Anyone want to share their smartphrases?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

whopper

Former jolly good fellow
20+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2004
Messages
8,026
Reaction score
4,167
Here are some of mine.

Lamotrigine: I explained to the patient the risks of the medication including the need to take as prescribed, possible rash, and Stevens-Johnson Syndrome. The patient was informed that if they experience a rash to call me immediately and that if the medication is not taken consistently it cannot simply be resumed at the prior dosage and to call me to see if it can be restarted.

Benzodiazepines: The risks and benefits of benzodiazepines were discussed with the patient including that this medication class is addictive, mixing with alcohol and/or opioids could be dangerous, their use should be limited (with few exceptions), and with continued use their benefits are less and less because the body will develop a tolerance and possible dependence on them. The possible risks discussed included dementia, poor memory, and worsened sleep quality. Pt was recommended to learn more about the medication from reliable sources such as medlineplus.gov, or the FDA.

Controlled Substances:
You were prescribed a controlled substance and their use requires several responsibilities including not to mix it with alcohol, not to drive on the medication or use heavy machinery unless you are confident it is not affecting your ability to do so, if you want a professional level evaluation to see if you can drive on the substance you need to be evaluated by a local department of motor vehicles office while under the influence of that medication, and that it is your responsibility to monitor yourself with these medications because I cannot follow you 24/7. If you lose a controlled substance there is a high likelihood I will not allow a refill prescription and even if I did your pharmacy might refuse it to be filled. If you are arrested or otherwise in question of having violated the law, I may have to stop prescribing you a controlled substance until I am reasonably certain the controlled substance was not connected with the crime in question. You must carry medications within their prescription bottle while out in the public. You cannot share these medications with other people. Keep any medications, but especially controlled substances, in a safe place where others will not be able to access them. You should make efforts consistently to use the same pharmacy to pick up controlled substances. Going to multiple doctors for several controlled substances and going to several different pharmacies to pick them up can sometimes be interpreted as "doctor-shopping."

Guns:
Due to the patient living in a setting with a firearm, I told the patient that firearms should be kept in accordance to federal, state, and local laws, guns should be kept locked, and ammunition should be kept in a separate location to reduce risk of accidental use or suicide, and that I could not monitor their safety once they leave my office. Further several medications including all psychotropic medications could cause suicidal ideation (although very rare) as a side effect and access to a firearm while suicidal is extremely dangerous. Therefore trying any psychiatric medication while in possession of a firearm should be handled accordingly by the patient because I will not be able to be with the patient to monitor them while trying a new medication. It is the patient's responsibility to incur the risk of trying a new psychiatric medication while in possession of a firearm and take the necessary and reasonable measures such as consideration of placing the firearm out of their access when trying a new medication until the doctor and patient are reasonably certain of the effect that medication has on that specific person.
 
I'm not in residency yet/using smartphrases, but my resident had similar smartphrases for things like Trazodone. I think it's good to have these because it not only does some CYA on your medical record but also can remind you to discuss it with the patient.

In psychosocial rehab the other day we actually had a conversation with the patient group about the sustained erection side effect of Trazodone, among others.
 
I have a form that I photocopied from clinic job for all controlled substances. It's a lot stricter. They can only use ONE pharmacy for controlled substances, we can ask them to to a random UDS at any time and they must do so within 24 hours, if they lose it or it gets stolen it won't be replaced . They must come in for appointments for controlled substances and they won't be refilled over the phone.

I review the side effects of EVERY medication with patients but say they are potential side effects that may or may not happen to them. For SSRIS/SNRIS (in general) You may feel more nervous for the first two weeks, it may cause n/v/d/c but a lot of the time it can be avoided by taking it with a meal, you have to take it daily for it to work, let me know if you have any abnormal bruising or bleeding. It may decrease your sex drive, if this happens let me know and we can add a low dose wellbutrin which often takes care of that issue.

For Lamictal I show them photos of Stevens Johnson on my cell phone so they know what they would be looking to see and tell them to go to the ER right away if they notice it and give the rest of the info that you said and mention other potential side effects. I cant answer my phone 24/7 so I want them to know what to look for. I also dont want them going to the ER for a pimple . This happened in residency. I saw the patient right after (with an attending) but the ER Dr said it was Stevens Johnsons "in the early stage, stop taking it and you will be fine, you are lucky you caught it so early or you could have died. Both myself and my attending assured the patient it wasn't Stevens Johnsons but the patient was too scared by what the ER doc said and would not restart it.

I like what you say about guns. I'm stealing it 🙂.
 
