, these harsh but truthful words and phrases are replaced with softer ones like accident, adverse event, or unfortunate outcome. If you hear any of these euphemisms, ask more questions or seek another opinion from a different doctor, preferably at a different facility.

Most doctors would never tell a flagrant lie. But in my experience as a neurosurgeon and as an attorney, too many of them resort to half-truths and glaring omissions when it comes to errors. Beware of passive language like “the patient experienced bleeding” rather than “I made a bad cut”; attributing an error to random chance or a nameless, faceless system; or trivialization of the consequences of the error by claiming something was “a blessing in disguise.”

When a serious preventable medical error occurs, the physician who made it always has the option to do the right thing and fully disclose what happened. He or she can make an honest apology, which must include accepting responsibility for the error. He or she can also explain what options are available for compensation. Anything less is a pseudo-apology at best and a cover-up at worst.

Lawrence Schlachter, MD, is a board-certified physician, a medical malpractice attorney, and the author of “Malpractice: A Neurosurgeon Reveals How Our Health-Care System Puts Patients at Risk” (Skyhorse Publishing, January 2017).

 

Is the DEA criminalizing CBD oil in crazy power grab?

 

Is the DEA criminalizing CBD oil in crazy power grab?

vimeo.com/199602046

 

What happens if kratom becomes illegal?

A Thai Malay Muslim drug user breaks up the kratom leaf into a pan to form part of a popular cheap narcotic drink called 4 x 100 on September 1, 2011i n Narwathiwat, southern Thailand. Photo by Paula Bronstein/Getty ImagesWhat happens if kratom becomes illegal?

BY PBS NewsHour  January 15, 2017 at 12:56 PM EST

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has received thousands of comments on whether it should make a psychoactive painkiller called kratom illegal because some say it could be key to battling the country’s opioid epidemic.

The DEA announced in August that it would list kratom, which is typically sold as a powder in capsules or for tea and can produce both a narcotic and a stimulant effect, as a Schedule 1 drug — along with heroin, LSD and ecstasy. Schedule 1 drugs are illegal because they have a “high potential for abuse” and there is no existing research that would make it acceptable for medical use. ”[With kratom] we’re basically running a huge unconsented medical experiment on the whole population.”

But some researchers studying kratom are pointing to several laboratory studies on mice that suggest it could help wean users off opioids – an overly prescribed, highly addictive class of drugs that killed 28,000 people in 2014. Other critics also say that making it illegal will only spur demand on the black market, instead of getting rid of it.

Responding to pushback, the DEA in October withdrew its decision and opened a public comment period. It garnered 23,000 comments and 140,000 petition signatures urging the government to keep it legal.

Mark Kleiman, Professor of Public Policy at New York University’s Marron Institute of Urban Management and at NYU Wagner, unpacked the debate for the PBS NewsHour Weekend.

What is kratom and where did it come from?

Kratom is the leaves of a plant native to Thailand. It’s a psychoactive drug. One of the things it does it have some of the same effects that opiates have — that is to say, it binds to the same receptor. So it is a pain reliever. It makes some people cheerful. Has some other effects that are like the effects of the opiates. People can get some pain relief from it and get some cheerfulness from it, but it seems to have a ceiling; they can’t keep taking more and more of it. We know that some people who use it for a while, when they stop using it, get withdrawal effects. Apparently not as strong as people tend to get from the opiates.

What can we say for sure?

We know very little about it. The problem that the DEA just faced was that if it’s not a controlled substance than it’s essentially a food substance, basically unregulated. Twenty years ago, Congress basically gave in to the nutraceutical industry and freed them from all of the restrictions that real pharmaceutical companies are under. So they’re not, in principle, allowed to make health claims, though they can imply them pretty strongly, but they can sell stuff that’s never been tested in humans in as much quantity as they want. And the Food and Drug Administration has to prove it’s harmful in order to get it off the market. While for a pharmaceutical drug, the sponsoring manufacturer has to prove it’s safe and effective before they can sell it.

So [with kratom] we’re basically running a huge unconsented medical experiment on the whole population.

You advise the state of Washington in aspects of its drug policy. What would you advise the DEA to do?

You’ve got two choices. You can schedule it, which has all the consequences you’d expect. You’ll probably get some illicit market in it. People [will] be using substitutes. Some of the people using kratom now will now go on to use the opiates because they don’t have their kratom. That’s not something you want. And you may be frustrating research into what could turn out to be a very beneficial drug, including for drug treatment.

READ NEXT: If DEA blocks kratom, promising research on opioid alternative may suffer

So do you want to ban it? Well, I’d be reluctant to ban it. But I’d like to put some kind of control on it. So what I’d say to the DEA is, ‘Let’s put on some lesser measure of control.’ And they would come back to me and say, ‘We don’t have that power.’ So either DEA can make it illegal and you go to jail for having it, or they can sit on their hands. They do not have a third option.

There’s no wiggle room?

The policy does not exist. So the Controlled Substances Act … desperately needs revision.

