Blog

Investing in primary care

The US healthcare system is an underperformer (highest healthcare spending for the lowest health system performance) compared to the other ten economically advantaged countries primarily due to differences in access, administrative inefficiency, disparities in healthcare delivery, and also due to the illogical underinvestment in primary care. Despite evidence by the Dartmouth Atlas of Health that the regions in which a higher percentage of Medicare beneficiaries receive majority of their care from a primary care physician lends to overall lower costs, higher quality of care, and lower rates of avoidable hospitalizations, the US continues to underinvest in primary care relative to other nations. Because of perverse incentives and overall fragmentation that is rampant in American healthcare, conscious and deliberate effort is needed to keep primary care at the forefront of clinical practice and population health improvement, including:

  • Implementation of quality improvement practices that have a theoretical basis
    According to Harvard Medical School’s Center for Primary Care established in 2011, there are five components necessary in improving primary care including evidence-based change concepts and tools, fostering strong relationships within and across practices, simple systems for reflection and feedback, structured time for team discussion and planning, and regular and meaningful engagement of leaders. The general theme is that quality improvement processes that have been validated (e.g. PDSA cycle) and implementation of driver diagrams that break up larger processes into smaller chunks/concepts have value and are worth the time to problem solve.
  • Prioritizing patient-centered care
    Care should be collaborative with patients’ preferences and values in the context of their socioeconomic conditions being respected. If there is less information asymmetry in clinical practice, then patients can be more active participants in their healthcare. Overall quality would improve with cost savings, as patient engagement research has demonstrated. Truly understanding a patient’s capacity and health literacy will improve a primary care physician’s ability to be effective in delivering patient-centric care.
  • Payer reimbursement for provider innovation in preventive and multidisciplinary care
    Primary care prioritization with the US healthcare system depends on heavy investment from payers because of the nature of reimbursement for clinicians’ time and services. In addition to a value-based compensation model that payers like Blue Cross Blue Shield reward providers with, more creative and interdisciplinary measures could be more payer driven. Humana’s Bold Goal program is a partnership between an influential payer and San Antonio Health Advisory board to partner with HEB grocery stores, community clinicians, and the YMCA to increase patients with diabetes’ better nutritional understanding of their choices. Because of the cost savings involved with more investment in primary care, it would make sense that payers would be incentivized towards this trend.
  • Leveraging of non-clinical members of a team to deliver comprehensive, value-based care
    Substantial evidence suggests that patients do not receive all of the preventive and chronic disease care that the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force advises on the basis of its best evidence because clinicians simply don’t have the time. Oak Street Health is a Chicago based network of value-based primary care centers that developed a clinical informatics specialist program 2014 where technical scribes were able to provide evidence-based recommendations and data support which resulted in improved effectiveness metrics, overall operational efficiency, and physician joy of practice.

Investment in primary care is necessary for the US healthcare system to have improved outcomes. Efforts at the community level, reinforced by theoretical models and financially backed by payers, are necessary in making changes that can yield significant population health improvements.

Posted in: Healthcare costs, Healthcare Policy, patient engagement

Leave a Comment (0) →

Digital Transformation in Pharma: Digital Pharma West

Like the rest of the healthcare industry, the pharma industry is also grappling with lots of data, disconnects from end-users, and shifting to a digital-first experience while grappling with ongoing regulatory and privacy challenges. Actually it’s pretty much what every industry is grappling with, so the good news is that no one is getting left behind in this digital revolution.

In pharma though, the division between commercial and R&D creates both delays and lags in implementing new technology and the regulatory challenges cause specific issues in communication with both providers and patients.

Last week, I was invited to speak at Digital Pharma West about our work in voice-enabling care plans for people with Type 2 diabetes, and also how our participation in the Alexa Diabetes Challenge enabled us to engage with pharma. It was my first ‘pharma-only’ conference, so it was interesting to contrast with the provider and healthcare IT world.

If you think that there are a lot of constituents who care about digital health in provider organizations, pharma rivals that. For example, there was a discussion about the value of patient-facing digital tools in clinical trials. While everyone agreed there could be real value in both efficiencies of collecting data, and engaging patients and keeping them enrolled in trials, a couple of real barriers came up.

First the question of the impact of the digital tools on the trial. Would they create an intended impact on the outcomes, for example a placebo effect? Depending on how the “usual care condition” is delivered in a control group, it might not even be possible to use digital tools in both cohorts, which could definitely impact outcomes.

Another challenge with digital technology in randomized control trials is that technology and interfaces can change much faster than drug clinical trials. Considering that elapsed time between Phase 1 and Phase 3 trials can be years, also consider that the technology that accompanies the drug could change dramatically during that period. Even technology companies that are not “moving fast and breaking things” may do hundreds of updates in that period.

Another challenge is that technology may advance or come on the market after the initial IRB is approved, and while the technology may be a perfect fit for the study, principle investigators are hesitant to mess with study design after IRB approval.

Interestingly, while in the patient-provider world the number of channels of communication are increasing significantly with mobile, texting, web, and voice options, the number of touch points in pharma is decreasing. Pharma’s touchpoints with providers are decreasing 10% per year. While some may say that this is good due to past overreach, it does make it difficult to reach one of their constituents.

At the same time, regulations on approved content for both providers and patients means that when content has had regulatory approval, like what you might find in brochures, on websites, and in commercials, the easiest thing to do is reuse this content. However, new delivery channels like chatbots and voice don’t lend themselves well to static marketing or information content. The costs of developing new experiences may be high but the costs of delivering content that is not context or end-user aware can be even higher.

At the same time, these real-time interactive experiences create new risks and responsibilities for adverse event reporting for organizations. Interestingly, as we talk with pharma companies about delivering interactive content through the new Wellpepper Marketplace, these concerns surface, and yet at the same time, when we ask the difference between a patient calling a 1-800 line with a problem and texting with a problem there doesn’t seem to be a difference. The only possible difference is a potential increase in adverse event reporting due to ease of reporting, which could cause problems in the short term, but in the long term seems both inevitable and like a win. Many of the discussions and sessions at the conference were about social media listening programs for both patient and provider feedback, so there is definitely a desire to get and make sense of more information.

Like everyone in healthcare, digital pharma also seems to be at an inflection point, and creativity thinking about audiences, channels, and how to meet people where they are and when you need them is key.

