Concise Documentation of the Assessment and Plan

I asked Cedric Skillon, MD to write this post to elaborate on his method of documenting elements of the treatment plan. Dr. Skillon and I work in the same system of care. Over the years I have been impressed with the high quality of his work and a lot of that is captured in how the treatment plan is documented. I think his documentation is concise and yet it covers a lot of ground in terms of the clinical discussion with the patient and his thought process. What follows a discussion of his approach and a good example.  The remainder of this post was written by Dr. Skillon.   Fell free to add comments on what you find useful as concise documentation.

George Dawson, MD, DFAPA


Assessment and Recommendation/Plan

Throughout my medical education I was reminded over and over again to document everything that occurred during an appointment; because if it was not documented, it did not happen. But just as important, during my psychiatry residency training at Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, Dr. Petronilla Vaulx-Smith expressed upon me the fact that with every medical note that I write, any physician should be able to read my note, understand my logic, and be able to pick up taking care of that client from the last note that I wrote. Over the years my notes have evolved to include the following.

Assessment: In this section of the note I have 1-2 sentences to highlight sign/symptom changes that I have documented in greater detail in the History of Present Illness section of my note.

Recommendations/Plan: In this section I document medication and therapies prescribed, as well as the target symptoms for the medication or therapies that I am recommending. I also educate the patient about potential side effects and medication interactions with the prescribed medications. I then numerically list each step of the plan for that appointment, including medications prescribed and discontinued. With each prescription I state how long the prescription will last and if there was a refill included. I list continued therapies, including community support such as attending AA meetings.

Below is a fictitious example of an Assessment and Recommendation/Plan.

Assessment: Patient reports worsening depressive and anxiety symptoms. Patient has maintained his sobriety.


Recommendation/Plan: Plan to discontinue Wellbutrin XL. Plan to continue with current dose of Prozac. Plan to start Effexor XR in combination therapy with Prozac to treat depressive and anxiety symptoms. The patient will continue with individual psychotherapy and continue attending AA meetings. I educated patient about the risk of serotonin syndrome with the combination of Effexor XR and Prozac. I educated the patient about the symptoms of serotonin syndrome.


1. Patient was educated about the above assessment and plan.

2. Patient was educated about the side effects and potential benefits of each prescribed medication.

3. Patient gave verbal informed consent for the prescribed medications.

4. Discontinue Wellbutrin XL

5. Start Effexor XR 75mg take one pill daily. I gave patient a written prescription for a 30 day supply and no refills.

6. Continue with current dose of Prozac. On 12/20/16, I gave patient a written prescription for a 30 day supply and 5 refills)

7. Patient will continue with individual psychotherapy.

8. Patient will continue attending AA meetings.

9. Patient will schedule a follow up appointment to see Dr. Skillon in 2 weeks.

10. Patient agrees to call readily with questions, side effects, or clinical worsening. Patient agrees to call Dr. Skillon, or go to the closest emergency room if he has onset of suicidal ideation or homicidal ideation.

11. Treatment plan was discussed at length including alternative medications and importance of compliance.

Cedric Skillon, MD




Attributions:

Graphic at the top is from Shutterstock per their licensing agreement - "Medical files on a shelf" by Val Lawless.

The Problem With EHR Software - A Clear Example

The above example is as clear as it gets in terms of illustrating the problem with electronic health record (EHR) software and associated hype and government mandates.  The idea that we need an EHR is a given, and I am not arguing that point.  I am arguing that the current software is inefficient, on par in many ways with software I was using on my PC in the 1990s, high maintenance, and a tremendous burden to any physician who has to use it.  It is also vastly overpriced with no end to that overpricing in sight - largely due to a monopoly of manufacturers and the use of a licensing model for the software.  And like practically every process in medicine these days, the implementation and actual use of EHRs is a highly politicized process that is far removed from the people who have to use it every day.

In the above example, I am tasked with a basic titration of gabapentin according to a recent research protocol (1).  All of the doses used are generic 300 mg capsules of gabapentin for the purpose of simplification.  The dose is titrated over 3 days to 300 mg TID (three times a day) or 600 mg TID.  People reading this may have picked up prescriptions with instructions typed out on the label about how to increase the dose to a therapeutic level.  In settings where a particular medication is used repeatedly and across a large patient population, the rate of titration and capsule side may need to be varied but the concept is the same.  

