Connect with us

Government

What will it take to transform obesity care for all?

When a person with diabetes, high blood pressure, or osteoarthritis goes to their primary care clinic, they expect treatment that’s grounded in modern…

Published

on

When a person with diabetes, high blood pressure, or osteoarthritis goes to their primary care clinic, they expect treatment that’s grounded in modern medical evidence.

Credit: University of Michigan

When a person with diabetes, high blood pressure, or osteoarthritis goes to their primary care clinic, they expect treatment that’s grounded in modern medical evidence.

That might mean nutrition and exercise recommendations, prescriptions for medications, regular measurement of their progress and referrals for visits to specialists or even surgery.

But if they have obesity, they may not get the same level of evidence-based care for that chronic condition, recent studies have shown.

Why not? Like obesity itself, the answer is complicated, say Michigan Medicine primary care physicians with advanced training in obesity medicine.

The reasons include health insurance rules that exclude obesity medications and behavioral therapy, lack of training among primary care clinicians on best practices for treating obesity such as prescribing newer medications, and societal stigma against people with obesity.

And unlike those other chronic health conditions, few outside forces have driven primary care clinics to focus on providing high-quality, personalized obesity care for all.

That means it will take a multi-pronged effort to ensure that the tens of millions of Americans with obesity get better care, say Lauren Oshman, M.D., M.PH. and Dina Hafez Griauzde, M.D., M.Sc. of Michigan Medicine, the University of Michigan’s academic medical center. Both are trained in obesity medicine and members of the U-M Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation.

Through a recently published framework for obesity care in primary care, and other efforts, they and others are helping lead efforts to ensure that more people with obesity can reduce their risk of developing, or suffering complications from, obesity-related conditions. These may include diabetes, high blood pressure and osteoarthritis.

Gaining a healthier control of weight could not only change and extend these patients’ lives and improve their well-being, but also save the nation tens of  billions of dollars in health care costs.

“Obesity is a chronic disease and has been classified as one since 2013,” says Griauzde, an assistant professor in the Division of General Medicine. “We need to remove the perception that obesity is willfully caused by unhealthy lifestyle choices, which has been a misperception historically held by the medical profession and is still a pervasive misunderstanding held by many today.”

“We know now that obesity is a chronic disease caused by metabolic and hormonal changes, with influences from genetics, stress and community-level factors. And that means it is sometimes best treated by medications and surgery in addition to lifestyle change,” says Oshman, an associate professor in the Department of Family Medicine. “Just as people with diabetes can manage their condition with lifestyle change but some need medication, the same is true for obesity. Treating obesity as a chronic disease in primary care, with a similarly graded, personalized approach, makes sense.”

The insurance conundrum

One big hurdle: the lack of insurance coverage for a range of FDA-approved medications that treat obesity. Studies have shown they can help a person with obesity lose up to 15% of their body weight, much more than the 5% that diet and exercise might achieve with concerted, sustained effort.

But without insurance coverage, these medicines remain out of reach for many, especially people living with lower incomes, Oshman and Griauzde note.

That’s why the two physicians teamed up to provide evidence about the costs and potential impacts of the drugs to the board that oversees Michigan’s Medicaid prescription drug coverage.

That information helped lead to the approval of coverage of such drugs this spring for Michiganders with Medicaid insurance who have obesity (defined as a body mass index over 30 kg/m2). The medication coverage also includes people with overweight (BMI between 27 and 30 kg/m2) who also have a weight-related risk factor such as hypertension, coronary artery disease, type 2 diabetes, elevated cholesterol, or sleep apnea.

A growing number of states – but still fewer than half – have adopted similar provisions for their Medicaid populations. The Veterans Health Administration also covers the drugs for veterans in its clinics.

But Medicare still does not cover these drugs for people over 65 with obesity, because of a provision in the Part D prescription drug program that excludes coverage of weight control medications. A bill introduced in Congress last year seeks to change that.

And most prescription drug programs offered by employers do not cover the full cost of obesity drugs. That leaves patients paying hundreds or even thousands of dollars a month if they want to try an FDA-approved obesity medication – which they may need to take for years to keep weight off.

To reduce confusion, the team created a quick-reference guide for Michigan physicians that providers insurer-specific coverage information, coverage restrictions, and patient costs.

Even as insurance plans’ coverage of obesity medications varies widely, many plans cover another obesity treatment: bariatric surgery.

