Reflections on My First Year as a Concierge Physician

Reflections on My First Year as a Concierge Physician

Dr. Jenifer Drummond

Doctors of Distinction – Outstanding Team Winners

Doctors of Distinction – Outstanding Team Winners

Congratulating our own Doctors of Distinction!

 

About Darien Signature Health

In 2017 Amanda Collins-Baine, MD, founded Darien Signature Health, a concierge internal medicine practice, to offer patients the highest level of personalized care and attention. Dr. Jen Drummond joined the team in 2022, bringing more than a decade of experience as a hospitalist and a shared passion for practicing excellent medicine with empathy and kindness. The number of patients cared for at Darien Signature Health is limited to ensure benefits that include direct after-hours communications, same day sick appointments, comprehensive visits, and a focus on proactive wellness. The practice, located at 53 Old Kings Highway North in Darien, CT, is affiliated with Yale New Haven Health and Greenwich, Stamford and Norwalk Hospitals. For more information, call 203.286.5604 or visit www.DarienSignatureHealth.com.

Reflections on My First Year as a Concierge Physician

Dr. Jenifer Drummond Elected ACP Fellow

Jenifer Drummond, MD, recognized by the American College of Physicians for achievements in Internal Medicine

 

Jenifer Drummond, MD, FACP, concierge internal medicine physician in practice at Darien Signature Health, has been elected a Fellow of the American College of Physicians (ACP). The distinction, based on the recommendation of peers and the review of ACP’s Credentials Subcommittee, recognizes Dr. Drummond’s individual service and contributions to the practice of medicine.

After more than a decade as a hospitalist at Stamford Hospital, Dr. Drummond joined Darien Signature Health in 2022, inspired by the opportunity to provide personalized, preventive care. Her approach includes a yearly 90-minute physical, individualized wellness plan, extended office visits, and prompt availability by cell phone after hours.

“This practice is uniquely designed to stay small, enabling me to establish a meaningful, long-term relationship with each patient,” said Dr. Drummond. “I’m truly gratified to provide care in a very personal and wholistic way, focused on disease prevention and optimizing wellness to help patients live their best lives.”

About Darien Signature Health

In 2017 Amanda Collins-Baine, MD, founded Darien Signature Health, a concierge internal medicine practice, to offer patients the highest level of personalized care and attention. Dr. Jen Drummond joined the team in 2022, bringing more than a decade of experience as a hospitalist and a shared passion for practicing excellent medicine with empathy and kindness. The number of patients cared for at Darien Signature Health is limited to ensure benefits that include direct after-hours communications, same day sick appointments, comprehensive visits, and a focus on proactive wellness. The practice, located at 53 Old Kings Highway North in Darien, CT, is affiliated with Yale New Haven Health and Greenwich, Stamford and Norwalk Hospitals. For more information, call 203.286.5604 or visit www.DarienSignatureHealth.com.

 

About ACP

ACP is the largest medical internal medicine-focused society in the world, with more than 161,000 member physicians, trainees, and other health professionals. Internal medicine physicians are specialists who apply scientific knowledge and clinical expertise to the diagnosis, treatment, and compassionate care of adults across the spectrum from health to complex illness. To be elected a Fellow of the ACP, doctors must demonstrate continuing scholarship and professional accomplishments, and be recommended by other internists for excellence and skill in medical practice, teaching, or research.

Health Studies: Expert Insight

Understanding Health Studies

Why Today’s Health News Often Becomes Tomorrow’s Retractions

We’ve all seen it played out hundreds of times, as a drug, food or habit is trumpeted as the way to lower the risk of cancer or heart disease only to be walked back the next month in another study. The reasons can be diverse, including a flawed hypothesis, bad data or misleading conclusions, but at the center is the study design itself. A longitudinal trial may yield very different findings from an observational one, while the gold standard – a randomized controlled trial (RCT) – can be extremely costly and difficult to design. The resulting patchwork of research requires professional analysis and a wait-and-see approach until confirmation is received via follow-up studies. We share some expert insights to help you view new health studies with both a healthy skepticism and the realization that some of the most important medical breakthroughs of recent years have been discovered in just this way.

