Functional neurology is going to single handedly burn me out.

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

Cone774411

Full Member
5+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2017
Messages
13
Reaction score
7
Why isn't this discussed more? Why isn't there an entire AAN journal dedicated to this? Many days I see more functional patients/consults than "normal" patients. I'm becoming more and more cynical, I almost assume each patient is functional before meeting them.

These patients are ticking time bombs for the clinician. It's drilled into us about appropriate use of testing/imaging but where do you even begin with their ridiculous amount of symptoms? Of course the correct answer is to order as little testing as possible but all it takes is one of these crazy patients with 100 poorly localizable symptoms with one real underlying symptom/finding which can easily be missed to sue you and jeopardize your career.

And the idea that you should be "open" with these patients and have a frank discussion almost NEVER goes over well. 95% of the functional patients automatically become defensive and get upset no matter the amount of reasoning.

Just need to vent.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If this is burning you out, subspecialize in fields where there’s more objective data and less subjective complaints. Stroke and NCC come to mind. Avoid epilepsy, movement and MS. These fields are full of psychogenic stuff and subjective complaints.
 
If you feel you are seeing mostly functional patients, and you are assuming people are functional before you even see them, then those two attitudes are reinforcing each other and you are missing a lot of organic neurologic disease that might not be easy to figure out.

My challenge to you is to never diagnose someone as functional without positive evidence (e.g. entrainment, unequivocal Hoover's), and even then consider it functional overlay on a real problem until proven otherwise. A large portion of EEG-proven epileptics also have pseudoseizures, but many would be confined to the pseudoseizures diagnosis if seen by someone with the cynical attitude you describe. Also remember that entire categories of disease we now understand to be organic were quite recently considered psychogenic - dystonia for example was widely thought to be psychogenic until Marsden in the 1970s and continues to be widely diagnosed as functional by those without sufficient training.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Discharge them from clinic if warranted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If this is burning you out, subspecialize in fields where there’s more objective data and less subjective complaints. Stroke and NCC come to mind. Avoid epilepsy, movement and MS. These fields are full of psychogenic stuff and subjective complaints.

I would rather see an outpatient with functional neurological symptoms than immediately be summoned to the ED for subjective symptoms while being required to make tPA and disposition decisions while the ED provider can forego all decision-making and liability in the name of “possible stroke”.

Agree that outpatient vascular is very objective with exception of TIA/“spell medicine”

Neuromuscular sees a lot of functional patients but is blessed with the power of the EMG/NCS which is objective although there are many pitfalls to performing and interpreting

Neuro onc and neuro ophtho both rarer specialties but quite objective although neuro-ophtho can venture into the land of migraine and transient visual phenomenon

Agree that movement sees a lot of functional patients but also has probably the highest percentage of patients misdiagnosed with functional symptoms by other providers. Would also argue that in the next ten years the examination is routinely going to be accompanied by electrophysiologic data in the form of tremor studies, which already occurs at many academic centers and is the only way to reliably diagnose orthostatic tremor or parse out some essential myoclonus
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Why isn't this discussed more? Why isn't there an entire AAN journal dedicated to this? Many days I see more functional patients/consults than "normal" patients. I'm becoming more and more cynical, I almost assume each patient is functional before meeting them.

These patients are ticking time bombs for the clinician. It's drilled into us about appropriate use of testing/imaging but where do you even begin with their ridiculous amount of symptoms? Of course the correct answer is to order as little testing as possible but all it takes is one of these crazy patients with 100 poorly localizable symptoms with one real underlying symptom/finding which can easily be missed to sue you and jeopardize your career.

And the idea that you should be "open" with these patients and have a frank discussion almost NEVER goes over well. 95% of the functional patients automatically become defensive and get upset no matter the amount of reasoning.

Just need to vent.

It is AWESOME that the conversation doesn’t go well. This is because you are being honest. If you’re honest, then most will hate you. It is the marker of a good doctor.

At the same time, however, you’ll get better at this. My last few actually thanked me because I showed them that they could move their weak arm the less they concentrate on it. They considered themselves healed by me just doing some nonsense distraction.

Couple of other pearls:

1. Never assume functional disorder. I know, it’s hard, but this is a sign of your burnout and you can’t project that on the patients. You fail to treat someone clearly having conversion with tPA, then they have + MRI for stroke, Better Call Saul. DItto with pseudoseizures. I’d also advise that you keep the door open to neurologic disease. You’re going to be right in 90% of cases, so that leaves 1 in 10 where you’re wrong. I’ve given tPA to at least half dozen to a dozen conversion cases and many where I honestly couldn’t tell. Even in retrospect would do the same with each case. That said, it is always right to consider FND when appropriate and the sooner you disclose this in the diagnostic process the better. That way you can say, “as we discussed last time, when I told you the brain sometimes gets in it’s own way, that appears to be the case.” Get your own style and use it.

2. Check yourself. If you are getting frustrated, then there’s a good reason for it. You’re burned out, upset, angry. All these things are normal, but they aren’t helpful. Just be open and caring and nice. Many patients are actually looking at you to be dismissive. The line between FND with ZERO insight and some malingering with a bit of insight is impossible to see, but their anger and their close observation for any signs that the doctor is dismissing their symptoms offers some hints. Don’t give them that thread to pull on.