I use the word death when talking with patients. This medicine can kill you by causing serotonin syndrome, Neuroleptic malignant syndrome, Stevens Johnson, etc. I mention the worst most lethal side effects for each medicine as part of the R/B/A discussion.

I also have patients sign a psychotropic consent form.

Also electronically send a PDF from UpToDate on the medicine for education.


Tobacco Use Disorder:
Separate from the evaluation and management portion of today's visit, tobacco cessation counseling was performed for a total of 3 minutes. Conditions adversely affected by continued use include ***. Pharmacotherapy affected by continued use includes none of the medicines currently taking, but aware it can impact future pharmacotherapy/Clozapine/zyprexa/Haldol/Fluvoxamine/Tricyclic antidepressants/Gabapentin/Lyrica/Depakote, recognizing nicotine metabolism by CYP1A2/CYP2A6 cytochromes. Education of physiologic changes, consequences of continued use, and treatment options were discussed.
Treatment selected today was none, chanatix, wellbutrin, patch, gum, hypnosis.
 
I use the word death when talking with patients. This medicine can kill you by causing serotonin syndrome, Neuroleptic malignant syndrome, Stevens Johnson, etc. I mention the worst most lethal side effects for each medicine as part of the R/B/A discussion.

I also have patients sign a psychotropic consent form.
Have you been burned before? What's your patient population? This seems mildly outside of the norm. Obvioulsy one should mention SJS is very serious / potentially fatal but I don't use "this can kill you" type language very often. Maybe I should.


...I might steal that for the "you don't want benzos" script though. "Impaired coordination and reduced cognitive function which (through a series of very unfortunate events) can lead to death."
 
No, never burned. Patient population has ranged from medicaid heavy substance abuse, to treatment resistant depression using ECT, inpatient, C&L, outpatient blue collar, outpatient white collar. But I believe it puts things into context. Medicines are not benign thinks to take trivially. Also, should there ever be a review I can show that I've documented the complete range of side effects, and death is the worst side effect. I have had enough patients over the years come to me and say, "Dr Jane Random (actually an ARNP) put me on Psychotropic X and had I known Side Effect Y that I experienced, I never would have taken it!" I'm doing my part to reduce this for my patients. The other issue is people don't always register the euphemisms of "serious" "life threatening" but when you say "this could kill you by causing X, very rare, but could" people will hear that and register it. And if it has the impact of patients being more reserved about medicines and instead want to focus their efforts with someone like Splik, I'm okay with that. Thankfully many of our conditions we treat can and do respond to therapy interventions. Our jobs are not to decide for the patients but to inform as well as possible to decide for themselves.

Our top 3 liabilities are side effects from medicines (heavily skewed toward lithium and TD), suicide and survived suicide with health deficits, and what should be the most avoidable of all, sexual impropriety.
 
No, never burned. Patient population has ranged from medicaid heavy substance abuse, to treatment resistant depression using ECT, inpatient, C&L, outpatient blue collar, outpatient white collar. But I believe it puts things into context. Medicines are not benign thinks to take trivially. Also, should there ever be a review I can show that I've documented the complete range of side effects, and death is the worst side effect. I have had enough patients over the years come to me and say, "Dr Jane Random (actually an ARNP) put me on Psychotropic X and had I known Side Effect Y that I experienced, I never would have taken it!" I'm doing my part to reduce this for my patients. The other issue is people don't always register the euphemisms of "serious" "life threatening" but when you say "this could kill you by causing X, very rare, but could" people will hear that and register it. And if it has the impact of patients being more reserved about medicines and instead want to focus their efforts with someone like Splik, I'm okay with that. Thankfully many of our conditions we treat can and do respond to therapy interventions. Our jobs are not to decide for the patients but to inform as well as possible to decide for themselves.

Our top 3 liabilities are side effects from medicines (heavily skewed toward lithium and TD), suicide and survived suicide with health deficits, and what should be the most avoidable of all, sexual impropriety.

This sounds extreme to me. There's a happy medium between informed consent and scaring patients half to death. I mean, even Tylenol has side effects. I think it's important to emphasize that ALL medication can have side effects and that if even one person experienced said side effect, it has to be listed. I inform my patients and we discuss the side effects, how common they are, etc, but the last thing I want to do is scare someone who is suffering from taking Prozac for fear of death.
 
I share rooms with a few other clinicians, one who does a bit of group therapy so there are four chairs where patients can sit. When I meet a patient for the first time, if they ask where to sit I tell them that there’s no right or wrong selection with the chair choice and they won’t be judged on where they sit. This rarely fails to elicit a laugh or a smile, and more often than not puts them at ease.