It’s more effective at reducing weight than medications or lifestyle change, but is also costly and carries risks, and getting insurance approval can involve multiple steps.

Those risks have declined in recent years in Michigan, thanks to a statewide effort to improve the quality of bariatric surgical care funded by the state’s largest insurer, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. That effort, called the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Consortium, also works to help primary care providers understand who can benefit most from weight loss surgery. But once a patient has surgery, their insurance may not cover the medications that 1 in 4 of them may need to maintain that high level of weight loss.

Redesigning primary care to delivery effective obesity treatment

Another big hurdle standing in the way of effective obesity care is the lack of a primary care- based system for obesity care.

Primary care clinicians are expected to treat patients with obesity, but often lack the knowledge and time to do so effectively. Fortunately, a small and growing number of physicians are now certified in obesity medicine through the American Board of Obesity Medicine (ABOM) and can provide personalized and effective obesity treatment to individual patients.

That’s why Griauzde and colleagues recently published a roadmap for a new way to integrate ABOM-certified physicians into primary care settings and break down clinical silos while individualizing care and supporting patients in their efforts to lose weight.

That roadmap serves as the framework for the new Weight Navigation Program at Michigan Medicine. This program is a joint clinical and research initiative led by endocrinologist Andrew Kraftson, M.D., who serves as program director, family physician Amal Othman M.D., serving as medical director, and Griauzde as research director. Both Othman and Griauzde are ABOM Diplomates.

The Weight Navigation Program model embeds an ABOM-certified physician, called the Weight Navigator, in the primary care team to serve as an expert to other providers and patients with obesity.

The Weight Navigator meets with the patient for an extended consultation, developing a personalized obesity treatment plan using existing health system, community, and medication-based resources. These resources include intensive programs such as those offered by Michigan Medicine’s Endocrinology and Cardiology divisions.  

Another innovative aspect of the program is the use of a text messaging platform linked to patients’ electronic health records, so patients can self-report their weight and progress to the Weight Navigation team and get extra help if they need it. A care manager tailors their outreach to patients to support them over time, address potential barriers, and facilitate changes to the treatment plan, if needed, to optimize patients’ outcomes.

The program launched in late 2020 in one Family Medicine clinic and is now open to patients of all Family Medicine clinics across Michigan Medicine, with plans to expand to Internal Medicine clinics by the end of the year. 

The team is studying the program’s effects on patient outcomes and experiences. This data will help refine the program to provide better care for the entire population of people with obesity at Michigan Medicine and inform care delivery for other researchers and health systems facing similar obstacles.

“This program addresses known gaps in primary care for people with obesity and delivers personalized care that uses our health system’s many resources, community resources and programs, and pharmacotherapy for weight management’ says Griauzde.

At many health systems, Griauzde notes, “No one has looked at obesity care from a system level – everyone is siloed and seeing the patients they see and seeing who happens to show up for follow up.” She hopes that by publishing on the new program they can help other systems adapt the approach as well.

Educating providers on obesity medication prescribing

It’s hard for people with obesity to escape advertisements from pharmaceutical companies about obesity medications. Those ads aim to prompt discussions with their primary care clinician.

But that means clinicians need impartial information about the evidence behind the medications, the patients they’re most appropriate for, and the potential out-of-pocket costs their patients might face if they try to fill a prescription for one.

Oshman recently gave a talk about the range of available medications and their pros and cons to clinicians who treat people with diabetes and prediabetes across Michigan, though the Michigan Collaborative for Type 2 Diabetes, another BCBSM-funded collaborative quality initiative.

Her talk, available for anyone to watch, uses de-identified patient case studies to examine treatment options in detail, and discuss insurance considerations. Her slides are available for download too.

The Obesity Medication Association and American Association of Clinical Endocrinology also offer treatment reference tools for providers.

Griauzde notes that most of the medications approved for obesity are already prescribed by physicians for other reasons, including intensive blood sugar control in people with diabetes, depression, headache and tobacco cessation.

Depending on the patient’s needs, most can be taken long-term to help achieve and maintain weight loss – just as medications to lower blood sugar, blood pressure and cholesterol are. But they should always be taken in conjunction with nutrition and activity program.

If a patient doesn’t receive effective obesity care from their primary care provider, they may turn to commercial services of uncertain quality – and not tell their primary care provider they’ve done so. That could lead to risky clashes between medications.

