Healthcare transformation

Archive for Healthcare transformation

Pointing Fingers at Healthcare Problems

I’m only halfway through Elizabeth Rosenthal’s “An American Sickness: How Healthcare Became Big Business and How You Can Take It Back” which means that I haven’t gotten to the “what you can do about the problem” part. It’s a slow read, not because it’s not compelling but because it’s too compelling, and if like the current President, you were surprised at how complicated healthcare is, this book will do nothing to dissuade you. It’s really really complicated.

So far, I have two main takeaways from the book, that are easily illustrated through my recent experience of breaking and dislocating my finger: a simple, non-life-threatening problem, that unearthed a couple of key dysfunctions and unintended consequences.

My first takeaway is that everyone is complicit, and yet seem to manage to finger point at everyone else. Rosenthal spares no punches in unearthing decisions that are not made with the best interest in of the patient at heart. Providers, healthcare organizations, payers, pharma, and employers all are complicit in the mess that is our current healthcare system.

This past fall, I broke and dislocated my finger. It wasn’t a big deal, but because it happened on a Saturday night, my only option for care was at the ER. Last week I received a letter in the mail from my insurance company, that according to the envelope required my urgent reply. In the letter, the insurance company suggested that perhaps someone other than them may be on the hook for my ER bill. While I understand they wanted to make sure this wasn’t a worker’s compensation claim, the form was basically for me to tell them whose fault my injury was so that they could go after another insurance company to pay. This was a sports injury in a game of Ultimate Frisbee, a game so granola-like that there are no referees: players call fouls on themselves. . No one was at fault, and even if they were, I would never have considered suing. However, the form didn’t give me that option: only gave me the option of saying whether I had settled my claim. I created a new box that said “NA” and checked it.

When I received the letter, I couldn’t help but think back to Rosenthal’s book, and also consider the amount of effort and cost that was going into finding someone else to blame and pay. Just imagine what this effort and cost would have been if there were legal action….

The second takeaway is that the original intention of a decision always has much farther reaching implications than anyone who agreed on what seemed like a reasonable decision though. Again with the finger, I was asked a number of times if I wanted a prescription for OxyContin. I did not. As has been well publicized we have an opioid addiction problem in North America. While my finger hurt, aside from morphine during inpatient for an appendectomy, I hadn’t had opioids, and really didn’t think that it was necessary, which I explained to the physician. It wasn’t. Tylenol worked fine—however, it seemed that it was very important that I be the one to make this call, not the physician.

One of the unintended consequences of patient satisfaction scores may be the over prescription of pain medication, as many of the questions on the HCAHPS are about whether the patient’s pain was well managed. In Rosenthal’s book, I was also surprised to learn that a finger fracture where an opioid is prescribed has a different billing code than if it is not prescribed, and that with the fracture plus opioid billing code, hospitals get paid more. Now, if you are wondering how this may be the case, if you think about it, a fracture that requires an opioid must be more severe than one that doesn’t and therefore the billing code reflects the severity. This is exactly where the unintended consequences of billing codes can result in exactly the wrong behavior for patient care and safety.

It’s quite possible that the physicians on duty were not aware of either of these two drivers for prescribing, especially the billing code one. They may have just been told “this is our standard of care” and were following guidelines.

If a simple finger fracture and dislocation can shine a light on two key problems in our healthcare system, just imagine what else is out there. Actually, you don’t have to, just get a copy of Elizabeth’s book yourself, and let’s compare notes when I get to the part about what the fix is. It’s going to take all of us.

Posted in: Health Regulations, Healthcare costs, Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Legislation, Healthcare Policy, Healthcare transformation, Opioids

Leave a Comment (0) →

Wellpepper Wins $125K Grand Prize in Alexa Diabetes Challenge

NEW YORK: Today, the Challenge judges awarded Wellpepper the $125,000 grand prize in the Alexa Diabetes Challenge. Wellpepper is the team behind Sugarpod, a concept for a multimodal diabetes care plan solution using voice interactions.

The multi-stage Challenge is sponsored by Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, New Jersey, U.S.A., supported by Amazon Web Services (AWS), and powered by Luminary Labs. In April, the competition launched with an open call for concepts that demonstrate the future potential of voice technologies and supporting Amazon Web Services to improve the experience of those who have been newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes.

“Technology advances are creating digital health opportunities to improve support for people managing life with a chronic disease,” said Tony Alvarez, president, Primary Care Business Line and Customer Strategy at Merck & Co., Inc. “One purpose of the Alexa Diabetes Challenge was to identify new ways to use the technology already present in a patient’s daily routine. The winner of the Challenge did just that.”

Sugarpod is a concept for an interactive diabetes care plan solution that provides tailored tasks based on patient preferences. It delivers patient experiences via SMS, email, web, and a native mobile application – and one day, through voice interfaces as well. Since much of diabetes management occurs in the home, the Wellpepper team recognized that integrating voice was the natural next step to make the platform more convenient where patients are using it most. During the Challenge, Wellpepper also prototyped an Alexa-enabled scale and foot scanner that alerts patients about potential foot problems, a common diabetes complication.

“Sugarpod helps newly diagnosed people with type 2 diabetes integrate new information and routines into the fabric of their daily lives to self-manage, connect to care, and avoid complications. The Challenge showed us the appeal of voice solutions for patients and clinical value of early detection with home-based solutions,” said Anne Weiler, co-founder and CEO of Wellpepper.

The Challenge received 96 submissions from a variety of innovators, including research institutions, software companies, startups, and healthcare providers. The panel of judges, independent from Merck, narrowed the field down to Wellpepper and four other finalists, who each received $25,000 and $10,000 in AWS promotional credits and advanced to the Virtual Accelerator. During this phase of the competition, the finalists received expert mentorship as they iterated their solutions in preparation for Demo Day. At Demo Day on September 25, 2017, the five finalists presented their solutions to the judges and a live audience of industry leaders at the AWS Pop-up Loft in New York to compete for the grand prize.

