Commentary

A few years ago I wrote a column about what promised to be an exciting development in blood testing technology. Using the money her parents had set aside for her education, a young woman dropped out of Stanford University at age 19 and started a company that she claimed would be able to offer hundreds of lab tests on just a few drops of blood. Results would be available in just minutes instead of hours or days. At the time I wrote the column, the company had just landed a contract with a large drug store chain with an arrangement that would eventually allow nearly every resident of the United States to be within a few miles of a site that would offer rapid response blood tests with nothing more than a finger prick.

It seemed a little hard to believe, but the prospect of pediatricians being able to make a diagnosis without running the risk of exsanguinating our smallest patients sounded appealing. On the other hand, I worried that a quick and easy technology might encourage some physicians to use a shotgun approach to diagnosing illness rather than a more rational and cost-effective process based on the traditional skills of history taking and physical examination. Some patients who foolishly wanted to know “everything” about themselves might be tempted to ask their physicians to order the whole smorgasbord of tests. “Hey, it’s only a few drops of blood.”

Turns out there were enough people with more money than reservations and the company quickly attracted hundreds of millions of dollars in venture capital. The company, now calling itself Theranos, has been valued at nine billion dollars. But, recently this startup star has encountered some serious bumps in the road to a full-scale launch (“Hot Startup Theranos Has Struggled With Its Blood-Test Technology” by John Carreyrou, The Wall Street Journal, updated Oct. 16, 2015). The Wall Street Journal reported that despite promises, only a few of the 240 tests offered by the company are currently performed using their proprietary microtechnique. In the days following the Journal article, the Food and Drug Administration warned Theranos that their “nanotainer” is considered a new medical device that must first clear the agency’s time consuming and costly vetting process (“Hot Startup Theranos Dials Back Lab Tests at FDA’s Behest” by John Carreyrou, The Wall Street Journal, updated Oct. 16, 2015).

The venture capitalists who had climbed on the Theranos bandwagon tempted by the just-a-few-drops promise may end up seeing their bank accounts hemorrhage. But I don’t think we should be too critical of their investment decision. It was and may still be good idea that has simply run afoul of the details. However, I recently learned about another new business that I don’t consider to have even started with a good idea, but still has managed to attract enough capital to get itself off the ground (“Should Breast Milk Be Nutritionally Analyzed?” by Laura Johannes, The Wall Street Journal, Dec. 28, 2015).

I’m sure you have seen some new mothers who were concerned that their breast milk was not enough for their babies. But how many of them would pay $150 for a start-up kit and then more than $300 to find out the nutritional content of their breast milk? What if it meant pumping and freezing three samples 2 or 3 days apart and then shipping them in a cooler to a lab? What if you told them that neither you nor anyone else could reliably interpret the results because there aren’t any published guidelines for the optimal composition of human breast milk? Even if your practice is packed to the rafters with anxiety-driven, irrational parents, I don’t think you would find many takers. But that doesn’t seem to have bothered the folks who have invested in Happy Vitals, a company in Washington that is offering a service similar to the one I have just described.

You and I might not have invested in a company whose business plan was to offer such a service. But I fear there may be enough health care “providers” practicing without the benefit of an evidence-based education that what I consider a capital misadventure may actually be able to pay back its investors.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.”

A few years ago I wrote a column about what promised to be an exciting development in blood testing technology. Using the money her parents had set aside for her education, a young woman dropped out of Stanford University at age 19 and started a company that she claimed would be able to offer hundreds of lab tests on just a few drops of blood. Results would be available in just minutes instead of hours or days. At the time I wrote the column, the company had just landed a contract with a large drug store chain with an arrangement that would eventually allow nearly every resident of the United States to be within a few miles of a site that would offer rapid response blood tests with nothing more than a finger prick.

It seemed a little hard to believe, but the prospect of pediatricians being able to make a diagnosis without running the risk of exsanguinating our smallest patients sounded appealing. On the other hand, I worried that a quick and easy technology might encourage some physicians to use a shotgun approach to diagnosing illness rather than a more rational and cost-effective process based on the traditional skills of history taking and physical examination. Some patients who foolishly wanted to know “everything” about themselves might be tempted to ask their physicians to order the whole smorgasbord of tests. “Hey, it’s only a few drops of blood.”

Turns out there were enough people with more money than reservations and the company quickly attracted hundreds of millions of dollars in venture capital. The company, now calling itself Theranos, has been valued at nine billion dollars. But, recently this startup star has encountered some serious bumps in the road to a full-scale launch (“Hot Startup Theranos Has Struggled With Its Blood-Test Technology” by John Carreyrou, The Wall Street Journal, updated Oct. 16, 2015). The Wall Street Journal reported that despite promises, only a few of the 240 tests offered by the company are currently performed using their proprietary microtechnique. In the days following the Journal article, the Food and Drug Administration warned Theranos that their “nanotainer” is considered a new medical device that must first clear the agency’s time consuming and costly vetting process (“Hot Startup Theranos Dials Back Lab Tests at FDA’s Behest” by John Carreyrou, The Wall Street Journal, updated Oct. 16, 2015).

The venture capitalists who had climbed on the Theranos bandwagon tempted by the just-a-few-drops promise may end up seeing their bank accounts hemorrhage. But I don’t think we should be too critical of their investment decision. It was and may still be good idea that has simply run afoul of the details. However, I recently learned about another new business that I don’t consider to have even started with a good idea, but still has managed to attract enough capital to get itself off the ground (“Should Breast Milk Be Nutritionally Analyzed?” by Laura Johannes, The Wall Street Journal, Dec. 28, 2015).

I’m sure you have seen some new mothers who were concerned that their breast milk was not enough for their babies. But how many of them would pay $150 for a start-up kit and then more than $300 to find out the nutritional content of their breast milk? What if it meant pumping and freezing three samples 2 or 3 days apart and then shipping them in a cooler to a lab? What if you told them that neither you nor anyone else could reliably interpret the results because there aren’t any published guidelines for the optimal composition of human breast milk? Even if your practice is packed to the rafters with anxiety-driven, irrational parents, I don’t think you would find many takers. But that doesn’t seem to have bothered the folks who have invested in Happy Vitals, a company in Washington that is offering a service similar to the one I have just described.

You and I might not have invested in a company whose business plan was to offer such a service. But I fear there may be enough health care “providers” practicing without the benefit of an evidence-based education that what I consider a capital misadventure may actually be able to pay back its investors.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.”

A few years ago I wrote a column about what promised to be an exciting development in blood testing technology. Using the money her parents had set aside for her education, a young woman dropped out of Stanford University at age 19 and started a company that she claimed would be able to offer hundreds of lab tests on just a few drops of blood. Results would be available in just minutes instead of hours or days. At the time I wrote the column, the company had just landed a contract with a large drug store chain with an arrangement that would eventually allow nearly every resident of the United States to be within a few miles of a site that would offer rapid response blood tests with nothing more than a finger prick.

It seemed a little hard to believe, but the prospect of pediatricians being able to make a diagnosis without running the risk of exsanguinating our smallest patients sounded appealing. On the other hand, I worried that a quick and easy technology might encourage some physicians to use a shotgun approach to diagnosing illness rather than a more rational and cost-effective process based on the traditional skills of history taking and physical examination. Some patients who foolishly wanted to know “everything” about themselves might be tempted to ask their physicians to order the whole smorgasbord of tests. “Hey, it’s only a few drops of blood.”

Turns out there were enough people with more money than reservations and the company quickly attracted hundreds of millions of dollars in venture capital. The company, now calling itself Theranos, has been valued at nine billion dollars. But, recently this startup star has encountered some serious bumps in the road to a full-scale launch (“Hot Startup Theranos Has Struggled With Its Blood-Test Technology” by John Carreyrou, The Wall Street Journal, updated Oct. 16, 2015). The Wall Street Journal reported that despite promises, only a few of the 240 tests offered by the company are currently performed using their proprietary microtechnique. In the days following the Journal article, the Food and Drug Administration warned Theranos that their “nanotainer” is considered a new medical device that must first clear the agency’s time consuming and costly vetting process (“Hot Startup Theranos Dials Back Lab Tests at FDA’s Behest” by John Carreyrou, The Wall Street Journal, updated Oct. 16, 2015).

The venture capitalists who had climbed on the Theranos bandwagon tempted by the just-a-few-drops promise may end up seeing their bank accounts hemorrhage. But I don’t think we should be too critical of their investment decision. It was and may still be good idea that has simply run afoul of the details. However, I recently learned about another new business that I don’t consider to have even started with a good idea, but still has managed to attract enough capital to get itself off the ground (“Should Breast Milk Be Nutritionally Analyzed?” by Laura Johannes, The Wall Street Journal, Dec. 28, 2015).

I’m sure you have seen some new mothers who were concerned that their breast milk was not enough for their babies. But how many of them would pay $150 for a start-up kit and then more than $300 to find out the nutritional content of their breast milk? What if it meant pumping and freezing three samples 2 or 3 days apart and then shipping them in a cooler to a lab? What if you told them that neither you nor anyone else could reliably interpret the results because there aren’t any published guidelines for the optimal composition of human breast milk? Even if your practice is packed to the rafters with anxiety-driven, irrational parents, I don’t think you would find many takers. But that doesn’t seem to have bothered the folks who have invested in Happy Vitals, a company in Washington that is offering a service similar to the one I have just described.

You and I might not have invested in a company whose business plan was to offer such a service. But I fear there may be enough health care “providers” practicing without the benefit of an evidence-based education that what I consider a capital misadventure may actually be able to pay back its investors.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.”

The dream unfolds late in the semester with just a week to go, usually my final semester. My college career has been exemplary … good grades, honor society member, academic behavior any parent would be proud of. But for some reason I realize that I have failed to attend any of the classes of one of my courses, usually a math course. In fact, I’m not sure I have the text or maybe I never purchased it. More frighteningly, I can’t remember in which classroom it meets or even the hour. No one else seems to have noticed my failure to show up for class. Remember, it’s a math course and BSing doesn’t work in math. There is no way I will be able to resurrect myself from this academic disaster. The dream eventually dissolves without resolution, but it will return in some permutation, fortunately less often as I have gotten older. My wife and many of our friends share similar nightmares.