Posted in: Adherence, Clinical Research, Data Protection, Health Regulations, Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Policy, Healthcare Research, Healthcare Social Media, Healthcare Technology, HIPAA, M-health, Outcomes, pharma, Voice

Leave a Comment (0) →

The Challenge of Challenges: Determining When To Participate

There’s an explosion of innovation in healthcare and with that comes a plethora of incubators, accelerators, pitches, challenges, prizes, awards, and competitions. Trying to sort through which ones are worth paying attention to can be a full-time job. At Wellpepper we’ve tried to be selective about which ones we enter. A recent post by Sara Holoubeck, CEO and founder of Luminary Labs about the outcomes of challenges got me thinking about the cost/benefit analysis of entering challenges. Both costs and benefits come in hard and soft varieties.

If you want to be scientific, you can assign a score to each of the costs and the benefits, and use it to decide whether to throw your hat in the ring. (For the purposes of this blog post, we’ll use the term “challenge” to refer broadly to all of these opportunities.)

Costs

  • Time: How many hours will your team need to put into this challenge? How much of your team needs to be involved?
  • Focus: Does the focus on this challenge distract your team from core customer or revenue priorities?
  • Financial: Is there an entry fee to participate? What other costs, like travel, may you need to incur to deliver on the challenge?
  • Strategy: Is this challenge aligned with your
  • IP: Do you have to give up intellectual property rights as part of this challenge? Do you have to give away any confidential information that you are not yet ready to share publically?

Benefits

  • Financial: Is there prize money? Does it cover your expected costs? Could you actually profit from entering? If winner receives funding who decides the terms? Is this an organization that would be beneficial to have on your cap table?
  • Focus: Does this challenge provide the team with a forcing function to deliver innovation in an area that is aligned with your overall strategy?
  • Innovation: Does this challenge take your team in stretch direction or enable you to demonstrate a direction on your roadmap that you may otherwise not immediately approach due to market issues?
  • Publicity: Where will the winner be announced? Is there a PR strategy for the entire process or just the winner? Does it help your organization to be aligned with the content or sponsors of this challenge?
  • Introductions: Who will this challenge help you meet that can further your business goals?

It’s up to you to consider the cost/benefit analysis. Both may not have to be high, but when they are the opportunity can be high if you have the ability to put in the effort. You may also consider your chances of winning if it’s defined as a competition, and whether there is any drawback to losing, or if just participating provides enough benefit.

Here are a few examples from our own history that may help illustrate the tradeoffs.

Low cost/medium benefit

We entered a local pitch event for a national organization. The effort to pitch was minimal: we had case studies and examples that fit the thesis directly. The event was nearby and there was no cost to enter. The pitch was short. We won this pitch and got some local awareness and leads. However, when we were offered to go to the national conference and pitch for an even shorter period in a showcase heHIMSS Venture+ Winnersld simultaneously with other conference activities and with no actual competition, we declined as the cost/benefit was not there.

Medium cost/medium benefit

Each year HIMSS has a venture competition at the annual conference. We won this event in 2015, and received PR as well as in-kind benefits at HIMSS conferences including booth space. The effort to prepare was medium: any startup should be prepared for an onstage venture pitch, and the audience was exactly right. As a follow on from this event we’ve been involved in panels showcasing our progress.

High cost/migh benefit

Both the Mayo Clinic ThinkBIG challenge, and the Alexa Diabetes Challenge had a relatively high effort and opportunity cost to participate and high rewards, but both were aligned with directions our company had already embarked on, and both resulted in deeper connections for us with the sponsoring organizations, positive press, validation of our company and solution, and financial support.

In the case of the Mayo Clinic ThinkBIG challenge, we received investment on our convertible note for winning, and the challenge afforded us introductions to important clinical and IT contacts at Mayo Clinic. We were also able to showcase our solution to other potential customers live at the annual Transform event.

Our team put in a tremendous effort on our winning entry for the Alexa Diabetes Challenge but the pay-off was worth it in a number of ways. Certainly the prize money and publicity was welcome, but more importantly, we have created new IP and also come to a whole new understanding of how people can move through their daily lives with technology to support them in managing chronic conditions.

Both of these challenges have afforded us ongoing opportunities for engagement and awareness as a result our participation, and our positive outcomes.

One thing to note, none of these challenges I mention had an entry fee. Sometimes nominal entry fees are used to deter casual entries, but for the most part if a challenge is seeking to fund itself by charging the startups to participate, it’s the wrong model.

While you don’t have to be this explicit when making your decisions about entering a challenge, consideration of the costs and opportunity cost of either participating or not, can help you sort through the ever increasing number of grand challenges.

Posted in: Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, Uncategorized, Voice

Leave a Comment (0) →

Behavioral changes with deliberate patient engagement

Based on the NEJM Catalyst survey regarding the differences between initiating and maintaining behavior change, in-person social support (followed by virtual social support) ranked the highest in sustaining long-term behavioral changes. Members of the council who participated in the survey believed that continued and consistent contact with patients influenced sustainable changes. The combination of human interaction plus digital tools reinforcing the relationship appear to be the best strategy. Even though there has been a gradual shift away from the fee-for-service culture, it still seems impractical for physicians to invest even more time into patient engagement given current constraints of the healthcare system (e.g. clinicians rarely have enough time to get through all the evidence based teaching necessary let alone focus on other factors seemingly non-clinical). Clinicians often give up motivating and influencing their patients, especially after they see marginal gains (or lack thereof) over the course of several years with patients who have chronic illnesses. You have burned out and cynical clinicians on one hand and patients who love inertia on the other. The irony is that if clinicians were to spend more time towards patient engagement, then there would be more impetus for patients to self-manage and be more accountable in their care and outcomes. Research has demonstrated that patient engagement leads to better health outcomes and reduces overall costs. Ultimately, patients being active participants in their healthcare leads to sustainable, long-term behavioral changes. In order to practice medicine effectively, efficiently, and to allow patients to extract the most out of the healthcare services they receive, clinicians should make attempts at patient engagement in a more deliberate manner with different strategies:

  • Model after other human service businesses

One of the reasons that luxury car dealerships, financial planners, and boutique firms across a range of industries are so effective with their clientele is due to their shameless persistence in engaging with their customers. They seem to be very regimented in their follow-up without it appearing overly contrived. What if clinicians could adopt that kind of style with their patients? A combination of phone calls and digital contact seems appropriate – even leaving a voicemail in the evening as follows could signal enough persistence: “I sent you an email asking you if you’ve ever been tested for Thalassemia about a week ago– I think you are iron deficient for other reasons, but I want to make sure we’re covering all our bases for your condition.  If I don’t hear from you this week, I’ll be discussing this with you at your next appointment in 2 weeks.”

