Free EMR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Get all the latest EMR updates from a practicing doctor for FREE!

7 Tips to Help Improve EHR Etiquette

It’s been a while since I’ve written, but only because my practice has been booming lately and I’ve barely had a moment to breathe here in DC.  But I’m back now, and for who knows how long given the waves tossing on the sea of digital medical practice!

Patient engagement continues to be one of the most common complaints about EMR software.  There was even a mention of the frustrations in a previous post on Happy EMR Doctor.  Many physicians say that it interferes with patient interactions and that now most of their time is spent looking at a computer monitor and updating charts.  This causes frustration for all parties – patients and physicians – because doctors did not sign up for computer duty when they went to medical school and patients expect a doctor’s full attention during visits.

Software Advice, a website that reviews medical software, launched a survey on how to improve doctor-patient interactions in the EMR era and the results are finally in.  See below for the top seven tips received on maintaining quality relationships:

1. Position your computer between you and the patient:  No brainer here.  Face the patient during interactions.  Take the time to plan where your equipment will go so that this possible.

2. Invest in mobility:  Whether it’s a small rolling desk, small tablets or other lightweight tools, choose equipment that helps you move around.  A laptop may cost an extra buck but can be worth the investment.

3. Delegate as much as possible:  The objective is to interact with the patient as much as possible.  Have staff members enter the medical history, medications, prior procedures, etc. prior to the patient’s visit so you don’t have to during the appointment.

4. Dictate as much as possible:  Talk with the patient while scribes enter the information or use dictation software.  These allow you to focus more on the patient.

5. Ignore the computer when you first enter the room:  Chat with your patient for a few minute before you start recording information in the digital record.

6. Ask about previous complaints:  If the patient information is pre-loaded, look over it before entering the room. If they have open complaints, ask them about the issues to close them out in the emr. This reaffirms to the patient that you care.

7. Finish the chart in the room:  This can help to answer any other questions that might come up so patients feel like they have been listened to.

All in all, EMRs take some getting used to.  Once a physician develops a rhythm with the software, every patient interaction becomes easier.  Focus on the tasks as they come, and remember, practice makes perfect.

March 6, 2013 I Written By

Dr. West is an endocrinologist in private practice in Washington, DC. He completed fellowship training in Endocrinology and Metabolism at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. West opened The Washington Endocrine Clinic, PLLC, as a solo practice in 2009. He can be contacted at doctorwestindc@gmail.com.

EMRs’ Slippery Slope of Cloning Notes

Given all of the recent hubbub regarding cloning of medical office notes using electronic medical records systems, I thought I would write in with my opinion on this topic. You know, just as one fabulous new technology comes about that enables much more efficient documentation of patient encounters in physicians offices, it seems like critics are quick to try to take away that ability from doctors. Most doctors work hard at what they do and are just trying to do a good job in providing the best of care using all the modern digital tools available.

Since there are no official published guidelines in this area, it seems yet another of many many MANY (did I mention many?) gray zones in the world of digital and mobile health technology.

Like it or not folks, the cut-and-paste function available on any computer is here to stay. It’s up to physicians and other providers like nurse practitioners and physician assistants to choose to use this technology responsibly. Furthermore, I believe that it is not impossible to do so. That would only be logical. Otherwise, we could never acquire anything that made our lives as providers a little easier.

I understand that the Medicare system is practically bankrupt as it is and seeks to minimize fraudulent payouts. I also recognize that there are nefarious individuals out there posing as medical providers who can crank out EMR notes that are identical in a mass-production fashion in order to financially rob the system again and again.

However, let’s not take an anti-EMR philosophy.  Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.  I don’t have the perfect solution, but rather then forbidding medical providers to use the technology in a powerful way to see more patients with less busywork at the end of the day that does not benefit patients whatsoever, I think we need to put more thought into solving this problem. What do they expect doctors to do with EMRs anyway?  Write everything from scratch every time?  Such an approach would be both nonsensical and naive.  And the solution should not be to withdraw the technology or force doctors to do things that are unconventional.

On the contrary, we need guidelines that make sense and do not add needless work to already harried medical professionals.  We need simplicity and not complexity.  We should not seek to recreate the debacle that some people came up with long ago that is the tax code-like nightmare of Evaluation & Management (E&M) guidelines, which are still quite gray in many areas.  We need to be able to empower doctors, NP’s and PAs even further with technology rather than retract abilities that the technology enables.

