Entries in Data & Technology (73)

Friday
Sep212018

In China, It’s the 21st Century

by Kim Bellard, September 21, 2018

It is 2018 everywhere, but not every country is treating being in the 21st century equally. China is rushing into it, even in healthcare, while the United States is tip-toeing its way towards the future. Especially in healthcare: Let’s look at a few examples:

5G: You may just be getting used to 4G, but 5G is right around the corner, with U.S. carriers expected to start offering networks in a few cities by the end of this year. Meanwhile, China has committed to having national 5G coverage by 2020, and the government is working closely with its private sector to spur development. U.S. wireless trade association CTIA believes China is leading the 5G race. Deloitte agrees; in a recent report, they cite reasons why China is leading, and warn that countries that adopt 5G first “are expected to experience disproportionate and compounding gains in macroeconomic benefits caused by “network effect.”’

Artificial Intelligence: Yes, the U.S. has been the leader in A.I., with some of the leading universities and tech companies working on it. That may not be enough. A year ago China announced that it intended to be the world leader in A.I. by 2025. China is far outspending the U.S. on A.I. research and infrastructure, coordinating efforts between government, research institutes, universities, and private companies. Dr. Steven White, a professor at China’s Tsinghua University, “likens the country’s succeed at all costs AI program to Russia’s Sputnik moment.” We have yet to have that wake-up call.

Quantum computing: Don’t worry if you don’t understand quantum computing; no one does. What matters is that quantum computing is literally a quantum leap above what current computing, so the first to deploy it will have unimaginable advantages. Take a guess what country is leading. Paul Stimers, the founder of the U.S. Quantum Industry Coalition, told CNN: “They [China] have a quantum satellite no one else has done, a communications network no one else has done, and workforce development program to bring new Chinese quantum engineers online. You start to say, that’s worrisome.”

Genetic research: The U.S. has been the leader in genetic research, but — you guessed it — that lead has been rapidly diminishing. Earlier this year, Eric Green, the head of the National Human Genome Research Institute told Asia Times: I do know that if you look in the last 15 years, the investment in genomics, in particular, have been more substantial in countries like China, South Korea, Singapore, and even places like Brazil. For example, the U.S. is still doing research on techniques like CRISPR, but The Wall Street Journal found that China is “racing ahead” in gene editing trials, in large part due to a more relaxed attitude towards regulation and possible ethical considerations.

When it comes to healthcare, China recognizes shortcomings of its existing system, and is rapidly trying to deploy 21st century solutions to it. China adopted a universal healthcare system in 2011 (about the same time the U.S. adopted ACA.)

Last year Fortune reported on China’s healthcare “boom,” spurred in part due to direct government investments and favorable regulatory processes. Similarly, earlier this year The New York Times noted U.S. tech companies’ interest in healthcare, but pointed out that their Chinese counterparts had already jumped in.

I don’t want to live in China, nor would I want to get my health care there. Yet. But if we don’t soon have our own “Sputnik moment” (or moments), we’re going to see the 21st century of healthcare happen in China, not here.

 

This post is an abridged version of the posting in Kim Bellard’s blogsite. Click here to read the full posting

Friday
Jul202018

Consumers and Digital Technology: What’s the Deal With Healthcare?

by Clive Riddle, July 20, 2018 

The Deloitte Center for Health Solutions has just released some preliminary findings from their 2018 Survey of U.S. Health Care Consumers, which will be published in August, on the heels of their recently released Deloitte 2018 Survey of U.S. Physicians. Deloitte shares that “consumers and physicians typically agree that virtual health care holds great promise for transforming care delivery. Yet many physicians remain reluctant to embrace the technologies, worried about reimbursement, privacy and other issues.”

Thus Deloitte found consumers are well ahead of providers on the technology acceptance curve, and many providers are dragging their feet in meeting rising consumer demand in this arena. Dr. Ken Abrams, managing director, Deloitte Consulting tells us "Changes in health care reimbursement models, combined with growing consumer demand, are driving health systems to embrace virtual care, but they are struggling to get physicians on board."

The Deloitte surveys found:

  • 64% of consumers and 66% physicians “cite improved patient access as the top benefit of virtual care.”
  • “About half of physicians surveyed agree that virtual care supports the goals of patient-centricity, including improved patient satisfaction (52% agree) and staying connected with patients and their caregivers (45%  agree)
  • “While 57% of consumers favor video-based visits, only 14% of physicians surveyed have the capability today, and just 18% of the remainder plan to add this capability.”
  • “Clinicians worry about medical errors (36%) and data security and privacy (33%) associated with virtual care.”
  • “Email/patient portal consultations are the most prevalent virtual care technology used by responding physicians (38%), followed by physician-to-physician consultations (17%) and virtual/video visits (14%).”

Moving beyond just virtual care, and examining the healthcare digital experience as a whole, the global brand and marketing consultancy Prophet has just released a two part report: Making the Shift, Part I Healthcare’s Transformation to Consumer-Centricity (25 pages) and Part II  A Culture Change Playbook for Healthcare Transformation (also 25 pages.) They found that “ healthcare providers, payers and pharma companies are not making significant strides toward consumer centricity despite increasing demands and competition for healthcare dollars.”