People make fun of DEA about cannabis all the time. They say, well you’ve got cannabis in schedule 1 with heroin? Seriously? And that misunderstands the way the law works. Because what the law says is, if a drug has abuse potential…

And if there is no proven or known medical benefit or treatment benefit…

Then it’s illegal, and it’s got to be in Schedule 1. Schedules 2 through 5 are for [drugs] with demonstrated medical benefit to a fairly high standard of demonstration. The DEA could have decided 30 years ago, ‘Lots of oncologists think that cannabis helps their patients with nausea. That’s accepted medical use. We’re going to treat it as accepted medical use.’ But they decided the other way, so that’s the current definition of the law that the courts have upheld. And that leaves no place in the law for a drug of moderate abuse potential and no [proven] medical use.

Now all we need is Congress to rewrite the Controlled Substances Act to allow room for drugs that have moderate abuse potential and no accepted use, and drugs that may have medical use but it hasn’t been proven yet.

The current act does not give us a good way to deal with drugs [like] kratom, of which there are many. Congress could also pass a law creating a class of drugs that can be sold only behind the counter. If such a category existed and the kratom question came along, I think my advice to DEA is, ‘Let’s put it behind the counter while we find out whether it’s a big problem or not.’

If the DEA decides to schedule it, what are the consequences for people who use it?

It’ll become more expensive; it’ll become less available. People will counterfeit it. People will adulterate it. People will get arrested for using it. People who can’t get it will move on to other drugs.

The problem is, let’s imagine that you decided that kratom has medical value, and you’d like to set up a company to do that medical research and, once it’s approved, sell it. You can’t even start using it in humans experimentally until you’ve run a lot of mice through it. So that’s a few million dollars’ worth of work and a couple years at least. Then if you’re lucky you’ll be able to start phase 1 human trials just to see if it’s safe. Then if that works then you get to start to phase 2, small-scale studies to see if it’s effective in various populations for various indications. And if that works we’re now seven years into the process, you might get approval to start full phase 3 clinical trials, which means you can spend $5-10 million.

If it’s scheduled, everything will get more expensive because then you’re going to need special DEA permission to do the experiment. But whether it’s scheduled or not, you can put it through all these trials, and at the end of the day, the FDA has to decide whether it’s safe and effective to treat disease x in population y.

How long does something like that take?

Decade would be optimistic for a new drug like this. You’ve spent millions of dollars along the way. If the indication, the beneficial use is pain relief, a ferociously hard endpoint to measure. There’s no objective correlative.

And you have the additional problem that it’s a plant. So you’d either have to prepare a standardized version of the plant or do an extract, or find the active molecules, all of which is complicated. Once you’d done all of that [the FDA could say], ‘Hey, it’s just a plant, it’s just a couple molecules, there’s nothing there to patent.’ So now you’ve spent $10 million plus the interest on all that money in all those years and won your lottery ticket. Anybody else can get in right next to you. So not only is our drug control mechanism broken, our drug approval mechanism is broken.

A Thai Malay Muslim drug user breaks up the kratom leaf into a pan to form part of a popular cheap narcotic drink called 4 x 100 on September 1, 2011i n Narwathiwat, southern Thailand. Photo by Paula Bronstein/Getty Images

Class-action lawsuit concerning prescription pet foods

Dr. Fox: Class-action lawsuit concerning prescription pet foods

http://www.journalnow.com/relishnow/columnists/dr-fox-class-action-lawsuit-concerning-prescription-pet-foods/article_e648273a-18bf-50bc-a5c7-ba2a514ca175.html

Dear Readers: Attorneys in California, Minnesota, Georgia and North Carolina filed a class-action lawsuit against the leading manufacturers and sellers of pet food: Mars, Nestle Purina, Hills, PetSmart and several veterinary hospital chains in California on Dec. 7. The four main pet food brands involved in the suit include Hill’s Prescription Diet, Purina Pro Plan Veterinary Diets, Royal Canin Veterinary Diet and Iams Veterinary Formula.

Mars, the biggest seller of pet food, sells two of the four prescription pet food brands and is also the owner of the largest veterinarian hospital chain the United States, BluePearl Vet Hospital. Mars also partners with the largest specialty pet retailer, PetSmart, in the ownership of the largest veterinarian clinic chain, Banfield Pet Hospital.

The suit concerns prescription pet foods that cost more, but that plaintiffs contend are no different than any other kind of pet food. Some highlights in this complaint:

 

Dear Dr. Fox: I have a 13-year-old beagle-shepherd-Lab mix named Nibbles. At her last vet appointment, her tests showed kidney problems.

Up until that point, she had always been eating Nutro Max dog food, and was on the senior formula. The vet, who I’ve gone to for years and do trust, put her on new food, Hills Prescription Diet k/D Kidney Support, which has “less phosphorus, protein and salt” — or so he said. Looking at this food’s ingredients and comparing them with Nutro Max, it seems to me like this new food has a lot more junk ingredients in it, and more fat.

Now, if this diet works despite all the crap ingredients, then fine! The issue is, prior to the diagnosis, I had seen no sign of kidney issues. Now, after about a month on this food, she seems very antsy and anxious; she pees more than she used to, drinks more than she used to and seems hungrier. The main reason I am writing is that last night, she wet the bed (she released her whole bladder). This has never happened before!

The reason she went to the vet in the first place was merely for a senior exam, during which I mentioned her recently insatiable appetite, and her weight loss (she’s lost about 5 pounds). Her whole life, she’s received a half-cup of food in the morning and a half-cup at night. We upped it to an extra half-cup in the past year, and now with the new kidney support diet, we upped it to 2 full cups a day.