I’m purposefully not getting into specific examples in this post for the sake of brevity.  But I’ll be happy to take any questions my readers may have.  Who knows, it could lead to interesting future discussions.  For example, the precise definition of “cloning notes”, what qualifies?

November 10, 2012 I Written By

Dr. West is an endocrinologist in private practice in Washington, DC. He completed fellowship training in Endocrinology and Metabolism at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. West opened The Washington Endocrine Clinic, PLLC, as a solo practice in 2009. He can be contacted at doctorwestindc@gmail.com.

EMR use improves primary care: new study

There seems to be a lot of buzz in the news lately around the question of whether electronic medical record documentation can lead to a higher quality of care.  Last year, a study came out suggesting that this might be true for diabetes care.  More recently, my attention came to an article published in the Journal of the American medical informatics Association in May 2012, Method of electronic health record documentation and quality of primary care.

A group of researchers led by Dr. Jeffrey Linder at Harvard University’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital studied primary care physicians taking care of 7000 patients with coronary artery disease and diabetes over nine months. The study authors assessed 15 quality measures, three of which were found to be performed significantly less by physicians using a typical dictation system for record-keeping as opposed to those keeping records by electronic medical records systems.  Two of the three standards of care measures that dictating physicians were less likely to provide were tobacco use documentation and diabetic eye examinations.
This parallels my own findings as an endocrinologist using electronic medical records. During the period of my early years before I instituted widespread use of templating, I was much less likely to hit all of the quality care measure marks compared with after instituting templates.  It’s actually quite commonsensical that a medical provider can hit all of the marks if they are prompted by the computer.  In a sense, the care goes on autopilot.  No matter how chaotic a given point in the day of a busy doctor might be, it becomes impossible to complete a note without performing all of the prompts unless doing so deliberately.

There has been at least one or two studies that I’m aware of that have doubted or not found the conclusion that electronic medical records improve the quality of care patients receive.  I think that most likely these studies did not find a significant association because they were not properly designed.  When one considers the volume of quality measures pertinent to a typical patient visit with diabetes or coronary artery disease, there are so many measures that unless every physician has the measures memorized and never forgets anything, gets flustered or has to hurry through the visit, there will almost be a guarantee that not all measures will be addressed at a visit.  I’ll take that bet and win every time.

The fact that there are now at least two studies showing a positive relationship between the quality of care given to diabetic patients in the use of electronic medical records documentation is even stronger evidence that this is a real phenomenon.  Personally, I can’t believe that anybody would think that electronic medical records don’t lead to better care, regardless of the degree of such improvement.  That is, unless they’re not using the templating advantage.

October 21, 2012 I Written By

Dr. West is an endocrinologist in private practice in Washington, DC. He completed fellowship training in Endocrinology and Metabolism at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. West opened The Washington Endocrine Clinic, PLLC, as a solo practice in 2009. He can be contacted at doctorwestindc@gmail.com.

Patient Engagement: Who are the Real Targets?

As I further considered the ideas generated by the breakfast panel I had the opportunity to participate in recently, Doctors and Patients: Bridging the Digital Divide, I was reminded of a stimulating comment made by Nikolai Kirienko, a patient advocate with Crohn’s disease. He stated that we need to use the current technology to reach patients who need it most.

But who are these patients, really?

Are they the well and well-to-do, middle to upper-class population who are internet-savvy, highly educated, and compliant with following the plans suggested by the healthcare provider?

Are they the patient struggling with chronic illnesses, the symptoms of which may tend to wax and wane on a daily basis, making their issues a daily struggle?

Are they the poverty-stricken residents of typically lower class neighborhoods in metropolitan areas, who may have more limited access to digital technology?

From my personal experience in a downtown metropolitan area, namely Washington, DC, I can tell you that most of the patients who are engaged in seeking out new information regarding their health conditions tend to be highly educated, middle to upper-class patients with excellent access to digital technology.

But I have to come back to the initial comment in question, which begs the question of who should we really be targeting?  Who can really take the most advantage to gain from the digital healthcare revolution?

