Optimizing Lifestyle Medicine Health Care Delivery Through Enhanced Interdisciplinary Education

The unintended consequences of modernity: Pollution and its effect on reproductive, maternal and fetal health

Over the past 50 years there has been an unprecedented increase in pollution globally. Population growth and higher standards of living have resulted in increases in global consumption facilitated by industrialisation and globalisation of goods and services thus resulting in the release of environmental pollutants on a mass scale. This article analyses the effects and consequences of pollution on important aspects of reproductive health including fertility, pregnancy and infant health. It is a narrative review based on a search of PubMed using the terms 'pollution and fertility,' 'pollution and pregnancy,' 'pollution and infant health,' and 'history of pollution.' Additional references were identified through articles provided by the authors of related studies. Studies were included based on their relevance to the topic and were prioritized for their methodological rigour and recency. While no formal quality assessment tools were employed, the potential limitations of individual studies are discussed where applicable.

Lifestyle Medicine in Medical Education: Maximizing Impact

The relationship between lifestyle behaviors and common chronic conditions is well established. Lifestyle medicine (LM) interventions to modify health behaviors can dramatically improve the health of individuals and populations. There is an urgent need to meaningfully integrate LM into medical curricula horizontally across the medical domains and vertically in each year of school and training. Including LM content in medical and health professional curricula and training programs has been challenging. Barriers to LM integration include lack of awareness and prioritization of LM, limited time in the curricula, and too few LM-trained faculty to teach and role model the practice of LM. This limits the ability of health care professionals to provide effective LM and precludes the wide-reaching benefits of LM from being fully realized. Early innovators developed novel tools and resources aligned with current evidence for introducing LM into didactic and experiential learning. This review aimed to examine the educational efforts in each LM pillar for undergraduate and graduate medical education. A PubMed-based literature review was undertaken using the following search terms: lifestyle medicine, education, medical school, residency, and healthcare professionals. We map the LM competencies to the core competency domains of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. We highlight opportunities to train faculty, residents, and students. Moreover, we identify available evidence-based resources. This article serves as a "call to action" to incorporate LM across the spectrum of medical education curricula and training.

American College of Lifestyle Medicine Expert Consensus Statement: Lifestyle Medicine for Optimal Outcomes in Primary Care

OBJECTIVE

Identify areas of consensus on integrating lifestyle medicine (LM) into primary care to achieve optimal outcomes.

METHODS

Experts in both LM and primary care followed an a priori protocol for developing consensus statements. Using an iterative, online process, panel members expressed levels of agreement with statements, resulting in classification as consensus, near consensus, or no consensus.

RESULTS

The panel identified 124 candidate statements addressing: (1) Integration into Primary Care, (2) Delivery Models, (3) Provider Education, (4) Evidence-base for LM, (5) Vital Signs, (6) Treatment, (7) Resource Referral and Reimbursement, (8) Patient, Family, and Community Involvement; Shared Decision-Making, (9) Social Determinants of Health and Health Equity, and (10) Barriers to LM. After three iterations of an online Delphi survey, statement revisions, and removal of duplicative statements, 65 statements met criteria for consensus, 24 for near consensus, and 35 for no consensus. Consensus was reached on key topics that included LM being recognized as an essential component of primary care in patients of all ages, including LM as a foundational element of health professional education.

CONCLUSION

The practice of LM in primary care can be strengthened by applying these statements to improve quality of care, inform policy, and identify areas for future research.

Lifestyle Medicine Reimbursement: A Proposal for Policy Priorities Informed by a Cross-Sectional Survey of Lifestyle Medicine Practitioners

Lifestyle medicine (LM) is a rapidly emerging clinical discipline that focuses on intensive therapeutic lifestyle changes to treat chronic disease, often producing dramatic health benefits. In spite of these well-documented benefits of LM approaches to provide evidence-based care that follows current clinical guidelines, LM practitioners have found reimbursement challenging. The objectives of this paper are to present the results of a cross-sectional survey of LM practitioners regarding lifestyle medicine reimbursement and to propose policy priorities related to the ability of practitioners to implement and achieve reimbursement for these necessary services. Results from a closed, online survey in 2019 were analyzed, with a total of n = 857 included in this analysis. Results were descriptively analyzed. This manuscript articulates policy proposals informed by the survey results. The study sample was 58% female, with median age of 51. A minority of the sample (17%) reported that all their practice was LM, while 56% reported that some of their practice was LM. A total of 55% of practitioners reported not being able to receive reimbursement for LM practice. Of those survey respondents who provided an answer to the question of what would make the practice of LM easier (n = 471), the following suggestions were offered: reimbursement overall (18%), reimbursement for more time spent with patients (17%), more support from leadership (16%), policy measures to incentivize health (13%), education in LM for practitioners (11%), LM-specific billing codes and billing knowledge along with better electronic medical record (EMR) capabilities and streamlined reporting/paperwork (11%), and reimbursement for the extended care team (10%). Proposed policy changes focus on three areas of focus: (1) support for the care process using a LM approach, (2) reimbursement emphasizing outcomes of health, patient experience, and delivering person-centered care, and (3) incentivizing treatment that produces disease remission/reversal. Rectifying reimbursement barriers to lifestyle medicine practice will require a sustained effort from health systems and policy makers. The urgency of this transition towards lifestyle medicine interventions to effectively address the epidemic of chronic diseases in a way that can significantly improve outcomes is being hindered by current reimbursement policies and models.