“The Alexa Diabetes Challenge has been a great experiment to re-think what a consumer, patient, and caregiver experience could be like and how voice can become a frictionless interface for these interactions. We can imagine a future where technological innovations, like those provided by Amazon and AWS, are supporting those who need them most,” said Oxana Pickeral, Global Segment Leader in Healthcare and Life Sciences at Amazon Web Services.

Learn more at alexadiabeteschallenge.com and follow the Challenge at @ADchallenge.                                                                   

###

Contact: Emily Hallquist

(425) 785-4531 or emily@luminary-labs.com

Posted in: Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, patient engagement, Press Release

Leave a Comment (0) →

Ready When You Are: Voice Interfaces for Patient Engagement

We started experimenting with voice as a patient interface early this year, and showed a solution with a voice-enabled total-joint care plan to a select group of customers and partners at HIMSS 2017. Recently we were finalists in the Merck-sponsored Alexa Diabetes Challenge, where we built a voice-enabled IOT scale and diabetic foot scanner, and also a voice-powered interactive care plan.

Over the course of the challenge we tested the voice experience with people with Type 2 diabetes. We also installed the scale and scanner in a clinic, and we found that clinicians also wanted to engage with voice. Voice is a natural in the clinical setting: there’s no screen to get in the way of interactions, and people are used to answering questions. Voice is also great in the home.

However, voice isn’t always the best interface which is why we think multimodal care plans including voice, text, mobile, and web can deliver a more comprehensive solution. Since it’s easier for someone to overhear a conversation than look at your smartphone or even computer screen, mobile or web are often better interfaces depending on the person’s location (for example taking public transit), or the task they need to do (for example, reporting status of a bowel movement). We do think that voice has many great healthcare applications, and benefits for certain interactions and populations.

In our testing, we found that both patients and providers really enjoyed the voice interactions and wanted to continue the conversation. They felt very natural, and people used language that they would use with a human. For example, when asked to let the voice-powered scale know when he was ready to have his foot scan, one person responded with:

“Ready when you are.”

This natural user interface presents challenges for developers. It’s hard to model all the possible responses and utterances that a person would use. Our application, would answer to ready, sure, yes, and okay, but the “when you are” caused her some confusion.

Possibly the most important facet of voice is the connection people have with voice is extremely strong, and unlike mobile voice is not yet associated with the need to follow up, check email, or other alerts. (Notifications on voice devices could change this.)

“Voice gives the feeling someone cares. Nudges you in the right direction”

Creating a persona for voice is important, and relying on the personas created by the experts like the Alexa team, is probably the best way for beginners to start.

“Instructions and voice were very calm, and clear, and easy to understand”

Calm is the operative word here. Visual user interfaces can be described as clean, but calm is definitely a personification of the experience.

Voice is often seen as a more ubiquitous experience, possibly because using fewer words, and constantly checking for the correct meaning are best practices, for example “You want me to buy two tickets for Aladdin at 7:00 pm. Is this correct?” We often hear pushback on mobile apps for seniors, but haven’t heard the same for voice. However, during our testing, a senior who was hard-of-hearing told us she couldn’t understand Alexa, and thought that she talked too quickly. While developers can put pauses to set the speed of prompts and responses in conversation, this would mean that the same speed would have used for all users of the skill, which might be too slow for some or two fast for others. Rather than needing to build different skills based on hearing and comprehension speed it would be great if end-users could define this setting so that we can build usable interfaces for everyone.

While this was our first foray into testing voice with care plans, we see a lot of potential to drive a more emotional connection with the care plan, and to better integrate into someone’s day.

People need to manage interactions throughout their day, and integrating into the best experience based on what they need to do and where they are provides a great opportunity to do that, whether that’s voice, SMS, email, web, or mobile. While these consumer voice applications are not yet HIPAA-compliant, like our tester patient said we’ll be “ready when you are.”

Posted in: Behavior Change, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, patient engagement

Leave a Comment (0) →

What Motivates You, May Not Motivate Me

At Wellpepper our goal is to empower people to be able to follow their care plans and possibly change their behavior, so we think a lot about how to motivate people. Early on when working with Terry Ellis, Director of the Boston University Center for Neurorehabilitation, wanted to make sure that our messages to patients that may struggle with adherence were positive. She works with people who have Parkinson’s disease, and stressed that while they may improve symptoms they would not “get better.”

Last week I had a similar conversation with an endocrinologist about diabetes care plans. People with chronic diseases are often overwhelmed and may take a defeatist attitude to their health. Feedback and tools need to be non-judgmental and encouraging. Ideas like “compliance” and “adherence” may not be the way to look at it. Sometimes the approach should be “something is better than nothing.” And humans, not just algorithms need to decide what “good” is.

Am I good or great?

Here’s an example, non-healthcare related of algorithmic evaluation gone wrong. Rather than applauding me for being in the top tier of energy efficient homes, the City of Seattle, says I’m merely “good.” There’s no context on my “excellent” neighbors, for example are they in a newly built home compared to my 112 year old one, and no suggestions on what I might want to do to become “excellent. (Is it the 30-year old fridge?) I’m left with a feeling of hopelessness, rather than a resolve to try to get rid of that extra 2KW. Also, what does that even mean? Is 2KW a big deal?

Now imagine you’re struggling with a chronic disease. You’ve done your best, but a poorly tuned algorithm says you’re merely good, not excellent. Well, maybe what you’ve done is your excellent. This is why we enable people to set their own goals and track progress against them, and why care plans need to be personalized for each patient. It’s also why we don’t publish stats on overall adherence. Adherence for me might be 3 out of 5 days. For someone else it might be 7 days a week. It might depend on the care plan or the person.