I could take the Pollyanna-esque view that everyone should be able to take advantage of everything equally and we should all just get along and be happy.  However, real-world experience tells me that there may be a different answer this question.  There are also limited resources for healthcare outreach campaigns.  Therefore, it would seem appropriate to do more research into the area to really define who the best targets are for the maximum benefits. It certainly seems like a valuable question to answer and one that’s worth going after.  What do you think?

September 24, 2012 I Written By

Dr. West is an endocrinologist in private practice in Washington, DC. He completed fellowship training in Endocrinology and Metabolism at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. West opened The Washington Endocrine Clinic, PLLC, as a solo practice in 2009. He can be contacted at doctorwestindc@gmail.com.

Patient engagement in the digital era

In the not-so-old days of medicine, patient engagement used to involve things like looking the patient in the eye when speaking to them, facing the patient, asking them how they felt, and asking them if they had any other questions before ending the visit. These so-called rules of engagement have now been augmented by the computer in between the patient and the provider.

No longer are the former etiquette protocols sufficient for interacting in the digital era. Now, patient engagement includes Internet searches using “Dr. Google” for what in my opinion are typically anxiety-fueled questions that are frequently unnecessary and irrelevant and would not have been asked prior to the arrival of Internet searches.

However, the internet isn’t going anywhere anytime soon, and so providers have to be able to deal with this new level of interaction. Fortunately, not all patient engagement is so maladaptive.

Patient engagement is a funny thing though. It seems to be confused by doctors, staff and patients. Some people think patient engagement involves E-medicine, or rather electronic visits over secure messaging systems. I laughed the other day when I viewed a YouTube video showing a woman talking about a third party for-profit software vendor company using their technology to allow patients to pay bills online and therefore be more” engaged”. Right. That’s twistier than Presidential campaign rhetoric.

Another speaker put it well when he said that “reality struggles to keep up with the rhetoric” when he was commenting on the difficulty in defining patient engagement, yet everyone wants to use the jargon liberally.

I prefer to think of patient engagement in the digital era as being positive in several respects. I expect the patients to take an active role in their healthcare, in gaining knowledge about their disease, and in gaining knowledge about health prevention and treating ongoing illness issues. In doing so, the patient becomes empowered to take an active role in the decision-making process during the testing and treatment phases of care. This is not to say the patient should get to consult Dr. Google and then dictate what tests are being done on them regardless of what the ordering provider thinks is appropriate. I think the most ethical and appropriate response to such requests are to, first, consider them seriously; second, discuss with the patient which tests are medically indicated and which tests are medically unnecessary; and finally, to stand one’s ground in either writing or not writing for any medically unnecessary tests to be ordered.

I also completely agree with the definition of patient engagement as defined by the Society for Participatory Medicine. It says that patient engagement is a movement in which networked patients shift from being mere passengers to responsible drivers of their health, and in which providers encourage and value them as full partners.

In order to get patients more engaged in participating in their healthcare, I think we need to make it fun, make it interesting, and communicate using means where the patient actually is, on multiple levels of “is”. In the case of the digitally connected patient, we should be considering communicating using the Internet, smartphones, and mobile devices such as iPads. We need to be able to make this communication valuable to the patient so that they, in turn, want more of it, and so that the movement grows.

September 17, 2012 I Written By

Dr. West is an endocrinologist in private practice in Washington, DC. He completed fellowship training in Endocrinology and Metabolism at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. West opened The Washington Endocrine Clinic, PLLC, as a solo practice in 2009. He can be contacted at doctorwestindc@gmail.com.

EMRs’ big gaping hole of secure messaging

Today’s post begins a series inspired by my recent participation in a breakfast panel in Washington, DC, Doctors and Patients Bridging the Digital Divide. There were a lot of useful ideas discussed during this panel, and so I decided to capture and share some with you.

One of the biggest holes in electronic medical records currently seems to be a lack of secure messaging systems built into the software.  Although maybe not universally true, this still represents a huge problem that also represents a great opportunity for gains in technology that will enhance the doctor-patient relationship and move digital healthcare forward into the future.

Currently, my electronic medical record vendor does not supply this feature as part of its software package.  However, as part of the Meaningful Use Stage 2 requirements by the federal government, the use of a certified EMR system that supports this function will be required.  A HIPAA-compliant secure messaging system will be needed as a part of every electronic medical record going forward.