  • Blend a style between a motivational coach and psychologist

Motivational coaches who are very effective typically try to leverage emotional vulnerabilities and emotional language in very explicit ways to enforce change. Psychologists tend to non-judgmentally allow clients to form conclusions by themselves. Clinicians are often balancing these two approaches to avoid both paternalism as well as the snail-paced results of motivational interviewing. Language could be blended, with elements of idealism and also allowing for patient autonomy: “The pain of discipline is nothing compared to the pain of regret. You’ve recently had a lapse, but if you stick with the diet that you initially were so good with, what do you think it will do for your diabetes? Can you imagine what life will be like?”

Clinicians are never at risk of overinvesting in communication skills, as this is necessary to strike the right balance in influencing patients over the long-run. They would benefit from practices and processes in other industries where contact is consistent and maintained over a continuum with the assistance of digital technologies.

 

 

Posted in: Behavior Change, patient engagement

Leave a Comment (0) →

Sidelined by mindlines?

Evidence-based medicine (EBM), a movement that emerged roughly 30 years ago, advocates for the use of current best evidence from high quality research studies in healthcare decision making. This logical and straightforward way of delivering healthcare often fails in modern day practice. One simple reason that clinicians cannot execute point of care decision making with EBM is due to the overwhelming volume of scientific evidence that is ever changing and available within severe time constraints. A more pervasive reason is found in the way clinicians practice and incorporate knowledge into their daily work – they tend to follow what ethnographers Gabbay and Le May have coined as mindlines: collectively reinforced, iterative, internalized, and tacit guidelines. Clinicians’ practice is primarily influenced by trusted colleagues, mediated by cultural and organizational features of their practices, and is constantly refined as knowledge-in-practice-in-context.

Through my own wandering through various clinical settings, I have often heard phrases from respected clinicians including “there is evidence…and then there is actual practice.” The five part concept of EBM appears intuitively important in a science-based profession – define the problem, search for sources of information, critically evaluate that information, apply the information to the patient encounter, and evaluate the efficacy of the application of that information for that specific patient. It seems that an exciting opportunity would be data analytics enhanced by artificial intelligence that could search high volume clinical research and identify patient-matching criteria in order to assist clinician judgment on relevant treatment protocols.

How much of this is naïve rationalism? Upon evaluating a typical clinical scenario, what I used to think was a clear set of facts in a one-dimensional reality is now more like an interaction of temporary realities of patients, clinicians, researchers, and guideline/policy makers. Mindlines are therefore:

  • More than intuition.
    Mindlines that clinicians abide by undergo a validation process despite being mainly tacit. They are built off of shared sense-making in the local settings of patient care, which leads to coherence and negotiation with real-time environmental influences. They provide for more accuracy than the reductionist tools and beliefs of EBM.
  • More patient centered.
    Mindlines allow for incorporation of valid knowledge to occur from the patient’s perspective, as opposed to the paternalistic model of clinician knowing all and only being able to derive more information from EBM.
  • Meaningful and effective.
    Mindlines are not very far off from the way typical high performers solve problems – they consciously and unconsciously adjust their frameworks through contextual experience, colleagues, and the physical world. EBM can negotiate with these frameworks, but likely can never replace them.

The paradigm of mindlines offers insight into the way clinicians practice and how western medicine operationally works in an environment with varying expectations from the patient and the overall industry where innovative work is being attempted. The secular trend for the future hopefully will be the risk-adjusted incorporation of EBM with assistance from artificial intelligence into the tacit world of clinical medicine.

Posted in: big data, Clinical Research, Research

Leave a Comment (0) →

Dispatches from the Canadian E-Health Conference: The same but different

Bear statue in VancouverThe annual Canadian E-Health Conference was held in Vancouver, BC last week. I had the opportunity to speak about the work we’re doing at Wellpepper in applying machine learning to patient-generated data, and in particular the insights we’ve found from analyzing patient messages, and then applying a machine-learned classifier to alert clinicians when a patient message might indicate an adverse event. Our goal with the application of machine-learning to patient generated data is to help to scale care. Clinicians don’t need to be alerted every time a patient sends a message; however, we don’t want them to miss out if something is really important. If you’d like to learn more about our approach, get in touch.

My session was part of a broader session focused on ‘newer’ technologies like machine-learning and blockchain, and some of the other presenters and topics definitely highlighted key differences between the US and Canadian systems.

Aside from the obvious difference of Canada having universal healthcare, there were subtle differences at this conference as well. While the same words were used, for the most part: interoperability, usability, big data, and of course blockchain and AI, the applications were different and often the approach.

Interoperability: Universal doesn’t mean one

Each province has their own system, and they are not able to share data across provinces. Unlike the UK which has a universal patient identifier, your health records in Canada are specific to the province you live in. As well, apparently data location for health records is sometimes not just required to be in Canada, but in the actual province where you reside and receive care. As for interoperability, last we heard, British Columbia was doing a broad roll out of Cerner while large systems in Alberta were heading towards EPIC, so Canada may see the same interoperability challenges we see here if people move between provinces.

Privacy: The government is okay, the US is not

What’s interesting is as a US company, is that whenever we talk to health systems in Canada they bring up this requirement, but as soon as you mention that the PIPEDA requirements enable patients and consumers to give an okay for out of Canada data location they agree that it’s possible. Regardless, everyone would rather see the data in Canada.

What was possibly the most striking example of a difference in privacy was from one of my co-presenters in the future technologies session, who presented on a study of homeless people’s acceptance of iris scanning for identification. 190 out of 200 people asked were willing to have their irises scanned as a means of identification. This identification would help them access social services, and healthcare in particular. The presenter, Cheryl Forchuk from the Lawson Health Research Institute said that the people who participated didn’t like to carry wallets as it was a theft target, that they associated fingerprinting with the criminal justice system, and that facial identification was often inaccurate due to changes that diet and other street conditions can make. When I tweeted the 95% acceptance rate stat there were a few incredulous responses, but at the same time, when you understand some of the justifications, it makes sense. Plus, in general Canadians have a favorable view of the government. The presenter did note that a few people thought the iris scan would also be a free eye exam, so there may have been some confusion about the purpose. Regardless, I’m not sure this type of identification would play out the same way in the US.