Jeff Gourdji, a partner at Prophet, tells us  “consumers want to be treated as powerful participants in their own health.  Increasingly healthcare organizations’ own bottom lines require meeting consumers halfway or more. So, it is increasingly in everyone’s best interests to make sure consumers are empowered, engaged, equipped and enabled so they become what we call the ‘e-consumer.’”

Prophet paints the picture at the start of their report like this: “With the rise of digital technology, consumers have unprecedented power. Consumers expect business categories like retail and consumer goods to provide individual experiences across both the physical and digital worlds. While other businesses are shifting their focus toward delivering meaningful and valuable consumer experiences, healthcare has largely stayed the same. And, until recently, it hasn’t had the imperative to change. However, pressures from governments and employers to lower costs and pressures from consumers to meet ever rising expectations means that driving consumer engagement and redefining how healthcare organizations interact with people is no longer a luxury, but a necessity. While healthcare organizations are feeling pressure to upgrade their consumer experience, with a focus on how to engage and empower consumers, the path to accomplishing this is unclear.”

Immediately below this intro, the next section header asks “What’s the Deal with Healthcare?” They share survey results that “81 percent of consumers are dissatisfied with their healthcare experiences, and the happiest are those who interact with the system the least.”

Some of Prophet's other survey findings include:       

  • “Fewer than 10% of all healthcare organizations say they are “most willing” to partner with digital companies     
  • Only 21% of respondents believe that ‘practical and important innovation is coming from digital startups’ compared to over 50% of respondents who believe this innovation is coming from providers and medical device companies         
  • "Only about a quarter (27%) of surveyed companies measure relationship metrics like Net Promoter Score despite evidence that consumer metrics are critical to driving a commitment to consumer centricity.”
  • "Only 15% of respondents reported a willingness to consider adding leadership from outside the industry, even when those leaders would be supported by a healthcare-savvy team.

Prophet goes on to share on elaborate on “five shifts that organizations must prioritize to reshape into more consumer-centric businesses:

  1. Moving from tactical fixes to a holistic experience strategy
  2. Moving from fragmented care to connected ecosystems
  3. Moving from population-centric to person-centered
  4. Moving from incremental improvements to extensive innovation
  5. Moving from insights as a department to a culture of consumer obsession
Friday
Jun152018

Healthcare Organization Mobile Device Use: Check That Pager

By Clive Riddle, June 15, 2018

The list of benefits derived from mobile device use by clinicians and staff at healthcare organizations is a long one. But the challenges exacted comprise a worrisome list topped by privacy and cybersecurity concerns. Organizations who promote or allow BYOD (Bring your own device) of course have significantly enhanced concerns.

So in this context its worthwhile to take a gander at the eighth annual Spok survey report: Mobile Strategies in Healthcare Results Revealed. The good news is that 57% of healthcare organizations surveyed have developed a documented mobile device strategy. The bad news is 43% have not.

They respondents say these are the challenges they are facing

  • Wifi coverage – 51%
  • Cellular coverage – 40%
  • Data security – 34%
  • Compliance with BYOD policies – 34%
  • IT support – 29%
  • Mobile adoption rates – 28%

For those with a strategy, here’s the top seven components included:

  1. Mobile management and security - 56%
  2. Mobile device selection - 51%
  3. Integration with the EHR - 48%
  4. Infrastructure assessment (wireless and mobile) - 45%
  5. Clinical workflow evaluation - 43%
  6. Device ownership strategy (such as BYOD) - 34%
  7. Mobile app strategy (in-house, third-party, hybrid) - 29%

How well are these policies enforced? 39% said extremely well, 33% said well. 24% weren’t sure and an honest 4% said poorly. With respect to validating compliance, 48% use education, 42% gather data from the devices, 37% seek feedback from the end user, 23% take surveys, and an honest 21% said they aren’t doing any validation.

With respect to devices they organization supports, 74% said smart phones, 69% wifi phones, 56% onsite pagers, 54% tablets, 45% wide area pagers, 22% encrypted pagers, 12% voice badges and 6% wearables.  

Perhaps the biggest surprise I found in the report was this passage: “Pagers are still a mainstay in healthcare. Despite the growth of other communication tools, they remain at a relatively high level of use as other mobile devices complement them (without necessarily replacing them altogether). In fact, onsite pagers are the most popular communication option for non-clinical care team members such as housekeepers, transport techs, and phlebotomists.” For non-clinical staff 54% listed some type of pager as their primary communication device (onsite 40%, wide area 10% or encrypted 4%/) Wifi phones came in at 15% and smartphones at 14%.