Currently, if I wanted to use secure messaging to communicate with my patients, I would have to purchase a separate third-party vendor’s online software to communicate in a HIPAA-compliant fashion.  This involves an additional service agreement between the third-party and me, as well as monthly fees they can be expensive.  This would grant me the right to not only communicate with patients but also to bill third-party insurance companies for providing such electronic health services.  However, what may people do not appreciate is the small reimbursement allowance for such services, which is quite minimal.  Thus, regardless of the demand by patients, it’s currently more financially lucrative simply to see another patient in the office for a follow-up visit rather than answer a message electronically.  If an electronic medical record vendor builds secure patient messaging into their platform, when there is already a contractual arrangement between the doctor and EMR vendor, then a third-party cost would potentially become unnecessary.  The prospect of using a built-in, HIPAA-compliant, secure messaging system suddenly becomes much more attractive and potentially fiscally responsible.

Unfortunately, many EMR systems are in still developing stages at which they do not yet have built-in secure messaging features in their PHR or personal health record modules.

But what a wonderful and potentially powerful area for future development in order to further promote patients to become more engaged in playing a more active role in their own health care.  The ability of a patient to reach their doctor through the Internet is certainly an attractive feature if done right and seems potentially better than a patient spending five minutes on hold listening to elevator music only to finally speak to a front desk staff member who will only be able to forward a message, which may or may not be forwarded accurately.

September 12, 2012 I Written By

Dr. West is an endocrinologist in private practice in Washington, DC. He completed fellowship training in Endocrinology and Metabolism at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. West opened The Washington Endocrine Clinic, PLLC, as a solo practice in 2009. He can be contacted at doctorwestindc@gmail.com.

Can We Talk? Challenges of SaaS Type EMR User Interfaces

Forget about EMR interoperability between doctors’ offices and hospitals for a moment.

One of the recent developments in the ever-expanding SaaS (software as a service) world of electronic medical records must be the challenge of making all the individual software components talk together correctly.

There is (1) the EMR itself, (2) the programming platform/language, and the (3) internet browser.  Forgive the novice in me if I don’t get all my nomenclature correct.  I’m just a doctor.  If one component gets upgraded (and they always do), then the house of cards can come tumbling down in one fell swoop, at least temporarily.  We’ve experienced this recently at our office with our own EMR system and so I have a few thoughts on the matter.

In our office, first it was Firefox stopped working with the EMR.  Then we all switched over to Internet Explorer, which seemed to work for a time, but then that stopped working well and frequently froze up.  Chrome is working for now, but it seems to be only a ticking timebomb before this no longer works.

To make matters more complicated, different browsers have different ways of displaying information bars at the top, sides and bottom of the EMR window, and so some bars can get in the way of viewing different parts of the screen depending on which browser is used.  There are ways around this (conveniently called “workarounds”), but yet again, not so simple or straightforward and thus suboptimal.  I have to admit that it sort of feels like jiggling the handle on an old toilet to get it to stop running.  In other words, yes, you can do it, but, no, it doesn’t feel like it should work that way ideally.

We’ve been given the explanation that Adobe Flash is having problems interacting with the EMR system, or vice versa, since both the EMR and Flash have gone through successive, iterative upgrades to improve and add functionality to both services.  I can totally buy this explanation.  However, at what point will it just get too difficult to keep everything going?  Is it impossible?  Probably not.  But it’s a heck of a pain watching the EMR go through roadblocks as we forge into the future together, as vendor and provider.

This will undoubtedly affect any EMR system that is dependent upon other, third-party software.  It is a common situation that will change over time, and I’m almost certain that this is going to be a challenge, all around, for any EMR system on the market today.  As such is the case, I look forward to the day when it can be solved permanently by adopting a new standard for all platforms.

August 20, 2012 I Written By

Dr. West is an endocrinologist in private practice in Washington, DC. He completed fellowship training in Endocrinology and Metabolism at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. West opened The Washington Endocrine Clinic, PLLC, as a solo practice in 2009. He can be contacted at doctorwestindc@gmail.com.

Does Meaningful Use Destroy Doctors’ Skills?