Reimbursement: It happens, just don’t talk about it

The word you didn’t hear very much was reimbursement or when you did, from a US speaker the audience looked a bit uncomfortable. The funny thing is though, that physicians have billing codes in Canada as well. It’s just that they are less concerned about maximizing billing versus being paid for the treatment provided and sometimes even dissuading people from over-using the system. Budgets were discussed though, and the sad truth that money is not always smartly applied in the system, and in a budget-based system, saving money may decrease someone’s future budget.

Blockchain: It’s not about currency

Probably the biggest difference with respect to Blockchain was the application, and that it was being touted by an academic researcher not a vendor. Edward Brown, PhD from Memorial University suggested that Blockchain (but not ethereum based as it’s too expensive) would be a good way to determine consent to a patient’s record. In many US conferences this is also a topic, but the most common application is on sharing payer coverage information. Not surprisingly this example didn’t come up at all. If you consider that even though it is a distributed ledger, a wide scale rollout of Blockchain capabilities for either identification or access might be more likely to come from a system with a single payer. (That said, remember that Canada does not have a single payer, each province has its own system, even if there is federal funding for healthcare.)

“E” HR

Physician use of portalFor many of the session the “E” in e-health stood for EHR, which while also true in the US, the rollout of wide scale EHRs is still not as advanced. Cerner and EPIC in particular have only just started to make inroads in Canada, where the a telecommunications company is actually the largest EHR vendor. In one session I attended, the presenter had done analysis of physician usage of a portal that provided access to patient labs and records, but they had not rolled out, what he was calling a “transactional” EHR system. Physicians mostly accessed patient history and labs, and felt that if the portal had prescribing information it would be perfect. Interesting to see this level of access and usage, but the claim that they didn’t have an EHR. What was also interesting about this study is that it was conducted by a physician within a health system rather than an academic researcher. It seemed like there was more appetite and funding for this type of work within systems themselves.

Other Voices: Patients!

Patients on the mainstageDuring the interlude between the presentations and judging for the well-attended Hacking Health finals, and on the main stage, presenters interviewed two advocate patients. While they said this was the first time they’d done it, both patients had been at the conference for years. So while the mainstage was new, patient presence was not, and patient advocate and blogger Annette McKinnon pushed attendees to go further when seeking out engaged patients. Noting that retirees are more likely to have the time to participate in events she asked that they make sure to seek out opinions for more than 60 year old white women.

There was also an entire track dedicated to First Nations Healthcare. Think of the First Nations Health authority as a VA for the indigenous people of Canada, which incorporates cultural differences and traditional practices of the First Nations people. The track started and concluded with an Elder song and prayer.

Manels

Speaking of diversity, I didn’t witness any manels.

Best Quote

 

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

Leave a Comment (0) →

Healthcare Transformation: Emulating Disney Is Not A Bad Idea

Last week, I had the privilege of speaking to a group of CMIOs about disruption and consumerism in healthcare. We had a lively discussion, with the two main takeaways being that having a broad digital strategy is key, and also that healthcare really needs to find its own way to delivering the things consumers want. While looking to other industries for inspiration is a good way to think about change, blindly implementing strategies without thinking about how to adapt them for your own industry is not a good path.

We started off the discussion with this quiz from Elizabeth Rosenthal, former physician and health editor of the New York Times, and author of An American Sickness. Try it for yourself: it’s fun to try to figure out which is the hospital and which is the luxury hotel. (The CMIOs got 8/12 correct. Can you beat them?)

This prompted a debate about how much environment matters to healing, and why hospitals have no “back office.” Having a calming environment can definitely promote healing, however, it wasn’t clear from some of the images presented in the quiz whether healing or luxury was the goal.

Adopting ideas from other industries without fully understanding their priorities and understand how they might differ from your goals. For example, people may complain about the Disneyfication of healthcare, and point to managing to the HCHAPS survey as driving this and other evils. However, did you know that Disney’s #1 corporate value is safety? Adopting safety as a number one organizational value in healthcare would be completely relevant and appropriate. What has happened with these hotel-like experiences is adopting the surface of what Disney stands for without understanding the core goals and objectives of the experience or of the patient, or even of what Disney is trying to achieve.

Recently I received this in the mail from UnitedHealthcare.

Much has been written about the power of hand-written notes, however, usually within business situations and often from a senior manager to a junior manager. This, however, is not a good use of a handwritten note. It’s so many kinds of wrong, and bordering on creepy, especially since I had just gone for my annual physical.

The pressure to deliver better service, and better outcomes is not going to decrease in healthcare. However, it’s easy to avoid these types of pitfalls by considering what people are really looking for. This might not be the same for all patients, but we think this sets up a good framework to approach consumerization.

In addition to thinking about how your offerings, outreach, and engagement with patients fulfills these needs, going a step further, you could try to think about which one of these is most important to each individual patient, and that’s really the crux of delivering a great patient or consumer experience.

Posted in: Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, Meaningful Use, Outcomes, patient engagement, Patient Satisfaction

Leave a Comment (0) →

Wellpepper now an Amazon Partner Network Advanced Technology Partner

Wellpepper is pleased to announce that we are now an AWS Advanced Technology partner!

When we started Wellpepper in 2012, we evaluated a list of hosting options. We looked at availability and durability guarantees, the breadth of service offerings, how deeply the provider was investing in their cloud offerings, and their expertise and compliance with healthcare requirements.

AWS was clearly at the head of the pack in their cloud investment, and had the most believable availability and durability guarantees. Over the last 5 years, this has proven true – AWS has been a rock solid platform for us. But what’s really been incredible is to watch how fast AWS has broadened their service offerings (many new useful platform-as-a-service tools), and pulled many of these under the HIPAA-eligible service umbrella.

Our software architecture has evolved over time. We have always relied heavily on EC2 instances and S3 for bulk object storage, and we still do. We have also started using services like Lambda for some of the newer parts of our platform. We also rely heavily on AWS services like CloudWatch for monitoring and logging, CloudTrail for auditing, and CodeDeploy to deploy services automatically. We did a little video about our architecture with the AWS Startups team last year if you want to know more.

As Advanced Tier partners, we’re looking forward to delivering the Wellpepper patient engagement platform through the AWS marketplace, in addition to selling directly.

Posted in: Healthcare Technology

Leave a Comment (0) →

HIMSS 2018: We’re having a party in your house!

From the opening keynote of HIMSS 2018, you could tell things were going to be different. Unlike last year, where actors touted the marvels of flash drives and backup storage, this year kicked off with singers from The Voice. Not sure how to interpret their music choices, though, I’m sure Leonard Cohen never envisioned his anthem Hallelujah pumping up 45,000 healthcare IT experts.