Is this recent bed-wetting and altered behavior part of the kidney cleansing process? Or is this making her issue worse? To me, it seems like the less I feed her, the better (for example, go back to only 1 cup of food per day), but she is so hungry, and that also seems kind of mean. She also takes a kidney-support vitamin (VetriSCIENCE). — H.P., Washington, D.C.

 

Dear H.P.: Dogs with chronic kidney disease, when accurately diagnosed, need careful monitoring of blood pressure, dietary phosphate, potassium and blood urea nitrogen, as per my article on kidney disease posted on my website, www.DrFoxVet.net.

The ingredients in the special prescription diet are of dubious value, possibly harmful and certainly not providing your dog with sufficient nutrients if she is constantly hungry.

This is no way to go. Chronic kidney disease can lead to sarcopenia — wasting of muscles due to the kidneys passing out more protein. So your dog needs some good-quality protein in her daily diet.

Dogs with kidney disease drink more, so take your dog out more frequently to urinate. But this, coupled with the increased appetite, could be related to di-abetes, which I would have your dog checked for, along with a blood test to see how her kidneys are functioning.

Do keep me posted on the outcome, and good luck.

From the CDC Comments… Pain DOES Kill.

Remember this comment from the CDC Guidelines docket? I don’t think there’s been a single day I haven’t thought about this poor husband.

Docket CDC-2015-0112
“I write this from the intensive care unit waiting room, a suicide letter on my lap. My beloved wife is currently an ICU patient due to under treated chronic pain.
10 years ago we had it all. 3 beautiful children, a lovely home in the suburbs. We were “the American Dream.” I had a job that allowed me to take on the household expenses solo so my wife could be a stay at home mom. In a moment it all shattered.
My wife was rear ended by a kid who was on his cell phone while driving. Her injuries, besides the regular bumps and bruises included a stress fracture in her back, a sprained neck and wrist and a concussion.
Doesn’t sound bad, does it? Except that for months, the pain increased almost daily. Physical therapy did not help. The trips to the chiropractor left her in tears afterwards from the pain. Almost a year after the accident, I came home from work and she was in bed still, in so much agony she couldn’t move.
A MRI shortly after this day showed multiple damage to the discs in her neck and back, the stress fracture not healed properly and severe spinal arthritis. It was then she was referred to pain management. Her PMP was amazing. She was treated with dignity and respect. She was put on anti inflammatory medicine, along with ER OxyContin and 10 mg oxycodone for breakthrough pain. With this my wife could almost go back to her “old life” as she called it. Yes, she had some bad days. But on good days she could do light housekeeping, a little bit of yoga, even work part time. She did every single thing the PMP asked of her. Not once did my wife break her pain contract. Several times her provider called her “an ideal patient.”
9 months ago he took early retirement. The new PMP has been the polar opposite. Immediately he cut her pain meds to less than half her previous doses (which never increased since she went on them), increased her anti inflammatory meds and put her on Neurontin (by now she’s started having severe sciatica). He said that “All his patients will be off opiates in a year unless they’re dying of cancer.” Several weeks later, her pain was increased dramatically, her behavior was erratic and she developed a GI bleed. She took up smoking cigarettes and stopped doing self breast exams because “If I get cancer he will at least treat my pain.” I truly believe that by now the Neurontin was affecting her behavior, as was her increased pain. Her PMP’s solution? He added Lyrica to her prescriptions, instructed her physical therapist to “challenge her” and told her to “Stop trying to make me your dealer.”
This lack of compassion, professionalism and accusations has destroyed what self esteem my beautiful wife had left. Up until recently she fought her pain with every step. She started eating healthier, she exercised as much as she could, she tried every legal option she could think of. Opioids are a last resort for her. The severe pain she faces every minute of the day (which has been made worse by the naproxen thanks to kidney disease and stomach ulcers), to be treated in such a derogatory manner, coupled with the Neurontin and Lyrica became too much.
The love of my life attempted suicide in a last ditch effort to stop her suffering. She will survive….today. However her blood pressure is incredibly high, as is her heart rate. Her kidney function is so poor she may need dialysis. She is requesting to be DNR. And even now, the doctors are refusing to give her pain medication.
Chronic pain does kill. It has destroyed the beautiful woman who I love so much. It has killed us financially. It has ruined my children’s lives. It has destroyed our faith in the medical profession.
Please, don’t let this happen to another family. Please allow doctors to treat all pain patients with what works for them, including the option of opioids.
I thank you for your time.”

 

Southern Indiana courts see rise in heroin, meth sentences

Southern Indiana courts see rise in heroin, meth sentences

http://www.dailyprogress.com/southern-indiana-courts-see-rise-in-heroin-meth-sentences/article_5a489ea9-04a1-5bff-9181-653eb1ace39a.html

EVANSVILLE, Ind. (AP) — Recently released court statistics show a growing percentage of prisoners sentenced for federal drug crimes in southern Indiana are heroin offenders.

A U.S. Sentencing Commission report shows that heroin accounted for nearly 13 percent of the sentences for federal drug crimes in the region during the 2015 fiscal year. That’s up from 5 percent in 2014, the Evansville Courier & Press (http://bit.ly/2iAxvXT) reported.