When the Desire for Lifestyle Medicine Counseling Remains Unfulfilled: A Case Report

More and more patients are suffering from multiple concomitant chronic conditions, which are often associated with an unhealthy lifestyle, including inadequate physical activity and poor nutrition. Patients increasingly seek thorough advice on lifestyle counseling, however, many physicians encounter this development with a pharmacotherapy-centered strategy—thereby paying insufficient attention to lifestyle modifications. This case report attempts to capture the concerning experience of a particular patient, who was hospitalized for uncontrolled type-2-diabetes in an American hospital. Despite curiosity and a great interest in lifestyle modifications, his desire for lifestyle medicine counseling was not addressed during a long inpatient stay. This case illustrates that patients wish to make sustainable lifestyle changes but apparently receive insufficient support from their physicians. This applies for both, dietary and exercise counseling. To address the patients’ needs and the increasing burden from chronic diseases, physicians must practice lifestyle medicine now. Appropriate educational resources for physicians are provided.

Association of the Functional Medicine Model of Care With Patient-Reported Health-Related Quality-of-Life Outcomes

IMPORTANCE

The incidence of chronic disease is increasing along with health care-related costs. The functional medicine model of care provides a unique operating system to reverse illness, promote health, and optimize function. The association between this model of care and patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between functional medicine and patient-reported HRQoL using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health measures.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective cohort study was performed to compare 7252 patients aged 18 years or older treated in a functional medicine setting with propensity score (PS)-matched patients in a primary care setting. Sensitivity analyses assessed improvement limited to patients seen at both 6 and 12 months. The study included patients who visited the Cleveland Clinic Center for Functional Medicine or a Cleveland Clinic family health center between April 1, 2015, and March 1, 2017.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was change in PROMIS Global Physical Health (GPH) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included PROMIS Global Mental Health (GMH) at 6 months and PROMIS GPH and GMH at 12 months. The PROMIS GPH and GMH scores were transformed to a T-score from 0 to 100 with a mean of 50. Higher scores indicate a better health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

Of the 7252 patients (functional medicine center: 1595; family health center: 5657), 4780 (65.9%) were women; mean (SD) age was 54.1 (16.0) years. At 6 months, functional medicine patients exhibited significantly larger improvements in PROMIS GPH T-score points than were seen in patients treated at a family health center (mean [SD] change, functional medicine center: 1.59 [6.29] vs family health center: 0.33 [6.09], P = .004 in 398 PS-matched pairs). At 12 months, functional medicine patients showed improvement similar to that observed at 6 months; however, comparisons with patients seen at the family health center were not significant. Patients in the functional medicine center with data at both 6 and 12 months demonstrated improvements in PROMIS GPH (mean [SD], 2.61 [6.53]) that were significantly larger compared with patients seen at a family health center (mean [SD], 0.25 [6.54]) (P = .02 in 91 PS-matched pairs).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, the functional medicine model of care demonstrated beneficial and sustainable associations with patient-reported HRQoL. Prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings.

Catalysts for Change: Accelerating the Lifestyle Medicine Movement Through Professionals in Training

While the Western diet has evolved to become increasingly high in saturated fat, cholesterol, protein, sugar, and salt intake, nutrition education and training of health care professionals to counsel their patients on the hazards of such a diet has trailed behind. Primary care physicians have an opportunity to bridge the gap by providing nutrition and dietary counseling as key components in the delivery of preventive services. Increasing research points to the value of a whole-foods plant-based diet in combating chronic disease, yet the knowledge of health professionals about the topic is comparable to that of the general public. This education crisis is apparent in medical training with restricted time for dedicated lectures on nutrition, physical activity, restorative sleep, emotional well-being, and avoidance of risky substance use. Together, educators and learners are valuable catalysts for culture change in medical education, training, and clinical practice. Barriers to physician ability to counsel about lifestyle are many, but one that stands out is lack of training and comfort with counseling. This has implications for the training of health care professionals. American College of Lifestyle Medicine has a committee, Professionals in Training, composed of interprofessional and multidisciplinary students, residents, and fellows nationally and worldwide who are committed to expanding exposure to lifestyle medicine and implementation of lifestyle medicine in parallel curriculum and personal care.