Free EMR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to EMR and HIPAA for FREE!!

#HIMSS18: Oh The Humanity

Posted on April 2, 2018 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Sean Erreger, LCSW or @StuckonSW as some of you may know him.

It was a privilege to attend the 2018 HIMSS global conference this year. Having blogged and tweeted about Health IT for a couple of years, it was great to finally live it. By taking a deep dive, attending presentations, demoing products, and networking; I came to a greater understanding of how Health IT tackles the problems I hope to solve. From a social work perspective, I continue to be fascinated with the idea that technology can facilitate change.  Getting lost in artificial intelligence, machine learning, natural language processing, and predictive analytics was easy. It was exciting to learn the landscape of solutions, amount of automation, and workflow management possible. As a care manager, I believe these tools can be incredibly impactful.

However, despite all the technology and solutions, came the reminder that Health IT is a human process. There were two presentations that argued that we can’t divorce the humanity from health information technology process.  First was on the value of behavioral science and secondly a presentation on provider burnout and physician suicide.

The Value Of Behavioral Science

This was a panel presentation and discussion moderated by Dr. Amy Bucher of Mad*Pow including Dr. Heather Cole-Lewis of Johnson and Johnson, Dr. David Ahern of the FCC, and Dr. John Torous of Harvard Medical school. All experts were a part of projects related to Personal Connected Health Alliance. They asked attendees to consider the following challenges and how behavior science play a role…

Questions like how do we measure outcome and defining what “engagement” look like are key to how we build Health IT.  Yes, things like apps and wearables are cool but how do we measure their success. This can often be a challenge. It often feels like health IT is trying to outdo each other about who is coming up with the coolest piece of technology. However, when we get down to the nuts and bolts and start to measure engagement in technology, we might not like the results…

This presentation reminded me that technology is not often enough. Valuing the importance of “meeting people where they are”, may not include technology at all. We have to challenge ourselves to look ethically at the evidence and ensure that digital health is something a patient may or may not want.

Technology as a Solution to Physician Burnout and Suicide

It was reassuring to know even before I got to HIMSS that suicide prevention was going to be part of the conversation. Janae Sharpe and Melissa McCool presented on physician suicide and tools to potentially prevent it. This presents another human aspect of Health IT, the clinicians that use them. The facts about physician suicide are hard to ignore…

As someone who has done presentations about burnout and secondary trauma, I am acutely aware of how stressful clinical care can be.  It is unclear whether technology is a cause but it is certainly a factor, even in physician suicide. The research on this complex, but to blame the paperwork demands for burnout and physician suicide is tricky. To attribute a cause to things is always a challenge but my take away is that the Health IT community might be part of the problem but the presenters made a compelling case that it should be part of the solution. That not only reducing clicks and improving workflow is needed but providing support is critical.

They talked about the need to measure “burnout” and see how the Health IT community can design technology to support those at risk.  They have created a scale called the Sharp Index to try to measure physician burnout and also build technology to provide support. This seems to be striving for that right mix between measurement in the hopes of making space for human processes in a complex technology space.

Cooking The Mix Between Tech and Human Care

These presentations leave Health IT with many questions. Apps to provide a means of clinical care exist but are they working? How can we tell we are getting digital health right? How can we tell if technology is making a difference in patients’ lives? How do we define “success” of an app? Is technology having a negative impact on clinical care and clinicians themselves? If so, how do we measure that?

These questions force us to take an intentional look at how we measure outcomes but more importantly how we define them. Both presentations stressed the multi-disciplinary nature of health information technology development.  That no matter what the technology, you need to ask what problem does it solve and for who? As we consider building out AI and other automation we need to keep the humanity in healthcare.  So we can better care for ourselves as providers and ask what patients need in a human centered manner.

For a deeper dive into each presentation, I have created twitter recaps of both the Behavioral Science Panel and the presentation on Physician Suicide.

About Sean Erreger
Sean is Licensed Clinical Social Worker in New York. He is interested in technology and how it is facilitating change in a variety of areas. Within Health IT is interested in how it can include mental health, substance abuse, and information about social determinants. He can be found at his blog www.stuckonsocialwork.com.

Health IT Leaders Spending On Security, Not AI And Wearables

Posted on December 18, 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.