Keynote speaker Eric Schmidt executive chairman of Alphabet, admonished the crowd to get to the cloud, any cloud, even Google Cloud’s competitors. He also described a scenario with an assistant named Liz, listening in on a doctor/patient visit and transcribing notes. Ironically, this exact scenario was announced by Microsoft the week before. I’ve witnessed shifts to digital and cloud before in other industries, and it does take a village, so Eric calling on the power of the technology and being rather vendor agnostic is a good sign. That said, there were a few things in his talk that might have ruffled his audience. First, where were the partners? In the utopia of voice and cloud for healthcare that Schmidt described the only partner referenced was Augmedix, poster child for Google Glass, and absolutely no healthcare system examples. Which makes sense, as when asked by HIMSS president emeritus, Steven Lieber for his parting words to the crowd, Schmidt said:

“You’re late to the party.”

Which is an interesting comment at as he was a guest keynote speaker at a healthcare IT event and representing big tech, so you could interpret this to mean:

“You’re late to the party (that we’re throwing in your house).”

As the keynote emptied in a mass stream to the tradeshow floor, I eavesdropped on a number of conversations, and many people weren’t too happy about the message: “they (aka tech) don’t understand how complicated our lives are.” It’s an interesting conundrum, because Google et al have solved some pretty complicated problems making sense of what we’re all looking for online, a problem of completely unstructured data, and yet, as recent Facebook incidents show, there can be a lack of respect for people’s data and privacy that is crucial for any type of healthcare deployment in big tech.

The tradeshow floor itself showed a lot of new entrants, including booths from Lyft and Uber, who previously had only partnered with companies like Circulation for medical transportation, and a much larger Google Cloud and Amazon Web Services presence than the previous year. Microsoft and IBM have been at the healthcare party for a long time, and have settled in.

Big tech is indeed at the party. Who else is at the party? Purveyors of security and in particular block-chain crypto were definitely there. We saw APIs hanging around the punch bowl, this time invited by the new Blue Button 2.0 initiative, unlike previous years as the date of big tech.

Who wasn’t at the party? Patients. On the one hand, we’ve found that the digital patient experience and patient engagement is now mainstream, and our research partner Tamara Deangelis from Boston University Center for Neurorehabilitation was awesome talking about patient/provider messaging at the patient engagement summit. At the broader HIMSS conference, it seemed only vendors were representing patients. Most of the patient invitations must have gotten lost in the mail.

One CIO I talked to suggested that there was a different feeling at HIMSS this year and that this is the year we’ll look back and see that things really changed for healthcare IT. We’ve seen an acceleration of the shift to the cloud for new patient-facing applications, and a rapid realization of a need for an overall patient digital strategy. All heartening, especially since it will take everyone at the party to accomplish this transformation, debutantes and charming hosts alike.

Until next year’s party, cheers!

(Footnote: The actual Google Cloud party had a long line immediately, so some people heeded Schmidt’s words about not being late for the fantastic view of the Bellagio fountains, poke bowls, and open bar. The party was predominantly male, which hopefully isn’t part of the vision. Of course, it was at the same time as the Women in Healthcare IT event, which I heard was awesome. Perhaps a poor party choice on my part.)

Posted in: Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, HIMSS, Interoperability

Leave a Comment (0) →

Mayo Clinic Care Plans to be available on the Wellpepper patient engagement platform

PR Newswire release

Las Vegas, Nevada, March 5, 2018 – Mayo Clinic Global Business Solutions and Wellpepper, Inc. announced today that Mayo Clinic will be providing best practices for interactive care plans on the Wellpepper platform. Wellpepper is a clinically-validated patient engagement platform used by major health systems to improve outcomes and lower costs of care.

Wellpepper customers who use any electronic health record will be able to use Mayo Clinic care plan protocols to help patients follow their physicians’ instructions outside the clinic to self-manage and improve their outcomes.

Mayo Clinic Care Plans will be available through Wellpepper Marketplace, which launches later in the second quarter of 2018. Mayo Clinic Care Plans initially will be available to cardiac rehabilitation, headache and sports medicine patients. The care plans eventually will encompass hundreds of patient interventions showcasing the breadth of Mayo Clinic expertise.

“Wellpepper and Mayo Clinic share a continuous commitment to providing care that ultimately benefits patients,” says Steve Ommen, M.D., interim medical director of  Mayo Clinic Global Business Solutions. “We look forward to the opportunity to share our best practices with other health systems through the Wellpepper platform.”

Wellpepper’s interactive care plans are based on a framework of building blocks that support creating any type of patient instructions. Wellpepper patients are more than 70 percent engaged in their care plans, and control trials conducted by researchers at Boston University and Harvard University show clinically meaningful patient outcomes for patients using the Wellpepper platform.

“We are thrilled to launch the Wellpepper Marketplace starting with one of the leading academic medical centers in the world,” said Wellpepper CEO Anne Weiler. “Our customers and their patients will benefit immensely from access to Mayo Clinic best practices. Analysis of patient experience and outcomes from these care plans will enable continual improvement and new insights to deliver better care.”

The Wellpepper Marketplace will offer health systems the choice of best practice care plan templates from leading health systems and Wellpepper’s out-of-the-box care plan templates. These turnkey solutions will enable quick deployment of evidence-based and clinically-validated care plans to improve patient outcomes.

About Wellpepper 
Wellpepper is a health care technology company with an award-winning and clinically-validated patient engagement platform used by major health systems to improve outcomes and lower costs of care. Wellpepper treatment plans can be customized for each health system’s own protocols and best practices, and personalized for each patient. Wellpepper’s patented adaptive notification system helps drive over 70 percent patient engagement with treatment plans. Wellpepper was founded in 2012 to help healthcare organizations lower costs, improve outcomes and improve patient satisfaction. The company is headquartered in Seattle, Washington.

Media contacts:

Jennifer Allen Newton, Wellpepper, (503)-805-7540, jennifer@bluehousecg.com

Rhoda Madson, Mayo Clinic Public Affairs, 507-284-5005, newsbureau@mayo.edu

Posted in: Press Release

Leave a Comment (0) →

HIMSS 2018…See you there!

HIMSS17 in Orlando was a great conference for Wellpepper. We’re looking forward to HIMSS18 in Las Vegas even more!