Fast Facts on Health Studies

1,400

Number of scientific papers retracted each year
Sources: Vaccine Journal August 2018, Centers for Disease Control, Harvard Health

50%

Percentage of scientific studies confirmed in follow-up studies
Source: Healthy Aging Project, University of Colorado, Boulder

 

Researchers agree that a randomized, controlled trial is the best way to learn about the world. In a drug study, for instance, a population is randomly divided into groups who receive the drug and those who don’t. If properly controlled and designed, any difference in outcomes between the groups can be measured and credibly attributed to the effects of the treatment. The methodology is highly valued in evidence-based medicine, proving that associations are causal, and not just by chance. The approach has powerful real-world applications, as seen in the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), one of the nation’s largest-ever health projects.

Begun in 1993, with more than 161,000 women enrolled, the randomized, controlled clinical trial was designed to test the efficacy of long-term hormone therapy in preventing heart disease, hip fractures and other diseases in post-menopausal women over 60 years old on average. Previous observational studies had strongly suggested the preventive benefits of hormone therapy, and it was routinely recommended for women years after menopause. What happened next was stunning.

In 2002, the trial was halted three years earlier than planned as evidence mounted that the estrogen plus progestin therapy significantly raised a woman’s chances of developing cardiovascular disease, stroke and breast cancer. Millions of women stopped taking hormone therapy, and the trial has since been credited with reducing the incidence of breast cancer by 15,000-20,000 cases each year since the results were made public. Numerous follow-up studies were conducted to dig deeper into the surprising data, and while they showed that hormone therapy may still be reasonable short-term to manage menopausal symptoms in younger women, it is no longer routinely recommended years after menopause to prevent chronic disease in women.

Similarly, Vitamin E supplements, once thought to reduce risk of heart disease, were found to not have beneficial properties and actually may increase the risk of heart disease in higher doses. Consequently, the American Heart Association now advises that the best source of Vitamin E is foods, not supplements.

The biggest takeaway from both initiatives: the critical need for randomized, controlled trials to prove that associations between an intervention and a disease are causally related.

Nutrition health studies have also come under increased scrutiny, especially with the recent revelation of erroneous data published by high-profile researcher Dr. Brian Wansink, founder of the Food and Brand Lab at Cornell University. Numerous papers have been retracted as the lab’s propensity for data dredging – running exhaustive analyses on data sets to cherry pick interesting and media-friendly findings – came to light. This practice, seen somewhat frequently in food and nutrition research, may be part of why contradictory headlines seem to be the norm.

As the adage goes, data can be tortured until it says what the researcher wants to hear. That’s why your physician will always be the best source for making sense of the tremendous amount of health data released each day…so please ask!


Testing by Design

The most commonly used research models include:

Randomized controlled trial (RCT): carefully planned experiments like the WHI that introduce a treatment or exposure to study its effect on real patients; includes methodologies that reduce the potential for bias and allow for comparison between intervention groups and control groups.

Observational studies: researchers observe the effect of a risk factor, diagnostic test, treatment or other intervention without trying to change who is or isn’t exposed to it. Includes cohort studies, which compare any group of people linked in some way (e.g. by birth year); and longitudinal studies in which data is gathered for the same subjects repeatedly over years or even decades. An example is the Framingham Heart Study, now in its third generation, which has provided most of our current consensus regarding the effects of diet, exercise and medications on heart disease.

Case control study: compares exposure of people with an existing health problem to a control group without the issue, seeking to identify factors or exposures associated with the illness. This is less reliable than RCTs or observational studies because causality is not proven by a statistical relationship.

Meta-analysis:  a thorough examination of numerous valid studies on a topic, which uses statistical methodology to combine and report the results of multiple studies as one large study. This is cost-effective but not as accurate as RCTs as the individual studies were not designed identically.

The post Health Studies: Expert Insight appeared first on Specialdocs Consultants.