Award winner urges coverage of nursing homes
Last summer, Theo Francis, then working for The Wall Street Journal, wrote a compelling report about a disturbing trend in which nursing homes are evicting residents, sometimes because these people are simply too costly or inconvenient. His story noted that residents on Medicaid bring facilities as little as half what they can get from people who pay out of pocket, with private health insurance or through Medicare. Meanwhile, he wrote, formal complaints about nursing-home discharge practices have doubled over a decade, to 8,500 nationally in 2006.
The story has earned Francis, who is an AHCJ member, the Jack Newfield Award for Excellence in Investigative Reporting from FRIA, a New York-based, nonprofit organization that tries to foster dignity and independence of seniors in long term care settings. The goal of the award is to encourage socially conscious reporting on the challenges of elderly life, in general, and especially those related to long-term care. FRIA hopes the award provides incentives to journalists to report on issues important to the nation’s aging population.
“No one tracks nursing-home evictions nationally, and even complaints are tracked inconsistently. Few states go farther,” Francis writes us. “So it took a lot of phone work to confirm and flesh out the pattern of evictions that I had heard about. Moreover, many of those who have been evicted are unaware of their rights under federal law, and may never know they were forced out of their homes improperly. Others are afraid to complain, fearing they may retaliation when they depend on their nursing homes to eat, bathe or use the toilet. And assisted-living facility residents, while more independent, have more to fear in some ways. In many states, they can be evicted for no reason at all. As a result, it was also challenging to find residents and families both able to articulate their experiences and willing to do so publicly.
“As news organizations cut back, investigative reporting is often one of the early casualties. Even so, I want to encourage other reporters to write about nursing homes, assisted-living facilities and their residents, many of whom are among the most vulnerable people in America today. Writing about long-term care can be a real challenge, thanks in part to a byzantine regulatory system, the incredibly decentralized nature of the industry an the anxieties that often surround those living in institutional settings. But it is also incredibly rewarding. For one thing, you meet people who’ve lived long and colorful lives. But beyond that, there are few opportunities for reporters to make more of a concrete difference in their communities and in the lives of individuals.”
FDA creates tipster Web page for alleged crimes
Do you know something about the sale of counterfeit prescription drugs or off-label promotion of medical devices? What if you came across fraud committed by a clinical trial investigator or a case of product tampering? Do you know how to get in touch with the Food and Drug Administration if you knew about an alleged crime?
Well, the FDA is trying to encourage tipsters to get in touch. The agency recently created a special page on its Web site to report suspected criminal activity, and the info gets forwarded directly to the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigation.
Here are activities the FDA’s OCI would investigate: illegal diversion of pharmaceuticals and other regulated products; Prescription Drug Marketing Act violations; schemes involving fraudulent treatments, cures or devices; New Drug Application fraud; crimes affecting the safety or integrity of the nation’s blood supply or the adulteration and/or misbranding of food; Internet facilitated criminal violations involving FDA regulated products; illegal importation of FDA regulated products, and crimes involving the manufacture, sale or distribution of unapproved FDA regulated products.
We asked an FDA spokeswoman what exactly prompted this initiative and whether any tips have actually been reported. The FDA responded that nothing prompted the move and that it “can’t comment on any of the e-mails we have received or any other communication we receive via other means.”
Globe section eliminated; Post staff joins team
Call this the case of the disappearing health section. One of the nation’s biggest and best-known dailies - The Boston Globe - has eliminated its stand-alone Monday Health/Science section after 25 years of widely praised coverage that included a 2005 Pulitzer Prize. The move, of course, comes amid ongoing retrenchment at the paper, but health and science editor Gideon Gil is putting on a brave face.
“I don’t see it as a serious retreat,” says Gil, who expects his nine-person staff will remain intact. “The content is all running in the paper, but going in different places … It was nice to have our own sandbox to play in, the freedom to stretch. Science is quirky sometimes, so a bit of serendipity is lost when we have to fit into different niches in the paper.”
However, former Globe science editor Nils Bruzelius, who is now deputy national editor in charge of science at The Washington Post, was more blunt. “It will definitely put a crimp in the amount of science and health coverage in the paper,” he tells the Columbia Journalism Review. ”It will continue to be high-quality, but this can’t help but dim the overall breadth and scope of coverage when you’re fighting for space every day and defining what you do in a more narrowly focused way.”