There are many angles from which one can interpret a dream like this, but one explanation is that I finally have been discovered as an impostor. I had studied hard, gotten good grades but at the core of things I was a goof-off and really wasn’t worthy of the adulation I had received. My good works were merely a shell over a life of not doing all the things that other people thought I had been doing.

It turns out that I had fallen into a surprisingly common psychological trap, probably during medical school. Despite accumulating significant amounts of clinical acumen, and in my later years what some might call wisdom, my dream suggests that I still have been unable to free myself of a nagging self-doubt. In 1978, two American psychologists Pauline Clance and Suzanne Imes labeled this phenomenon “the impostor syndrome” (“Learning to Deal with the Impostor Syndrome” by Carl Richards [The New York Times, Oct. 26, 2015]). They characterized it as a feeling “of phoniness in people who believe that they are not intelligent, capable, or creative despite evidence of high achievement.” The victims “are highly motivated to achieve” but “live in fear of being ‘found out’ or exposed as frauds.”

In college, I was in awe of those classmates who could play bridge for hours day after day, write their papers in the wee morning hours on the day they were due, and still get very acceptable grades. I imagined that if these guys had studied a third as much as I did or had simply begun their term papers on the day before they were due, their academic credentials would have blown mine out of the water.

In medical school I always had a sense that I didn’t belong there. I had never heard of anyone else who had gotten into an elite medical school off the waiting list as I had. There must have been a clerical error, and I had been mistaken for the scion of a wealthy benefactor with a similar sounding name. I had been around some smart people before, but my medical school classmates were in a different league altogether.

It turns out I was not alone bobbing in my sea of self-doubt. I learned from a blog entry on KevinMD.com (“The effect of impostor syndrome on medical students” by Aryeh Goldberg, March 1, 2014) of a lecture by Suzanne Poirier at Northwestern’s Feinberg School of Medicine, during which she reported on her analysis of more than forty book-length medical school memoirs. She discovered that a theme of a sense of not belonging ran through most (if not all) of the sources she reviewed. Other observers have wondered how much the impostor syndrome contributes to burnout, depression, and suicidal ideation in medical students.

I suffered from none of those maladies, but my feeling of unworthiness followed me into practice. Even as I acquired more experience during hundreds of thousands of patient encounters, I continued to worry that the next patient through the door would be the end of a decade’s long string of good fortune and my clinical ineptitude would be unmasked.

One of the most effective strategies for dealing with such feelings is sharing them. Unfortunately, most physicians don’t often find themselves in settings in which they can comfortably share these feelings with their peers. And of course it is probably not the best idea to share your self-doubts when you are trying to reassure a patient who is feeling vulnerable herself. Finding the balance between admitting that we don’t know everything and projecting the image that we know more than enough to help our patients is one of the biggest challenges facing us as we struggle to master the art of clinical medicine.

I will leave the question of whether I was an impostor to those who can be more objective. All I know is that I was damn lucky for 40 years.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.”

The dream unfolds late in the semester with just a week to go, usually my final semester. My college career has been exemplary … good grades, honor society member, academic behavior any parent would be proud of. But for some reason I realize that I have failed to attend any of the classes of one of my courses, usually a math course. In fact, I’m not sure I have the text or maybe I never purchased it. More frighteningly, I can’t remember in which classroom it meets or even the hour. No one else seems to have noticed my failure to show up for class. Remember, it’s a math course and BSing doesn’t work in math. There is no way I will be able to resurrect myself from this academic disaster. The dream eventually dissolves without resolution, but it will return in some permutation, fortunately less often as I have gotten older. My wife and many of our friends share similar nightmares.

There are many angles from which one can interpret a dream like this, but one explanation is that I finally have been discovered as an impostor. I had studied hard, gotten good grades but at the core of things I was a goof-off and really wasn’t worthy of the adulation I had received. My good works were merely a shell over a life of not doing all the things that other people thought I had been doing.

It turns out that I had fallen into a surprisingly common psychological trap, probably during medical school. Despite accumulating significant amounts of clinical acumen, and in my later years what some might call wisdom, my dream suggests that I still have been unable to free myself of a nagging self-doubt. In 1978, two American psychologists Pauline Clance and Suzanne Imes labeled this phenomenon “the impostor syndrome” (“Learning to Deal with the Impostor Syndrome” by Carl Richards [The New York Times, Oct. 26, 2015]). They characterized it as a feeling “of phoniness in people who believe that they are not intelligent, capable, or creative despite evidence of high achievement.” The victims “are highly motivated to achieve” but “live in fear of being ‘found out’ or exposed as frauds.”

In college, I was in awe of those classmates who could play bridge for hours day after day, write their papers in the wee morning hours on the day they were due, and still get very acceptable grades. I imagined that if these guys had studied a third as much as I did or had simply begun their term papers on the day before they were due, their academic credentials would have blown mine out of the water.

In medical school I always had a sense that I didn’t belong there. I had never heard of anyone else who had gotten into an elite medical school off the waiting list as I had. There must have been a clerical error, and I had been mistaken for the scion of a wealthy benefactor with a similar sounding name. I had been around some smart people before, but my medical school classmates were in a different league altogether.

It turns out I was not alone bobbing in my sea of self-doubt. I learned from a blog entry on KevinMD.com (“The effect of impostor syndrome on medical students” by Aryeh Goldberg, March 1, 2014) of a lecture by Suzanne Poirier at Northwestern’s Feinberg School of Medicine, during which she reported on her analysis of more than forty book-length medical school memoirs. She discovered that a theme of a sense of not belonging ran through most (if not all) of the sources she reviewed. Other observers have wondered how much the impostor syndrome contributes to burnout, depression, and suicidal ideation in medical students.

I suffered from none of those maladies, but my feeling of unworthiness followed me into practice. Even as I acquired more experience during hundreds of thousands of patient encounters, I continued to worry that the next patient through the door would be the end of a decade’s long string of good fortune and my clinical ineptitude would be unmasked.

One of the most effective strategies for dealing with such feelings is sharing them. Unfortunately, most physicians don’t often find themselves in settings in which they can comfortably share these feelings with their peers. And of course it is probably not the best idea to share your self-doubts when you are trying to reassure a patient who is feeling vulnerable herself. Finding the balance between admitting that we don’t know everything and projecting the image that we know more than enough to help our patients is one of the biggest challenges facing us as we struggle to master the art of clinical medicine.

I will leave the question of whether I was an impostor to those who can be more objective. All I know is that I was damn lucky for 40 years.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.”

The dream unfolds late in the semester with just a week to go, usually my final semester. My college career has been exemplary … good grades, honor society member, academic behavior any parent would be proud of. But for some reason I realize that I have failed to attend any of the classes of one of my courses, usually a math course. In fact, I’m not sure I have the text or maybe I never purchased it. More frighteningly, I can’t remember in which classroom it meets or even the hour. No one else seems to have noticed my failure to show up for class. Remember, it’s a math course and BSing doesn’t work in math. There is no way I will be able to resurrect myself from this academic disaster. The dream eventually dissolves without resolution, but it will return in some permutation, fortunately less often as I have gotten older. My wife and many of our friends share similar nightmares.

There are many angles from which one can interpret a dream like this, but one explanation is that I finally have been discovered as an impostor. I had studied hard, gotten good grades but at the core of things I was a goof-off and really wasn’t worthy of the adulation I had received. My good works were merely a shell over a life of not doing all the things that other people thought I had been doing.

It turns out that I had fallen into a surprisingly common psychological trap, probably during medical school. Despite accumulating significant amounts of clinical acumen, and in my later years what some might call wisdom, my dream suggests that I still have been unable to free myself of a nagging self-doubt. In 1978, two American psychologists Pauline Clance and Suzanne Imes labeled this phenomenon “the impostor syndrome” (“Learning to Deal with the Impostor Syndrome” by Carl Richards [The New York Times, Oct. 26, 2015]). They characterized it as a feeling “of phoniness in people who believe that they are not intelligent, capable, or creative despite evidence of high achievement.” The victims “are highly motivated to achieve” but “live in fear of being ‘found out’ or exposed as frauds.”

In college, I was in awe of those classmates who could play bridge for hours day after day, write their papers in the wee morning hours on the day they were due, and still get very acceptable grades. I imagined that if these guys had studied a third as much as I did or had simply begun their term papers on the day before they were due, their academic credentials would have blown mine out of the water.

In medical school I always had a sense that I didn’t belong there. I had never heard of anyone else who had gotten into an elite medical school off the waiting list as I had. There must have been a clerical error, and I had been mistaken for the scion of a wealthy benefactor with a similar sounding name. I had been around some smart people before, but my medical school classmates were in a different league altogether.

It turns out I was not alone bobbing in my sea of self-doubt. I learned from a blog entry on KevinMD.com (“The effect of impostor syndrome on medical students” by Aryeh Goldberg, March 1, 2014) of a lecture by Suzanne Poirier at Northwestern’s Feinberg School of Medicine, during which she reported on her analysis of more than forty book-length medical school memoirs. She discovered that a theme of a sense of not belonging ran through most (if not all) of the sources she reviewed. Other observers have wondered how much the impostor syndrome contributes to burnout, depression, and suicidal ideation in medical students.

I suffered from none of those maladies, but my feeling of unworthiness followed me into practice. Even as I acquired more experience during hundreds of thousands of patient encounters, I continued to worry that the next patient through the door would be the end of a decade’s long string of good fortune and my clinical ineptitude would be unmasked.