As part of every care plan in Wellpepper, patients can set their own goals. Sometimes clinicians worry about the patient’s ability to do this. These are not functional goals, they represent what’s important to patients, like family time or events, enjoying life, and so on. We did an analysis of thousands of these patient-entered goals, and determined that it’s possible to track progress against these goals, so we rolled out a new feature that enables patients to do this.

Patient progress against patient-defined goal

Success should be defined by the patient, and outcome goals by clinicians. Motivation and measures need to be appropriate to what the patient is being treated for and their abilities. Personalization, customization, and a patient-centered approach can achieve this. To learn more, get in touch.

Posted in: Behavior Change, chronic disease, Healthcare motivation, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, Outcomes, patient engagement, patient-generated data

Leave a Comment (0) →

Disruptive Innovation, Sparks of Light, or the Evolution of Care: Recap of Mayo Transform Conference

In what has been a roller-coaster year for healthcare legislation, it’s the annual touchstone of the Mayo Clinic Transform Conference provided a welcome opportunity to reflect on where we are. This conference, sponsored by the Mayo Clinic Center for Innovation attracts powerhouse speakers like Andy Slavitt and Clayton Christensen, and yet manages to fly under the radar. This year’s theme was about closing the gap between people and health, so the social determinants of health were a key topic, as was whether disruption alone would solve the problem.

Dr Robert Pearl

This was my third year attending, and second year speaking at the conference, and I’ve noticed a trend: the conference starts by articulating the problem, and building up solutions and creative ways to reshape the problems over the course of the two days. This year the conference was deftly moderated by Elizabeth Rosenthal, MD,Editor-In-Chief of Kaiser Health News and author of “An American Sickness.” Rosenthal, an MD herself, and former NYTimes journalist, peppered her moderation with real-world examples of both waste and inefficiencies and effective programs based on her investigative journalism.

I’ve been wanting to write a blog post for a while that riffs on the theme of “You Are Here” trying to outline where we are in the digital evolution in healthcare, but it’s clear that we don’t know where we are, digital or otherwise: too much is currently in flux. There are points of light with effective programs, and things that seem very broken. The panel I was on, was titled “Disruptive Innovation” and I’m afraid we let the audience down, as while we are doing some very interesting things with health systems, we are not turning every model on its head. We work with providers and patients to help patients outside the clinic. Truly disruptive innovation would work completely outside the system, which leads to the question, can health systems disrupt themselves or will it come from entirely new entrants like say Google, Apple, or Amazon?

Dr. David Feinberg of Geisinger reads from debate opponent Dr. Robert Pearl’s book

Clayton Christensen, the closing keynote speaker, likens hospitals to mainframe computers, and basically says they will be overtaken by smaller more nimble organizations, much like the PC and now smartphone revolution. Organizations like Iora Health who holistically and preventatively manage a Medicare Advantage population are the epitome of these new entrants, and we’ve seen some hospitals struggle this year, but will they go away entirely? The answer to this question may lie in the excellent debate session “Is The US Healthcare System Terminally Broken” hosted by Intelligence Squared and moderated by author and ABC News Correspondent John Donovan.

 

Shannon Brownlee, senior VP of the Lown Institute and visiting scientist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and Robert Pearl, MD, and former CEO of the Permanente Medical group were arguing that the system is broken, vs Ezekiel Emmanuel, MD, Senior Fellow Center for American Progress, and David Feinberg, MD, CEO of Geisinger.

While prior to the debate the audience favored the idea that the system is irreparably broken, by the end, they had come around to the idea that it’s not, which would point to the ability for healthcare to disrupt itself. The debate

Is Healthcare Terminally Broken

The final audience vote

was ridiculously fun, partially from the enthusiasm of the debaters, and because the topic was so dear to all attendees. You can listen to the podcast yourself. However, the posing of the question set up an almost impossible challenge for Pearl and Brownlee: they had to argue the patient is terminal, but without any possible solution. No one in the room wanted to hear that, and so when Emmanuel and Feinberg were able to point to innovative programs like the Geisinger Money Back Warranty or Fresh Food Pharmacy that just needed to find scale, the audience latched onto the hope that we can fix things, and we all have to believe in these points of light, to face each new day of challenges.

Posted in: Health Regulations, Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Legislation, Healthcare Policy, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation

Leave a Comment (0) →

Alexa Voice Challenge for Type 2 Diabetes: Evolving An Idea

For the past couple of months some of our Wellpepper team, with some additional help from a couple of post-docs from University of Washington, have been working hard on a novel integrated device, mobile, and voice care plan to help people newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes as part of our entry in the Alexa Diabetes Challenge.

Team Sugarpod

This challenge offered a great opportunity to evolve our thinking in the power of integrating experiences directly into a person’s day using the right technology for the setting. It also provided the opportunity to go from idea to prototype in a rapid timeframe.

Our solution featured an integrated mobile and voice care plan, and a unique device: a voice powered scale that scans for diabetic foot ulcers, a leading cause of amputation, hospitalization, and increased mortality, and is estimated to cost the health system up to $9B per year.

During the challenge, we had access to amazing resources, including a 2-day bootcamp held at Amazon headquarters during which we heard from experts in voice, behavior change, caring for people with type 2 diabetes, and a focus group with people who have type 2 diabetes. We also had 1:1 sessions with various experts who had seen our entry and helped us think through the challenges of developing it. After the bootcamp, we were assigned a mentor, an experienced pharmacist and diabetes educator, who was available for any questions. Experts from the bootcamp also held office hours where we explored topics like

Early Prototype Voice Powered Scale & Scanner

how to help coach people in what they can do with an Alexa skill, and how to build trust with a device that takes pictures in your bathroom.

As we evolved our solution, we were fortunate to have support from Dr Wellesley Chapman, medical director of Kaiser Permanente Washington’s Innovation Group. We were able to install the device in a Diabetes and Wound Clinic. We used this to train our image classifier to look for foot ulcers, and compare results to human detection, and also to test the voice service. We used an anonymous voice service as Alexa and the Lex services are not currently HIPAA-eligible.