On the other hand, many providers may still remember, or have heard of, the risks associated with a combination of medications used for obesity in the 1980s and 1990s, known colloquially as “fen/phen.” If anything, she says, that experience has put more focus on safety of the current generation of obesity medications and ensuring the safety of the ones now in the pipeline.

The more recent experience of the pandemic shows the importance of addressing obesity in an evidence-based way, Oshman and Griauzde say. Obesity emerged as a major risk factor for developing severe COVID-19 or dying of it, and the higher rates of obesity in communities of color and low-income populations helped contribute to the higher COVID-19 death toll among members of these groups.

Often, treating obesity with medication can reduce the impact of inflammation and hormonal impacts on patients’ other conditions – and they may even be able to stop taking the medicines they’ve been on for other reasons. Griauzde notes that for primary care providers who engage in practicing obesity medicine, “it’s bringing the joy back to primary care, because we can give people a chance to live a life with fewer medications overall, and a reversal of health consequences.”

 

The Weight Navigation Program and the evaluation of its effects on patient outcomes are funded by the Elizabeth Weiser Caswell Diabetes Institute, the Michigan Center for Diabetes and Translational Research Pilot, and the National Institutes of Health (DK092926, DK123416).

 

Developing weight navigation program to support personalized and effective obesity management in primary care settings: protocol for a quality improvement program with an embedded single-arm pilot study Primary Health Care Research & Development, 23, E14. doi:10.1017/S1463423621000906 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/primary-health-care-research-and-development/article/developing-weight-navigation-program-to-support-personalized-and-effective-obesity-management-in-primary-care-settings-protocol-for-a-quality-improvement-program-with-an-embedded-singlearm-pilot-study/52FDC8AFEED652E2DEB3BE7B979A1E7A

 

Access to Anti-Obesity Medications (issue brief): DOI:10.7302/4522 https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/172493


Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Survey Shows Declining Concerns Among Americans About COVID-19

Survey Shows Declining Concerns Among Americans About COVID-19

A new survey reveals that only 20% of Americans view covid-19 as "a major threat"…

Published

on

Survey Shows Declining Concerns Among Americans About COVID-19

A new survey reveals that only 20% of Americans view covid-19 as "a major threat" to the health of the US population - a sharp decline from a high of 67% in July 2020.

(SARMDY/Shutterstock)

What's more, the Pew Research Center survey conducted from Feb. 7 to Feb. 11 showed that just 10% of Americans are concerned that they will  catch the disease and require hospitalization.

"This data represents a low ebb of public concern about the virus that reached its height in the summer and fall of 2020, when as many as two-thirds of Americans viewed COVID-19 as a major threat to public health," reads the report, which was published March 7.

According to the survey, half of the participants understand the significance of researchers and healthcare providers in understanding and treating long COVID - however 27% of participants consider this issue less important, while 22% of Americans are unaware of long COVID.

What's more, while Democrats were far more worried than Republicans in the past, that gap has narrowed significantly.

"In the pandemic’s first year, Democrats were routinely about 40 points more likely than Republicans to view the coronavirus as a major threat to the health of the U.S. population. This gap has waned as overall levels of concern have fallen," reads the report.

More via the Epoch Times;

The survey found that three in ten Democrats under 50 have received an updated COVID-19 vaccine, compared with 66 percent of Democrats ages 65 and older.

Moreover, 66 percent of Democrats ages 65 and older have received the updated COVID-19 vaccine, while only 24 percent of Republicans ages 65 and older have done so.

“This 42-point partisan gap is much wider now than at other points since the start of the outbreak. For instance, in August 2021, 93 percent of older Democrats and 78 percent of older Republicans said they had received all the shots needed to be fully vaccinated (a 15-point gap),” it noted.

COVID-19 No Longer an Emergency

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently issued its updated recommendations for the virus, which no longer require people to stay home for five days after testing positive for COVID-19.

The updated guidance recommends that people who contracted a respiratory virus stay home, and they can resume normal activities when their symptoms improve overall and their fever subsides for 24 hours without medication.

“We still must use the commonsense solutions we know work to protect ourselves and others from serious illness from respiratory viruses, this includes vaccination, treatment, and staying home when we get sick,” CDC director Dr. Mandy Cohen said in a statement.

The CDC said that while the virus remains a threat, it is now less likely to cause severe illness because of widespread immunity and improved tools to prevent and treat the disease.

