Care Coordination Tech Still Needs Work

Posted on July 26, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is a healthcare journalist who has written about the industry for 30 years. Her work has appeared in all of the leading healthcare industry publications, and she’s served as editor in chief of several healthcare B2B sites.

Virtually all of you would agree that we’ll have to do a better job of care coordination if we hope to meet our patient outcomes goals. And logically enough, most of us are hoping that technology will help us make this happen.  But from what I’ve seen, it isn’t going to happen anytime soon.

Every now and then, I get a press release from a company that says a company’s tech has solved at least some part of the industry’s care coordination problem. Today, the company was featured in a release from Baylor College of Medicine, where a physician has launched a mobile software venture focused on preventing miscommunication between patient care team members.

The company, ConsultLink, has developed a mobile platform that manages patient handoffs, consults and care team collaboration. It was founded by Dr. Alexander Pastuszak, an assistant professor of urology at Baylor, in 2013.

As with every other digital care coordination platform I’ve heard about – and I’ve encountered at least a dozen – the ConsultLink platform seems to have some worthwhile features. I was especially interested in its analytics capability, as well as its partnership with Redox, an EMR integration firm which has gotten a lot of attention of late.

The thing is, I’ve heard all this before, in one form or another. I’m not suggesting that ConsultLink doesn’t have what it takes. However, it’s been my observation if market space attracts dozens of competitors, the very basics of how they should attack the problem are still up for grabs.

As I suspected it would, a casual Google search turned up several other interesting players, including:

  • ChartSpan Medical Technologies: The Greenville, South Carolina-based company has developed a platform which includes practice management software, mobile patient engagement and records management tools. It offers a chronic care management solution which is designed to coordinate care between all providers.
  • MyHealthDirect: Nashville’s MyHealthDirect, a relatively early entrant launched in 2006, describes itself as focusing consumer healthcare access solutions. Its version of digital care coordination includes online scheduling systems, referral management tools and event-driven analytics, which it delivers on behalf of health systems, providers and payers.
  • Spruce Health: Spruce Health, which is based in San Francisco, centralizes care communication around mobile devices. Its platform includes a shared inbox for all patient and team communication, collaborative messaging, telemedicine support and mobile payment options.

No doubt there are dozens more that aren’t as good at SEO. As these vendors compete, the template for a care coordination platform is evolving moment by moment. As with other tech niches, companies are jumping into the fray with technology perhaps designed for other purposes. Others are hoping to set a new standard for how care coordination platforms work. There’s nothing wrong with that, but its likely to keep the core feature set for digital coordination fluid for quite some time.

I don’t doubt among the companies I’ve described, there’s a lot of good and useful ideas. But to me, the fact that so many players are trying to define the concept of digital care coordination suggests that it has some growing up to do.