Meanwhile, The Post is gathering its smattering of health, science and environment reporters into one team. Just the same, the “stories will appear all over the paper and online, just as they do now - on the front page or home page, in National, Metro, Business and the Health sections,” according to a memo written by executive editor Marcus Brauchli and publicized by Politico’s Michael Calderone.
“The aim is two-fold. One, our current structure can sometimes work against strong communication and collaboration, which means reporters only occasionally work in concert with each other and - not surprisingly - often don’t know who’s working on what at any given time. Second, we hope to break down the newsroom silos that can prevent us from using resources in the smartest, highest-impact way.”
NEJM weighs in on Obama’s budget plan
Filed under: Government, Health care reform, Health policy, Hot Health Headline
In a rather measured Perspective piece by correspondent John K. Iglehart, the New England Journal of Medicine expresses admiration for President Barack Obama and his commitment to health reform. At the same time, however, the closely read periodical also admits to some doubt that Obama can make an appreciable dent in health care spending, at least to the extent that is needed.
You may recall Obama last week released a $3.6 trillion proposal that challenges Congress to commit a “down payment” of $630 billion over the next decade to finance health care reform. The NEJM reminds us that this adds “substantially” to the $150 billion in health-related revenues from the economic stimulus package he signed into law last month.
“In addressing the vast medical economy, Obama has proposed a grand bargain to the American people and the disparate array of private interests engaged in health care. The administration has assured the populace, providers and its political allies that it is serious about pursuing reform and expanding coverage.
Oh, but those hurdles. As the NEJM notes, this will require reductions, totaling $318 billion over 10 years, in Medicare and Medicaid payments to health plans, drug makers, hospitals, and home health care providers. Where will the rest come from? Raising taxes for Americans in the highest tax brackets. And even then, it will be far from enough.
“Though strident in its language,” the NEJM writes, ” the budget proposal includes only a sliver of the savings required to slow the growth of health care costs to anything close to the rate of growth for non-medical goods and services. Very little in the history of modern Congress suggests that legislators have the stomach to retrench a sector that is such a large part of the economy, particularly one with an impressive record of creating jobs.
“Carrying it off in normal times would take much of the political capital of any president, and this is only one of countless challenges faced by the new administration. On the other hand, Obama pulled off a historic victory last November; perhaps he will prove capable of bending the cost curve and achieving health care reform as well.”
Related
Covering health reform and Obama’s proposed budget
Sebelius coverage focuses on experience, abortion
She tries to work with both Republicans and Democrats, but is inexperienced when its comes to working with Congress. And her support for abortion rights is a flashpoint that will generate serious protest. These are among the observations from various corners now that President Barack Obama has nominated Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius as U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary.
Several AHCJ members and staff visited Sebelius in Topeka on April 21, 2008, as part of AHCJ's Midwest Health Journalism Program Fellowships.
For instance, USA Today points out that Sebelius would bring “expertise as a former state health insurance regulator but not deep ties to the members of Congress who will decide the fate of the president’s health care proposals.” The paper quotes Norman Ornstein of conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute as saying “it’s a tough job for anybody to do right now,” but especially for a Washington outsider. “It’s like suddenly being inserted as quarterback in the second quarter of the Super Bowl, where you know the coach, you know the game, but you haven’t played with this team and you don’t know all the plays.”
On the other hand, CNNPolitics.com notes that Sebelius has “experience working with both Democrats and Republicans in her home state, which could be an asset to President Obama as he embarks on an effort at bipartisanship in reforming health care.”
The experience, however, may have been sobering, according to The New York Times, which pointed out that her “efforts to forge bipartisan consensus have rarely succeeded. She recently observed that the greatest frustration of her six years in office had been her inability to persuade lawmakers to raise tobacco taxes for a modest expansion of government health coverage.”
Meanwhile, The Washington Post writes that Sebelius, who was raised as a Roman Catholic in Ohio, has “endured fierce and often personal criticism from anti-abortion activists largely because she vetoed a bill that would have required doctors who perform late-term abortions to report a reason for the procedure.” The paper adds that, after the veto, the archbishop of Kansas City asked her to stop taking Communion. Underscoring the point, FoxNews.com reports how anti-abortion activists plan to fight her nomination.