About two weeks ago, I saw a patient who was referred for a new diagnosis of hypocalcemia (low blood calcium levels).  I ran a few additional appropriate lab tests and will be seeing him back this week or next.  This weekend, however, I had some spare time to read back through the sections of two medical textbooks dealing with a more detailed discussion of this issue.

How apropos, I thought, when reading a recent post on the Health Care Blog, titled The Destructiveness of Measures.  This post says such a powerful amount in such a short blog span, that I needed to highlight and share it.  It succinctly describes what the government is currently trying to do to a highly trained labor force who’s best asset is their ability to think about patients with complex medical problems.  Every minute spent filling out online forms to report meaningful use data to the government could be better spent in reviewing and updating their medical knowledge set.  Both tasks focus on patient’s and their medical problems, yet one is a much higher yield for patient care and physicians’ sharpness in providing higher quality care than the other, which could be completed by a person with a high school education.

Let’s not dumb down our physician’s knowledge levels by asking them to complete such inane tasks as generating Meaningful Use data sets.  Are the physicians the right personnel for such a clerical job?  Absolutely not.  Airline pilots can’t maintain their flying skills by running the beverage cart.  Doctors are no different.

July 23, 2012 I Written By

Dr. West is an endocrinologist in private practice in Washington, DC. He completed fellowship training in Endocrinology and Metabolism at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. West opened The Washington Endocrine Clinic, PLLC, as a solo practice in 2009. He can be contacted at doctorwestindc@gmail.com.

How an EMR gets in the way of doctor-patient relationships

For all of the glorification of EMRs and EHRs and pushing into the new age of digital healthcare, I thought I would throw in my 2 cents from the dark side of electronic health record keeping.  To be honest, there are a few things that could be greatly improved.

Now, before I get a whole bunch of unsolicited email from EMR vendors out there waiting to pounce on me with sales pitches of how theirs is better and I should give it a try, I should say that I’m very happy with my current EMR system and not looking to switch.

That notwithstanding, there are a few simple concepts that no EMR system to my knowledge has gotten right yet.  It’s even possible that it may be hard to ever get right, and a lot of it has to do with mouse clicks and typing.

During my average day, I feel the need to maintain at least some eye contact with my patients, mostly because I’m a bit uncomfortable with the amount of time I have to spend looking at my computer.  I’m a bit of a slave to the computer system in that sense.  I know I could do all of the documentation after the patient is gone, but I’m afraid of missing something in the documentation.  You could say I could just scratch notes on paper to avoid missing anything, but this is not in keeping with the lofty goal of being paperless, now is it?  Maybe the lofty point is just to eliminate paper charts.  Still, scraps of paper doesn’t really sound modern or safe now, does it?

I also feel a bit uncomfortable giving up my nights and weekends just to “look good” in front of my patients.  A burned out doctor who has no life outside the office to spend with family and friends, and who ultimately quits the profession because of such, is not an ethical thing to expect of physicians, is it?

And so, for now, I do my best to incorporate a bit of eye contact, but still spend time typing away with the patient across my desk watching me and telling me about their issues.

The EMR still requires a lot of additional tasks outside of documentation: electronic prescribing, reviewing messages from staff and performing additional tasks as necessitated by these messages.  And all of these tasks take a considerable amount of time.  Up until now, they have required human intervention to complete, but what about the future?

One of my recent hobbies is reading history texts.  Interestingly, one of the stimuli that encouraged the Europeans to seek an alternative passage to the Far East was the excessive trading fees imposed by transmitting goods through Muslim and African nations.  An alternative route that would allow the elimination of hefty fees and allow them to run their import-export businesses cheaper and more efficiently was the dream.

If we can automate all of the EMR tasks more effectively using a Siri-like voice-activated platform, then medical providers may be able to achieve all of their work during normal business operating hours, face the patients when they speak, and have a better quality of work and home life than their predecessors.  I’d love to be able to tell my computer to send in a scrip refill for thyroid hormone and it would be done, without the need for any other steps or human involvement, but that remains a far off mirage at this point.

The more an EMR can do for me, the more time I can spend in humanistic and meaningful contact with patients.  I dream of actually living the dream but for now live in the reality of a less than perfect world.

July 16, 2012 I Written By

Dr. West is an endocrinologist in private practice in Washington, DC. He completed fellowship training in Endocrinology and Metabolism at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. West opened The Washington Endocrine Clinic, PLLC, as a solo practice in 2009. He can be contacted at doctorwestindc@gmail.com.