We have a long list of sessions to attend and booths to visit, but below are some places you’re guaranteed to find us:

Monday, March 5th

  • Hear from Tami Deangelis on how our research partners at Boston University engaged patients outside the clinic and improved outcomes using Wellpepper care plans. She is speaking at the “Remote Patient Messaging for Adherence and Engagement” session from 4:05pm-4:25pm at the Patient Engagement & Experience Summit

Tuesday, March 6th

  • Hall G, Innovation Zone: Booth 9900-78 from 9am-6pm
  • CTO, Mike Van Snellenberg will be demonstrating our voice-powered scale and foot scanner, and integrated diabetes care plan at the Industry Showcase at BHI & BSN 2018 https://bhi-bsn.embs.org/2018/industry-showcase/

Wednesday, March 7th

  • Hall G, Innovation Zone: Booth 9900-78 from 9am-6pm
  • CEO, Anne Weiler, will be sharing the Wellpepper Vision and Mission at HIMSS VentureConnect http://www.himssconference.org/education/specialty-programs/venture-connect
  • CEO, Anne Weiler, will be joining other industry leaders to continue the conversation with CMS toward inclusion of patient engagement and outcomes tracking in the MIPS Improvement Activity for provider reimbursement

Thursday, March 8th

  • Hall G, Innovation Zone: Booth 9900-78 from 9am-4:30pm

We can’t wait to connect with friends, partners, colleagues and industry leaders to continue the journey towards an amazing patient experience. Hope to see you there!

Posted in: Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Technology, M-health, Outcomes, patient engagement, Uncategorized

Leave a Comment (0) →

Supporting Patient Motivation

What motivates people to improve their health and stay on the right track over time?

This question is on the mind of every practitioner, whether it’s a physician sending someone home with a wound care plan, a nutritionist giving dietary advice to help manage diabetes or a physical therapist providing exercises to get a frozen shoulder moving again. They’re thinking: “Will the patient do it?” To a great extent, the answer to this question determines how successful their treatment plans will be.

Some of this blog’s most popular posts have explored the issue of motivation because it is a major underpinning of patient engagement technology – will the patient use, and stick with, the technology that in turn helps them adhere to their care plans?

The subject of motivation usually starts with a discussion about goal-setting. This process, at least in the medical context, typically begins when the practitioner sets goals for the patient and provides a care plan that tells the patient what they need to do in order to get there. Some practitioners feel this should be motivation enough for a patient. In reality, they know it’s not.

So what is motivation? A great deal of research has gone into the subject, particularly with regard to behavior change. It is most often described as being either extrinsic (outside the individual) or intrinsic (inside the individual). With extrinsic motivation, we engage in a behavior or activity either to gain some sort of external reward or avoid a negative consequence. With intrinsic motivation, we engage in something because we find it personally fun or rewarding.

While these are the two areas most often discussed, there are other, deeper dimensions to motivation, including fear-based and development-based motivators – and these can be either extrinsic or intrinsic. Understanding the interplay among these different forms of motivation is an important element in successful health coaching and in the creation of successful, supportive technologies that assist people in reaching their health goals.

Fear-based motivation comes in two basic flavors: deficiency-based and threat-based. Deficiency-based motivations come from the sense you are lacking in some way. These can have an external, socio-cultural source (just watch any personal care product advertisement: you smell bad, your hair is the wrong color and your teeth aren’t nearly white enough) or an intrinsic source (e.g. internal pressure “shoulds,” self-imposed discipline or overcoming the deficiency of lost health). Threat-based motivations tap into fear at a deeper level. In the world of medicine, this might be a medical incident that serves as a wake-up call, and the threat of disability or death propels a person to make serious lifestyle changes.

Development-based motivation tends to come from the desire for personal growth or self-actualization. It can also be externally sourced (e.g. from positive peer health norms or positive environmental conditions like smoke-free public spaces) or intrinsic – from the satisfaction, pleasure or joy we derive from doing something.

Research has shown that while fear can be a great motivator for getting people started on something, the positive, development-based motivators tend to be more powerful in keeping people engaged and active in behavior change over the longer term.

I believe one of the reasons the Wellpepper patient engagement platform is so successful at driving patient engagement with care plans (70% engagement compared to an average of 20% engagement with portals) is because the Wellpepper team understands this complex motivation dynamic very well and they have incorporated some of the most successful elements from it into their platform. They call it the “3rd approach” and here’s why I think it works.

Wellpepper takes a very obvious extrinsic motivator – the practitioner’s care plan – and turns it into an application that incorporates both intrinsic and extrinsic development-based motivators that keep people engaged over time. There are many layers we could explore here, but we’ll start with a few of the big ones.

Setting aspirational goals: In addition to the functional goals set by the practitioner, Wellpepper provides the ability for patients to set their own personally meaningful, aspirational goals that can support and reinforce their motivation to heal. For example, someone recovering from a total joint replacement operation might set a future vision of wanting to hike to their favorite fishing spot with a grandchild. They can use Wellpepper to set interim goals that lead them toward that vision and can rate their own progress on a Likert scale.

Research in positive psychology has shown that this kind of personal vision and goal setting is highly successful at sustaining motivation over time. In this case the patient is more likely to complete their prescribed exercises because it leads them toward goals that are personally meaningful about their own healing and about doing something special with someone they love.

Personalized experience: Wellpepper also provides a personalized experience for the patient. Using the same joint replacement example, instead of getting a piece of paper with a series of exercise diagrams or a generic video, the practitioner can record the patient doing their own exercises. Seeing yourself, and hearing the personal comments of the physician or physical therapist as you do it, is not only easier to follow, it feels personal. And, as you begin to improve, when you watch yourself then and now, seeing your own progress can be very satisfying (a powerful development-based motivator).

Adaptive notification: Wellpepper’s patented adaptive notification system means the patient doesn’t get the same generic reminder every day – it changes the notification based on the patient’s progress and level of engagement, keeping the extrinsic motivator relevant, fresh and focused on personal development.

Tracking progress: By enabling people to track progress on their goals and sharing that information with their practitioners, patients tap into positive, extrinsic motivation. Also tracking progress on personal, aspirational goals helps people feel a greater sense of accomplishment and direction over their own developmental outcomes.

While motivation for any one individual can be elusive, the way Wellpepper weaves together the positive extrinsic and intrinsic development-based motivators may be the key to its success in helping patients stay motivated and helping practitioners answer the age-old question: “Will the patient do it?”

If they’re using Wellpepper, chances are, they will.

Jennifer Allen Newton is Wellpepper’s PR lead, and also a Functional Medicine Certified Health Coach. 