More than 37 percent of criminals sentenced in southern Indiana’s four federal courthouses in 2015 were for drug crimes, up from 30 percent the previous year. Southern Indiana has outpaced the entire nation in percentage of drug offense sentences, according to the report.

 

Methamphetamine cases still overwhelmingly account for the largest percentage of drug offense sentences in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Indiana at more than 51 percent in 2015, up from 42 percent in the previous year. U.S. Attorney Josh Minkler said the changes in percentages reflect the availability of meth brought in across the U.S. southern border.

“Particularly in southwestern Indiana, from Terre Haute down to Evansville, meth is the number one threat in terms of drugs,” he said.

The same cycle of supply and demand is occurring with heroin, because people addicted to prescription opioids are turning to the drug as a cheaper and more effective option, Minkler said. An additional reason could be because after the state started federally prosecuting pharmacy robberies, the number of those robberies dropped by more than 50 percent from 2015 to 2016, causing people to turn to heroin, he said.

 

Methadone clinic fights public perceptions

Methadone clinic fights public perceptions

http://www.ncnewsonline.com/methadone-clinic-fights-public-perceptions/article_a6ca5a60-d9ee-11e6-a389-1f2ca472a845.html

Our court system in 1917 declared that addiction was a CRIME and not a DISEASE and any prescriber that treats/maintain a addict by prescribing them opiates would lose their license. But now we have the Surgeon General claiming that addiction is a “brain disease” and the DEA is providing a legal mechanism for opiate addicts to be treated and become “functioning addict”.. while the DEA/CDC/FDA discourages prescribers from treating chronic pain pts with opiates because apparently they still believe that prescribing opiates can cause a “brain disease”.  Where is the disconnect ?

The Florida company fighting to open a methadone clinic in Shenango Township said much of the opposition to such clinics is based on misconceptions.

Cheryl Zelenak, director of marketing for Colonial Managment Group, the parent company of Metro Treatment of Pa., said 90 percent of such a clinic’s clients are employed full time and are paying for their own treatment. The remaining 10 percent are on Medicare or Medicaid programs.

She said this is why the peak hours for methadone clinics are so early. She said they open at 5:30 a.m. in order to give clients time to get their dose of the drug and then go to work.

 

Zelenak said Friday that though people in methadone treatment are stigmatized, “this could happen to your loved one.” She compared methadone treatment to diabetics being kept alive with insulin or heart patients living with the help of blood pressure medicine.

Colonial Management, which has been in business 20 years, wants to spend $1,375,000 to build a clinic on the approximately three-acre site at 1901 Butler Road. Plans call for a privacy fence that would surround the building on three sides and for the front doors of the building to face the back of the 5,000 square foot property.

According to Zelenak, as well as to testimony during the clinic’s initial zoning hearing last year, the clinic would be licensed for a maximum 470 patients, with 100 patients expected to be on the caseload after one year operation. Twenty-five percent of the clients would be expected at the clinic each day, or about 125 at the maximum caseload, with most of those coming between 5:30 and 6:30 a.m.. Clients would begin arriving at 4:30 a.m. and wait for clinic doors to open at 5:30 a.m.

The for-profit business operates 65 similar clinics throughout the United States and is the second-largest provider of opiate addiction treatment, Zelenak said. She and others from the business also have provided the following information about the proposed clinic:

•Clients must be at least 18 years old, and addicted for at least one year to be accepted. They would refer themselves and there would be no court referrals.

•The clinic would employ two physicians or one of the following combinations: one physician and one nurse practitioner or one physician and a physican’s assistant; one pharmacist; multiple nurses; five to 10 counselors; and a treatment services coordinator.

•Hours would be 5:30 a.m. to 2 p.m., with methadone being administered from 5:30 a.m. to 11 a.m.

•Treatment would progress in phases, with patients being allowed to take up to 13 doses home in later phases. In earlier phases of treatment, they would be dosed with oral methadone by personnel who watch to make sure they swallow the drug.

•There would be no security guard on premises, only an electronic security system.

•Government rules require that clients who come only for their methadone does must be out of the clinic within 15 minutes.

•Patients are not referred by courts, but reach out for treatment themselves.

•The goal is not weaning patients off drugs although this happens in some cases. The goal is to stabilize the patient on methadone so they can lead normal lives.

 

•A physician testifying at the initial zoning board hearing said methadone generally does not make a client “high” or euphoric although in rare cases, this could occur. Even though there is a caution about driving on the methadone drug package, company officials and a physician who testified at the zoning hearing said clients are considered able to safely drive from the clinic as soon as they receive their dose.

•New patients must be in drug withdrawal to be treated at the clinic, meaning they are not taking an opioid, and this is confirmed at the clinic through blood and other tests.

•Methadone dosing is combined with counseling to lessen chances of a relapse.

•Maintenance on methadone allows patients to regain stability in their lives and remain employed, and minimum length of time on treatment on methadone is 12 to 18 months.

•Clinic officials say there is no evidence of increased crime around such clinics and said two university studies actually show a slight decrease.

 

•One half of the clinic’s intakes for new patients are “no-shows.”

•Federal Medicaid rules provide gas mileage payments for patients coming from beyond a 30 mile radius for treatment. Those abusing this rule , by carpooling to a clinic and all the clients in the car filing for gas mileage reimbursement, can have their payments pulled.