Guest Post: Do EMRs Cause a Mirage of Health?

This is a guest post by Ken Harrington, Practice Manager at the Washington Endocrine Clinic.

The smart phone (blackberry, android, iphone) is an icon of the postmodern age.  In my fingertips, I hold the power of the internet.  I can look up my e-mail messages in real time, search anything in the world on the web, and be socially connected to a world-wide community of people – all in the palm of my hand.  This concept is slowly being applied to medical records.

Many of the new EMR systems that are beginning to infiltrate into the physician’s office now allow patients access (even if partial for now) to their own medical record.  With a few clicks of the computer mouse, a patient can now access his or her labs, radiology, and pathology reports.  Even better, the EMR that we use at the doctor’s office in which I work will soon be available on the iPhone and iPad.  This will enable any of the patients in our office to login anywhere and have instant access to their medical chart.  No longer does a patient have to guess at what she thought the doctor said or didn’t say about her results – the patient can now have access to the official record herself.

This gives a patient a lot of new power over his own healthcare that he did not previously hold.  For example, now the patient can research online about cholesterol if his test results show he had an elevated level. Granted he still cannot write his own prescription for a medication, but he can educate himself and use that knowledge when he speaks to his doctor about the test results.  This is a game changer of sorts which will add the physician’s office to the growing list of other institutions that have become transparent in the postmodern age.

This is all good for the consumer/patient – right?  On many levels, it is.  Patient empowerment in the realm of healthcare is what doctors have been complaining about for years.  Theoretically, this should lead to the patient having greater control over the choices she can make regarding her healthcare.

To boost this empowerment, certain companies are taking all of this patient data and showing what the future could look like.  The particular EMR that we use is partnering with a start-up company called 100Plus.  100Plus is taking the data and filtering it through a computer algorithm to project what someone’s future health would look like if he did not make the recommended choices to improve his health.  A future projection might mean death 10 years earlier if he had not made the choice to start exercising and eating right when the test results began to show a problem.  The entrepreneurs behind 100Plus know they have a market-winning idea because, in the postmodern world, people want to take control of their reality, including their health, as much as possible. This is just one more way to gain a little bit more control.

But what really do you gain by having all of this control and power?  A recent news article described a doctor in California who offered himself up as a test case for a new personal human genome sequencing test.  This test would look at whether a person’s DNA sequence could foretell that the person would be more predisposed to certain diseases over others.  This particular doctor’s test result showed he had a strong predisposition in his genes for developing diabetes, despite that fact that he was in good shape and ate health-consciously. However, six months after the test results were reviewed, the doctor was diagnosed with diabetes.

This makes me wonder whether it’s possible to have ultimate control over one’s health. Will access to a patient’s medical chart cause them to make better choices – or any choice – to improve their health? One would think it would at least give them a leg-up on the limited choices their recent ancestors had and make life-changing decisions possible sooner rather than later. But sometimes empowerment leads people to think that they have ultimate control and can make all the right choices. I’m not convinced that this is the case. If it is built into my genes that I am gong to die of a disease that I cannot do much about, doesn’t this level of transparency simply cause me to worry about something I have no control over? I guess you could say, “Well, we will all die of something, and if we know what that something might be, then we might try to limit its damage with better choices now.” But, unless someone can actually change the direction of my genes, I might actually be quite limited still in what I know.

The same may hold true for open EMRs. If the patient is focused enough to make choices with the knowledge they now have on a 24/7 basis, will it cause their health to be any better? Maybe. But could patients’ thoughts that they have a growing control over their own healthcare (via knowledge of their medical records) also potentially lead to developing a culture of false security? In other words, will such thinking only lead to a mirage of health? For me, I think it might.

* Dr. West’s note: This reminds me of a book titled “Mirage of Health” by Rene Dubos, the famous microbiologist who wrote that mankind develops a false sense of security with the acquisition of technological advances over his environment.

May 29, 2012 I Written By

Dr. West is an endocrinologist in private practice in Washington, DC. He completed fellowship training in Endocrinology and Metabolism at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. West opened The Washington Endocrine Clinic, PLLC, as a solo practice in 2009. He can be contacted at doctorwestindc@gmail.com.