The question is how do I get this information to the pharmacy so that the medication can be dispensed to the patient in the most effective manner.  In the "old days" of paper records or the early hybrid models where  all of the orders and medications were entered into a text based computerized record, I would enter the orders onto a paper order sheet.  From there the pharmacist would either write up a parallel record for what the pharmacy needed to do or enter it into computerized pharmacy software.  An MAR (medication administration record) would be used by nursing staff to record the administration and time of administration of every medication.  There was a set of checks and balances because every dose of medication was checked at some point by a physician, a nurse, and a pharmacist.  In the 1980s and 1990s, clinical pharmacists would often have close relationships with the inpatient nursing and medical staff.  Those relationships were instrumental when it came to dosage changes, using novel medications, and making sure that all of the medication was given as scheduled.  The entire chain of events in the case of a low dose gabapentin prescription would start with a very simple handwritten order like the one below:

That is all written in my notoriously bad handwriting but I think it is perfectly legible.  I wrote it to show in two places that the capsules used here were all 300 mg and how they can be increased over three days.  More importantly, I turned on a stopwatch just as I started to write this order and it took me 1 minute and 50 seconds.

Compare a recent effort using an EHR.  The scratching in red at the top of this post is basically a worksheet on how to enter the medication without making a mistake.  The overall titration is the same (except the starting dose is 300 mg three times a day), but there are large differences.  In this case the physician is responsible for entering the medication into the pharmacy record and MAR at the same time.  The convenience with which that can be done is software dependent.  With the available software there are only two possibilities - add a new line of gabapentin doses to the HS, AM and Noon doses respectively over three days or rewrite the adjacent blocks of gabapentin doses and ultimately the 600 mg TID dose.  The difference is that the first procedure involved three steps and the second procedure four steps.  Each step also involves writing in the "Comments" section on each order to make sure that there is no confusion and that multiple doses of gabapentin do not end up being given over the course of the day.  For example in the red diagram for the single gabapentin 300 mg dose at the bottom of the column on the 28th I might enter:  "This is a single gabapentin 300 mg dose in the AM on 7/28/2016.  It is a one time dose".  Using any standard EHR will generate four or five separate orders for these simple titrations.  My first time through using the top method took me 30 minutes and at the end I had broken into a cold sweats.  I had to double check all of the text orders against my sketch (boxes and U-shaped checks) and the MAR.  I ended up calling the pharmacist and giving him a verbal version of my sketch as a back up.   The second method took me a total of 15 minutes.

This very basic example illustrates some huge problems with the EHR:

1.  Fewer people have hands on the medication orders - There may of may not be an immediate double check by the pharmacist.  Nursing staff are no longer entering the MAR and double checking how it looks.  The entire task and all of the associated time has been shifted to the physician.  When this happened, clinical pharmacists also disappeared from the floors.  The hype was that we have a newer and safer systems.  It should be apparent from my example that more can go wrong with the EHR titration than more traditional methods, even if there is a clinical pharmacist at the other end reading and approving hundreds of these order entries.

2.  More and more time is added to the physician - The EHR is a classic example of how numerous jobs including billing and coding, transcribing, and now data entry that used to be done by a pharmacist has been added to the physician's burden over the years.  It is as if physicians have unlimited time for all of these additional tasks.  The time constraint has to increase the likelihood of errors in the EHR.  If you have 5 or 10 minutes between patients and have to add even a mildly complicated order - it can easily take up twice that amount of time.  Administrators view this as a plus, because other jobs can be eliminated and physicians never get paid for administrative time.  By now it should be apparent that the enterprise wide EHR is such a financial burden on organizations that jobs need to be eliminated to pay for it - often many more jobs than the physician workload has assumed.

3.  The software itself has 20th century sophistication but without the report writing capabilities or data analysis - anyone who used spreadsheet or database software in the 1990s is used to the intensive data entry approach used in the modern EHR.  Should an extremely expensive, federally mandated piece of software be this clunky to use?  Should it take me 5-10 times as long to enter an order with this software as it did by writing it down on a piece of paper?  Should the final report of a hospitalization be a phone book sized incoherent document with very little information density?  I don't think that any of these constraints should apply.  I did not include the time it takes in direct conversations with a pharmacist to clarify what was entered in the EHR.  Every home computing environment these days is at least partially object/icon based to minimize typing where possible.  In the case of medication entry, the obvious solution would allow the physician to point and click medications on the MAR with no typing.  Select the medication and dose and enter it directly into the MAR with a few mouse clicks.  That would easily beat my time for writing it out and it would be more accurate than either of the approaches that I wrote about here.