•The clinic would accept patients from any geographic area.

•It would be open every day, but would have abbreviated hours Saturdays and Sundays.

•The company chose a Pennsylvania site is because the state has the nation’s second-highest rate of opiate and painkiller deaths, and Western Pennsylvania is an area of need.

•The facility would be regulated by state and federal agencies that set detailed parameters of how they must operate. Some of the agencies are the Pennsylvania Department of Substance Abuse and Alcohol, which licenses it, and the Drug Enforcement Agency, the Board of Pharmacy and other federal and state regulators.

•Company officials would not put a number to the percent of clients who relapse, stating this is difficult to do because it is self reported by clients.

*They claim that the only alternatives to methadone clinics are expensive in-patient treatment, or “cold turkey” abstinence, which they say is ineffective. Physicians are not licensed to provide methadone treatment to their patients, they said.

Bellingham mother filed lawsuit against DOC in wrongful death of daughter

Bellingham mother filed lawsuit against DOC in wrongful death of daughter

http://www.milforddailynews.com/news/20170115/bellingham-mother-filed-lawsuit-against-doc-in-wrongful-death-of-daughter

BELLINGHAM – Late on a June evening, Jacqueline Olivo paced frantically in her cell at MCI-Framingham. The 40-year-old woman had been addicted to drugs for about half her life and was also struggling with mental illness and an infection. Olivo had been in prison for 12 days after her arrest in a Worcester prostitution sting and had complained to her mother that she wasn’t receiving her medications, including antibiotics for her infection.

It’s June 17, 2014. Between midnight and 12:30 a.m., security camera footage shows Olivo restlessly inhabiting the cell. She paces, lies down, gets up again, lies down again.

Just after 12:30, Olivo gets out of bed, paces and then collapses on the floor. She gets up when a staff member comes to the door and talks to the staffer. She collapses again, writhes on the floor a bit and then gets back into bed while the staffer remains visible through the window of the door.

The staffer leaves at 12:36 a.m. Olivo gets back into bed and stays there restlessly until 12:47 a.m., when a nurse, with medical equipment, and three guards come in the room.

Six minutes later, she is unresponsive. She breathes shallowly and her pulse is weak; her body begins to turn blue and her airways become clogged with a dark brown fluid.

Prison personnel rush her to MetroWest Medical Center, but it’s too late. Doctors place her on life support but she dies shortly before 5 a.m.

“Jacqueline did not die from a drug overdose,” said Lois Olivo, Jacqueline’s mother. “She died from horrific neglect.”

During Olivo’s 12-day incarceration at MCI-Framingham in June 2014, Department of Corrections staff were “grossly negligent” in providing Olivo medical care and ignored her condition, resulting in Olivo’s death from a duodenal ulcer, according to a lawsuit Lois Olivo filed against the Department of Corrections in September.

Watch video below of the security camera footage. The video may contain images upsetting to some viewers so caution is advised.

  Former Department of Corrections Commissioner Carol Higgins and former MCI-Framingham Superintendent Lynn Bissonnette are also named in the suit, which is filed in Middlesex Superior Court. Higgins stepped down as commissioner in April 2016 to move on with her professional career, according to a resignation letter. The lawsuit did not indicate when or why Bissonnette left her position as superintendent.

The suit also alleges MCI-Framingham staff withheld Olivo’s prescribed medications. Lois is hopeful the District Attorney’s office will open an investigation into potential criminal charges against those involved. The Middlesex District Attorney’s office did not return an inquiry seeking comment.

“This was a criminal act,” she said. “It’s not revenge. You have to pay for what you did. These people all need to be held accountable.”

Officials from the state Department of Correction declined to comment citing pending litigation.

Olivo’s more than two-decade long addiction to heroin and later crack cocaine began with a simple question from a friend when she was 18 years old.

“He said ‘Do you want to try heroin,'” said Lois. “You don’t just try heroin.”

Throughout Olivo’s 22-year addiction, Lois spent countless nights driving around the region in search of her daughter, often finding her in shelters, dingy hotels or walking the streets.

“If she didn’t contact me for 24 hours I would grab pictures and go look for her,” she said wiping tears from her eyes. “I used to drive all night long. I wanted her alive. I knew one day she wouldn’t be. I don’t think you can know that kind of fear and terror for your child.”

Olivo’s addiction brought her to many places, including more than 150 detox and treatment centers, homeless shelters, the streets of Worcester and, finally, MCI-Framingham where she would spend the final days of her life.

“She could just never, never shake those demons,” said Lois, who described her daughter as brilliant, creative and loving. “Very seldom do addicts live that long. Most parents have to force their children into detox. Not once did I have to tell her she needed detox. You really see what kind of disease this is. Their mind is controlled by the drug.”

Olivo, who grew up in Framingham and lived in Worcester, was one of 14 women arrested in the June 6, 2014 prostitution sting. Olivo was arrested for prostitution six times between 2000 and 2014, according to Olivo’s arrest record.

Olivo was initially treated at the Framingham prison’s infirmary for opioid and alcohol detox and was prescribed multiple detox medications. Olivo told prison staff she was on medication for bipolar disorder, seizures and high blood pressure. Prison staff verified that, according to the suit.