One of the most effective strategies for dealing with such feelings is sharing them. Unfortunately, most physicians don’t often find themselves in settings in which they can comfortably share these feelings with their peers. And of course it is probably not the best idea to share your self-doubts when you are trying to reassure a patient who is feeling vulnerable herself. Finding the balance between admitting that we don’t know everything and projecting the image that we know more than enough to help our patients is one of the biggest challenges facing us as we struggle to master the art of clinical medicine.

I will leave the question of whether I was an impostor to those who can be more objective. All I know is that I was damn lucky for 40 years.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.”

If you haven’t already stopped investing your limited supply of office time in fruitless attempts to convince vaccine-hesitant parents to immunize their children, a small study at the University of North Carolina Women’s Hospital in Chapel Hill might finally convince you it’s time to save your breath for other more achievable goals. In a survey of 171 parents, 72% reported that they already had settled on their vaccine preferences prior to pregnancy.

This was a limited survey and may not reflect the responses of a national sample of parents, but it is concerning in light of several other studies that paint a similar gloomy picture. One such study found that even when vaccine-denying parents were presented with educational materials that they acknowledged seemed valid, they continued to withhold vaccines by falling back on other arguments to support their views (“Effective Messages in Vaccine Promotion: A Randomized Trial” by Nyhan et al. [Pediatrics. 2014 Apr;133(4):e835-42]).

If a larger and more geographically diverse study continues to find that the die is cast well before pediatricians have gotten our chance to discuss vaccines with parents-to-be, we will need to rethink our strategies for dealing with vaccine refusers. For those pediatricians who already ask vaccine decliners to find another practice, this new study suggests that they could save themselves time and trouble by advertising their policy to the obstetricians in their communities. This proactive advertising would require some courage, but in the long run it probably makes economic sense.

However, for most pediatricians it may be better to wait in hopes that future research can determine exactly when and under what circumstances most vaccine decliners arrive at their unfortunate decisions. How often was it a philosophy that they inherited from their parents? How often did it reflect their religious views? How often did it evolve from something they heard in school? Junior high, high school, college? Was it a science class, or history, or philosophy?

Was it the result of some media story? TV? Print? Internet? If they can recall a particular show or website, what was it that made it sound so convincing? If it was an individual, was it a friend, celebrity, or a teacher?

A study this detailed would be time consuming and labor intensive, as it would be best done in face-to-face structured interviews by someone who could project a nonjudgmental aura. It would necessarily be retrospective. But it might yield some surprising and helpful information that could be used to target our attack on the epidemic of vaccine refusal.

We know that outbreaks of certain infectious diseases, smallpox being the prime example, do not respond to media blitzes and immunization campaigns. Epidemics will continue to roll along unchecked until a labor-intensive, boots-on-the-ground, door-to-door case-finding effort is undertaken. Vaccine refusal may be similar to smallpox. It appears to be unresponsive to mass media and educational initiatives. It may continue to plague us until we chase down its roots.

Whatever strategy we try next, it is clear that although most parents report that they consider pediatricians among their most trusted sources of health information for their children, we are failing to reach a segment of our target audience. We are too late, long after the die is cast.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.”

*This story was updated 1/28/2016.

If you haven’t already stopped investing your limited supply of office time in fruitless attempts to convince vaccine-hesitant parents to immunize their children, a small study at the University of North Carolina Women’s Hospital in Chapel Hill might finally convince you it’s time to save your breath for other more achievable goals. In a survey of 171 parents, 72% reported that they already had settled on their vaccine preferences prior to pregnancy.

This was a limited survey and may not reflect the responses of a national sample of parents, but it is concerning in light of several other studies that paint a similar gloomy picture. One such study found that even when vaccine-denying parents were presented with educational materials that they acknowledged seemed valid, they continued to withhold vaccines by falling back on other arguments to support their views (“Effective Messages in Vaccine Promotion: A Randomized Trial” by Nyhan et al. [Pediatrics. 2014 Apr;133(4):e835-42]).

If a larger and more geographically diverse study continues to find that the die is cast well before pediatricians have gotten our chance to discuss vaccines with parents-to-be, we will need to rethink our strategies for dealing with vaccine refusers. For those pediatricians who already ask vaccine decliners to find another practice, this new study suggests that they could save themselves time and trouble by advertising their policy to the obstetricians in their communities. This proactive advertising would require some courage, but in the long run it probably makes economic sense.

However, for most pediatricians it may be better to wait in hopes that future research can determine exactly when and under what circumstances most vaccine decliners arrive at their unfortunate decisions. How often was it a philosophy that they inherited from their parents? How often did it reflect their religious views? How often did it evolve from something they heard in school? Junior high, high school, college? Was it a science class, or history, or philosophy?

Was it the result of some media story? TV? Print? Internet? If they can recall a particular show or website, what was it that made it sound so convincing? If it was an individual, was it a friend, celebrity, or a teacher?

A study this detailed would be time consuming and labor intensive, as it would be best done in face-to-face structured interviews by someone who could project a nonjudgmental aura. It would necessarily be retrospective. But it might yield some surprising and helpful information that could be used to target our attack on the epidemic of vaccine refusal.

We know that outbreaks of certain infectious diseases, smallpox being the prime example, do not respond to media blitzes and immunization campaigns. Epidemics will continue to roll along unchecked until a labor-intensive, boots-on-the-ground, door-to-door case-finding effort is undertaken. Vaccine refusal may be similar to smallpox. It appears to be unresponsive to mass media and educational initiatives. It may continue to plague us until we chase down its roots.

Whatever strategy we try next, it is clear that although most parents report that they consider pediatricians among their most trusted sources of health information for their children, we are failing to reach a segment of our target audience. We are too late, long after the die is cast.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.”

*This story was updated 1/28/2016.

If you haven’t already stopped investing your limited supply of office time in fruitless attempts to convince vaccine-hesitant parents to immunize their children, a small study at the University of North Carolina Women’s Hospital in Chapel Hill might finally convince you it’s time to save your breath for other more achievable goals. In a survey of 171 parents, 72% reported that they already had settled on their vaccine preferences prior to pregnancy.

This was a limited survey and may not reflect the responses of a national sample of parents, but it is concerning in light of several other studies that paint a similar gloomy picture. One such study found that even when vaccine-denying parents were presented with educational materials that they acknowledged seemed valid, they continued to withhold vaccines by falling back on other arguments to support their views (“Effective Messages in Vaccine Promotion: A Randomized Trial” by Nyhan et al. [Pediatrics. 2014 Apr;133(4):e835-42]).

If a larger and more geographically diverse study continues to find that the die is cast well before pediatricians have gotten our chance to discuss vaccines with parents-to-be, we will need to rethink our strategies for dealing with vaccine refusers. For those pediatricians who already ask vaccine decliners to find another practice, this new study suggests that they could save themselves time and trouble by advertising their policy to the obstetricians in their communities. This proactive advertising would require some courage, but in the long run it probably makes economic sense.

However, for most pediatricians it may be better to wait in hopes that future research can determine exactly when and under what circumstances most vaccine decliners arrive at their unfortunate decisions. How often was it a philosophy that they inherited from their parents? How often did it reflect their religious views? How often did it evolve from something they heard in school? Junior high, high school, college? Was it a science class, or history, or philosophy?

Was it the result of some media story? TV? Print? Internet? If they can recall a particular show or website, what was it that made it sound so convincing? If it was an individual, was it a friend, celebrity, or a teacher?

A study this detailed would be time consuming and labor intensive, as it would be best done in face-to-face structured interviews by someone who could project a nonjudgmental aura. It would necessarily be retrospective. But it might yield some surprising and helpful information that could be used to target our attack on the epidemic of vaccine refusal.

We know that outbreaks of certain infectious diseases, smallpox being the prime example, do not respond to media blitzes and immunization campaigns. Epidemics will continue to roll along unchecked until a labor-intensive, boots-on-the-ground, door-to-door case-finding effort is undertaken. Vaccine refusal may be similar to smallpox. It appears to be unresponsive to mass media and educational initiatives. It may continue to plague us until we chase down its roots.

Whatever strategy we try next, it is clear that although most parents report that they consider pediatricians among their most trusted sources of health information for their children, we are failing to reach a segment of our target audience. We are too late, long after the die is cast.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.”

*This story was updated 1/28/2016.

I hadn’t originally planned to be an obstetrician-gynecologist; in fact, I trained as an internist for 2 years. But as I became more exposed to the real-life experience of medical care, I realized that ob.gyn. would allow me to take care of women in all facets of their lives, from family planning to childbirth to endocrine problems and even depression.

Having joined the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in 1965, my tenure as an ob.gyn. has spanned almost the exact length of this 50th anniversary retrospective of Ob.Gyn.News. But in my experience, those early days of my practice were actually the turning point for our specialty.

I’m an observer, not a historian. But I can’t imagine that any other specialty was more impacted by societal change in the mid-1960s than ours.

Courtesy Rivermend Health

For one thing, when I was training, we were an overwhelmingly male group of residents who were learning about how to take care of women. Our commitment was not in question, but our ability to truly connect with women was certainly underdeveloped.

I’m gratified now to see that the demographics of ob.gyn. have changed, because they should. Without disrespecting my male ob.gyn. brethren, I was pleased to see that more than 80% of ob.gyn. trainees are now women. Importantly, many of them are learning now from female ob.gyns. This foretells a future in which connections between patient and physician are as strong as they should be.

Moreover, ob.gyn. trainees today have the highest proportions of African American and Hispanic trainees compared with any other specialty. We are doing a better job of representing, within our ranks, the women whom we treat. This continues to bolster our relationships, and in no other field is a trusting, intimate relationship as important as in ours.

Of course, the mid-1960s also heralded dramatic changes within reproductive health. Women were beginning to dip their toes into being able to control their own fertility and, in so doing, to prevent pregnancy. This also gave us the opportunity to focus on a woman’s greater well-being, helping her to address her own health before becoming pregnant. It pivoted the role of the ob.gyn. and charted us on a course to being, for many women, their primary point of care. And it gave women educational, professional, and economic opportunities the likes of which had never existed before.