While breakout technologies like wearables and AI are hot, health system leaders don’t seem to be that excited about adopting them, according to a new study which reached out to more than 20 US health systems.

Nine out of 10 health systems said they increased their spending on cybersecurity technology, according to research by the Center for Connected Medicine (CCM) in partnership with the Health Management Academy.

However, many other emerging technologies don’t seem to be making the cut. For example, despite the publicity it’s received, two-thirds of health IT leaders said using AI was a low or very low priority. It seems that they don’t see a business model for using it.

The same goes for many other technologies that fascinate analysts and editors. For example, while many observers which expect otherwise, less than a quarter of respondents (17%) were paying much attention to wearables or making any bets on mobile health apps (21%).

When it comes to telemedicine, hospitals and health systems noted that they were in a bind. Less than half said they receive reimbursement for virtual consults (39%) or remote monitoring (46%}. Things may resolve next year, however. Seventy-one percent of those not getting paid right now expect to be reimbursed for such care in 2018.

Despite all of this pessimism about the latest emerging technologies, health IT leaders were somewhat optimistic about the benefits of predictive analytics, with more than half of respondents using or planning to begin using genomic testing for personalized medicine. The study reported that many of these episodes will be focused on oncology, anesthesia and pharmacogenetics.

What should we make of these results? After all, many seem to fly in the face of predictions industry watchers have offered.

Well, for one thing, it’s good to see that hospitals and health systems are engaging in long-overdue beefing up of their security infrastructure. As we’ve noted here in the past, hospital spending on cybersecurity has been meager at best.

Another thing is that while a few innovative hospitals are taking patient-generated health data seriously, many others are taking a rather conservative position here. While nobody seems to disagree that such data will change the business, it seems many hospitals are waiting for somebody else to take the risks inherent in investing in any new data scheme.

Finally, it seems that we are seeing a critical mass of influential hospitals that expect good things from telemedicine going forward. We are already seeing some large, influential academic medical centers treat virtual care as a routine part of their service offerings and a way to minimize gaps in care.

All told, it seems that at the moment, study respondents are less interested in sexy new innovations than the VCs showering them with money. That being said, it looks like many of these emerging strategies might pay off in 2018. It should be an interesting year.

AMA Connects Doctors With Health IT Ventures

Posted on November 22, 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.

Maybe I’m wrong, but the following strikes me as coming straight from the Redundancy Department of Redundancy…but let’s see. Maybe I’m just being mean. Or maybe it’s because I just couldn’t taste The Rainbow in my last package of Skittles.

Anyway, recently AMA announced the launch of an online platform, the Physician Innovation Network (PIN), designed to connect physicians together with health tech firms.

The PIN will give HIT companies will have a straightforward channel for collecting physician input on the products and services they’re developing. The health IT ventures will also be able to search for physicians who have the expertise they need and are willing to exchange information with them. Meanwhile, the platform will help physicians to find paid and volunteer opportunities to work with health tech companies to work with the health take ventures that suit them.

In recent years, the AMA has taken several steps to bring the world of health IT and physicians closer together. Most recently, the trade group announced that it had created a data standardization organization known as the Integrated Health Model Initiative. The physician group and its partners say the new data model will include clinically-validated data elements designed to speed up the development of improved data organization, management, and analytics.

Its other HIT initiatives include:

  • Co-founding Health2047, a company designed (like PIN) to bring together physicians with established healthcare companies and help them launch useful services and products
  • Serving as one of four founding organizations behind Xcertia, an organization intended to foster knowledge about clinical content, usability, privacy, security and evidence of efficacy for mHealth apps
  • Managing a student-run biotechnology incubator in collaboration with Sling Health,

But what is there to say about PIN that distinguishes it from all of these efforts? It resembles Health2047, mais non? And what benefit does it add over LinkedIn? Specialty interest groups within the MGMA and HIMSS? AngelList? A giant digital corkboard and some virtual Post-It notes?

Don’t get me wrong, I know I’ve come down hard on the AMA’s product launch announcements rather often, perhaps too often. Depending on how it actually works, PIN may actually offer some incremental value over all of these other options. And hey, if the trade group wants to throw its money around, whom am I to say that they shouldn’t have at it.

The thing is, though, the AMA doesn’t work in a vacuum.