Importantly, states and countries that have already adjusted recommended isolation times have not seen increased hospitalizations or deaths related to COVID-19,” it stated.

The federal government suspended its free at-home COVID-19 test program on March 8, according to a website set up by the government, following a decrease in COVID-19-related hospitalizations.

According to the CDC, hospitalization rates for COVID-19 and influenza diseases remain “elevated” but are decreasing in some parts of the United States.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/10/2024 - 22:45

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Rand Paul Teases Senate GOP Leader Run – Musk Says “I Would Support”

Rand Paul Teases Senate GOP Leader Run – Musk Says "I Would Support"

Republican Kentucky Senator Rand Paul on Friday hinted that he may jump…

Published

on

Rand Paul Teases Senate GOP Leader Run - Musk Says "I Would Support"

Republican Kentucky Senator Rand Paul on Friday hinted that he may jump into the race to become the next Senate GOP leader, and Elon Musk was quick to support the idea. Republicans must find a successor for periodically malfunctioning Mitch McConnell, who recently announced he'll step down in November, though intending to keep his Senate seat until his term ends in January 2027, when he'd be within weeks of turning 86. 

So far, the announced field consists of two quintessential establishment types: John Cornyn of Texas and John Thune of South Dakota. While John Barrasso's name had been thrown around as one of "The Three Johns" considered top contenders, the Wyoming senator on Tuesday said he'll instead seek the number two slot as party whip. 

Paul used X to tease his potential bid for the position which -- if the GOP takes back the upper chamber in November -- could graduate from Minority Leader to Majority Leader. He started by telling his 5.1 million followers he'd had lots of people asking him about his interest in running...

...then followed up with a poll in which he predictably annihilated Cornyn and Thune, taking a 96% share as of Friday night, with the other two below 2% each. 

Elon Musk was quick to back the idea of Paul as GOP leader, while daring Cornyn and Thune to follow Paul's lead by throwing their names out for consideration by the Twitter-verse X-verse. 

Paul has been a stalwart opponent of security-state mass surveillance, foreign interventionism -- to include shoveling billions of dollars into the proxy war in Ukraine -- and out-of-control spending in general. He demonstrated the latter passion on the Senate floor this week as he ridiculed the latest kick-the-can spending package:   

In February, Paul used Senate rules to force his colleagues into a grueling Super Bowl weekend of votes, as he worked to derail a $95 billion foreign aid bill. "I think we should stay here as long as it takes,” said Paul. “If it takes a week or a month, I’ll force them to stay here to discuss why they think the border of Ukraine is more important than the US border.”

Don't expect a Majority Leader Paul to ditch the filibuster -- he's been a hardy user of the legislative delay tactic. In 2013, he spoke for 13 hours to fight the nomination of John Brennan as CIA director. In 2015, he orated for 10-and-a-half-hours to oppose extension of the Patriot Act

Rand Paul amid his 10 1/2 hour filibuster in 2015

Among the general public, Paul is probably best known as Capitol Hill's chief tormentor of Dr. Anthony Fauci, who was director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease during the Covid-19 pandemic. Paul says the evidence indicates the virus emerged from China's Wuhan Institute of Virology. He's accused Fauci and other members of the US government public health apparatus of evading questions about their funding of the Chinese lab's "gain of function" research, which takes natural viruses and morphs them into something more dangerous. Paul has pointedly said that Fauci committed perjury in congressional hearings and that he belongs in jail "without question."   

Musk is neither the only nor the first noteworthy figure to back Paul for party leader. Just hours after McConnell announced his upcoming step-down from leadership, independent 2024 presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr voiced his support: 

In a testament to the extent to which the establishment recoils at the libertarian-minded Paul, mainstream media outlets -- which have been quick to report on other developments in the majority leader race -- pretended not to notice that Paul had signaled his interest in the job. More than 24 hours after Paul's test-the-waters tweet-fest began, not a single major outlet had brought it to the attention of their audience. 

That may be his strongest endorsement yet. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/10/2024 - 20:25

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

The Great Replacement Loophole: Illegal Immigrants Score 5-Year Work Benefit While “Waiting” For Deporation, Asylum

The Great Replacement Loophole: Illegal Immigrants Score 5-Year Work Benefit While "Waiting" For Deporation, Asylum

Over the past several…

Published

on

The Great Replacement Loophole: Illegal Immigrants Score 5-Year Work Benefit While "Waiting" For Deporation, Asylum

Over the past several months we've pointed out that there has  been zero job creation for native-born workers since the summer of 2018...