When discussing medications with patients I outline the common and rare critical side effects. I also inform them that product information sheets are required by law to list every side effect reported in every trial, but it doesn’t mean patients are guaranteed to get all of them.

If a patient insists on increasing a medication with addictive potential like a benzodiazepine or stimulant and I don’t believe it’s indicated, I will explain my reasoning in terms of how there are a limited amount of receptors for the drugs to act on and increasing the dose will only result in more side effects without any clinical benefit. If a patient is already on a high dose of something and tells me it doesn’t work, I may also use this kind of reasoning to create an opportunity to reduce their dose. The logic is that if it’s not working at a high dose where all the relevant receptors are saturated, it probably doesn’t work so you might as well come off it. I find the majority of patients will accept this line of reasoning, but the drug seekers will usually grin and bear it, but decide to see someone else later on.
 
This sounds extreme to me. There's a happy medium between informed consent and scaring patients half to death. I mean, even Tylenol has side effects. I think it's important to emphasize that ALL medication can have side effects and that if even one person experienced said side effect, it has to be listed. I inform my patients and we discuss the side effects, how common they are, etc, but the last thing I want to do is scare someone who is suffering from taking Prozac for fear of death.
Your response hints that patients are incapable of filtering the information provided to them and that learning of a mortal side effect will "scare" them. I have greater faith in the resiliency of patients. You filtering the information reminds me of paternalistic medicine. I didn't create the side effects, but it is our job to convey them, and let the patient weigh the Risks and Benefits themselves. Patient gets serotonin syndrome, dies in ICU, kin sues you for not conveying the full risk of the medicine.
 
I didn't create the side effects

If I’m remembering correctly the more recent nocebo effect research would disagree with you.

Education on risks is obviously important, but there is definitely some middle ground. Lamictal is one I do say explicitly if you stop this Med and then restart at old dose you could die bc this is not intuitive to patients.

SSRIs I tell all patients about the youth BB bc they will read about it online, talk about nausea/HA when starting and sexual/discontinuation syndrome bc they are common, so I don’t want patients surprised. Then say that like all other meds there can be rare life threatening reactions so it’s important to seek medical care for new or concerning symptom.

It would take 2 hours to explain every possible side effect from Epocrates SSRI entry and somehow I don’t think a jury is going to believe psychiatrists actually said everything listed in a 3 pages of generic dot phrases tacked to bottom of note.

Just imagine if PCP were this paranoid about getting sued, their notes would be literally 25 pages long.
 
For reference to my last post just checked Epocrates for Prozac.

It lists 21 Serious Adverse Effects and 25 Common Reactions.
 
Your response hints that patients are incapable of filtering the information provided to them and that learning of a mortal side effect will "scare" them. I have greater faith in the resiliency of patients. You filtering the information reminds me of paternalistic medicine. I didn't create the side effects, but it is our job to convey them, and let the patient weigh the Risks and Benefits themselves. Patient gets serotonin syndrome, dies in ICU, kin sues you for not conveying the full risk of the medicine.

It hints of no such thing and I don't agree with the notion that I don't believe in the resiliency of patients because I'm not a fan of scaring them half to death by telling them that Prozac = death. It's not paternalistic to educate patients on what side effects, in general, are, what it means, what the serious and not-so-serious ones are for a particular drug (including rare potential for life-threatening reaction). I think your paranoia of a lawsuit may do greater harm than good for patients.
 
On the contrary, it further establishes rapport. Most patients have been on mental health medications before and seen other clinicians this isn't a new process for them. A more common event for them is "here take this medicine, let me know if you have any troubles." When they encounter a psychiatrist like myself who takes the time to review the common, concerning, and worst case scenarios, they are appreciative. "Wow! None of my other doctors told me how serious this could be! Glad its rare, thanks Doc." It does more good than harm. We agree to disagree.
 
I've noticed that some patients want you to be paternalistic. E.g. when I tell patients their options some upfront just say to prescribe the pill and they don't want to know the details.

But that's their choice. So overall you can say they're choosing to be ignorant, or you could also argue they have a lot of faith and trust in you as their doctor.

Legally, however, you're supposed to inform patients of the significant risks vs benefits, but the law also states that you are only supposed to within a reasonable degree that can be done within an office visit. As I often times mention to patients I could teach a course on specifically just one medication that could last days.

I also tell patients the bottom line are major and minor side effects. If you get a major side effect just lower to the previously lower dosage or stop it. If it's a minor side effect you have to decide if it's worth it to be on this medication given the potential benefits it should give you.

For all the verbiage, "25 pages" of information you could provide the patient almost all of them really just want the above paragraph.
 
Anyone with one for SSRI and blackbox warning? Also how about one for SGA's?
 
Top