Outside of fertility planning, we also began to make inroads in obstetric care – and to make some mistakes. The 1960s heralded some developments that we still embrace, but we also began a path toward dependence on technology and overinvasive care that we are trying to step away from today.

And, we had difficult conversations then that we have now. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

One of the most exciting, and essential, changes that I have seen since I began my career is the voice of the woman in ob.gyn. care. We speak with our patients. We screen them for depression and for intimate partner violence. We discuss their lives and whether they are using the birth control that is best for them. We try to reflect their own preferences in our approach to their labor and delivery. We missed an opportunity to do this in the past, to discuss a woman’s social history. We know now that there is more to a woman’s well-being than whether she smokes and drinks.

It makes sense that our specialty has changed, because we are the only specialty dedicated to women, and the last 50 years have brought about intense societal change for women.

We still have further to go. We can be slow to evolve, and we constantly face challenges that other specialties don’t confront. But I believe that the same dedication to women that inspired me to go into ob.gyn. 50 years ago is the same inspiration that is leading today’s trainees to do the same.

Dr. Pion is a clinical professor at the UCLA School of Medicine. He has served on the faculty of the University of Washington and the University of Hawaii, and worked for more than 25 years in the development and production of TV and radio programming on health care. He is a fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

I hadn’t originally planned to be an obstetrician-gynecologist; in fact, I trained as an internist for 2 years. But as I became more exposed to the real-life experience of medical care, I realized that ob.gyn. would allow me to take care of women in all facets of their lives, from family planning to childbirth to endocrine problems and even depression.

Having joined the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in 1965, my tenure as an ob.gyn. has spanned almost the exact length of this 50th anniversary retrospective of Ob.Gyn.News. But in my experience, those early days of my practice were actually the turning point for our specialty.

I’m an observer, not a historian. But I can’t imagine that any other specialty was more impacted by societal change in the mid-1960s than ours.

Courtesy Rivermend Health

For one thing, when I was training, we were an overwhelmingly male group of residents who were learning about how to take care of women. Our commitment was not in question, but our ability to truly connect with women was certainly underdeveloped.

I’m gratified now to see that the demographics of ob.gyn. have changed, because they should. Without disrespecting my male ob.gyn. brethren, I was pleased to see that more than 80% of ob.gyn. trainees are now women. Importantly, many of them are learning now from female ob.gyns. This foretells a future in which connections between patient and physician are as strong as they should be.

Moreover, ob.gyn. trainees today have the highest proportions of African American and Hispanic trainees compared with any other specialty. We are doing a better job of representing, within our ranks, the women whom we treat. This continues to bolster our relationships, and in no other field is a trusting, intimate relationship as important as in ours.

Of course, the mid-1960s also heralded dramatic changes within reproductive health. Women were beginning to dip their toes into being able to control their own fertility and, in so doing, to prevent pregnancy. This also gave us the opportunity to focus on a woman’s greater well-being, helping her to address her own health before becoming pregnant. It pivoted the role of the ob.gyn. and charted us on a course to being, for many women, their primary point of care. And it gave women educational, professional, and economic opportunities the likes of which had never existed before.

Outside of fertility planning, we also began to make inroads in obstetric care – and to make some mistakes. The 1960s heralded some developments that we still embrace, but we also began a path toward dependence on technology and overinvasive care that we are trying to step away from today.

And, we had difficult conversations then that we have now. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

One of the most exciting, and essential, changes that I have seen since I began my career is the voice of the woman in ob.gyn. care. We speak with our patients. We screen them for depression and for intimate partner violence. We discuss their lives and whether they are using the birth control that is best for them. We try to reflect their own preferences in our approach to their labor and delivery. We missed an opportunity to do this in the past, to discuss a woman’s social history. We know now that there is more to a woman’s well-being than whether she smokes and drinks.

It makes sense that our specialty has changed, because we are the only specialty dedicated to women, and the last 50 years have brought about intense societal change for women.

We still have further to go. We can be slow to evolve, and we constantly face challenges that other specialties don’t confront. But I believe that the same dedication to women that inspired me to go into ob.gyn. 50 years ago is the same inspiration that is leading today’s trainees to do the same.

Dr. Pion is a clinical professor at the UCLA School of Medicine. He has served on the faculty of the University of Washington and the University of Hawaii, and worked for more than 25 years in the development and production of TV and radio programming on health care. He is a fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

I hadn’t originally planned to be an obstetrician-gynecologist; in fact, I trained as an internist for 2 years. But as I became more exposed to the real-life experience of medical care, I realized that ob.gyn. would allow me to take care of women in all facets of their lives, from family planning to childbirth to endocrine problems and even depression.

Having joined the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in 1965, my tenure as an ob.gyn. has spanned almost the exact length of this 50th anniversary retrospective of Ob.Gyn.News. But in my experience, those early days of my practice were actually the turning point for our specialty.

I’m an observer, not a historian. But I can’t imagine that any other specialty was more impacted by societal change in the mid-1960s than ours.

Courtesy Rivermend Health

For one thing, when I was training, we were an overwhelmingly male group of residents who were learning about how to take care of women. Our commitment was not in question, but our ability to truly connect with women was certainly underdeveloped.

I’m gratified now to see that the demographics of ob.gyn. have changed, because they should. Without disrespecting my male ob.gyn. brethren, I was pleased to see that more than 80% of ob.gyn. trainees are now women. Importantly, many of them are learning now from female ob.gyns. This foretells a future in which connections between patient and physician are as strong as they should be.

Moreover, ob.gyn. trainees today have the highest proportions of African American and Hispanic trainees compared with any other specialty. We are doing a better job of representing, within our ranks, the women whom we treat. This continues to bolster our relationships, and in no other field is a trusting, intimate relationship as important as in ours.

Of course, the mid-1960s also heralded dramatic changes within reproductive health. Women were beginning to dip their toes into being able to control their own fertility and, in so doing, to prevent pregnancy. This also gave us the opportunity to focus on a woman’s greater well-being, helping her to address her own health before becoming pregnant. It pivoted the role of the ob.gyn. and charted us on a course to being, for many women, their primary point of care. And it gave women educational, professional, and economic opportunities the likes of which had never existed before.

Outside of fertility planning, we also began to make inroads in obstetric care – and to make some mistakes. The 1960s heralded some developments that we still embrace, but we also began a path toward dependence on technology and overinvasive care that we are trying to step away from today.

And, we had difficult conversations then that we have now. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

One of the most exciting, and essential, changes that I have seen since I began my career is the voice of the woman in ob.gyn. care. We speak with our patients. We screen them for depression and for intimate partner violence. We discuss their lives and whether they are using the birth control that is best for them. We try to reflect their own preferences in our approach to their labor and delivery. We missed an opportunity to do this in the past, to discuss a woman’s social history. We know now that there is more to a woman’s well-being than whether she smokes and drinks.

It makes sense that our specialty has changed, because we are the only specialty dedicated to women, and the last 50 years have brought about intense societal change for women.

We still have further to go. We can be slow to evolve, and we constantly face challenges that other specialties don’t confront. But I believe that the same dedication to women that inspired me to go into ob.gyn. 50 years ago is the same inspiration that is leading today’s trainees to do the same.

Dr. Pion is a clinical professor at the UCLA School of Medicine. He has served on the faculty of the University of Washington and the University of Hawaii, and worked for more than 25 years in the development and production of TV and radio programming on health care. He is a fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Used for centuries by humans for its health-promoting qualities, royal jelly is a yellowish, viscous secretion from the hypopharyngeal and mandibular glands of worker bees that nourishes bee larvae of all kinds (i.e., drones, workers, queens) after which it becomes the exclusive nourishment for queens throughout their development.^1-3 A wide range of biologic activity has been attributed to royal jelly, including antitumor, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, collagen production-promoting, immunomodulatory, and wound healing.^3-8 Royal jelly is used in cosmetics, health tonics (particularly in Asia), dietary supplements, and beverages.^2,9

Produced from pollen, royal jelly contains water, proteins (82%-90% of which are known as the major royal jelly proteins, with five primary members), lipids – including its primary unsaturated fatty acid, 10-hydroxy-2-decenoic acid (10-HDA) – sugars, carbohydrates, free amino acids, vitamins, and minerals.^4,7,10 Many of the benefits to human health linked to royal jelly can be partly attributed to the activity of its lipids, particularly 10-HDA, which render the royal jelly emulsion highly acidic and impart antimicrobial properties.¹⁰ These and other constituents of royal jelly operate in ways that are thought to yield broad protection against skin aging and cancer development, modulation of the immune system, induction of neurogenesis, and alleviation of menopausal symptoms.¹ This column will focus on recent studies pertaining to the topical use of royal jelly.