... and that since Joe Biden was sworn into office, most of the post-pandemic job gains the administration continuously brags about have gone foreign-born (read immigrants, mostly illegal ones) workers.

And while the left might find this data almost as verboten as FBI crime statistics - as it directly supports the so-called "great replacement theory" we're not supposed to discuss - it also coincides with record numbers of illegal crossings into the United States under Biden.

In short, the Biden administration opened the floodgates, 10 million illegal immigrants poured into the country, and most of the post-pandemic "jobs recovery" went to foreign-born workers, of which illegal immigrants represent the largest chunk.

Asylum seekers from Venezuela await work permits on June 28, 2023 (via the Chicago Tribune)

'But Tyler, illegal immigrants can't possibly work in the United States whilst awaiting their asylum hearings,' one might hear from the peanut gallery. On the contrary: ever since Biden reversed a key aspect of Trump's labor policies, all illegal immigrants - even those awaiting deportation proceedings - have been given carte blanche to work while awaiting said proceedings for up to five years...

... something which even Elon Musk was shocked to learn.

Which leads us to another question: recall that the primary concern for the Biden admin for much of 2022 and 2023 was soaring prices, i.e., relentless inflation in general, and rising wages in particular, which in turn prompted even Goldman to admit two years ago that the diabolical wage-price spiral had been unleashed in the US (diabolical, because nothing absent a major economic shock, read recession or depression, can short-circuit it once it is in place).

Well, there is one other thing that can break the wage-price spiral loop: a flood of ultra-cheap illegal immigrant workers. But don't take our word for it: here is Fed Chair Jerome Powell himself during his February 60 Minutes interview:

PELLEY: Why was immigration important?

POWELL: Because, you know, immigrants come in, and they tend to work at a rate that is at or above that for non-immigrants. Immigrants who come to the country tend to be in the workforce at a slightly higher level than native Americans do. But that's largely because of the age difference. They tend to skew younger.

PELLEY: Why is immigration so important to the economy?

POWELL: Well, first of all, immigration policy is not the Fed's job. The immigration policy of the United States is really important and really much under discussion right now, and that's none of our business. We don't set immigration policy. We don't comment on it.

I will say, over time, though, the U.S. economy has benefited from immigration. And, frankly, just in the last, year a big part of the story of the labor market coming back into better balance is immigration returning to levels that were more typical of the pre-pandemic era.

PELLEY: The country needed the workers.

POWELL: It did. And so, that's what's been happening.

Translation: Immigrants work hard, and Americans are lazy. But much more importantly, since illegal immigrants will work for any pay, and since Biden's Department of Homeland Security, via its Citizenship and Immigration Services Agency, has made it so illegal immigrants can work in the US perfectly legally for up to 5 years (if not more), one can argue that the flood of illegals through the southern border has been the primary reason why inflation - or rather mostly wage inflation, that all too critical component of the wage-price spiral  - has moderated in in the past year, when the US labor market suddenly found itself flooded with millions of perfectly eligible workers, who just also happen to be illegal immigrants and thus have zero wage bargaining options.

None of this is to suggest that the relentless flood of immigrants into the US is not also driven by voting and census concerns - something Elon Musk has been pounding the table on in recent weeks, and has gone so far to call it "the biggest corruption of American democracy in the 21st century", but in retrospect, one can also argue that the only modest success the Biden admin has had in the past year - namely bringing inflation down from a torrid 9% annual rate to "only" 3% - has also been due to the millions of illegals he's imported into the country.

We would be remiss if we didn't also note that this so often carries catastrophic short-term consequences for the social fabric of the country (the Laken Riley fiasco being only the latest example), not to mention the far more dire long-term consequences for the future of the US - chief among them the trillions of dollars in debt the US will need to incur to pay for all those new illegal immigrants Democrat voters and low-paid workers. This is on top of the labor revolution that will kick in once AI leads to mass layoffs among high-paying, white-collar jobs, after which all those newly laid off native-born workers hoping to trade down to lower paying (if available) jobs will discover that hardened criminals from Honduras or Guatemala have already taken them, all thanks to Joe Biden.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/10/2024 - 19:15

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending