• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

MassDevice

The Medical Device Business Journal — Medical Device News & Articles | MassDevice

  • Latest News
    • Cardiovascular
    • Orthopedics
  • Wall Street Beat
    • Funding Roundup
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Podcasts & Webinars
    • Podcasts
    • Webinars
  • Resources
    • About MassDevice
    • Newsletter Signup
    • Leadership in Medtech
    • Manufacturers & Suppliers Search
    • MedTech100 Index
    • Videos
    • Whitepapers
  • DeviceTalks Tuesdays
  • Coronavirus: Live updates
Home » A million hearts or a million dreams?

A million hearts or a million dreams?

September 20, 2011 By MassDevice

By Westby G. Fisher, MD, FACC

Westby Fisher

Yesterday, Thomas R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H., and Donald M. Berwick, M.D., M.P.P. used the bulliest of scientific pulpits, the New England Journal of Medicine, to announce their "Million Hearts" initiative aimed at "preventing" heart attacks and strokes.

Now I do not hold a Masters in public health or public policy, but I do know a thing or two about evidenced-based medicine and cardiology. So it seems only appropriate that a cardiologist should comment on the proclamations made by an infectious disease specialist and pediatrician who promise to "save a million hearts," especially when we consider the billions of taxpayer dollars that have been or will be allocated to their programs.

I suspect neither of these highly accomplished men from public policy circles knows if, or exactly how, they will save a million lives nor how they should appropriately measure the effect of their initiative. That is not the point. Sexy program names are the point and making sure those names appear in a scientific journal within reach of treating cardiologists is especially the point. 

We should acknowledge that the authors have been very good at dangling statistics of death and destruction caused by heart attacks and stroke to drive their policies. After all, while cardiovascular disease has remained the number one killer of Americans year after year, it is also the biggest driver of health care costs in America. I have no doubt these two non-cardiovascular specialists are proposing their initiative as a straw dog in an effort to gain the public’s favor while simultaneously working around the clock to reduce cardiovascular spending. This is, after all, about a money shift, not just about more good ideas for improving cardiovascular outcomes. 

How do I know?

I know because you will not hear from these men about the changes underway to limit access to cardiologists by forcing their consolidation with larger health care systems. I know because doctors are scrambling to these systems in an effort per preserve their income in a system intent on cost cutting. I know because government regulators are also working to restrict access to technologies have proven efficacy at saving lives and prolonging life for our older seniors, like wearable defibrillators whose use is being "reconsidered" and percutaneous aortic valves that still wait to gain approval (likely with significant restrictions to their use) here in the US. I also know because even with all the waste, fraud, and abuse measures underway to the cost of health care delivery in America, there will still be a need to cut America’s health care system payments by at least 10-20% over the next ten years to maintain the program’s fiscal solvency. 

So given these overriding needs to cut costs, Americans should expect there are rock-hard data upon which the authors have based their need to start such a "million heart" initiative. Sadly, there are not. In fact, when we dig deeper we find the health care dollars spent on many of the cornerstone programs that serve as the foundations to their theories have lacked sufficient data to even justify their continuation. Yet, they ignore these data.

Let’s look closer at the six cornerstone "principles" upon which their "million hearts" initiatives rest:

  • Principle 1: Focus – The authors claim that "communication, clinical measurements, reporting by physicians and health care facilities, and health care systems will emphasize improving ABCS (Aspirin therapy administration, Blood pressure management, Cholesterol lowering, and Smoking cessation)." Few data support this claim. In fact, clinical measurement programs, like pay-for-performance measures, have failed to affect outcomes in smaller pilot programs here in the US and in a larger population studies overseas. Despite this, additional money for these programs continues to be promoted by these authors. We should really ask why.
  • Principle 2: Health Information Technology (HIT) – The authors claim that "HIT enables providers and facilities to provide cardiovascular care and target intervention to patients in need of intensified care through registries and EHR (electronic health records) functions used at the point of care." While this sounds great, the data so far do not support this assumption when outcomes are actually measured:

    In fact, EMRs (electronic medical records) were associated with significantly improved performance in only one measure — giving diet advice to high-risk adults. They didn’t improve performance in things including giving aspirin for coronary artery disease, depression treatment or blood-pressure measurement.

  • Principle #3 – Clinical innovations – The authors claim: Innovations such as team-based care, patient-centered medical homes and interventions to promote adherence will be supported, evaluated, and disseminated rapidly to increase the effective use of ABCS practices." In other words, they haven’t figured out if any of these "innovations" actually work. Truth be known, patient-centered medical home pilot projects have been a bit of a disappointment so far. Still, our authors press on absolutely convinced, (convinced I tell you!) that these measures will work despite data to the contrary.
  • Principle #4: Policies and programs to reduce smoking and effects of second-hand smoke – This program is likely to be cost-effective. But we should temper our enthusiasm for these efforts now that the anti-smoking message is firmly established in our schools and public consciousness.
  • Principle #5: Policies for reducing sodium content of food – While it is one thing to project the number of lives saved from modest sodium restriction in the diet, its an entirely different thing to suggest public policy will change people’s individual lifestyle decisions. Good luck getting Americans to restrict sodium to 3 grams per day, especially when people can buy a salt shaker. If Drs. Frieden and Berwick could also impact the farm subsidies for corn that have been criticized as a significant contributor to our current obesity epidemic, they might gain favor with cardiologists, but politics are not likely to permit such a move.
  • Principle #6: Policies at eliminating artificial trans fats in the diet – The authors expect to "further reduce the level of trans fats that increase LDL cholesterol levels, lower HDL cholesterol levels that increases the risk of heart attacks." This principle requires the authors to accept the cholesterol theory of reducing heart attacks, but recent studies are debunking that theory. Take the recent high-profile NIH-sponsored AIM-HIGH trial comparing statin to statin plus niacin therapy in patients with cardiovascular disease and low HDL levels. (This study was designed to show that increasing HDL levels with niacin would improve heart attack and stroke outcomes.) This study was stopped 18 months ahead of schedule not only because it was determined to be extremely unlikely that the increase in HDL produced by niacin would improve outcomes, but also because of an unexpected increase in strokes among the patients receiving niacin, a drug known to increase HDL. Support for the results of this study come from earlier trials on non-statin cholesterol lowering medications that lowered cholesterol but never reduced the outcomes of heart attack and stroke. Only statins as a class of drugs have shown such a benefit. So what gives? Doctors are not sure, but it’s more about the statins than it is about the cholesterols. Still, such analyses are unimportant to our policy-makers intent on moving their agenda forward. You see it is far better to espouse non-factual takes in the New England Journal of Medicine unencumbered by critical discussion. Worse, given what we now know about elevating HDL levels from the AIM-HIGH trial, their programs could even have a deleterious effect to public health.

Most of the best ideas for improving the public’s health will come from those on the front lines of specialized medical care and not those who dictate unproven policy initiatives from a place of theories, inexperience, and assumptions. Like the 90-minute door to balloon time, an idea stemming from the professionals in the field with hard data to suggest its benefit to our patients, these are the initiatives that save real lives. 

But we should realize what these feel-good perspective pieces are really about: they’re about the money. More specifically, this perspective piece serves as a distraction to the money cuts and a money shifts from real-life proven therapies to mostly unproven, costly initiatives based on dreamy projections of public good rather than actual patient outcomes. As a result, we are now seeing the modus operandi of our government health care leaders of the future: placing feel-good happy-face programs in place based upon mostly unproven, theoretical data in favor of funding more expensive, better-proven therapies that really do save lives.

-Wes

Filed Under: News Well Tagged With: Dr. Wes

In case you missed it

  • Former Integra founder, CEO Richard Caruso has died
  • Moximed raises $40M for implantable shock absorber for knee osteoarthritis
  • Philips names Roy Jakobs as CEO amid ventilator, CPAP recalls
  • Shareholder lawsuit over BD’s Alaris pumps recall moves forward
  • Dyad Medical wins FDA clearance for cardiac imaging platform Echo:Prio
  • Outset Medical wins national VA contract
  • Inspire Medical Systems appoints former Zimmer Biomet exec as VP of investor relations
  • Abbott will spend $450M to up FreeStyle Libre production in Ireland
  • Acutus Medical ticks up on revenue beat, missed EPS in Q2 results
  • ResMed expects steady growth over the next year
  • Ambu is letting go of 200 employees
  • Medtronic has Class I recall for low-shock risk in ICDs
  • Titan Medical to start manufacturing Enos systems later this year
  • ZimVie sales down more than 11% in Q2 as it streamlines after spinoff
  • Cardinal Health’s CFO to move up to corner office
  • Levita Magnetics raises $26M for Magnetic-Assisted Robotic Surgery platform
  • Data supports use of Channel Medsystems Cerene cryotherapy

