On the Full Body CT Scan: Don’t Do It.

caduceus

NaBloPoMo 2016, Letters to Patients, Day 27

To Patients Considering Full Body CT Scans:

Please reconsider.

Forgive me for putting on my preachy doctor hat for this post.  I will also break my NaBloPoMo 500 word limit for this one.

As we approach the end of the calendar year, many of you may have met your health insurance deductibles.  Maybe now would be a good time to get in some tests to ‘check under the hood,’ as some of you have said.  I share below some of my screening  recommendations, along with rationale.

Keep in mind that for this article, I define ‘screening’ as looking for a disease in a person with a) average risk for developing the disease and b) no symptoms.

Please also know that the opinions I express here are my own only and do not necessarily represent those of my colleagues, employer, or professional societies.

 

  1. Full body CT scan: This is not recommended by any clinical guideline or medical professional society as a screening test for anything.  As I will describe below, specific screening tests are recommended for specific diseases, and the best ones obtain actual cells or tissue, rather than imaging alone.  In addition, a full body CT exposes you to significant radiation, the long term consequences of which are still not fully understood.  Lastly, CT scans inevitably detect incidental abnormalities that have no clinical consequences, but that often lead to invasive tests that can cause real harm, such as bleeding, pain, infection, and anxiety.  This article from the FDA and this one by a radiologist at Harvard explain pretty clearly how the risks of this test far outweigh the benefits.
  2. Colonoscopy (colon cancer): This is the one test that nobody argues.  It is both diagnostic (can see signs of early disease) and therapeutic (can take it out).  Start at age 50, and repeat every 10 years if normal, barring new symptoms.  Read the full guideline from the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) here.  I know the prep is a pain, and I know you have to take a day off of work to have it.  But on the whole, the returns here are well worth the investment.
  3. PSA and digital rectal exam (prostate cancer): This is perhaps the most personal decision of all cancer screening. Population-wise, we have yet to show mortality benefit from screening of any kind, such that the USPSTF now recommends against screening until better tests become available.  But it’s not really that simple, because prostate cancer affects so many men, and is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in men in the US.  The most important thing here is to decide which risks you are more comfortable with: potential serious harm from screening and unnecessary treatment, or finding cancer at a later, potentially more high-risk stage.  This article from the New York Times may help, and this one from the National Cancer Institute.cancer-cases-and-death-2016
  4. Mammogram (breast cancer): It’s hard to walk back from more screening to less; people fear loss of security. When I started my training over 20 years ago, the recommendation was to screen every woman every year, starting at age 40.  Since then epidemiologists have kept track, and similar to prostate cancer screening, the mortality rate from breast cancer has not decreased proportionally to the amount of screening done.  Diagnosis has increased dramatically, due to early detection.  Again, screening increases the risk of certain harms:  anxiety (so much, for so many), pain, deformity, infection (from invasive biopsies), and then commitment to repeated testing (a vicious potential cycle of imaging, needling, more imaging, and more needling), while likely not saving your life.  Here is the USPSTF guideline, and a helpful infographic .  Like prostate cancer screening, this is one you have to decide for yourself, with the help of your doctor.mammo-infographic
  5. Pap smear (cervical cancer): Again, former guidelines called for annual screening. Today, if your test is repeatedly normal and your sex habits are low risk, the interval can be lengthened to 3 to 5 years, and can start later in life (over 21).  Cervical cancer is highly correlated to exposure to human papilloma virus, or HPV, which is sexually transmitted.  Positive pap results, which range from mild to severe, occur far more often in younger women, and of those, many will revert to normal without progression to cancer in a woman’s lifetime.  The main risk of over-screening, again, is unnecessary procedures when true disease not present.

In summary, these are the most common conversations I have with patients about screening.  You may rightly infer that my personal bias is minimalist:  Primum non nocere.  Unfortunately, we have no good screening tests for some diseases, such as pancreatic cancer, ovarian cancer, and liver cancer, and the screening guidelines in other countries (eg Taiwan screens adults regularly for liver cancer) do not apply here because prevalence rates differ so widely.

This is why I think it’s important to establish care with a primary care physician and get regular check-ups.  That fatigue you feel is likely just life and chronic sleep deprivation.  You’re probably constipated because you eat too few stems/stalks/leaves and don’t move enough.  You and your doctor can review your general health together, and if there is suspicion for some underlying health risk, it can be addressed personally and specifically.

To look up USPSTF guidelines yourself, I recommend searching Google for “USPSTF (disease) guidelines” and look for the hit that starts with “Final Recommendation Statement…”  I have no financial or professional interests in Google or the USPSTF.  Other respected sources for screening recommendations include the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, and the American Medical Association.  As an internist, I recommend the American College of Physicians.

I hope this piece has helped illuminate the complex decision-making behind screening and diagnostic testing.  I have only scratched the surface; the links contain the data and full rationale.  Please take the time to read through them and discuss them with your doctor.