Wound healing

In 2008, Abdelatif et al. conducted a pilot study to determine the safety and effectiveness of a then-new ointment combining royal jelly and panthenol (Pedyphar) in 60 patients with limb-threatening diabetic foot infections. After 9 weeks of treatment and through 6 months of follow-up, 96% of subjects with full-thickness skin ulcers (Wagner grades 1 and 2) or deep tissue infection and suspected osteomyelitis (grade 3) responded well, with all grade 1 and 2 ulcers healing and 92% of grade 3 ulcers healing. All patients with gangrenous lesions (grades 4 and 5) healed after surgical excision, debridement, and conservative treatment with the royal jelly/panthenol product. The researchers called for more double-blind, randomized controlled studies to confirm their promising findings of the safety and efficacy of the royal jelly/panthenol combination.¹¹

Two years later, Kim et al. treated freshly scratched normal human dermal fibroblasts with different concentrations of royal jelly (0.1 mg/mL, 1.0 mg/mL, or 5 mg/mL) for up to 48 hours. Fibroblast migration was found to have peaked at 24 hours after wound induction, with royal jelly significantly and dose-dependently accelerating the migration at the 8-hour mark. Royal jelly also influenced several fibroblast lipids involved in the wound healing process, with a decrease in cholesterol level and an increase in sphinganines.¹²

A small study with eight subjects was done in 2011 by Siavash et al. to evaluate the efficacy of topically applied royal jelly for diabetic foot ulcers. Seven of the eight ulcers treated healed, with a mean healing time of 41 days. The eighth ulcer improved, diminishing significantly in size. The researchers concluded that a royal jelly dressing is an effective alternative for treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.¹³ However, the same team conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of topical royal jelly on diabetic foot ulcers in 25 patients (6 females, 19 males) and found no significant differences between 5% sterile topical royal jelly or placebo.⁶

Collagen production

shootthebreeze/thinkstockphotos.com

A decade ago, Koya-Miyata et al. showed that royal jelly promotes collagen synthesis by skin fibroblasts in the presence of ascorbic acid-2-O-alpha-glucoside. They also showed that its primary fatty acid constituent, 10-HDA, facilitates the collagen production by fibroblasts treated with ascorbic acid-2-O-alpha-glucoside through activation of transforming growth factor-beta 1 production.₅

Photoprotection

Park et al. measured the 10-HDA content of royal jelly in 2011 and studied its effects on UVB-induced skin photoaging in normal human dermal fibroblasts. The introduction of royal jelly (0.211% 10-HDA) promoted the production of procollagen type I and transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta-1 without affecting matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-1 levels. The investigators concluded that the impact of royal jelly on collagen production positioned the bee product as a potential photoprotectant against UVB-induced photoaging.¹⁴ The next year, Park et al. observed that the production of type I collagen in the dorsal skin of ovariectomized Sprague-Dawley rats was enhanced by the dietary supplementation of 1% royal jelly extract. Although MMP-1 levels were unaffected, the investigators speculated that the effects on collagen synthesis alone were sufficient for royal jelly to provide anti-aging activity.⁴

In 2013, Zheng et al. found that 10-HDA significantly protected fibroblasts from UVA-induced cytotoxicity, reactive oxygen species, and cellular senescence. They also noted that 10-HDA inhibited the UVA-generated expression of MMP-1 and -3, and stimulated collagen production. Treatment with 10-HDA also reduced the activation of the c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways. The researchers concluded that this royal jelly fatty acid appears to be a promising agent for the prevention and treatment of cutaneous photoaging.⁸

Skin whitening

In 2011, Han et al. reported that royal jelly dose-dependently inhibited melanin biosynthesis in the B16F1 mouse melanocyte cell line by reducing tyrosinase activity. Royal jelly also lowered mRNA levels of tyrosinase. The investigators concluded that royal jelly may be a viable option in the skin-lightening arsenal.³

Safety

There are some reports of contact dermatitis from the use of topical royal jelly.¹⁵ Far more significant, while rare, adverse reactions have been linked to oral use of royal jelly, including acute asthma, anaphylaxis, and even death.^2,16,17

Conclusion

Royal jelly is one of several bee products found to have beneficial health effects in humans. Various dermatologic applications of royal jelly have been employed in recent decades. More research is necessary, though, to determine just how useful this bee product may be for a range of cutaneous conditions.

References

1. J Med Food. 2013;16(2):96-102.

2. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2013;77(4):789-95.

3. Am J Chin Med. 2011;39(6):1253-60.

4. J Med Food. 2012;15(6):568-75.

5. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2004 Apr;68(4):767-73.

6. Int Wound J. 2015;12(2):137-42.

7. J Food Sci. 2008 Nov;73(9):R117-24.

8. J Eur Acad Dermatol. Venereol. 2013;27(10):1269-77.

9. Pharmacogn Mag. 2013;9(33):9-13.

10. Ayu. 2012;33(2):178-82.

11. J Wound Care. 2008;17(3):108-10.

12. Nutr Res Pract. 2010;4(5):362-8.

13. J Res Med Sci. 2011;16(7):904-9.

14. J Med Food. 2011;14(9):899-906.

15. Contact Dermatitis. 1983;9(6):452-5.

16. Trop Biomed. 2008;25(3):243-51.

17. J Dermatol. 2011;38(11):1079-81.

Dr. Baumann is chief executive officer of the Baumann Cosmetic & Research Institute in the Design District in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote the textbook, “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and a book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). She has contributed to the Cosmeceutical Critique column in Dermatology News since January 2001. Her latest book, “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” was published in November 2014. Dr. Baumann has received funding for clinical grants from Allergan, Aveeno, Avon Products, Evolus, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Kythera Biopharmaceuticals, Mary Kay, Medicis Pharmaceuticals, Neutrogena, Philosophy, Topix Pharmaceuticals, and Unilever.

Used for centuries by humans for its health-promoting qualities, royal jelly is a yellowish, viscous secretion from the hypopharyngeal and mandibular glands of worker bees that nourishes bee larvae of all kinds (i.e., drones, workers, queens) after which it becomes the exclusive nourishment for queens throughout their development.^1-3 A wide range of biologic activity has been attributed to royal jelly, including antitumor, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, collagen production-promoting, immunomodulatory, and wound healing.^3-8 Royal jelly is used in cosmetics, health tonics (particularly in Asia), dietary supplements, and beverages.^2,9

Produced from pollen, royal jelly contains water, proteins (82%-90% of which are known as the major royal jelly proteins, with five primary members), lipids – including its primary unsaturated fatty acid, 10-hydroxy-2-decenoic acid (10-HDA) – sugars, carbohydrates, free amino acids, vitamins, and minerals.^4,7,10 Many of the benefits to human health linked to royal jelly can be partly attributed to the activity of its lipids, particularly 10-HDA, which render the royal jelly emulsion highly acidic and impart antimicrobial properties.¹⁰ These and other constituents of royal jelly operate in ways that are thought to yield broad protection against skin aging and cancer development, modulation of the immune system, induction of neurogenesis, and alleviation of menopausal symptoms.¹ This column will focus on recent studies pertaining to the topical use of royal jelly.

Wound healing

In 2008, Abdelatif et al. conducted a pilot study to determine the safety and effectiveness of a then-new ointment combining royal jelly and panthenol (Pedyphar) in 60 patients with limb-threatening diabetic foot infections. After 9 weeks of treatment and through 6 months of follow-up, 96% of subjects with full-thickness skin ulcers (Wagner grades 1 and 2) or deep tissue infection and suspected osteomyelitis (grade 3) responded well, with all grade 1 and 2 ulcers healing and 92% of grade 3 ulcers healing. All patients with gangrenous lesions (grades 4 and 5) healed after surgical excision, debridement, and conservative treatment with the royal jelly/panthenol product. The researchers called for more double-blind, randomized controlled studies to confirm their promising findings of the safety and efficacy of the royal jelly/panthenol combination.¹¹

Two years later, Kim et al. treated freshly scratched normal human dermal fibroblasts with different concentrations of royal jelly (0.1 mg/mL, 1.0 mg/mL, or 5 mg/mL) for up to 48 hours. Fibroblast migration was found to have peaked at 24 hours after wound induction, with royal jelly significantly and dose-dependently accelerating the migration at the 8-hour mark. Royal jelly also influenced several fibroblast lipids involved in the wound healing process, with a decrease in cholesterol level and an increase in sphinganines.¹²

A small study with eight subjects was done in 2011 by Siavash et al. to evaluate the efficacy of topically applied royal jelly for diabetic foot ulcers. Seven of the eight ulcers treated healed, with a mean healing time of 41 days. The eighth ulcer improved, diminishing significantly in size. The researchers concluded that a royal jelly dressing is an effective alternative for treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.¹³ However, the same team conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of topical royal jelly on diabetic foot ulcers in 25 patients (6 females, 19 males) and found no significant differences between 5% sterile topical royal jelly or placebo.⁶

Collagen production

shootthebreeze/thinkstockphotos.com

A decade ago, Koya-Miyata et al. showed that royal jelly promotes collagen synthesis by skin fibroblasts in the presence of ascorbic acid-2-O-alpha-glucoside. They also showed that its primary fatty acid constituent, 10-HDA, facilitates the collagen production by fibroblasts treated with ascorbic acid-2-O-alpha-glucoside through activation of transforming growth factor-beta 1 production.₅

Photoprotection

Park et al. measured the 10-HDA content of royal jelly in 2011 and studied its effects on UVB-induced skin photoaging in normal human dermal fibroblasts. The introduction of royal jelly (0.211% 10-HDA) promoted the production of procollagen type I and transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta-1 without affecting matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-1 levels. The investigators concluded that the impact of royal jelly on collagen production positioned the bee product as a potential photoprotectant against UVB-induced photoaging.¹⁴ The next year, Park et al. observed that the production of type I collagen in the dorsal skin of ovariectomized Sprague-Dawley rats was enhanced by the dietary supplementation of 1% royal jelly extract. Although MMP-1 levels were unaffected, the investigators speculated that the effects on collagen synthesis alone were sufficient for royal jelly to provide anti-aging activity.⁴

In 2013, Zheng et al. found that 10-HDA significantly protected fibroblasts from UVA-induced cytotoxicity, reactive oxygen species, and cellular senescence. They also noted that 10-HDA inhibited the UVA-generated expression of MMP-1 and -3, and stimulated collagen production. Treatment with 10-HDA also reduced the activation of the c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways. The researchers concluded that this royal jelly fatty acid appears to be a promising agent for the prevention and treatment of cutaneous photoaging.⁸

Skin whitening

In 2011, Han et al. reported that royal jelly dose-dependently inhibited melanin biosynthesis in the B16F1 mouse melanocyte cell line by reducing tyrosinase activity. Royal jelly also lowered mRNA levels of tyrosinase. The investigators concluded that royal jelly may be a viable option in the skin-lightening arsenal.³

Safety

There are some reports of contact dermatitis from the use of topical royal jelly.¹⁵ Far more significant, while rare, adverse reactions have been linked to oral use of royal jelly, including acute asthma, anaphylaxis, and even death.^2,16,17

Conclusion

Royal jelly is one of several bee products found to have beneficial health effects in humans. Various dermatologic applications of royal jelly have been employed in recent decades. More research is necessary, though, to determine just how useful this bee product may be for a range of cutaneous conditions.