RSS From Medical Design & Outsourcing

  • TE Connectivity opens global medical device prototyping center in Ireland
    TE Connectivity (NYSE:TEL) today announced it opened its global Propelus Prototype Center for medical devices in Galway, Ireland. The $5 million rapid prototyping center was built into its existing manufacturing site in Galway and directly connects TE engineers with customers to reduce development time and increase speed to market for lifesaving and life-improving medical devices. Propelus… […]
  • Contract manufacturer Minnetronix Medical launches its first in-house product, MindsEye
    Minnetronix Medical has launched MindsEye, making it the first medical device that the contract developer and manufacturer has conceived and commercialized. St. Paul-based Minnetronix Medical’s MindsEye is the first expandable brain access port on the market. The FDA cleared the device under the 510(k) pathway in August 2020. The minimally invasive device gives neurosurgeons deep… […]
  • What’s next for Jennifer Fried after leaving Explorer Surgical?
    Explorer Surgical co-founder Jennifer Fried has resigned from the company after selling it to Global Healthcare Exchange in October. Fried announced her departure last week on LinkedIn, saying she’s preparing for her next professional chapter. “It’s bittersweet — I’m so proud of everything our team has built and accomplished,” Fried wrote. “The time has flown… […]
  • The 24 best medical device innovations of 2022
    The Galien Foundation recently announced its nominees of medical device innovations for its 2022 Prix Galien USA awards. There are 24 medical technologies nominated for the annual award this year, up from 18 nominees in 2021. The Galien Foundation’s annual Prix Galien awards highlight devices, biotechnology and pharmaceutical products designed to improve the human condition.… […]
  • FDA issues new COVID-19 testing guidance to avoid false negatives
    COVID-19 testing should be repeated following a negative result on any antigen test, the FDA said in a move that could increase demand for diagnostics manufacturers. The latest guidance from the federal health agency is for negative COVID-19 antigen test results regardless of the presence or absence of symptoms. The federal agency said recent studies… […]
  • Confluent Medical expands Costa Rica manufacturing footprint for nitinol, complex catheter production
    Confluent Medical Technologies this week announced the opening of its new addition to its Costa Rica manufacturing facility. The expansion adds 66,000 sq. ft to its large-scale manufacturing center of excellence in Alajuela, Costa Rica to expand Confluent’s capacity for nitinol component processing and complex catheter manufacturing. “Confluent has experienced consistent and strong growth in… […]
  • FDA’s breakthrough medical device designations tally nears 700
    Stewart Eisenhart, Emergo Group The US Food and Drug Administration has granted almost 700 designations over the past seven years under a voluntary program for expedited regulatory review of medical devices and combination products that facilitate more effective treatment or diagnosis of serious diseases. According to recent metrics published by FDA, the agency has issued a total of… […]
  • Lifecore Biomedical’s owner plans to go all-in on contract development and manufacturing
    Lifecore Biomedical parent company Landec Corp. (Nasdaq:LNDC) plans to take the subsidiary’s name, leadership and headquarters as its own and sell off food businesses to focus on contract development and manufacturing. Santa Maria, California-based Landec said it will rename itself as Lifecore Biomedical “in the near future” and change its Nasdaq ticker to LFCR. Landec… […]
  • COVID-19 immunity test developers at MIT seek diagnostic manufacturer
    MIT researchers have developed a device for predicting an individual’s COVID-19 immunity and are looking for a diagnostic company to get it manufactured in large numbers and approved by the FDA. The lateral flow test uses the same technology as at-home rapid antigen COVID-19 tests to measure neutralizing antibodies for SARS-CoV-2 in a blood sample,… […]
  • GE Healthcare picks AI imaging startups for inaugural Edison Accelerator
    GE Healthcare and Nex Cubed have selected seven companies focused on artificial-intelligence-augmented medical imaging for the first cohort of the Edison Accelerator in Canada. The companies will be matched with mentors and test their technologies with GE’s new Edison Digital Health Platform over the next three months. The program will end with innovation showcase presentations… […]
  • Boston Scientific whistleblower launches corruption investigation
    Boston Scientific (NYSE:BSX) is investigating claims that the company violated the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in Vietnam. Marlborough, Massachusetts–based Boston Scientific disclosed receipt of a whistleblower’s allegations in its latest filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. “In March 2022, the company received a whistleblower letter alleging Foreign Corrupt Practices Act violations in Vietnam.… […]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Primary Sidebar

DeviceTalks Weekly

August 12, 2022
DTW – Medtronic’s Mauri brings years of patient care to top clinical, regulatory, scientific post
See More >

MEDTECH 100 INDEX

Medtech 100 logo
Market Summary > Current Price
The MedTech 100 is a financial index calculated using the BIG100 companies covered in Medical Design and Outsourcing.
Need Medtech news in a minute?
We Deliver!

MassDevice Enewsletters get you caught up on all the mission critical news you need in med tech. Sign up today.

MDO ad

Footer

MASSDEVICE MEDICAL NETWORK

DeviceTalks
Drug Delivery Business News
Medical Design & Outsourcing
Medical Tubing + Extrusion
Drug Discovery & Development
Pharmaceutical Processing World
MedTech 100 Index
R&D World
Medical Design Sourcing

DeviceTalks Webinars, Podcasts, & Discussions

Attend our Monthly Webinars
Listen to our Weekly Podcasts
Join our DeviceTalks Tuesdays Discussion

MASSDEVICE

Subscribe to MassDevice E-Newsletter
Advertise with us
About
Contact us
Add us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Connect with us on LinkedIn Follow us on YouTube

Copyright © 2022 · WTWH Media LLC and its licensors. All rights reserved.
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of WTWH Media.

Advertise | Privacy Policy