Days later, Olivo was placed in isolation due to an infection. She was released into general population when results came back negative for active pulmonary disease or tuberculosis.

Four days into her stay at MCI-Framingham, Olivo had still not received her psychiatric medications or antibiotics for infection and was “agitated, restless and upset,” according to the suit. Lois left a phone message for Bissonnette notifying her that Olivo had not received her prescriptions. A deputy chief told Lois the next day she would make sure Olivo received her medications, but she didn’t.

“I can’t wrap my head around what anybody did,” said Lois. “It was so inhumane.”

Olivo submitted a sick call request for indigestion and constipation on June 14, but was not seen by nursing staff until the following day. After complaining of severe stomach pain June 15, Olivo had an apparent seizure, according to her cellmates. Olivo was transported to the prison’s intensive care unit, but still had not been given her prescriptions.

Shortly after midnight on June 17, Olivo again complained of severe stomach pain and eventually collapsed on the floor of her cell. Surveillance footage from Olivo’s cell shows prison staff peer into the cell while she is laying on the ground and return minutes later with a nurse.

“She was trying to get to them,” said Lois.

While staff were taking her vital signs and attempted to take her blood pressure, Olivo became unresponsive. Corrections officers reported hearing gurgling sounds coming from her airway and turned her onto her left side to remove “a copious amount of dark brown fluid coming out of Ms. Olivo’s nose and mouth,” according to the lawsuit.

Corrections officers began administering CPR and called 911 at 1:04 a.m.

Framingham Fire responded but had difficulty getting her to breathe due to the amount of fluid obstructing her airway. Firefighters eventually were able to insert a breathing tube and continued CPR while bringing her to MetroWest Medical Center.

At the hospital, Olivo was put on life support due to her grave condition. After consulting with doctors, Lois took her daughter off life support.

“She wasn’t going to get better,” said Lois. “I couldn’t say goodbye. I just leaned over and kept telling her how much I loved her. She died one of the most painful deaths there is.”

An autopsy revealed Olivo died of a duodenal ulcer, which is caused by a stomach infection associated with the Helicobacter pylori bacteria. Only Ibuprofen and Trazodone, a drug to treat depression, were in her system at the time of her death.

“I would have never ever comprehended her dying the way she did,” said Lois. “It’s like a nightmare you can’t wake up from. I’ll never wake up from it.”

Attorney David Angueria said prison officials had total disregard for Olivo’s condition.

“This unfortunately is an issue that’s happening all over the country,” he said. “They just stood there and were indifferent while she died a painful death.”

Though Lois would sometimes get frustrated with her daughter’s addiction, it never strained the mother-daughter relationship. The pair went to church and prayed together and were in frequent contact.

“We never spoke without saying ‘I love you’,” said Lois.

In memory of her daughter, Lois started the Jacqueline Olivo Foundation, which provides clothing to the region’s homeless. Lois’ ultimate goal is to open a 1,000-bed home in Jacqueline’s name.

“There really is a legacy of love that’s grown so huge in her name,” said Lois. “Her death saved many, many lives.”

She also visits homeless shelters and recovery centers in Worcester once a week.

“Their love and gratitude puts me to tears every week,” she said. “These aren’t throw away people. These people have stories to tell.”

Lois agonizes over her daughter’s addiction and the circumstances surrounding her death each day, but is hopeful Jacqueline’s story will help families and those struggling with addiction.

For more information on the Jacqueline Olivo Foundation visit www.jofoundation.org.

Jeff Malachowski can be reached at 508-490-7466 or jmalachowski@wickedlocal.com. Follow him on Twitter @JmalachowskiMW.

 

Is INTENTIONALLY throwing a pt into cold turkey withdrawal… MEDICAL BATTERY ?

Apparently the new regulation that the FL BOP passed in 2015 and went into effect in Dec 2015.. http://floridaspharmacy.gov/latest-news/validate-pain-medication-prescriptions/  That basically mandates that Pharmacist start looking for a reason to fill prescriptions rather than start looking for a reason NOT TO FILL.  This new regulation requires all FL RPH’s to participate in 2 hrs CE EVERY YEAR to try to teach Pharmacists not to always start looking for “red flags”… FL Rph’s have until the end of Sept 2017 to meet this requirement… perhaps this Pharmacist has not bothered to meet that requirement yet… or if she did.. it did not SINK IN… because apparently her feelings have more to do if she does or does not fill a controlled Rx than the facts and or the pt’s medically necessity.  Isn’t the starting, changing, stopping a pt’s medication a primary function of the practice of medicine… normally referred to as “prescriptive authority”.  Which normally, Pharmacists in community pharmacies do not have that legal authority.

FROM MY IN BOX:

I have been a Baptist pharmacy patient 4 plus years and have had nothing but wonderful care. Walgreens bought out my parmacy and my records were transferred to them. I have lupus as well as 3 fractured vertebrae and other medical conditions such as RA. I was started on percocet 10/325 every 4 hours as well as hydromorphon 2mg every 4 hours by mayo clinic and now follow up with my pcp monthly with frequent tests. I went to walgreens with my prescriptions after my apt where they filled the percocet I later dropped off the hydromorphone . I recieved a call from them an hour latter stating they could not fill those two medications because the pharmacist wasn’t comfortable with that. I informed her I had already picked up the percocet and she continues to tell me no we did not fill any of them you need to pick up your rxs . I went to the pharmacy and showed her the percocet I had just picked up and she states oh I didn’t know it was already filled but we will not fill any longer or fill the other script today I’m not comfortable with that. I informed her I am on disability with all these medical problem and you already confirmed with my doctor they are legitimate and he wants them filled. I informed her they were leaving me without medication and no time to find another pharmacist to establish with and she informed me that was not her problem. I am now disabled with no way to full my medication  and out so when I start having seizures I guess that’s not their problem either. This has all occurred at Walgreens 13905 old saint augustine Rd jax fl 32258.