References

1. J Med Food. 2013;16(2):96-102.

2. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2013;77(4):789-95.

3. Am J Chin Med. 2011;39(6):1253-60.

4. J Med Food. 2012;15(6):568-75.

5. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2004 Apr;68(4):767-73.

6. Int Wound J. 2015;12(2):137-42.

7. J Food Sci. 2008 Nov;73(9):R117-24.

8. J Eur Acad Dermatol. Venereol. 2013;27(10):1269-77.

9. Pharmacogn Mag. 2013;9(33):9-13.

10. Ayu. 2012;33(2):178-82.

11. J Wound Care. 2008;17(3):108-10.

12. Nutr Res Pract. 2010;4(5):362-8.

13. J Res Med Sci. 2011;16(7):904-9.

14. J Med Food. 2011;14(9):899-906.

15. Contact Dermatitis. 1983;9(6):452-5.

16. Trop Biomed. 2008;25(3):243-51.

17. J Dermatol. 2011;38(11):1079-81.

Dr. Baumann is chief executive officer of the Baumann Cosmetic & Research Institute in the Design District in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote the textbook, “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and a book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). She has contributed to the Cosmeceutical Critique column in Dermatology News since January 2001. Her latest book, “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” was published in November 2014. Dr. Baumann has received funding for clinical grants from Allergan, Aveeno, Avon Products, Evolus, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Kythera Biopharmaceuticals, Mary Kay, Medicis Pharmaceuticals, Neutrogena, Philosophy, Topix Pharmaceuticals, and Unilever.

Used for centuries by humans for its health-promoting qualities, royal jelly is a yellowish, viscous secretion from the hypopharyngeal and mandibular glands of worker bees that nourishes bee larvae of all kinds (i.e., drones, workers, queens) after which it becomes the exclusive nourishment for queens throughout their development.^1-3 A wide range of biologic activity has been attributed to royal jelly, including antitumor, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, collagen production-promoting, immunomodulatory, and wound healing.^3-8 Royal jelly is used in cosmetics, health tonics (particularly in Asia), dietary supplements, and beverages.^2,9

Produced from pollen, royal jelly contains water, proteins (82%-90% of which are known as the major royal jelly proteins, with five primary members), lipids – including its primary unsaturated fatty acid, 10-hydroxy-2-decenoic acid (10-HDA) – sugars, carbohydrates, free amino acids, vitamins, and minerals.^4,7,10 Many of the benefits to human health linked to royal jelly can be partly attributed to the activity of its lipids, particularly 10-HDA, which render the royal jelly emulsion highly acidic and impart antimicrobial properties.¹⁰ These and other constituents of royal jelly operate in ways that are thought to yield broad protection against skin aging and cancer development, modulation of the immune system, induction of neurogenesis, and alleviation of menopausal symptoms.¹ This column will focus on recent studies pertaining to the topical use of royal jelly.

Wound healing

In 2008, Abdelatif et al. conducted a pilot study to determine the safety and effectiveness of a then-new ointment combining royal jelly and panthenol (Pedyphar) in 60 patients with limb-threatening diabetic foot infections. After 9 weeks of treatment and through 6 months of follow-up, 96% of subjects with full-thickness skin ulcers (Wagner grades 1 and 2) or deep tissue infection and suspected osteomyelitis (grade 3) responded well, with all grade 1 and 2 ulcers healing and 92% of grade 3 ulcers healing. All patients with gangrenous lesions (grades 4 and 5) healed after surgical excision, debridement, and conservative treatment with the royal jelly/panthenol product. The researchers called for more double-blind, randomized controlled studies to confirm their promising findings of the safety and efficacy of the royal jelly/panthenol combination.¹¹

Two years later, Kim et al. treated freshly scratched normal human dermal fibroblasts with different concentrations of royal jelly (0.1 mg/mL, 1.0 mg/mL, or 5 mg/mL) for up to 48 hours. Fibroblast migration was found to have peaked at 24 hours after wound induction, with royal jelly significantly and dose-dependently accelerating the migration at the 8-hour mark. Royal jelly also influenced several fibroblast lipids involved in the wound healing process, with a decrease in cholesterol level and an increase in sphinganines.¹²

A small study with eight subjects was done in 2011 by Siavash et al. to evaluate the efficacy of topically applied royal jelly for diabetic foot ulcers. Seven of the eight ulcers treated healed, with a mean healing time of 41 days. The eighth ulcer improved, diminishing significantly in size. The researchers concluded that a royal jelly dressing is an effective alternative for treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.¹³ However, the same team conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of topical royal jelly on diabetic foot ulcers in 25 patients (6 females, 19 males) and found no significant differences between 5% sterile topical royal jelly or placebo.⁶

Collagen production

shootthebreeze/thinkstockphotos.com

A decade ago, Koya-Miyata et al. showed that royal jelly promotes collagen synthesis by skin fibroblasts in the presence of ascorbic acid-2-O-alpha-glucoside. They also showed that its primary fatty acid constituent, 10-HDA, facilitates the collagen production by fibroblasts treated with ascorbic acid-2-O-alpha-glucoside through activation of transforming growth factor-beta 1 production.₅

Photoprotection

Park et al. measured the 10-HDA content of royal jelly in 2011 and studied its effects on UVB-induced skin photoaging in normal human dermal fibroblasts. The introduction of royal jelly (0.211% 10-HDA) promoted the production of procollagen type I and transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta-1 without affecting matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-1 levels. The investigators concluded that the impact of royal jelly on collagen production positioned the bee product as a potential photoprotectant against UVB-induced photoaging.¹⁴ The next year, Park et al. observed that the production of type I collagen in the dorsal skin of ovariectomized Sprague-Dawley rats was enhanced by the dietary supplementation of 1% royal jelly extract. Although MMP-1 levels were unaffected, the investigators speculated that the effects on collagen synthesis alone were sufficient for royal jelly to provide anti-aging activity.⁴

In 2013, Zheng et al. found that 10-HDA significantly protected fibroblasts from UVA-induced cytotoxicity, reactive oxygen species, and cellular senescence. They also noted that 10-HDA inhibited the UVA-generated expression of MMP-1 and -3, and stimulated collagen production. Treatment with 10-HDA also reduced the activation of the c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways. The researchers concluded that this royal jelly fatty acid appears to be a promising agent for the prevention and treatment of cutaneous photoaging.⁸

Skin whitening

In 2011, Han et al. reported that royal jelly dose-dependently inhibited melanin biosynthesis in the B16F1 mouse melanocyte cell line by reducing tyrosinase activity. Royal jelly also lowered mRNA levels of tyrosinase. The investigators concluded that royal jelly may be a viable option in the skin-lightening arsenal.³

Safety

There are some reports of contact dermatitis from the use of topical royal jelly.¹⁵ Far more significant, while rare, adverse reactions have been linked to oral use of royal jelly, including acute asthma, anaphylaxis, and even death.^2,16,17

Conclusion

Royal jelly is one of several bee products found to have beneficial health effects in humans. Various dermatologic applications of royal jelly have been employed in recent decades. More research is necessary, though, to determine just how useful this bee product may be for a range of cutaneous conditions.

References

1. J Med Food. 2013;16(2):96-102.

2. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2013;77(4):789-95.

3. Am J Chin Med. 2011;39(6):1253-60.

4. J Med Food. 2012;15(6):568-75.

5. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2004 Apr;68(4):767-73.

6. Int Wound J. 2015;12(2):137-42.

7. J Food Sci. 2008 Nov;73(9):R117-24.

8. J Eur Acad Dermatol. Venereol. 2013;27(10):1269-77.

9. Pharmacogn Mag. 2013;9(33):9-13.

10. Ayu. 2012;33(2):178-82.

11. J Wound Care. 2008;17(3):108-10.

12. Nutr Res Pract. 2010;4(5):362-8.

13. J Res Med Sci. 2011;16(7):904-9.

14. J Med Food. 2011;14(9):899-906.

15. Contact Dermatitis. 1983;9(6):452-5.

16. Trop Biomed. 2008;25(3):243-51.

17. J Dermatol. 2011;38(11):1079-81.

Dr. Baumann is chief executive officer of the Baumann Cosmetic & Research Institute in the Design District in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote the textbook, “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), and a book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). She has contributed to the Cosmeceutical Critique column in Dermatology News since January 2001. Her latest book, “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients,” was published in November 2014. Dr. Baumann has received funding for clinical grants from Allergan, Aveeno, Avon Products, Evolus, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Kythera Biopharmaceuticals, Mary Kay, Medicis Pharmaceuticals, Neutrogena, Philosophy, Topix Pharmaceuticals, and Unilever.

A mentor—now in his 60s—related his experiences as a resident. On call as a second-year resident, he would often be alone at a busy trauma center with no backup. When a case came in, he would quickly read about it in the library, then manage it in the emergency department (ED) if possible, or, if necessary, take the patient to the operating room (OR).

In the era of improved patient care, increased supervision, and decreased autonomy, this is not the reality anymore.¹ In theory, more reliable patient care is the result; however, the pendulum may have swung too far.