Posted in: Adherence, Healthcare motivation, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, patient engagement, Physical Therapy

Leave a Comment (0) →

Alexa, Get Well Soon

The unofficial winner of the Super Bowl ad race this year was “Alexa Loses Her Voice”, an ad that shows celebrities subbing for Alexa when she (anthropomorphic being that she is, comes down with a cold). Both USA Today and YouTube are calling it the most watched ad.

Alexa, who won USA TODAY’s 30th Ad Meter?

“Well, um – me.”

Jeff Bezos looks skeptical that his team can replace Alexa as he should be, since their solution of Gordon Ramsay, CardiB, Rebel Wilson, and Anthony Hopkins is both extremely expensive, (Wellppper CTO Mike Van Snellenberg did the math), and breaks the key trust relationship that people have with Alexa.

Voice is a natural interface, and empathy can be quickly established by the types of utterances and engagement. By default, Alexa apologizes when she doesn’t understand something and it feels genuine. Compare that to Gordon Ramsay insulting his poor hapless user—all the guy wants is a bit of help making some comfort food. What he gets is abuse.

Or, the woman who wants Alexa’s help while she’s in her boudoir presumably getting ready for a date with her love. Instead, Anthony Hopkins insinuates that something horrific has happened to her beau possibly involving a pet peacock.

Cardi B insults a young man’s interest in Mars. Let’s hope she has not squashed his spirit of discovery and his desire to ask questions.

Since this is an all-ages blog, we won’t even mention the response Rebel Wilson gives from her bubble bath to the poor gentleman who asked Alexa to set the mood for a party. He and everyone at his party were fully traumatized.

We get it, Alexa is just better at delivering what people are asking for than real people. Especially real people with attitude like these celebrities.

As we found in our research with people with type 2 diabetes, Alexa has a natural ability that these celebrity Alexa impersonators do not. You can see it in this feedback we received from real people trying to manage Type 2 diabetes.

  • “Voice gives the feeling someone cares. Nudges you in the right direction”
  • “Instructions and voice were very calm, and clear, and easy to understand”

Voice is a natural fit to deliver empathy and care. However, since each one of these people is expecting Alexa, and has no visual indicator that anything has changed, the negative experiences will reflect on Alexa and she’ll have to win back their trust.

While the implied message of the ad spot is that Alexa does a better job of delivering on your needs than any of these celebrity experts we’re still feeling a bit traumatized by the abuse they hurled. For the sequel to this commercial, we’d expect to see Jeff firing the team that replaced Alexa with celebrities, and Alexa as a therapist working through the trust issues that her replacements created. She can do it. We believe in her.

Posted in: Behavior Change, Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare Technology, Voice

Leave a Comment (0) →

The Secrets of Strong CIO and CMIO Relationships

What’s the secret of a strong CIO and CMIO relationship? Many things including the ability to be adaptable, understand organizational priorities, and deadlines, but most importantly to align on shared goals and purpose.

These were some of the takeaways from the insights shared by CIOs and CMIOs of Confluence Health, and EvergreenHealth at the annual Washington State HIMSS Executive dinner. While the conversation was split between how to foster innovation, and how to manage the demands of an EMR rollout (including the resulting backlog of other IT requests), where the relationship really shone was in the implementation of tools for a shared purpose, in this case tracking and control of opioids to help curb the epidemic we’re seeing in this country.

In particular a project at EvergreenHealth to implement e-prescribing of controlled substances, showed the need for strong CMIO and CIO collaboration. The program is designed to decrease fraud and misuse of controlled substances, but it can also improve patient care. Since it involves both technology implementation and clinical guidelines it’s a perfect example of medical and technology collaboration. In Washington State, where we’re based, the Bree Collaborative also has recommended guidelines for prescribing opioids, that while optional are widely adopted across the state.

We’ve written about this problem before in pain management for total joint replacement. Sadly, an unintended consequence of the pain management question on the HCAHPS survey, is sometimes an overprescribing of prescription pain medication. According to one speaker at the event, 30mg of oxycontin over 7 days is enough to trigger an addiction, and yet often post-surgery up to 30 days of pills are prescribed. We talked to one patient (not a Wellpepper user) who reported taking all of her prescribed pain medication, not because she needed it but because it was prescribed. The first step to solving this problem is with the prescription, and EvergreenHealth’s e-prescription program, combined with locked cabinets in the operating room (the idea is that if you don’t need it immediately, you don’t actually need it), alerts on over prescribing, and programs to substitute suboxone, coupled with behavior health management can all help. As well behavior change happens with the physicians, and a powerful image was the story of a pharmacist who put a bag of unused opioid prescriptions on the table to show that even if they didn’t think so, some physicians may have been over-prescribing.

However there are ways to take it a step further: tracking what the patient actually took outside the clinic, which is why we include a pain medication usage task in many care plans. This activity asks patients some simple questions about their over-the-counter and prescribed pain medication usage, and alerts if the numbers or the length of time is over certain thresholds. It’s in use in care plans that include general pain management, surgical, and neurology (headache management), and provides a view into usage, and the opportunity to reach out and help patients outside the clinic before usage becomes a problem.

We’re strong believers in the ability for patients to record their own outcomes and experiences, and the value of combining this with prescribing and clinical data to close the loop on delivering better care. If you’re interested in learning more, get in touch.

Posted in: Adherence, Behavior Change, Healthcare Legislation, HIPAA, Opioids, Outcomes, patient engagement

Leave a Comment (0) →

CES 2018 Review: More Consumer Healthcare Disruption Please

CES 2018 Review: More Consumer Healthcare Disruption Please

We went to CES 2018 to understand more about how the consumer technology space was poised to disrupt healthcare. As a digital healthcare company, we sit in many conversations with established healthcare organizations. We know that they are concerned about the consumerization of healthcare and how this could disrupt the very core of their business. Fears about the big-5 technology companies moving into healthcare are themes in many an executive healthcare planning retreat.

So, what did this bold, disruptive vision of consumer-driven, technology-driven healthcare look like? Hundreds of companies selling rip-off activity tracking watches, and connected blood pressure cuffs and scales. The big booths felt depressingly resigned to a future where consumers would somehow want to buy big clunky medical monitoring devices-rebranded-as-consumer-devices, and then maybe sign into a dusty old web portal to view the data. “Requires Internet Explorer 5 or higher” warned one brochure – a browser that was literally released in the 90s. A disruptive consumer story this was not. Nothing to worry about here, big healthcare.