We gathered feedback from diabetes educators, clinicians at KP Washington, and across the country, and from people with Type 2 diabetes. While not everyone wanted to use all aspects of the solution, they all felt that the various components: voice, mobile, and device offered a lot of support and value. As well, we determined that there is an opportunity for a voice-powered scale and scanner in the clinic which could aid in early detection and streamline productivity. Voice interactions in the clinic are a natural fit.

Judges and Competitors: Alexa Diabetes Challenge

The great thing about a challenge is the constraints provided to do something really great in a short period of time. We’re so proud of the Sugarpod team, and also incredibly impressed with the other entries in this competition ranging from a focus on supporting the mental health challenges faced by people newly diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes to a specific protocol for diet and nutrition, to solutions that helped manage all aspects of care. We enjoyed meeting our fellow competitors at the bootcamp and the final, and wish we had met in a situation where we could collaborate with them. We also appreciated the thoughtful feedback and questions from the judges, and would definitely have a lot to gain from deeper discussions with them on the topic.

Stay tuned for more on our learnings through this challenge and our experiences with voice.

Posted in: Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, M-health, Managing Chronic Disease, Outcomes, patient engagement, patient-generated data

Leave a Comment (0) →

Meeting Consumer Expectations in Healthcare

We could talk about this all day, and we do! We’re glad to see healthcare executives start to take ownership of the digital experience, and understand that consumer and patient engagement is key to outcome success.

Consumer expectations are indeed hitting healthcare – hard. Patients are no longer shy about telling physicians and payers what they want and how much they’re willing to pay for it. While these expectations can seem overwhelming to those insiders who have long become accustomed to healthcare’s glacial pace, we shouldn’t be discouraged. These greater expectations can indeed be met, provided we take the time to develop and offer physicians and patients tools that meet their needs and fit their workflows.

Here’s the latest take on this topic from HISTalk

 

Posted in: Healthcare transformation, patient engagement, Patient Satisfaction

Leave a Comment (0) →

Patient Experience Versus Patient Engagement

As a volunteer session reviewer for the Patient and Consumer Engagement track for HIMSS 2018, I’ve been thinking a lot about the difference between engagement and experience, and also what it means to deliver connected health. While Wellpepper is a platform for patient engagement, a session based on Boston University’s study using Wellpepper with people with Parkinson disease actually suited the definition of Connected Health better and was submitted in that track.

As I’ve been reviewing sessions submissions for the track, I noticed that quite a few focus on patient experience rather than engagement. The difference really is about commitment and action. Patient experience is what happens when someone engages with a health system or physician office. Patient engagement is what happens when someone actively participates in their own care as a patient. You could argue that patients can’t help but be engaged because whatever is happening is happening to them, but it’s a bit more than that. (Also that argument gets a bit existential.)

Both engagement and experience are important. With a crappy experience then people may not engage with you, your system, or their own health. This can be as simple as not being able to find parking. Good experience is the pre-requisite for engagement, but it is not engagement on its own. Engagement happens when you empower the patient and treat them as an active participant in their care.

There’s a continuum from experience to engagement, and often the same digital tools represent both, although both also include the physical experience, and both will help you attract and retain patients but more importantly engagement will also help improve outcomes.

If you’re interested in this topic, this article in NEJM Catalyst from Adrienne Boissy, MD of Cleveland Clinic does much better job than I do of explaining it.

Posted in: Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, M-health, patient engagement, Patient Satisfaction

Leave a Comment (0) →

But Will It Fly? What Airlines and Healthcare Organizations Have In Common

What do airlines and healthcare systems have in common? Quite a lot it turns out, from a recent power breakfast featuring Rod Hochman, CEO of Providence St. Joseph Hoag Health system, and Brad Tilden, CEO of Alaska Airlines. In addition to the Pacific Northwest roots of both organizations, both have also undertaken mergers to gain market share and increase physical territory. Both serve a large cross-section of the population, and both are in highly-regulated industries that are not necessarily known for customer service that are grappling with new always connected user experiences and expectations.

The wide-ranging discussion included early inspiration for Hochman and Tilden’s early careers, how to motivate and engage a wide range of employees, and how to deal with competition and lead change. Both leaders had early influences on their career direction. Hochman knew he wanted to be a doctor at 16 when assisting on surgeries (!), and Tilden grew up beside Seatac airport watching planes while his peers were watching girls. Tilden grew his career at Alaska, while Hochman is a practicing rheumatologist, who has worked his way from small clinic to major system. Hochman joked that a rheumatology specialty is much more suited to success in administration than say surgery, equating running a hospital to the patient required in managing chronic diseases.

Airlines and health systems have similar challenges with employee experience. Both types of organizations have highly skilled staff, pilots and physicians, who demand a lot of autonomy. Mistakes in both professions can cause loss of life. The difference is that aviation has moved a lot faster in instituting standard procedures and checklists to improve safety and outcomes. Tilden frequently referenced an Alaska Air crash 17 years ago that impacted their approach to safety, and talked about the ways pilots and co-pilots double check settings. Hochman talked about his hope for quality improvements and better collaboration from the younger generation of physicians who have grown up in a world of checklists and standardization, and said that the ones who only care about being left alone to make decisions will retire.

They also have large teams of people who “get stuff done.” Hochman has banned the term ‘middle management’ since he sees those people as the ones who are making things happen, instead he calls them “core team”, a term that Tilden quipped he’d also start using.Rod Hochman & Brad Tilden

Customer experience was also top of mind for both execs. Tilden talked about Alaska adopting Virgin’s mission of being the airline people love. While he seemed to find some of Virgin’s approach to be a bit edgy compared to Alaska, he said you couldn’t find a better mission. Both grappled with the ease of sharing bad experiences on social media, and indicated that social media monitoring has become a key tool in managing consumer expectations. Hochman, also noted that it all comes back to the individual experience when he described that his staff hate when he has his own annual physical, because his expectations as a patient are much higher than what he experiences, especially with respect to convenience and information flow.