I can only speculate about all of the business and political incentives in place that has resulted in the current EHR environment.  A lot of them have been clearly documented on the Health Care Renewal blog by searching EHR.   That search will also reveal a number of safety concerns and the inescapable political factors that currently exist in a healthcare environment that routinely ignores the concerns of physicians in favor of those with no medical expertise.    



George Dawson, MD, DFAPA      


Reference:

1:  Mason BJ, Quello S, Goodell V, Shadan F, Kyle M, Begovic A. Gabapentin treatment for alcohol dependence: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Internal Med. Published online November 4, 2013. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.11950.

2:  Brett Boese.  Mayo Clinic tries to avoid physician burnout.  Rochester Post-Bulletin.  July 29, 2016.  Link. 

Timely article on Mayo Clinic concerns about burnout and the EHR.  The Mayo Clinic is currently in the process of conversion to Epic EHR and will "go live" on various dates between the summer of 2017 and fall of 2018.  Tait Shanafelt was interviewed about a study he co-authored on the EHR showing the clerical burden led to decreased job satisfaction and burnout.  Responding to a number of strategies to reduce physicians clerical burden his conclusion was: "The specific strategy probably used likely matters less than recognizing that physicians should not be doing this and finding a practical way to have this task completed by support staff."

3:   Shanafelt TD, Dyrbye LN, Sinsky C, Hasan O, Satele D, Sloan J, West CP.  Relationship Between Clerical Burden and Characteristics of the Electronic Environment With Physician Burnout and Professional Satisfaction. Mayo Clin Proc. 2016 Jul;91(7):836-48. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.05.007. Epub 2016 Jun 27. PubMed PMID: 27313121.

4:  Shanafelt TD, Hasan O, Dyrbye LN, Sinsky C, Satele D, Sloan J, West CP.Changes in Burnout and Satisfaction With Work-Life Balance in Physicians and the General US Working Population Between 2011 and 2014. Mayo Clin Proc. 2015 Dec;90(12):1600-13. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.08.023. Erratum in: Mayo Clin Proc. 2016 Feb;91(2):276. PubMed PMID: 26653297.

At The Edge Of My Notes........

For all of my professional life I have done my original notes the same way.  There is usually some kind of form anywhere from 4 to 8 pages long.  I list a few things on it, but for the majority of the interview I flip it over to the blank side and write free hand.  I have to write fast and my handwriting is bad - no cursive, just a crude combination of capitals, lowercase, and symbols that only I know the meaning of.  At some point back in the 1990s when I was studying medical decision making and reading how experts move between chunks of data - I started to draw out chunks of data on the paper.  Circles, squares, timelines, triangles with various connectors to show relationships.  There is a rhythm to it depending on how fast the person I am interviewing is talking and how much information is being discussed.  I have as much time if the person is mostly silent as I do if the person is rambling and including far too many details.  When you write that much, the feel of the pen in your hand and how it moves over the paper can be extremely important.  I only use Pilot G-2 pens.  I alternate between the 1.0 and 0.7 mm tips in black, red, and blue.  The red and blue are only for highlighting and editing.  Gel ink has a perfect feel as your hand is gliding across the page but it is messy.  At the end of a busy day my hands are smeared with ink.  After writing it all down the next step is dictation.  I have to translate all of my non-linear scratchings into a very linear and coherent report with a formulation, various diagnoses, and recommendations for a treatment plan.

The diagram at the top of this post is an example of one collection of words and symbols that are in the corner of one page of my notes.  It took me about 38 seconds to draw it, in pieces as I heard the various elements being described.  The HR in the middle of the circle here is heart rate.  Arrows in the up direction mean increasing and the down direction is decreasing.  I don't like to see elevated heart rates.  I have seen too many middle aged stimulant users with cardiomyopathy and had too many conversations with Cardiologists about whether or not sinus tachycardia is a benign finding or not.  I have obsessed far too long about who I can treat with medications based on their heart rate being greater than 100 beats per minute (bpm).  I am not reassured by the latest review in UpToDate on idiopathic sinus tachycardia and benign outcomes (1).  I doubt that the people in those studies are the same people I am seeing on stimulants, antidepressants, antipsychotics, street drugs, alcohol, caffeine and plenty of tobacco.  In the middle of trying to construct an impossible timeline of insomnia, anxiety, depression, childhood adversity, adult psychological trauma and multiple medical problems I am drawn temporarily to the little heart rate circle and I am trying to figure it out.  It all starts with THC and proceeds clockwise.