3. As has been said, there is something wrong with these people. Consider them as volitional disorders that get at the illusion of “normal” volition, along with Torette’s and alien limb. THe brain is a big place, and something is getting in the way of their conscious volitional motor/sensory functions. So we don’t know what’s wrong with these folks and as such, treating them like they have a fake disease is not a good solution. This is hard, because as we all know, these cases have horrible overlap with all sorts of personality disorders and psychiatric problems. Real hornet’s nest. If they respond poorly, that’s on them, and as @DrSatan mentioned above, fire them for any behavior that’s threatening or upsetting to you.

4. I firmly believe that the only way to get better from FND is for the patient to accept it and move from there into some sort of therpeutic relationship with PT and counseling. By offering them a clear and crisp diagnosis, you’re literally offering them lifesaving therapy and steering them away from absolutely horrific garbage: from the worst sorts of quackery to surgeries. Be proud of that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
I don't agree with this notion of "If you think it's functional you're just not good enough to get the correct diagnosis". I see where this comes from but I think it also stifles discussion and this is a very real part of our field and what we deal with. I've seen plenty of functional real, and misdiagnosed and unfortunately it happens. It's normal to feel burnout from this as these patients can be quite challenging and exhausting. Fortunately in the hospital I would say ~10-15% may be functional or non neurologic (depending on the month/week/phase of moon, etc.), but while I was doing CNP fellowship I'd say it was closer to 50%.

I do agree with Neglect's #1. I did residency at a big name place, a supra-tertiary type center and we got a TON of functional patients, or chronic pain patients. That burned me out really quick and I actually started assuming people were functional before I saw them. My attendings caught this tendency of mine and taught me to always rule it out. Functional is a diagnosis of exclusion and you better exclude it. Don't just focus on your physical exam because as we all know that's not perfect. You are in the unfortunate situation of proving a negative but such is life.

Regarding stroke alerts I agree that this is a minefield. The second a stroke alert is called everyone washes their hands of what's going on and will try to punt all liability to you. Often times the patients are very undifferentiated and their presentation vague and perhaps secondary to underlying metabolic issues and you're stuck trying to differentiate a patient in 30-40 minutes. I think everyone TPAs a few migraines or drunk people, it happens but I find myself more nervous when I DON'T give TPA than when I do, especially if I suspect it's functional and the notes have to be iron clad. I do agree sometimes if you just can't tell you're better off giving TPA though given how relatively safe it is in those cases.

Just to keep the discussion going: If anything right now I guess I've become somewhat discouraged with outcomes in the hospital and neurology being consulted for hopeless situations. By that I mean the 70+ y/o man with a subdural s/p crani who is now intubated and seizing on multiple meds, or the 80 + y/o patient with a massive stroke who gets TPA + thrombectomy and you know is hopeless the second they hit the door. Those have been getting to me lately. Feels like I get consulted for things that don't matter or things that are hopeless and no in between. Anyway...just some venting, I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I don't agree with this notion of "If you think it's functional you're just not good enough to get the correct diagnosis".

Just to add onto this, there's an internet subculture where these people find each other and make up diseases like "histamine storm" to explain their clear conversion and somatization. Hell, there's even a movie on the subject! UNREST. Also a series on Netflix Afflicted | Netflix Official Site

You can see some of this behavior in these medical 'seekers' who disbelieve their local doctors, then engage with charlatans. They all say that "Western Medicine" can't figure them out (which is, if one considers it for a moment, an implicitly racist phrase), not good enough to get at that correct diagnosis of whatever.

So for a neurologist to be vague when disclosing these diagnoses, it can cause very real harm.

I totally agree with the rest of @Telamir post. Put the entire picture together: history, exam, imaging findings. Conversion people have a pattern that's very different from elaboration on top of the normal diseases. Look for total dysfunction, then distraction, and regain of function, then without distraction return to dysfunction. The non-anatomic patterns and the history REALLY helps. But you can't figure that out in an NIHSS, so give them tPA.

Just to keep the discussion going: If anything right now I guess I've become somewhat discouraged with outcomes in the hospital and neurology being consulted for hopeless situations. By that I mean the 70+ y/o man with a subdural s/p crani who is now intubated and seizing on multiple meds, or the 80 + y/o patient with a massive stroke who gets TPA + thrombectomy and you know is hopeless the second they hit the door. Those have been getting to me lately. Feels like I get consulted for things that don't matter or things that are hopeless and no in between. Anyway...just some venting, I guess.

Personally it's the latter that bothers me the most. There's a very real commodification from the 'system' that includes employed hospitalists (and *****IC PA/NPs) who just want my note in the chart so they can send the person home. My entire consult is like ordering a sodium or an X-ray. They don't really care about what I say, as long as I cover them. This gives a bunch of bad consults where there's no thought.

Bad outcomes, bad disclosures, death and disability - somehow I feel these are more meaningful and you can really help the family by telling them the truth. I'll disclose 1000 brain death outcomes rather than one adversarial FND patient or explaining that I'm not needed for encephalopathy or syncope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Top