There are a number of injuries that are amenable to definitive fixation in the ED, but not as limited an array of injuries as we have perhaps grown accustomed to. Hand injuries are among the most common orthopedic injuries seen in the ED, with fractures of the metacarpals and phalanges constituting nearly one-half of all hand injuries.² The authors recently attended an excellent instructional course lecture on “The Lost and Found Art of Percutaneous Pinning in the Hand and Wrist” at the annual conference of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.³ The presenters itemized a comprehensive list of fractures and simple dislocations of the hand, which could be simply, safely, effectively, and definitively managed through percutaneous pinning techniques. A significant number of unstable fractures of the phalanges and metacarpals can be treated in the ED under mini–C-arm fluoroscopy without an admission and trip to the OR.^3,4 Most phalangeal and metacarpal fractures are nondisplaced or minimally displaced and stable, and can often be handled with a combination of closed reduction, buddy-taping, and splinting.⁵ The indications for percutaneous versus internal fixation depend on a number of factors, including bone quality, degree of comminution, quality of the soft-tissue envelope, articular involvement, acuity of presentation, and goals for motion.^6,7

Many simple injury patterns involving unstable fractures or dislocations may be definitively managed in the ED with percutaneous pinning (eg, injuries that are unstable with closed reduction alone but that do not necessitate soft-tissue dissection). These include but are not limited to bony mallet injuries, unstable transverse or oblique fractures or fracture-dislocations of the phalanges and metacarpals, carpometacarpal fracture- dislocations, and underlying fractures that need protection of nail-bed repairs, soft-tissue flaps, or extensor tendon injuries (Figures 1, 2).^7,8 The techniques for specific fracture types are beyond the scope of this article but are readily available.^5,6

There are certain situations that undoubtedly warrant surgery in the OR, such as neurovascular injury necessitating microvascular repair, flexor tendon laceration, severely comminuted or segmental fractures, irreducible dislocations, and fractures with severe soft-tissue injury or contamination not amenable to primary irrigation, débridement, and closure at bedside.^4,7,8

You might ask, “Why would one treat an operative injury in the ED and not formally in the OR?,” and we submit that there are a number of reasons.

First, and most important, with increasing health care costs and decreasing reimbursements, physicians are faced with providing safe but economical care. Percutaneous Kirschner wire (K-wire) fixation is dramatically more cost-effective when performed in the ED than in the OR. The cost of a procedure performed in either setting is similarly dependent on a variety of factors, generally including complexity of the patient or procedure, costs of supplies and pharmacologic agents, fixed versus variable overhead costs, and the professional fees of providers and ancillary personnel.^9,10

While the patient is not charged per hour in the ED, it is estimated that ORs in the United States cost, on average, $62 per minute, ranging from as low as $22 to as high as $133 per minute.⁹ Additionally, the number of personnel involved in running an OR exceeds those for a similar procedure performed in the ED, considering (at a minimum) the orthopedic surgeon, anesthesiologist, scrub and radiology technicians, and nursing personnel required before, during, and after an operation.

While analgesia and procedural sedation can be performed similarly in either setting, it is our experience that patients are managed much more often in the ED with local anesthesia under direct care of only the orthopedic provider, whereas intravenous sedation and general anesthesia are far more commonly implemented in the OR. There are exceptions for pediatric patients or those who are unable to tolerate the procedure under only local anesthesia. Local anesthesia or even intravenous conscious sedation entails less risk as well as lower associated drug costs.¹¹

The difference in risk is especially true for sicker patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures.¹¹ Although administration of adequate procedural analgesia grows increasingly difficult the more proximal the injury, the hand and the fingers are easily and reliably anesthetized with well-placed wrist or digital blocks, with infrequent complications.¹² Application of a lidocaine/bupivacaine mixture provides up to 6 to 8 hours of analgesia. A small tourniquet alternative, such as the finger of a sterile glove or phlebotomy tourniquet, applied to the base of the finger or the wrist additionally provides a relatively bloodless field and effectively acts as a Bier block.

Percutaneous pins are much more forgiving than rigid internal fixation. If the initial placement of a pin is unsatisfactory, the pin can be reinserted at little cost.¹² Conversely, it may not be possible to reposition a misplaced screw or screw with inadequate purchase and still maintain adequate fixation. While percutaneous pin fixation is not as rigid as screw fixation, the degree of stability provided is adequate for the small forces affecting the hand in most cases. Accordingly, there is a very low incidence of fibrous union or nonunion.^13,14 With an increasing appreciation of soft-tissue handling over the past few decades, another significant advantage of K-wire fixation is the obviation of soft-tissue dissection, preserving the biology to maximize healing and minimize adverse sequelae.¹² Percutaneous fixation has been shown to achieve functional outcomes comparable to open reduction with internal fixation of operative phalangeal and metacarpal fractures, without soft-tissue disruption, scarring, or implant irritation, and with minimal risk of infection.^3,13,15,16 Ultimate range of motion after percutaneous fixation is comparable, if not superior, to that of internal fixation, despite the initial advantage of rigid internal fixation secondary to decreased scarring and lack of indwelling hardware.^16,17

While the risk of infection, perhaps the primary concern with percutaneous fixation, has been cited as high as 7%, osteomyelitis is exceedingly rare (<0.5%).^3,13,14 Furthermore, pins are often left in place for 3 to 6 weeks, and infection has been found to occur most often at a mean of 10 weeks.^7,13 Infection can also be mitigated by intelligent pin placement, relief of residual tension, and splint immobilization.^4,15 Pin loosening has similarly been reported in up to 4% of cases in large retrospective studies, occurring at an average of 8 weeks, by which time most pins would have been extricated.¹³ Other complications related to impaling adjacent neurovascular or tendinous structures have also been cited but are rare.¹³ A 12-month prospective study of 75 patients specifically evaluating the outcomes after closed reduction with percutaneous fixation of unstable hand fractures in the ED reported only 6 complications at final follow-up.⁴ Complications were all minor, with no cases of nonunion, delayed union, malunion, pin-tract infection, pyarthrosis, or cellulitis, even in the setting of open fractures. Three patients required revision in the OR for pin migration, initial malreduction, and bone loss in the setting of comminution, respectively. The authors credited their low complication rate to supplementary immobilization.

In conclusion, many unstable simple fractures and dislocations of the hand and wrist can be safely and effectively treated in the ED. While it may seem daunting for a junior resident who is unfamiliar with percutaneous techniques, the authors advocate learning from a more senior mentor. The only additional training required is an understanding of how to apply this skill set in a different setting.

A mentor—now in his 60s—related his experiences as a resident. On call as a second-year resident, he would often be alone at a busy trauma center with no backup. When a case came in, he would quickly read about it in the library, then manage it in the emergency department (ED) if possible, or, if necessary, take the patient to the operating room (OR).

In the era of improved patient care, increased supervision, and decreased autonomy, this is not the reality anymore.¹ In theory, more reliable patient care is the result; however, the pendulum may have swung too far.

There are a number of injuries that are amenable to definitive fixation in the ED, but not as limited an array of injuries as we have perhaps grown accustomed to. Hand injuries are among the most common orthopedic injuries seen in the ED, with fractures of the metacarpals and phalanges constituting nearly one-half of all hand injuries.² The authors recently attended an excellent instructional course lecture on “The Lost and Found Art of Percutaneous Pinning in the Hand and Wrist” at the annual conference of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.³ The presenters itemized a comprehensive list of fractures and simple dislocations of the hand, which could be simply, safely, effectively, and definitively managed through percutaneous pinning techniques. A significant number of unstable fractures of the phalanges and metacarpals can be treated in the ED under mini–C-arm fluoroscopy without an admission and trip to the OR.^3,4 Most phalangeal and metacarpal fractures are nondisplaced or minimally displaced and stable, and can often be handled with a combination of closed reduction, buddy-taping, and splinting.⁵ The indications for percutaneous versus internal fixation depend on a number of factors, including bone quality, degree of comminution, quality of the soft-tissue envelope, articular involvement, acuity of presentation, and goals for motion.^6,7

Many simple injury patterns involving unstable fractures or dislocations may be definitively managed in the ED with percutaneous pinning (eg, injuries that are unstable with closed reduction alone but that do not necessitate soft-tissue dissection). These include but are not limited to bony mallet injuries, unstable transverse or oblique fractures or fracture-dislocations of the phalanges and metacarpals, carpometacarpal fracture- dislocations, and underlying fractures that need protection of nail-bed repairs, soft-tissue flaps, or extensor tendon injuries (Figures 1, 2).^7,8 The techniques for specific fracture types are beyond the scope of this article but are readily available.^5,6

There are certain situations that undoubtedly warrant surgery in the OR, such as neurovascular injury necessitating microvascular repair, flexor tendon laceration, severely comminuted or segmental fractures, irreducible dislocations, and fractures with severe soft-tissue injury or contamination not amenable to primary irrigation, débridement, and closure at bedside.^4,7,8

You might ask, “Why would one treat an operative injury in the ED and not formally in the OR?,” and we submit that there are a number of reasons.

First, and most important, with increasing health care costs and decreasing reimbursements, physicians are faced with providing safe but economical care. Percutaneous Kirschner wire (K-wire) fixation is dramatically more cost-effective when performed in the ED than in the OR. The cost of a procedure performed in either setting is similarly dependent on a variety of factors, generally including complexity of the patient or procedure, costs of supplies and pharmacologic agents, fixed versus variable overhead costs, and the professional fees of providers and ancillary personnel.^9,10

While the patient is not charged per hour in the ED, it is estimated that ORs in the United States cost, on average, $62 per minute, ranging from as low as $22 to as high as $133 per minute.⁹ Additionally, the number of personnel involved in running an OR exceeds those for a similar procedure performed in the ED, considering (at a minimum) the orthopedic surgeon, anesthesiologist, scrub and radiology technicians, and nursing personnel required before, during, and after an operation.

While analgesia and procedural sedation can be performed similarly in either setting, it is our experience that patients are managed much more often in the ED with local anesthesia under direct care of only the orthopedic provider, whereas intravenous sedation and general anesthesia are far more commonly implemented in the OR. There are exceptions for pediatric patients or those who are unable to tolerate the procedure under only local anesthesia. Local anesthesia or even intravenous conscious sedation entails less risk as well as lower associated drug costs.¹¹

The difference in risk is especially true for sicker patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures.¹¹ Although administration of adequate procedural analgesia grows increasingly difficult the more proximal the injury, the hand and the fingers are easily and reliably anesthetized with well-placed wrist or digital blocks, with infrequent complications.¹² Application of a lidocaine/bupivacaine mixture provides up to 6 to 8 hours of analgesia. A small tourniquet alternative, such as the finger of a sterile glove or phlebotomy tourniquet, applied to the base of the finger or the wrist additionally provides a relatively bloodless field and effectively acts as a Bier block.