I have been impressed by the number of daily cannabis smokers who at some point notice that they are getting anxious and panicky from it.  Despite all of the hype by the pro-marijuana contingent, most people can relate to augmented heart rate and increased intensity of heart beats when smoking marijuana.  It happens when THC drops the blood pressure and your heart acts reflexively.  That is typically ignored by young smokers, unless they have had a panic attack.  In that case, it feels like they are starting to have a panic attack and they start to feel very uneasy.  In many cases they start to develop panic attacks every time they smoke.  That often leads to them discontinuing the use of cannabis, since panic attacks are very unpleasant experiences.  So THC can lead to increased heart rate.

Caffeine is ubiquitous in American society.  It affects too many dimensions in psychiatry to not be asked about.  The answers are often shocking.  With the availability of espresso in most places, I often get an estimate in shots of espresso per day.  For filtered coffee fans, I learned to ask the question: "If you are home alone - do you ever drink the whole pot of coffee by yourself?"  And then there are the additional estimates of mg caffeine in terms of black tea, green tea, and every form of esoteric energy drink.  I can usually track down the mg caffeine using some online resource.  The DSM-5 suggests that caffeine consumption "...well in excess of 250 mg" can be a problem.  I find myself routinely advising people on how to get their caffeine consumption down to less than 1,000 mg/day and use it in the mornings - as a starting point.  In some cases, I am told that people are drinking beverages that combine alcohol, caffeine, and some other questionable compounds.  The pharmacokinetics of caffeine are important.  Most people know what happens if they get wired or precipitate a panic attack with a triple shot of espresso, but they don't know what can happen to sleep with steady state levels of caffeine.

Exercise can be an important source of accelerated heart rate.  In most cases it is just rushing to get the vital signs done, but there are  other important causes.  There are the deconditioned folks who decide that they are going to turn over a completely new leaf by starting to exercise vigorously.  I may be seeing them a day after and exercise session and they still have an elevated heart rate.  There are the conditioned folks who still overdo it.  That has led me to ask people if they are wearing a heart rate monitor and what their goals are.  Some of the responses are shocking.  I have had many people tell me that they are running their heart rate well beyond their age-determined maximal heart rate for a long time.  I have never had a person tell me why that might not be a good idea.  It is an opportunity to educate people on how to not overdo it and either maintain conditioning or start some basic conditioning.  It also leads me to consider some people who may have undiagnosed intrinsic heart disease and what further evaluations need to be done.

Medications can be an important direct or indirect cause of tachycardia.  As a group, older medications like tricyclic antidepressants and anticholinergics were more reliable causes.  Of current day medications stimulants are probably the most important cause of increased heart rate.  In general stimulants increase heart rate 3 - 10 beats per minute (bpm) and increase blood pressure by 1.5-14 points.  More recent generation medications are rarer causes, but it is always important to look for that one person in a hundred or a thousand.  Is that really an idiosyncratic reaction or is it a sign of something worse like neuroleptic malignant syndrome or serotonin syndrome?  In my current line of work withdrawal from medications is a more important cause of tachycardia than a direct effect of the medication itself.  Coming off of benzodiazepines, barbiturates, and clonidine are important causes. Tachycardia and various rare cardiovascular effects are still listed in most package inserts and that is an important reason for monitoring vital signs and electrocardiograms.

A lot of people seem to think that anxiety is a potent cause of tachycardia.  That may be true for panic attacks but on an ongoing basis I have found that anger is much more likely to elevate pulse and blood pressure.  I have seen persistent tachycardia in the 120-130 bpm range due to anger.  I have seen patients started on antihypertensives because of this and I think it is a good idea as long as there is a plan to decrease and stop the medication when the anger resolves.  I always tell my patients that an explanation (a white coat, life stressors, too much caffeine, etc) only gets you so far.  If you are still running a high pulse and blood pressure at home it should probably be treated and closely followed.  I personally don't like to see people running systolic blood pressures in excess of 150, diastolics greater than 95, or pulses greater than 100 while they wait for "lifestyle changes" to take effect, but I know for a fact that there are primary care physicians out there who disagree with me.

Anxiety especially the persistently panicky person can have elevated pulses.  Many of these folks look thin and hypermetabolic.  They are routinely checked for hyperthyroidism and they are always negative.  I listened to a NASA physician lecture about a subgroup of patients with this body habitus many years ago.  He said that thin people with arachnodactyly can be bothered by anxiety and panic and the best treatment was moderate levels of exercise like walking rather than medication.  He defined the condition as anyone who can grasp their wrist with their thumb and middle finger and notice that they overlap at least to the most distal joint of the middle finger.