Both are optimistic and passionate leaders who genuinely care about the consumer and employee experience, and had as good a time interviewing each other as the audience did listening to them. This event was sold out, so if an opportunity like this comes up again, sign up early.

Posted in: Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, M-health

Leave a Comment (0) →

Introducing Sugarpod by Wellpepper, a comprehensive diabetes care plan

We’re both honored and excited to be one of five finalists in the Alexa Diabetes Challenge. We’re honored to be in such great company, and excited about the novel device our team is building. You may wonder how a team of software folks ends up with an entry with a hardware component. We did too, until we thought more about the convergence happening in technology.

We were early fans of the power of voice, and we previewed a prototype of Alexa integration with Wellpepper digital treatment plans for total joint replacement at HIMSS in February 2017. Voice is a great interface for people who are mobility or vision challenged, and the design of Amazon Echo makes it an unobtrusive home device. While a mobile treatment plan is always with you, the Amazon Echo is central in the home. At one point, we thought television would be the next logical screen to support patients with their home treatment plans, but it seems like the Echo Show is going to be more powerful and still quite accessible to a large number of people.

Since our platform supports all types of patient interventions, including diabetes, this challenge was a natural fit for our team, which is made up of Wellpepper staff and Dr Soma Mandal, who joined us this spring for a rotation from the University of Georgia. However, when we brainstormed 20 possible ideas for the challenge (admittedly over beer at Fremont Brewing), the two that rose to the top involved hardware solutions in addition to voice interactions with a treatment plan. And that’s how we found ourselves with Sugarpod by Wellpepper which includes a comprehensive diabetes care plan for someone newly diagnosed, and a novel Alexa-enabled device to check for foot problems, a common complication of diabetes mellitus.

Currently in healthcare, there are some big efforts to connect device data to the EMR. While we think device data is extremely interesting, connecting it directly to the EMR is missing a key component: what’s actually happening with the patient. Having real-time device data without real-time patient experience as well, is only solving one piece of the puzzle. Patients don’t think about the devices to manage their health – whether glucometer, blood pressure monitor, or foot scanner – separately from their entire care plan. In fact, looking at both together, and understanding the interplay between their actions, and the readings from these devices, is key for patient self-management.

And that’s how we found ourselves, a mostly SaaS company, entering a challenge with a device. It’s not the first time we’ve thought about how to better integrate devices with our care plans, but is the first time we’ve gone as far as prototyping one ourselves, which got us wondering which way the market will go. It doesn’t make sense for every device to have their own corresponding app. That app is not integrated with the physician’s instructions or the rest of the patient’s care plan. It may not be feasible for every interactive treatment plan to integrate with every device, so are vertically integrated solutions the future? If you look at the bets that Google and Apple are making in this space, you might say yes. It will be fascinating to see where this Alexa challenge takes Amazon, and us too.

We’ve got a lot of work cut out for us before the final pitch on September 25th in New York. If you’re interested in our progress, subscribe to our Wellpepper newsletter, and we’ll have a few updates. If you’re interested in this overall hardware and software solution for Type 2 diabetes care, either for deploying in your organization or bringing a new device to market, please get in touch.

Read more about the process, the pitch, and how we developed the solution:

Ready When You Are: Voice Interfaces for Patient Engagement

Alexa Voice Challenge for Type 2 Diabetes: Evolving a Solution

 

Posted in: Behavior Change, chronic disease, Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, M-health, Managing Chronic Disease, patient-generated data

Leave a Comment (1) →

In Defense of Patient-Generated Data

There’s a lot of activity going on with large technology companies and others trying to get access to EMR data to mine it for insights. They’re using machine learning and artificial intelligence to crawl notes and diagnosis to try to find patterns that may predict disease. At the same time, equal amounts of energy are being spent figuring out how to get data from the myriad of medical and consumer devices into the EMR, considered the system of record.

There are a few flaws in this plan:

  • A significant amount of data in the EMR is copied and pasted. While it may be true that physicians and especially specialists see the same problems repeatedly, it’s also true that lack of specificity and even mistakes are introduced by this practice.
  • As well, the same ICD-10 codes are reused. Doctors admit to reusing codes that they know will be reimbursed. While they are not mis-diagnosing patients, this is another area where there is a lack of specificity. Search for “frequently used ICD-10 codes”, you’ll find a myriad of cheat sheets listing the most common codes for primary care and specialties.
  • Historically clinical research, on which recommendations and standard ranges are created, has been lacking in ethnic and sometimes gender diversity, which means that a patient whose tests are within standard range may have a different experience because that patient is different than the archetype on which the standard is based.
  • Data without context is meaningless, which is physicians initially balked about having device data in the EMR. Understanding how much a healthy person is active is interesting but you don’t need FitBit data for that, there are other indicators like BMI and resting heart rate. Understanding how much someone recovering from knee surgery is interesting, but only if you understand other things about that person’s situation and care.

There’s a pretty simple and often overlooked solution to this problem: get data and information directly from the patient. This data, of a patient’s own experience, will often answer the questions of why a patient is or isn’t getting better. It’s one thing to look at data points and see whether a patient is in or out of accepted ranges. It’s another to consider how the patient feels and what he or she is doing that may improve or exacerbate a condition. In ignoring the patient experience, decisions are being made with only some of the data. In Kleiner-Perkin’s State of the Internet Report, Mary Meeker estimates that the EMR collects a mere 26 data points per year on each patient. That’s not enough to make decisions about a single patient, let alone expect that AI will auto-magically find insights.