On What Helps

598672_4331811328037_1344124821_n

NaBloPoMo 2016, Letters to Patients, Day 22

To Patients Preparing for Uncomfortable Holidays:

Seek what helps.

What did I write recently about staying off of Facebook and minimizing my social media exchanges?  How fascinating, look what I just did—spent the last two hours on Facebook!  I also write about trying, falling down, and trying again…  So this is me both falling down (in my attempt to stay off) and trying again (to engage meaningfully).

The holidays are coming, yay!  …And, not so yay!  The conversations we have with friends and family in the next 6 weeks or so have enormous potential—for division as well as connection.  Personally, I feel optimistic.  I plan to evoke my core values of open-mindedness, empathy, and integrity.  I want to look back on the gatherings with gratitude and deeper connection.  So today I share with you all the things I have read (today—see?  I endure Facebook for your benefit! teeheehee) that have helped me.  These pieces validate, challenge, reassure, alarm, question and motivate me to Hold the Space, Stay on the Path, and Seek Love.  Please share yours, also!

A fellow physician’s acknowledgement of the humanness of bias, its potential for harm in caring for patients, and a reminder for self-awareness and –management.

Posts by Michelle at The Green Study, reminding us that internal conflict is normal in the face of world events such as ours, with concrete suggestions for actions that align with core values:  “We cannot strengthen our character unless it is tested. We cannot defend our freedoms unless they are threatened. We cannot become better writers or artists or humans unless we have obstacles to overcome.”

An article from The Guardian that points me to reputable sources of alternate points of view, so I may understand better.

A call out from the Wall Street Journal—to help me own my shit before I call out others on theirs.

A gentle message from fellow blogger John Pavlovitz: “Friend, however you choose to navigate these holidays, know that it’s the right way. Give yourself permission to pretend or confront or abstain as you need to, and forgive yourself later if you decide you chose poorly. You’re probably going to get it wrong or at least feel like you did.

“But remember too, to save a little of that mercy for those who sit across the table from you or those who choose not to. They’ll be doing the best they can too.”

And finally, the Prayer of Maimonides, the twelfth century physician and philosopher:

prayer-of-maimonides

These holidays, wish me persistence and ‘stubborn gladness,’ as Liz Gilbert calls it.  I wish you all the same!

On Expanding Our Potential

10-growth-mindset-thought-conversionsNaBloPoMo 2016, Letters to Patients, Day 20

To Patients Whose Identity is Fixed:

Why not adopt a Growth Mindset?

Have you already read Carol Dweck’s book Mindset?  I first learned about the premise of a growth mindset several years ago, in the context of parenting.  Basically we should praise kids’ efforts more than their attributes: “Way to keep at it!” instead of “Wow, you’re so smart!”  When I think of myself primarily as ‘smart,’ I am less likely to try new things or take risks, for fear of appearing ‘not smart’ and ruining my reputation, or worse, my self-image.  That is what Dweck calls a ‘fixed mindset.’  A growth mindset, in contrast, allows room for experimentation and, well, growth.  I could still think of myself as ‘smart,’ but it means something different—rather than all-knowing, I am smart because I am an avid and effective learner.

Now I see it in broader terms, and it applies to people of all ages, in all phases of life.

From now into January, I have committed to moderate a weekly board review webinar on infectious disease (‘ID’).  I review questions, prepare a slide deck with explanations of correct and incorrect answers, and go online Tuesday nights with a partner to teach fellow practicing internists.  I really enjoy the webinars, but the topics sometimes not so much.  My fixed mindset at the outset this time: “I hate ID.”  Last week’s slide prep session may have been the longest two hours in recent memory.  I answered 6 of 8 questions wrong.  “I hate ID!”

Then I thought of Dweck’s premise.  I started to think of my patients who see themselves decisively as non-exercisers.  Or who hate vegetables.  Or who say they are ‘all or nothing’ folks who simply cannot moderate their eating, alcohol intake, or anything else.  They say, “That’s just who/how I am/it is; nothing I can do.”  Until now I have accepted these self-assessments without question or challenge.

fixed-growth-mindset-2

And now I wonder:  If I allow for a different assessment of my relationship with infectious disease, how much better could I learn the material?  If I open my mind to the possibility that I could actually remember all those (damned) drug names and mechanisms, the myriad tick-born diseases and their cardinal symptoms, and all the rest, could I actually have fun?  And then, how much better could I teach it?

If we all saw in ourselves just a little more possibility, or redefined our attributes to allow for unrestricted growth and evolution, what more could we achieve?  How liberated could we feel to explore diverse aspects of our personalities?  What novel ideas could we exchange with others, to create and innovate around interpersonal, communal, and political life?

From now on I will recite a new mantra for the ID webinars:  “There’s a lot to learn here.  I can get better at this.  Bring it.”  Yup, feels good.  Hmmm, I wonder where else I could grow my mindset?