Thursday
May172018

Medication Nonadherence: Data and Analytics Can Make an Impact

By Claire Thayer, May 16, 2018

Over two-thirds of hospital readmissions are directly due to medication nonadherence.  Many factors contribute to patients not taking their medications, including fear of side effects, out-of-pocket costs, and misunderstanding intended use.  Interventions targeted at understanding the underlying causes on nonadherence are critical to improving chronic disease outcomes.  Successful interventions include: educating patients on purpose and benefits of treatment regimen, reducing barriers to obtain medication, as well as use of health IT tools to improve decision making and communication during and after office visits. 

This weeks’ edition of the MCOL infoGraphoid, co-sponsored by DST Health, explores how data and analytics can provide insight to drive behavior change to improve adherence.

MCOL’s weekly infoGraphoid is a benefit for MCOL Basic members and released each Wednesday as part of the MCOL Daily Factoid e-newsletter distribution service – find out more here.

Wednesday
Apr252018

Five Questions for Erin Benson and Rich Morino with LexisNexis Health Care: Post-Webinar Interview

Five Questions for Erin Benson and Rich Morino with LexisNexis Health Care: Post-Webinar Interview
 

Last week, Erin Benson, Director Marketing Planning and Rich Morino, Director, Strategic Solutions, LexisNexis Health Care, participated in a Healthcare Web Summit webinar discussion on opportunities for health plans to leverage social determinants of health data to attain quality goals while managing cost and enhancing member experience.  If you missed this engaging webinar presentation, watch the On-Demand version here. After the webinar, we interviewed Erin and Rich on five key takeaways from the webinar:

 

1. What are some of the ways that member health is impacted on a daily basis by social, economic and environmental factors?

 

Erin Benson and Rich Morino: The environment in which a person lives impacts their likelihood to develop health conditions as well as their likelihood to effectively manage those conditions. Care recommendations need to be a good fit for a member’s environment, not just their medical condition. If recommendations won’t work within the person’s physical environment, aren’t affordable or conveniently located, and are provided in a way that is hard for the member to understand, they won’t be effective at improving health. Studies support this fact. For example, 75-90% of primary care visits are the result of stress-related factors (JAOA Evaluating the Impact of Stress on Systemic Disease: The MOST Protocol in Primary Care). Money, work and family responsibilities – all reflective of social determinants of health -- are cited as the top three causes of stress (APA 2015).

 

2. We've heard reference to aggregating data at the zip code level for use in personalizing care for members. However, this is one of your top five myths about socio determinants of health. Can you tell us more?

 

Erin Benson and Rich Morino: While aggregate data can be useful in certain capacities, it isn’t recommended as a best practice for personalizing care. Within a single zip code, it is not unusual to see variance in income levels, crime rates and other factors impacting an individual’s neighborhood and built environment, so we recommend looking at an individual’s neighborhood from the perspective of their specific address. Focusing on zip code alone also ignores the influences of education, economic stability and social and community context so we recommend incorporating these other social determinants of health into decision-making in order to view the member holistically and create a more comprehensive plan of care outreach.  

 

3. Can you briefly explain why previous generations of SDOH have failed to improve health outcomes?

 

Erin Benson and Rich Morino: There are two primary reasons why previous generations of SDOH have failed to improve health outcomes, data and workflow.   In order to get sufficient value, the data needs to address all 5 categories of SDOH to properly draw useful insights.  The data should also be at the member level, and address who the member’s family and close associations.  Without that information, we cannot tell if someone is socially isolated or living with caregivers, for instance.

 

The second reason why previous generations of SDOH have failed is how they are deployed in the workflow.  An example would be a plan simply adding them to an existing claims-based model to achieve an increase in lift.  The lift is nice, but no changes in process are filtering down to the Care Management team interacting with the members.   In this scenario, a lot of value was ignored.

 

A better method would be if the plan also built models identifying members with barriers to improved health outcomes.  If you now apply this to your chronic or at-risk population you can determine not just who is sick and in need of help, but how to most likely achieve success in an intervention program.  Care Managers would immediately know the challenges to success, and what type of intervention program the member should be in enrolled in from the start.

 

4. One of the SDOH models to uncover health barriers referenced during your webinar was social isolation. Can you provide more context for us here?

 

Erin Benson and Rich Morino: Studies have shown that social isolation can increase risk of heart disease by 29% and stroke by 32% (New York Times How Social Isolation Is Killing Us). By understanding factors about an individual such as who else is living in the household with them, their predicted marital status, and how close their nearest relatives and associates live to them, healthcare organizations can identify who may be socially isolated. This allows care providers to ask the right questions to determine if that person needs access to social support systems such as support groups or community resources to improve their health outcomes.

 

5. What are some ways social determinants can help health plans enhance predictions and improve care management?

 

Erin Benson and Rich Morino: The most common way of utilizing SDOH data so far has been to incorporate it into existing claims-based predictive models to improve predictive accuracy or to use it to create new predictive models. The second use is for care management purposes and this is where social determinants of health can be truly transformational. We recommend as a best practice to use social determinants of health insights to also build models that identify health barriers. The combination of models allows healthcare organizations to better stratify the risk of their members and then better tailor care to their medical and social needs.