Epidemiological studies show that people who are sleep deprived or have their circadian rhythm disrupted have poorer cardiovascular health.  There are many people who develop tachycardia in this setting.  Sleep disordered breathing disorders can also be an important cause of tachycardia in the daytime.  These folks often have an associated problem like undiagnosed atrial fibrillation.  Many of the commercial automatic blood pressure machines do not detect irregular pulses, so it is important to check pulses and pulse deficits in the office.  All psychiatrists should have access to lab facilities where electrocardiograms can be run and referral facilities to do the necessary testing and management of the identified conditions.

All of that and more flows from a little 2 x 2 inch drawing on one of my intake notes.  I would have thought by now that some enterprising software developer would have come up with a system of icons that I could just point to and grow on a computer tablet, but so far it seems that electronic health record developers really are not designing software with physicians in mind.  They would rather have us enter full text or more commonly very choppy phrase based notes than using icon based full information approaches.  My little HR circle contains a lot of information and the only way I have seen the information content estimated is by constructing all of the possible text based narratives and then measuring the amount of text.

That method has its limitations because when I (or any other physician) makes a drawing it is connected to our own unique conscious state.  There is certainly overlap with all physicians to some extent or at least the ones with an HR icon in their notes.  The overlap gets closer among those of us who are looking for arachnodactyly.      


George Dawson, MD, DLFAPA


References:

1:  Homoud MK .  Sinus tachycardia: evaluation and management.  In: UpToDate, Cheng A, Downey BC (Eds), UpToDate, Waltham, MA. accessed on March 5, 2016.

Enduring Problems Of The Electronic Health Record

I think the national debate is coming back to the more reasonable position that the heavily hyped electronic health records (EHR) will not save up hundreds of billions of dollars due to "efficiency."  But then again again any physicians not working as an administrator hyping the EHR could have told you this based on their experience over the past 10 years.   If I had to think of a reason, I would imagine it is the companies trying to build a moat around their businesses.  Software engineering can't possibly be this bad.  Wall Street jargon considers moats or barriers to direct competition with a company to be a good thing.  Let me illustrate with a real world example.

Let's suppose you are working in a clinic that is not online with the largest managed care (MCO) company in your area.  The only way you can get electronic access is to pay a huge licensing fee, but in many cases the software company will not even accept that licensing fee.  It will just conclude that that you are not big enough to do business with them.  At any rate, you need electrocardiogram information on a patient from that MCO because you are looking at a new abnormal ECG on that patient.  You need to know if the pattern on that ECG is new or it has always been there.  You request the records from the MCO.  They fax you 50 pages containing the lowest possible amount of information per page.  There are two one line references in that 50 pages to an electrocardiogram.  One says: "Prolonged QTc" and the other says "Normal".  There is no graphic information (the tracing) and no numerical information (the intervals with the associated times in milliseconds, the machine read out).  So after the work put in by you and your staff to request this data, you have just read through 50 pages and found absolutely nothing useful.  A review of all of the pages shows scant information on each page.  As an example, one entire page contains a chest x-ray report, when it could easily be printed on an area 1/20th that size.  Some entire sheets contain 1 or 2 lab values of 3 to 5 digit numbers.

I am convinced that the multimillion dollar licensed legacy wide EHRs are designed this way.  There is really no other explanation for providing such an abundance of low to no information records.    Their intention is obvious.  Make sure everyone is using their system and at some point make sure that the government is forcing people to use somebody's system.  All physicians should be using electronic prescribing right?  It is only a matter of time before politicians mandate access and an extremely expensive portal will be required.

There was a time when the medical record was coherent.  Maybe I was spoiled by reading what sounded like fine literature by comparison.  There was one Cardiologist in particular who wrote incredible notes for consults.  Reading those notes gave you all of the medical information you needed and it also left the impression that you had just read something written by a highly intelligent person.  Somebody you probably wanted to have a conversation with.  Somebody you could learn from.

What has happened to the medical record leaves a bad taste in my mouth.  It reminds me of when an EHR consultant was showing me their latest time saving way to create a choppy, incoherent progress note, and sign off on a billing document at the same time.  She assured me that the "compliance people" would find it completely acceptable for billing purposes.  When she asked me what of thought of their system she seemed taken aback by my response.

"I would be ashamed to sign my name on that note."

That was about ten years ago and the electronic health record has not changed much since.  It will still kick out a phone book sized print out containing minimal to no useful information.

George Dawson, MD, DFAPA