Beyond the mainstream, blogs are reacting with passion. Catholic Fire writes that it would “certainly be good to get her out of Kansas.” On the other end of the spectrum, Women’s Voices for Change is thrilled that Sebelius was chosen for HHS and calls her a “Mistress of the Universe,” who is a tough administrator, deeply bipartisan and determined to get things right, even when faced with unpopular choices.
Related
- More news coverage of Sebelius’ nomination
- White House blog post about Sebelius’ nomination
- Sebelius’ official biography
Sealed Seroquel documents hearing is Thursday
A closely watched hearing will take place in a federal courtroom in Orlando, Fla., tomorrow [Thursday] over the extent to which AstraZeneca should be forced to divulge internal documents filed in connection with product-liability litigation over its Seroquel antipsychotic. About 6,000 lawsuits have been consolidated and allege the drugmaker failed to adequately disclose that the pill can cause serious weight gain and diabetes.
At issue is whether thousands of pages of material should be unsealed. Typically, numerous documents are sealed at the outset of such litigation under agreements between attorneys for defendants and plaintiffs, in part, to speed along the proceedings. Companies also seek to have documents sealed to avoid publicity, investigations and additional lawsuits.
But earlier this month, Bloomberg News filed a motion to have some of the Seroquel documents unsealed, citing ”the public’s right of access to judicial documents.” An AstraZeneca spokesman told BusinessWeek that releasing incomplete information could create a public health risk. However, Bloomberg argued that concerns about health risks are among the very reasons the documents should be unsealed.
Not surprisingly, the controversy is drawing parallels to the litigation over Eli Lilly’s Zyprexa, another antipsychotic linked to serious weight gain and diabetes. However, the Zyprexa lawsuits yielded an unexpected ruckus when David Egilman, a Brown University professor and an expert witness for the plaintiffs, leaked sealed Lilly documents to the media (background here).
Meanwhile, the Seroquel case is generating interest for yet another reason - allegations of sexual impropriety. An AstraZeneca employee, who was responsible for the drug in the United States, allegedly cavorted with a Seroquel researcher in the United Kingdom and a ghostwriter in the United States, according to court documents. You can read more about that here.
Update: AstraZeneca lawyer Stephen McConnell announced at the hear that AstraZeneca would release the documents, according to AmericanLawyer.com.
First chapters of latest sourcebook are online
Filed under: Health data, Health journalism, Health policy
Confused about covering health issues? The Alliance for Health Reform, a nonprofit that bills itself as nonpartisan health policy education group, is in the process of releasing a new guidebook for journalists who want background on the pressing matters of the day.
The 5th edition of Covering Health Issues: A Sourcebook for Journalists will eventually have 12 chapters online that tackle employer-sponsored coverage, individual coverage, children’s coverage, Medicare, Medicaid, long-term care, disparities, public health and mental health, among other things.
So far, three chapters are available: health reform, cost of health care and quality of care. The organization hopes journalists will find useful the various ‘fast facts;’ background information; story ideas; expert contact info; Web site suggestions; opinion polls and tips for understanding congressional budgeting and the appropriations process.
As with previous editions, the latest was funded with underwriting from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Grassley list keeps track of press coverage
Filed under: Conflicts of interest, Government, Health journalism, Pharmaceuticals
Chuck Grassley is nothing if not media savvy. The senator from Iowa, who is the ranking Republican on the U.S. Senate Finance Committee and has launched numerous investigations into pharmaceutical marketing and ties between industry and science, is keeping close tabs on press coverage of his efforts.
Sen. Charles Grassley
His staff recently circulated a nine-page list of some of the 70 stories about his various investigations - notably, a string of probes into conflicts of interest involving high-profile academics who simultaneously receive funding from drug makers and the National Institutes of Health. The recitation doesn’t include numerous editorials or mention in the “Boston Legal” television show (see this blog about the episode).
Along with the list is a string of actions taken in response:
- An Emory University professor stripped of chairmanship:
- The head of extramural research at NIH removed;
- A Stanford University professor pulled off an NIH grant;
- An ongoing internal investigation of professors at Harvard and Massachusetts General Hospital;
- Cancellation of a show that ran on an NPR satellite station;
- New policies on disclosure and physician relationships with industry being enacted at the University of Minnesota; Harvard University; Emory University; the University of Texas; Brown University; the Cleveland Clinic; the University of Wisconsin; the University of Iowa; the North American Spine Society and the American Psychiatric Association.