We’ve seen the value of patient engagement in our own research and data collected, for example in identifying side effects that are predictors of post-surgical readmission. If you’re interested, in these insights, we publish them through our newsletter.  In interviewing patients and providers, we’ve heard so many examples where physicians were puzzled between the patient’s experience in-clinic or in-patient versus at home. One pulmonary specialist we met told us he had a COPD patient who was not responding to medication. The obvious solution was to change the medication. The not-so-obvious solution was to ask the patient to demonstrate how he was using his inhaler. He was spraying it in the air and walking through the mist, which was how a discharge nurse had shown him how to use the inhaler.

By providing patients with useable and personalized instructions and then tracking the patient experience in following instructions and managing their health, you can close the loop. Combining this information with device data and physician observations and diagnosis, will provide the insight that we can use to scale and personalize care.

Posted in: Adherence, big data, Clinical Research, Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Research, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, Interoperability, M-health, patient engagement, patient-generated data

Leave a Comment (0) →

Consumerization Is Not A Bad Word

When you say consumerization, especially with respect to healthcare, people often jump to conclusions about valuing service over substance. There’s a lot of confusion over the meaning of consumerization, whether it’s possible in healthcare, and whether it’s happening. I recently had the privilege of speaking at the Washington State Health Exchange’s Annual Board Retreat on this topic. (Perhaps you saw it, the event was live-streamed to the public. 😉 ). The Health Exchange is pondering questions of how to attract new users, how to better serve their needs, and how to make the experience more useful and engaging. And, this my friends is consumerism, or at least one facet of it: user focus, better service, understanding needs. Doesn’t sound bad at all, does it? In fact, it sounds like something any good service or organization should be doing for its customers.

Consumer-centered pain scale. Baymax from Disney's Big Hero Six

Consumer-centered pain scale. Baymax from Disney’s Big Hero Six

And there’s that word, customers. That’s the debate. Are patients really customers? Not really, often they don’t have a choice, either because of their insurance coverage or from the necessity of an emergency where decisions are often made for patients. However, patients, and everyone else for that matter (except people in North Korea), are consumers, and they judge healthcare experiences both service delivery and technology as consumers. Think of it like this, your patients will judge your experiences through the lens of any other service they’ve interacted with. Fair or not, they will do that. Why do they do this? It’s human nature to remember positive experiences and try to seek them out. Although there’s another reason: high-deductibles are also driving people to examine where they are spending their healthcare dollars, and they evaluate based on outcomes, convenience, and the overall experience.

Since healthcare technology is my area of expertise, let’s stick to that rather than critiquing hospital parking, food, or beds. (Although these are often things that impact HCAHPS scores.) Consumerization when applied to health IT means that patients have an expectation that any technology you ask them to engage with, and especially technology you ask them to install on their own devices, will be as usable as any other app they’ve installed.

Consumerization also impacts internal health IT. Doctors were the first wave, when they pushed using their own devices to text with other providers within the hospital setting. (In IT this is often referred to as “bring your own device.”) The pager became obsolete and replaced with our own always on, always connected mobile devices. (Sadly, the fax machine, like a cockroach, keeps hanging in there.)

Patients are also bringing their own devices, and using them in waiting rooms and hospital beds. We’ve had patients reporting their own symptoms using Wellpepper interactive care plans from their hospital beds. This presents an opportunity to engage, and at a low cost: they are supplying the hardware. The final wave of consumerism will happen when clinicians and other hospital staff also demand convenient, usable, and well-designed tools for clinical care.

Consumerization is late to arrive in healthcare IT. Other industries have already reached tail end of this wave, and have already realized that technology needs to be easy to use, accessible, interoperable, and designed with the end-user foremost. However, consumerization is coming, both from internal staff demands and patients. Technology, healthcare IT, and the people that build and support it are facing scrutiny, being held to higher standards, and becoming part of the strategic decision-making healthcare organizations. This is a great thing, as it will result in better clinician and patient experiences overall, because at its core consumerism is about expecting value, and ease and getting it, and who doesn’t want that?

Posted in: Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, Interoperability, M-health, Outcomes, Patient Satisfaction

Leave a Comment (0) →

Trends That Survive Healthcare Reform

While many aspects of the Affordable Care Act drove significant new opportunities, innovation and change in healthcare, this recent article from Harvard Business Review points out that there are trends that are not dependent on the system. In particular they identify three trends that are not dependent on the act in its current form:

  1. Aging population
  2. Technology adoption
  3. Discoveries in life sciences

However, we think there are at least three more that will mean that the momentum in technology innovation and a patient-centered approach will continue.

  1. Consumer focus: High deductibles are driving two types of behavior. Patients are acting more like consumers and are shopping with their healthcare dollars. Healthcare organizations are trying to attract patients and better understand their experiences and pathways through the organization. The expectation of good and real-time service is high.
  2. People are getting less healthy: While we would like to see this change on its own, through diet and exercise, the fact is that people are not eating well or active enough, and the rates of diabetes and pre-diabetes are increasing. By 2030, it’s estimated that over 470M people world-wide will have pre-diabetes.
    Leading causes of death

    Leading Causes of Death from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/the-things-most-likely-to-kill-you-in-one-infographic-a7747386.html

  3. Value stays top of mind: Our healthcare costs cannot keep rising indefinitely, and experiments in value-based payments have shown to work. Payer/provider organizations are looking to deliver better outcomes at lower costs, and patient self-management and self activation can help with that.

While patient engagement is not the only solution, we believe activated people and patients are an under-utilized source of positive health outcomes. Regardless in of changes in the healthcare act, that will remain true.