There was some innovation to be seen, of course, including some truly interesting devices in the small 10×10 booths. Products like TytoCare’s tricorder for at-home vitals capture, and healthcare-relevant wearables like those from Sensoria. Also the number of do-it-at-home biological tests like Ellume’s at-home flu and strep tests and food allergen detectors like Nima are of particular interest to my household and our matrix of peanut, tree-nut, gluten, strawberry and peach allergies.

What’s missing is someone to pull these innovative ideas and devices together and offer a comprehensive vision for what consumer-driven healthcare could look like in a way that consumers would actually want to spend money on. Where’s the LG-OLED-tunnel of consumer health? Even if they didn’t have anything yet – at least sell the vision the way all those car vendors are selling the vision of self-driving cars.

We suspect that, as with self-driving cars (Tesla, Google) and smart phones (Apple), the companies with most complete vision in healthcare maybe just aren’t telling this story at CES. Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook: can’t wait to see your consumer healthcare booth when it’s ready, either at CES or some other show.

Posted in: Healthcare Disruption

Leave a Comment (0) →

Your Cupcakes Are Not My Goals

This year Google Maps tried out a short-lived motivational technique of showing how many cupcakes you would burn off or ostensibly could eat if you chose to walk to your destination. Not surprisingly this backfired, and they quickly retracted the feature. The reasons ranged from users expressing feelings of shame for not walking, to those with eating disorders saying it would encourage more obsessive behavior. Beyond that, many questioned how Google was even calculating both caloric expenditure and the actual calories in the cupcakes.

Regardless of the myriad of criticisms the experiment illustrated a key point: motivation and goal setting is best left to the individual, and understanding someone’s personal context is extremely important if you want to help them set goals.

One of our most read blog posts of 2017 was a 2015 post on whether setting SMART or MEANINGFUL goals was most effective for patients. I’m not sure why this bubbled to the top this year but the post provides an overview of two thoughtful frameworks for helping patients set goals.

At Wellpepper, we’d like to propose a third methodology: let people figure out what’s important to them. This year we expanded a capability we’ve had since V.1 that enables patients to set their own goals. This is a free-form, 140 character text box where patients write about what’s important to them. Over the years, we’ve had some clinicians express concern about whether patients could set their own goals. Functional goals are best left to the experts, but these are life goals, things that are important to people and why they are even bothering to use this app which helps them through healthcare activities to manage chronic diseases or recover from acute events.

Since we already knew that setting patient-generated goals is motivating, we also got to wondering whether you could track progress in a generic way based on patient-generated goals. After analyzing thousands of patient-generated goals, we figured out that asking a question about the patient’s perception progress on a Likert scale would work, and so this year we expanded the patient goal task type to include tracking.

It looks like this.

In case you’re skeptical that this works, here are a few examples of patient-generated goals.

Spend more time with family.

Get outside more frequently.

Walk more.

Be ready for vacation.

Now ask the question. See, it’s entirely possible for patients to set their own goals, unaided, and track progress against those goals. We’re pretty excited about the possibilities of this for improving motivation, and also for further analysis of patient adherence and outcomes. If you’d like to know more, or see a demo, we’d love to hear from you.

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

Leave a Comment (0) →

May You Live In Interesting Times: Wellpepper’s Most Interesting Blog Posts of 2017

Who would have predicted 2017? As soon as the election results were in, we knew there would be trouble for the Affordable Care Act no one could have predicted the path through repeal with no replacement to claw backs in a tax bill that no one has read. It’s been a crazy ride in healthcare and otherwise. As we look ahead to 2018, we’ve found that a good place to start is by looking back at what was popular in 2017.

Looking back over the past year’s top blog posts, we also believe trends that started in 2017, but will even stronger in 2018. These four themes bubbled up to the top in our most-read blog posts of 2017:

Shift to the cloud

We’ve noticed a much wider spread acceptance of cloud technologies in healthcare, and the big cloud platform vendors have definitely taken an interest in the space. Wellpepper CTO Mike Van Snellenberg’s comprehensive primer on using AWS with HIPAA protected data was one of our most read posts. Since he wrote it, even more AWS services have become HIPAA-eligible.

Using AWS with HIPAA-Protected Data – A Practical Primer

Consumerization of healthcare

Consumer expectations for efficient online interactions have been driven by high-deductible plans and an expectation from consumer technology and industries like retail and banking that customer service should be personalized, interactive, and real-time. These two posts about the consumerization of healthcare were among the most popular.

The Disneyfication or Consumerization of Healthcare

Consumerization Is Not A Bad Word

Value of patient-generated data

In 2017 we saw a real acceptance of patient-generated data. Our customers started asking about putting certain data in the EMR, and our analysis of the data we collect showed interesting trends in patient adherence and predictors of readmission. This was reflected in the large readership of these two blog posts focused on the clinical and business value of collecting and analyzing patient-generated data.

In Defense of Patient-Generated Data

Realizing Value In Patient Engagement

Power of voice technology

Voice technology definitely had a moment this year. Okay Google, and Alexa were asked to play music, turn on lights, and more importantly questions about healthcare. As winners of the Alexa Diabetes Challenge, we saw the power of voice firsthand when testing voice with people newly diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes. The emotional connection to voice is stronger than mobile, and it’s such a natural interaction in people-powered healthcare. Our blog posts on the Alexa Diabetes Challenge, and developing a voice solution were definitely in the top 10 most read.

Introducing Sugarpod by Wellpepper, a comprehensive diabetes care plan

Building a Voice Experience for People with Type 2 Diabetes

Ready When You Are: Voice Interfaces for Patient Engagement

Since these themes are still evolving we think 2018 will present a shift from investigation to action, from consideration to deployment and possibly insights. Machine-learning and AI will probably remain high in the hype cycle, and certainly the trends of horizontal and vertical healthcare mergers will continue. We also expect a big move from one of the large technology companies who have all been increasing their focus in healthcare, which in turn will accelerate the shift to a consumer-focus in healthcare.

There’s a saying “may you live in interesting times.” We expect 2018 to be at least as interesting as 2017. Onwards!

Note: There was one additional post that hit the most popular list. Interestingly, it was a post from 2014 on whether SMART or MEANINGFUL goals are better for patients. We’re not sure why it resurfaced, but based on analysis we’ve done of patient-directed goals, we think there’s a third approach.

Posted in: Behavior Change, Healthcare Disruption, Healthcare motivation, Healthcare Research, Healthcare Technology, Healthcare transformation, HIPAA, patient engagement, patient-generated data, Voice

Leave a Comment (0) →
Page 1 of 16 12345...»
Google+