Percutaneous pins are much more forgiving than rigid internal fixation. If the initial placement of a pin is unsatisfactory, the pin can be reinserted at little cost.¹² Conversely, it may not be possible to reposition a misplaced screw or screw with inadequate purchase and still maintain adequate fixation. While percutaneous pin fixation is not as rigid as screw fixation, the degree of stability provided is adequate for the small forces affecting the hand in most cases. Accordingly, there is a very low incidence of fibrous union or nonunion.^13,14 With an increasing appreciation of soft-tissue handling over the past few decades, another significant advantage of K-wire fixation is the obviation of soft-tissue dissection, preserving the biology to maximize healing and minimize adverse sequelae.¹² Percutaneous fixation has been shown to achieve functional outcomes comparable to open reduction with internal fixation of operative phalangeal and metacarpal fractures, without soft-tissue disruption, scarring, or implant irritation, and with minimal risk of infection.^3,13,15,16 Ultimate range of motion after percutaneous fixation is comparable, if not superior, to that of internal fixation, despite the initial advantage of rigid internal fixation secondary to decreased scarring and lack of indwelling hardware.^16,17

While the risk of infection, perhaps the primary concern with percutaneous fixation, has been cited as high as 7%, osteomyelitis is exceedingly rare (<0.5%).^3,13,14 Furthermore, pins are often left in place for 3 to 6 weeks, and infection has been found to occur most often at a mean of 10 weeks.^7,13 Infection can also be mitigated by intelligent pin placement, relief of residual tension, and splint immobilization.^4,15 Pin loosening has similarly been reported in up to 4% of cases in large retrospective studies, occurring at an average of 8 weeks, by which time most pins would have been extricated.¹³ Other complications related to impaling adjacent neurovascular or tendinous structures have also been cited but are rare.¹³ A 12-month prospective study of 75 patients specifically evaluating the outcomes after closed reduction with percutaneous fixation of unstable hand fractures in the ED reported only 6 complications at final follow-up.⁴ Complications were all minor, with no cases of nonunion, delayed union, malunion, pin-tract infection, pyarthrosis, or cellulitis, even in the setting of open fractures. Three patients required revision in the OR for pin migration, initial malreduction, and bone loss in the setting of comminution, respectively. The authors credited their low complication rate to supplementary immobilization.

In conclusion, many unstable simple fractures and dislocations of the hand and wrist can be safely and effectively treated in the ED. While it may seem daunting for a junior resident who is unfamiliar with percutaneous techniques, the authors advocate learning from a more senior mentor. The only additional training required is an understanding of how to apply this skill set in a different setting.

A mentor—now in his 60s—related his experiences as a resident. On call as a second-year resident, he would often be alone at a busy trauma center with no backup. When a case came in, he would quickly read about it in the library, then manage it in the emergency department (ED) if possible, or, if necessary, take the patient to the operating room (OR).

In the era of improved patient care, increased supervision, and decreased autonomy, this is not the reality anymore.¹ In theory, more reliable patient care is the result; however, the pendulum may have swung too far.

There are a number of injuries that are amenable to definitive fixation in the ED, but not as limited an array of injuries as we have perhaps grown accustomed to. Hand injuries are among the most common orthopedic injuries seen in the ED, with fractures of the metacarpals and phalanges constituting nearly one-half of all hand injuries.² The authors recently attended an excellent instructional course lecture on “The Lost and Found Art of Percutaneous Pinning in the Hand and Wrist” at the annual conference of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.³ The presenters itemized a comprehensive list of fractures and simple dislocations of the hand, which could be simply, safely, effectively, and definitively managed through percutaneous pinning techniques. A significant number of unstable fractures of the phalanges and metacarpals can be treated in the ED under mini–C-arm fluoroscopy without an admission and trip to the OR.^3,4 Most phalangeal and metacarpal fractures are nondisplaced or minimally displaced and stable, and can often be handled with a combination of closed reduction, buddy-taping, and splinting.⁵ The indications for percutaneous versus internal fixation depend on a number of factors, including bone quality, degree of comminution, quality of the soft-tissue envelope, articular involvement, acuity of presentation, and goals for motion.^6,7

Many simple injury patterns involving unstable fractures or dislocations may be definitively managed in the ED with percutaneous pinning (eg, injuries that are unstable with closed reduction alone but that do not necessitate soft-tissue dissection). These include but are not limited to bony mallet injuries, unstable transverse or oblique fractures or fracture-dislocations of the phalanges and metacarpals, carpometacarpal fracture- dislocations, and underlying fractures that need protection of nail-bed repairs, soft-tissue flaps, or extensor tendon injuries (Figures 1, 2).^7,8 The techniques for specific fracture types are beyond the scope of this article but are readily available.^5,6

There are certain situations that undoubtedly warrant surgery in the OR, such as neurovascular injury necessitating microvascular repair, flexor tendon laceration, severely comminuted or segmental fractures, irreducible dislocations, and fractures with severe soft-tissue injury or contamination not amenable to primary irrigation, débridement, and closure at bedside.^4,7,8

You might ask, “Why would one treat an operative injury in the ED and not formally in the OR?,” and we submit that there are a number of reasons.

First, and most important, with increasing health care costs and decreasing reimbursements, physicians are faced with providing safe but economical care. Percutaneous Kirschner wire (K-wire) fixation is dramatically more cost-effective when performed in the ED than in the OR. The cost of a procedure performed in either setting is similarly dependent on a variety of factors, generally including complexity of the patient or procedure, costs of supplies and pharmacologic agents, fixed versus variable overhead costs, and the professional fees of providers and ancillary personnel.^9,10

While the patient is not charged per hour in the ED, it is estimated that ORs in the United States cost, on average, $62 per minute, ranging from as low as $22 to as high as $133 per minute.⁹ Additionally, the number of personnel involved in running an OR exceeds those for a similar procedure performed in the ED, considering (at a minimum) the orthopedic surgeon, anesthesiologist, scrub and radiology technicians, and nursing personnel required before, during, and after an operation.

While analgesia and procedural sedation can be performed similarly in either setting, it is our experience that patients are managed much more often in the ED with local anesthesia under direct care of only the orthopedic provider, whereas intravenous sedation and general anesthesia are far more commonly implemented in the OR. There are exceptions for pediatric patients or those who are unable to tolerate the procedure under only local anesthesia. Local anesthesia or even intravenous conscious sedation entails less risk as well as lower associated drug costs.¹¹

The difference in risk is especially true for sicker patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures.¹¹ Although administration of adequate procedural analgesia grows increasingly difficult the more proximal the injury, the hand and the fingers are easily and reliably anesthetized with well-placed wrist or digital blocks, with infrequent complications.¹² Application of a lidocaine/bupivacaine mixture provides up to 6 to 8 hours of analgesia. A small tourniquet alternative, such as the finger of a sterile glove or phlebotomy tourniquet, applied to the base of the finger or the wrist additionally provides a relatively bloodless field and effectively acts as a Bier block.

Percutaneous pins are much more forgiving than rigid internal fixation. If the initial placement of a pin is unsatisfactory, the pin can be reinserted at little cost.¹² Conversely, it may not be possible to reposition a misplaced screw or screw with inadequate purchase and still maintain adequate fixation. While percutaneous pin fixation is not as rigid as screw fixation, the degree of stability provided is adequate for the small forces affecting the hand in most cases. Accordingly, there is a very low incidence of fibrous union or nonunion.^13,14 With an increasing appreciation of soft-tissue handling over the past few decades, another significant advantage of K-wire fixation is the obviation of soft-tissue dissection, preserving the biology to maximize healing and minimize adverse sequelae.¹² Percutaneous fixation has been shown to achieve functional outcomes comparable to open reduction with internal fixation of operative phalangeal and metacarpal fractures, without soft-tissue disruption, scarring, or implant irritation, and with minimal risk of infection.^3,13,15,16 Ultimate range of motion after percutaneous fixation is comparable, if not superior, to that of internal fixation, despite the initial advantage of rigid internal fixation secondary to decreased scarring and lack of indwelling hardware.^16,17

While the risk of infection, perhaps the primary concern with percutaneous fixation, has been cited as high as 7%, osteomyelitis is exceedingly rare (<0.5%).^3,13,14 Furthermore, pins are often left in place for 3 to 6 weeks, and infection has been found to occur most often at a mean of 10 weeks.^7,13 Infection can also be mitigated by intelligent pin placement, relief of residual tension, and splint immobilization.^4,15 Pin loosening has similarly been reported in up to 4% of cases in large retrospective studies, occurring at an average of 8 weeks, by which time most pins would have been extricated.¹³ Other complications related to impaling adjacent neurovascular or tendinous structures have also been cited but are rare.¹³ A 12-month prospective study of 75 patients specifically evaluating the outcomes after closed reduction with percutaneous fixation of unstable hand fractures in the ED reported only 6 complications at final follow-up.⁴ Complications were all minor, with no cases of nonunion, delayed union, malunion, pin-tract infection, pyarthrosis, or cellulitis, even in the setting of open fractures. Three patients required revision in the OR for pin migration, initial malreduction, and bone loss in the setting of comminution, respectively. The authors credited their low complication rate to supplementary immobilization.

In conclusion, many unstable simple fractures and dislocations of the hand and wrist can be safely and effectively treated in the ED. While it may seem daunting for a junior resident who is unfamiliar with percutaneous techniques, the authors advocate learning from a more senior mentor. The only additional training required is an understanding of how to apply this skill set in a different setting.