Not surprisingly, Grassley promises more will follow.
AHCJ members part of new St. Louis health section
Filed under: Health journalism, Health policy, Member news, Pharmaceuticals
In an encouraging move, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch will be placing greater emphasis on health coverage with the planned launch on March 25 of a new comprehensive health section. Called StL Health, the section will combine stories that, in the past, would have been scattered about the features, news and business sections.
The new, stand-alone section, which will appear every Thursday, will offer business health, consumer news, trends and features, and will have a staff of four full-time writers - a medical reporter, a business reporter and two feature writers - and one part-time writer. AHCJ members Blythe Bernhard and Harry Jackson Jr. will be among the staff.
“The idea is to provide news that matters to our readers,” says Jackie Hutcherson, who will edit the section.
“It made sense to do this, because it’s shifting pieces into one spot where we can make the most out of our health coverage and have it all in one place. It’s certainly a subject that affects everyone in one form or another - people with children, seniors, anyone who goes online for health info. It crosses a wide swath of readership.”
Another key focus of the coverage will be local hospitals, which Hutcherson points out are not only vital healthcare facilities, but also large employers in the greater St. Louis area. ”They’re such a vital part of the economy, and they’re in our backyard, which affects our readership.”
Related
Read more about what AHCJ members are doing.
Sites strive to make medical information accessible
SearchMedica
This is a search engine with a difference: It returns only clinical information from about 1,000 sources.
SearchMedica’s “About” page says it “scans well-known, credible journals, systematic reviews, and evidence-based article” and that it “selects and scans patient-directed websites, online CME courses, and government databases of clinical trials and practice guidelines.”
A quick search for “influenza” - admittedly a very broad term - yielded more than 53,000 results, but the site prominently displays links to help narrow the results based on sources of information:
To the left of the search results, it also offers suggested terms to either broaden or narrow the search. To broaden this particular search it suggests “lower respiratory tract infection” and “orthomyxovirus infection.” For narrower results, it suggests “bird flu,” “equine influenza,” “swine influenza” and “asian flu.”
It also has a “Suggested Medical Searches” page that offers predefined search terms to help users find relevant results.
The site is run by CMPMedica, part of United Business Media. The site says it is supported by ads and sponsorships and notes that “Advertisers have no influence whatever on our search results, and SearchMedica does not include advertiser websites among the scanned content.”
Medpedia
Yet another Web site is on its way and the organizers aspire to offer a wiki for a wide and diverse array of health care professionals, researchers, journalists and consumers. It could be one more tool for your journalistic toolkit.
Perhaps its most important value for journalists will be that it is intended to be a “collaborative encyclopedia and resource for information about health, medicine and the body.”
Medpedia is billed as a technology platform for a “worldwide health community.” The stated goal is ambitious: “to create a new model of how the world will assemble, maintain, critique and access medical knowledge … (and) become a repository of up-to-date unbiased medical information, contributed and maintained by health experts around the world, and freely available to everyone.”
There are some restrictions, though. Only physicians and Ph.D.s in a biomedical or health field can edit Medpedia’s “knowledge base,” and only health and medical professionals can use the professional network. However, consumers can suggest changes to article pages and participate in forums.
Contributors include Harvard Medical School, Stanford School of Medicine, Berkeley School of Public Health, and the University of Michigan Medical School, among others. So far, 110 organizations have contributed or pledged over 7,000 pages of content. The American Heart Association plans to promote the site to its member and the NHS Choices (National Health Service) of the U.K. expects to make use. Funding comes from Ooga Labs.
UPDATE: There is quite a bit of discussion about Medpedia on Twitter (#medpedia).
-
Join us in Omaha to find untold rural health stories
New at HealthJournalism.org
- AHCJ offers financial data about nonprofit hospitals
- Diversity in aging: Putting gray in the rainbow
- Southeast journalists eligible for regional fellowship program
- AHCJ-NLM Health Journalism Fellowship offers hands-on medical research training
- AHCJ announces 2011 winners of top health journalism awards