Patient engagement has been a mantra for those seeking to reform health care, as it’s widely accepted that patients who are engaged in their own health care have better outcomes. Frank Baitman & Kenneth Karpay

 

Posted in: Healthcare Policy, Healthcare transformation, Outcomes, patient engagement, Uncategorized

Leave a Comment (0) →

Mary Meeker’s 2017 Healthcare Trends Report Shows Opportunity

An annual highlight of Recode’s CodeConf is Mary Meeker’s internet trends report. Last year, I had the pleasure of hearing her in person, and I’m not sure I’ve ever heard a presentation with so much good data, presented so quickly. This year, I wasn’t able to attend, but she also ran out of time for some of the most important slides for a healthcare entrepreneur like me. Based on a quick run-through of the deck, these three slides struck me. (If you want to see the full section on healthcare, it starts at Slide 288.)

Not surprising that consumers expect digital health services, or that Millenials lead in most categories. It’s also not surprising that Boomers have sought the most remote care–they have probably sought the most care overall. It might be interesting to see this pro-rated by care usage. That Boomers are not looking at online reviews is very interesting given how much attention the surgeons we work with give to them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Even with all their consumer device troubles, Samsung squeaks above Apple, and Facebook and Amazon both with a tremendous amount of data about you, are still reasonably well trusted. Both Microsoft and Google have tried and failed previously to own your personal health record, but they are well positioned to do so. What would also be interesting is to see these trust levels against traditional healthcare companies like GE or Johnson & Johnson.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EHR adoption is not surprising since it was mandated through meaningful use. It’s a bit depressing to look at the 2004 stats, and think back to which parts of your life weren’t digital in 2004, and compare that to your medical records. However, the biggest opportunity we see in this slide is dramatically expanding the data points available by tracking patients outside the clinic. Physicians are making decisions with only a few data points when there is so much richer information available through patient-entered and patient generated data.

Posted in: Healthcare Research, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation

Leave a Comment (0) →

Patient engagement and design in the art of medicine

Patient engagement is controversial for many physicians because it interferes with the traditional values that arise from the several hundred-year old guild of medicine. Per the NEJM Catalyst Insights Council, patient engagement is characterized as patients interested in participating in choices about their health care, taking ownership of those choices, and having an active role in improving their outcomes. Given the current epidemiology of chronic diseases, it is not surprising that many patients have low levels of engagement as well as health literacy. As someone who is preoccupied with the diagnosis and treatment of diseases, it is difficult for me to view any problem solving from the patient’s lens; yet, I know through the literature and intuitively that how patients feel impacts their outcomes. The following are a few of the things I have learned and will work on as I improve my ability to deliver care:

  • Time = effectiveness Opinions of clinicians and leaders in patient care have determined that increased patient time with a health care team lends to increased engagement. A basic concept in human dynamics is that the mere exposure to someone over time is enough to start an unlikely relationship. Tack onto that high quality communication and understanding nuances of healthcare literacy, and you have a more engaged patient. In modern medicine, this would be accomplished through a multidisciplinary team effort. This task is challenging given the constraints of our current healthcare system. Could I increase time with patients through mobile technology? If there was an automated way for me or another care team provider to connect with patients via text or a quick phone call at specific intervals, I would be able to increase exposure and augment time.
  • Shared decision making is key Another finding of the NEJM Catalyst is that shared decision making is one of the most effective strategies in improving engagement. We learn about this academically through the interpretative model (as opposed to paternalistic, etc.) of provider-patient relations; but this is also just common sense. I like to think this gives patients a sense of control, a sense of choice in a matter, where frankly, a lot make be out of your control. We are also better able to accept the consequences of the decisions we make, rather than the ones that are placed upon us. One of the reasons that UNICEF has been effective in helping children around the world is from the core guiding principle that children inherently have rights. American political views are reflected in the current model of access, but I would like to practice medicine with the belief that patients have inherent rights. It is a slippery slope because patients’ actions can be counterproductive to their health – but my preference is still to protect patient autonomy.
  • Technology alone cannot solve the problem The concept of remote monitoring with wireless devices doesn’t appear to improve chronic disease management or outcomes. Technology alone cannot solve a dilemma in a people’s “business”. I would opt to use adaptive technologies that improve my relationship and sense of connectedness to the patient over technology that would offer mostly education or content to the patient. The idea of people taking ownership for a difficult problem is non-trivial. It requires motivation at a level that is primarily internal. How do you access that in people? In the self-help world, the most effective motivational coaches tend to elicit a hyper-emotional state in people along with placing a high premium on discipline. I think it’s logical to work on building a relationship, connecting, allowing a safe space for vulnerability, and witnessing the struggle to achieve begin from that foundation. While patient engagement is primarily a patient responsibility, I think providers have a responsibility to elicit patient activation as this directly affects outcomes.
  • Design-thinking can help When Indra Nooyi became the CEO of Pepsi, one of her top priorities was to explore her staff’s beliefs on the concept of design. She asked business executives to take photographs of anything that they believed constituted design. After such an abstract request, she noticed that not only did people not care to complete the assignment, that some had even hired professional photographers to complete the task. My interpretation of this story is that she believes that there is an artistic aspect in the most unsuspecting of transactions. According to IDEO, human-centered-design is about building a deep empathy with the people you are designing for. In the process of being inspired, ideating, and implementing, a design researcher explores the texture and what matters most to a person before execution of a solution. How is this any different from delivering empathetic, tailored care to a patient? What we do well in medicine, some of the time, is already done at a higher level of sophistication in the real world outside of our clinics and hospitals. While design-centric thinking may lead to innovations in healthcare, for the provider I think the greatest advantage is that you amplify the relationship you have with the patient and increase overall engagement.

Whether it’s the creation of something that didn’t exist before or making decisions that are influenced by intuition, everyone is at one level involved in artwork. Improving patient engagement particularly with design-centric thinking would bring more value and meaning to the art of medicine, a skill I look forward to building throughout my career.

Posted in: Behavior Change, Healthcare transformation, patient engagement

Leave a Comment (0) →

T2 Telehealth aka ATA 2017 aka ATA 23: Part 1, The Eye of the Hurricane

While there is a focus on transformation, value, and outcomes going on, if the keynotes are any indication it may be a rough road ahead for telemedicine.