Lumbo-Sacral Adhesive Arachnoiditis Introduction

Lumbo-Sacral Adhesive Arachnoiditis Introduction

www.burtonreport.com/infspine/adhesarachintro.htm

There is no area of medicine today where greater, or more cruel suffering has been created in large populations of patients throughout the globe than those directly related to adhesive arachnoiditis of which the most common form is in the lumbo-sacral area.  Whether due to apathy, disinterest, indifference or self-protective behavior by the medical, scientific and governmental communities lumbo-sacral adhesive arachnoiditis (LSAA) and it’s potential liabilities continues to remain essentially unknown, unreported, and unrecognized among both physicians and patients.

An important reason for this state of affairs has been the pattern of organized deception and obfuscation in regard to the safety and efficacy of oil myelographic substances such as Pantopaque® and Myodil® perpetrated by some of the originators and manufacturers of iophendylate for over half a century.  This “bodyguard of misrepresentation” and “damage control” by company lawyers has been effective in insuring that governmental agencies, physicians and patients have not been allowed to fully appreciate the risks inherent in introducing highly toxic substances into the sub-arachnoid space.  By not focusing, or adequately propagating, what is known scientifically regarding LSAA it has continued to be a serious world public health challenge and something which is continuously being  perpetrated on unsuspecting patients by their uninformed physicians.

Even today the world community has still not yet come to grips with this cruel phenomenon nor has it yet demonstrated an appropriate social conscience regarding this disease entity.  LSAA continues to be a trail of tragedy for manyunfortunate patients and  new cases appear on a regular basis because of our failure to learn from history.  This regrettable situation has tended to cast those health care professionals who have tried to sound this alarm in a role similar to that of Dr. Peter Stockmann, the hero of Hendrik Ibsen’s 1882 play “An Enemy of the People.”

What determines whether or not the pathologic entity LSAA produces significant or disabling pain and neurologic impairment has a lot to do with how active or passive the meningeal reaction is.  Because of the human nervous system’s remarkable abilities to recover from insult if given the opportunity many patients with LSAA are asymptomatic but exist in a precarious balance where things could easily change for the worse if a patient is subject to additional insult.

Remarkably there are still those who actually insist that the pathologic entity LSAA “does not even exist .”  Fortunately these individuals belong to the ever-diminishing circle of those who also believe that:


The Holocaust never happened. Americans never really landed on the moon (it was staged). September 11, 2001 was really an Israeli plot.

The saga of adhesive arachnoiditis is not just something of historical interest.  In no area of medicine has failure of “informed consent” been more evident than in the continuing saga of this disease process.  The discussion of this rather incredible and continuing misadventure, which focuses on the  neurotoxicity of foreign body substances being introduced into the subarachnoid space for the purposes of myelography and epidural steroid administration, begins with a review of these subjects:

Myelography
Myelography, is an invasive diagnostic test in which a radio-opaque substance is placed in the subarachnoid space so that the space can be visualized by x-ray. The first contrast material used for this purpose was air. Air myelography developed from innovations in air ventriculography and air encephalography started in 1918, by Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon Walter Dandy.  Because air was difficult to visualize on x-ray a search for alternatives began.  In 1932 thorium dioxide (Thorotrast®) was first introduced. It appeared to be ideal for the purpose of myelography (and other diagnostic studies) and were it not for the fact that it was radioactive it would have been.  Thorium dioxide turned out to be a highly toxic radioactive substance.  It was only 20-30 years after its introduction that the medical profession began to suspect that the sudden and unusually high incidence of malignancies involving the brain and spinal cord (as well as adhesive arachnoiditis) might be related to thorium dioxide’s radioactivity. At this point this myelographic agent “fell into disuse.”


Epidural Steroids

The “epidural” space is separated from the subarachnoid space only by the thin dura mater membrane and its associated filamentous pia mater. Epidural steroid administration is an empiric therapeutic modality commonly performed for the treatment of low back disorders. If the steroid is inadvertently injected into the subarachnoid space rather than the epidural space serious disability and incapacitation can result. Although all foreign body substances introduced into the subarachnoid space are “irritating” others can be highly neurotoxic. The most significant example of such neurotoxic agents are those containing ethylene glycols to allow for slow release (i.e. Depo-Medrol® , Depo-Medrone®, Aristocort® and Methylprednisolone Suspension®).  When introduced into the subarachnoid space these materials can be highly neurotoxic and productive of a potentially disabling condition referred to as adhesive arachnoiditis. Since none of these steroids is approved, by their manufacturers, for epidural injection, and that they are clearly know to be toxic if misinjected, it is interesting to note that they still appear to be used by the majority of physicians now performing epidural steroid injections.

A prudent individual would assume that the medical leaders in performing, teaching, and publishing on epidural steroids would be acutely cognizant of the most potentially serious patient complication of “epidural” steroid administration. The facts suggest otherwise.  A prominent medical publisher, publishing 16 spine-related patient manuals including “Lumbar Epidural Injection” and “Cervical Epidural Injection” has, under the section on “risks and complications“, made no mention of adhesive arachnoiditis, the most serious potential complication of epidural steroid administration. This is despite the fact that new cases of incapacitating adhesive arachnoiditis directly related to inadvertent subarachnoid administration of neurotoxic steroids are being diagnosed by spine specialists on a continuing basis.

Are there alternatives to potentially neurotoxic formulations of methyl- prednisolone for epidural administration? Indeed there are. Why are they not used? The best answer is colossal ignorance, indifference, deception, or worse. Methyl prednisolone “suspensions” have neither “fallen into disuse” nor have they been officially identified as being a serious potential risk to the public health in any country at this time.  What does this revelation mean in regard to informed consent?  Might viewing Burton Report® allow patients to ask the right questions as to just which drugs will be injected and techniques used prior to therapy?  Will physicians, because of these questions from informed patients, begin to modify their practice?  We certainly hope so.  It is sad to observe that once again, the public may be forced to call upon the good offices of the legal profession to help in promoting awareness of this clear and present danger because of failure by the health care establishment and elected officials to accept responsibility and become involved.

Intrathecal Catheters
The use of intrathecally placed (within the subarachnoid space) catheters for the purpose of delivering drugs (i.e. morphine for pain relief, baclofin for control of spasm) is not without risk of producing local adhesive arachnoiditis.  These catheters can produce focal adhesive arachnoiditis, cysts and other inflammatory problems.  That such risks exist should be explained to patients as part of the preoperative informed consent process.  It should also be an important part of the risk versus benefit consideration for even considering such therapy in patients with normal life expectancies.

Summary

Clinically significant lumbo-sacral adhesive arachnoiditis is a particularly cruel disease because of the nature of the pain syndrome associated with it.  Yet, its pathophysiology is well understood and is no mystery.  Yet, for those desiring an objective determination of the existence or absence of adhesive arachnoiditis non-invasive high-resolution MRI scans have now allowed definitive determination of this frightening pathologic entity.

The nature of the pain associated with adhesive arachnoiditis is uniquely incapacitating and dolorologists have created the term “regional complex pain disorder” (RCPD) to describe it. Apologists for those who have created adhesive arachnoiditis and RCPD in patients have pointed out that only 1-5% of those with the condition actually have the full-blown clinical symptoms (which can include progressive neurologic deficit and even death).  The reason for this is interesting and appears to relate to the remarkable ability of the nervous system, with its great reserve and redundancy, to cope with severe insult and injury (if applied in a gradual fashion).  It appears that despite being enmeshed in solid collagenous scar tissue and being deprived of the nurturing of cerebrospinal fluid and its normal vascular supply nerve cells can often achieve a tenuous equilibrium.  This delicate balance can, however, be easily upset by additional insult or injury (i.e. spinal surgery or a motor vehicle accident releasing blood into the subarachnoid space).

There are a number of other neurologic parallels to the phenomenon of nervous system acclimization.  One such is the “post-polio syndrome” where individuals afflicted with poliomyelitis early in life may make complete functional recoveries but as they age they experience progressive weakness.  In this circumstance polio has destroyed the neuronal reserve and normal function belies the fact that there is no reserve.  As the normal process of aging occurs and neurons die by attrition the lack of reserve is evidenced by the inability of the few remaining viable neurons to handle the challenge of normal function.  The human body functions well with only one kidney, one lung etc.  No one would  dare to suggest that the loss of these organs was not inconsequential to the welfare of the individual.  In the case of adhesive arachnoiditis the story has, unfortunately to date,  been different.

Expressions of plight by individuals suffering with adhesive arachnoiditis are common. The many individuals legitimately suffering from adhesive arachnoiditis often are undiagnosed only because of healthcare establishment inadequacies. The legitimate disability of these unfortunates is then looked upon with distain by the medical and legislative communities who, because of their own diagnostic limitations, tend too often to consider these patients to be malingerers (or worse).  The sad result of this are legions of patients seeking only the dignity of a definitive diagnosis from professional groups and organizations whose skill at evasion and cover-up have unfortunately exceeded their other talents. The disrespectful manner in which many countries have treated these unfortunates, whose only crime was not knowing the right questions to ask before a “minimally invasive” myelogram or epidural steroid injection was performed, has been sad to see.

Sadly, the rare examples where recourse has occurred typically has represented the compassion of the legal profession again serving as a societal “safety net.”  Even so legal attempts at legitimate recourse have been hampered by unrealistic “statue of limitation” requirements.  Unfortunately, tort litigation reform has focused only on limiting the liability of transgressors so that their exposure becomes only a “business expense” and not something which will actually change their behavior.

The Editor, as a health care professional who has been concerned with the subject of neurotoxicity and patients suffering from adhesive arachnoiditis for over a quarter of a century has, as his only excuse for becoming involved in an issue emulating Hendrik Ibsen’s “Enemy of the People”,  is not being “smart enough to know when to quit.”