“It’s the 23rd year for the American Telemedicine Association conference, why are we still talking about how to get paid?”, admonished Pamela Peele, PhD economist and Chief Analytics Officer of UPMC during the opening keynote of the annual conference of the American Telemedicine Association.

Pamela Peele at ATA2017

Pamela Peele at ATA2017

“Especially since, as this audience knows, telemedicine is the best thing since sliced bread?

Why indeed? Well, it’s complicated. The problem is that each person in the value chain, the payer, the physician, the healthcare organization, the patient, and the patient’s closest adult daughter (aka primary caregiver), only see the value of one slice of that loaf of bread, and we collectively as purveyors of telemedicine have to sell the entire loaf. There’s no clear solution to this problem. However, with unsustainable costs of healthcare, and increasing consumerization we have got to figure it out. The taxpayer is bearing the brunt of the costs right now, and Peele characterized the shift of baby boomers to skilled nursing facilities as a hurricane we are unprepared for. One way out is to keep people at home, and for that we need Medicare to fund a cross-state multi-facility study to determine efficacy, value, and best practices. Fragmentation of trials is keeping us from wide scale adoption.

The Adaptation Curve

The Adaptation Curve

“We have got to figure it out” was also the theme of best-selling author and New York Times columnist Tom Friedman’s keynote promoting his new book “Thank-You For Being Late.” Friedman claimed to be more right than the rightest Republican and suggested abolishing corporate taxes and at the same time more left than the leftist Bernie Sander’s supporter suggesting we need an adaptable safety net. His major thesis is that we are undergoing 3 climate changes right now: globalization, climate, and technological. To survive and thrive in this new world, we need to adapt and evolve, and take our cues from Mother Nature, not from some sort of top-down regulation. Like Peele on the previous day, Friedman also sees a hurricane coming and suggests that the only way to survive is to find the eye of the storm not by building a wall.

Adapting and evolving will come in handy with the harder times for healthcare investment ahead predicted by the venture investing panel in the day 3 keynote. Tom Rodgers of McKesson Ventures, and Rob Coppedge of the newly formed Echo Health Ventures pulled no punches, as they tossed of tweet worthy statements like “Don’t tell me you’re the SnapChat of healthcare” and “it seems like there are only 3 business models for telemedicine.” The later was Coppedge’s comment on walking the tradeshow floor. (The models are direct to consumer, platform, and as a combined technology and service.) Rodgers had no love for direct to consumer models or anything that targeted millennials who he deemed low and inconsistent users of services. Platform vendors were advised to surround themselves with services: video was seen as a commodity.

So where does that leave us? Value, value, value. The challenge is that the value is different depending on the intervention, the patient, the payer, and the provider. Preventing readmissions, aging at home, decreasing travel costs, all provide benefits to one or more of the key stake holders. Can we figure out how to reimburse based on slices of value? How do we get together to realize that value? And how do we do it before the hurricane hits?

Posted in: Behavior Change, Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Policy, Healthcare Research, Healthcare transformation, Telemedicine

Leave a Comment (0) →

Wellpepper attends Episodes of Care Summit at Cambia Grove

Last week, Wellpepper CEO, Anne Weiler and I attended a half-day Episodes of Care Summit put on by Cambia Grove. It was great to see payers, providers and technologists come together to focus on initiatives that directly impact the patient experience. Here are some of our takeaways:

Horizon BCBS of New Jersey is an episodes of care pioneer

Focus on retroactive bundles before proactive. Episodes of care and bundled payments are often used interchangeably. An episode of care typically refers to a payment made retrospectively while a bundled payment typically refers to a payment made prospectively. Horizon BCBS of New Jersey first launched retrospective pilots in 2010 (total hip and total knee replacements). In this model, savings are shared with the physician or practice once quality benchmarks and patient experience thresholds are met and costs come in below budget. After 7 years of scale and success, Horizon is now launching more immediate, risk-based, prospective initiatives in 2017.

Drive success through quality. Horizon piloted with over 200 quality metrics with member-specific, risk-adjusted financial targets. Metrics are key in driving success. Identify 3-5 standard quality metrics and 2-4 episode-specific metrics.

Community involvement is imperative

It’s great to see continued focus on community involvement in innovation and healthcare. The Bree Collaborative is an excellent example of bringing together community and industry leaders to identify and promote strategies that directly impact patient outcomes, quality and affordability. Wellpepper firmly believes in the work that the Bree Collaborative is doing. In fact, our total joint and lumbar fusion care plans follow Bree recommendations.

The Episodes of Care Summit held breakout sessions that mapped out the ideal episode of care/bundle experience through the lens of people, process and technology. Think of people, process and technology as a three-legged table. Remove one leg and the table falls. If the three legs are not the same size, the table does not function properly. Effort needs to be allocated equally across people, processes and technology to drive behavior change. Reimbursement seemed to take a precedence in every conversation rather than the patient’s needs or the provider’s care. Until this mindset is fixed, it’s hard to focus on what healthcare is really about. Dr. Hugh Stanley, from the Bree Collaborative did an excellent job bringing the focus of the conversation back to the patient.

Memorable quotes from breakout sessions:

  • “Patients need to be at the center of episodes of care.”
  • “We need to capture patient satisfaction in real time.”
  • “I’m blown away I can get more info on a dog bed than a provider.”
  • “We need to rebuild the patient deductible and copay mindset.”
  • “The payer community has a responsibility to share information to publicize data that drives provider readiness.”
  • “Creating episodes vs bundles benefits providers and ultimately patients.”

Posted in: Healthcare Policy, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, patient engagement, Patient Satisfaction, Uncategorized

Leave a Comment (0) →
Page 1 of 6 12345...»
Google+