Look, as we all know, we’re absolutely drowning in initiatives and proposals and great new ideas for interoperability and the collection of consumer-generated health data. And don’t forget scoping out the best architecture for deploying two tin cans with a piece of string between them, getting budget approval from a Magic 8 Ball (signs point to no), and repurposing some BASIC code from a  Commodore 64 to develop your next mobile health app. (Yes, it tired me out to write that sentence but it was worth it.)

Silliness aside, when you have the kind of resources the AMA does, you want to the profession to say something meaningful when you open your mouth, professionally speaking. Other than that, you’re just sucking air out of the room that could be used for people with a differentiated idea in real value to deliver.  Hey, but other than that, the PIN announcement is just fine.

Where HIMSS Can Take Health 2.0

Posted on April 24, 2017 I Written By

Andy Oram is an editor at O'Reilly Media, a highly respected book publisher and technology information provider. An employee of the company since 1992, Andy currently specializes in open source, software engineering, and health IT, but his editorial output has ranged from a legal guide covering intellectual property to a graphic novel about teenage hackers. His articles have appeared often on EMR & EHR and other blogs in the health IT space. Andy also writes often for O'Reilly's Radar site (http://oreilly.com/) and other publications on policy issues related to the Internet and on trends affecting technical innovation and its effects on society. Print publications where his work has appeared include The Economist, Communications of the ACM, Copyright World, the Journal of Information Technology & Politics, Vanguardia Dossier, and Internet Law and Business. Conferences where he has presented talks include O'Reilly's Open Source Convention, FISL (Brazil), FOSDEM, and DebConf.

I was quite privileged to talk to the leaders of Health 2.0, Dr. Indu Subaiya and Matthew Holt, in the busy days after their announced merger with HIMSS. I was revving to talk to them because the Health 2.0 events I have attended have always been stimulating and challenging. I wanted to make sure that after their incorporation into the HIMSS empire they would continue to push clinicians as well as technologists to re-evaluate their workflows, goals, and philosophies.

I’m not sure there is such a thing as a typical Health 2.0 event, but I generally see in such events a twofold mission. Sometimes they orient technologists to consider the needs of doctors and patients (as at a developer challenge). Other times they orient clinicians and health care institutions to consider the changes in goals and means that technology requires, as well as the strains caused by its adoption (as in a HxRefactored conference). Both of these activities disturb the cozy status quo in health IT, prodding its practitioners to try out new forms of research, design, and interaction. Health 2.0 was also happy to publish my own articles trying to untangle the standard confusion around health care.

For HIMSS, absorbing Health 2.0 is about as consequential as an ocean liner picking up a band of performing musicians along its ports of call. For Health 2.0, the impact could be much larger. Certainly, they gain the stability, funding opportunities, and administrative support that typically come with incorporation into a large, established institution. But can they keep their edge?

Subaiya and Holt assured me that Health 2.0 maintains its independence as part of HIMSS. They will be responsible for some presentations at the mammoth annual HIMSS conferences. They also hope to bring more buyers and sellers together through the HIMSS connection. They see three functions they can provide HIMSS:

  • A scanner for what’s new. HIMSS tends to showcase valuable new technologies a couple years after Health 2.0 discovers them.

  • A magnet to attract and retain highly innovative people in health IT.

  • A mechanism for finding partners for early-stage companies.

Aside from that, they will continue and expand their international presence, which includes the US, Japan, South Korea, China, and India. Interestingly, Subaiya told me that the needs expressed in different countries are similar. There aren’t separate mHealth or IT revolutions for the US and India. Instead, both call for increased used of IT for patient education, for remote monitoring and care, and for point-of-care diagnostics. Whether talking about busy yuppies in the city or isolated rural areas lacking doctors, clinicians find that health care has to go to the patient because the patient can’t always come to a health care center. If somebody can run a test using a cheap strip of paper and send results to a doctor over a cell phone, health coverage becomes more universal. Many areas are also dealing with the strains of aging populations.

HIMSS leadership and Health 2.0 share the recognition that health happens outside the walls of hospitals: in relationships, communities, schools, and homes. Health 2.0 will push that philosophy strongly at HIMSS. They will also hammer on what Subaiya calls health care’s “unacceptables”: disparities across race, gender, and geographic region, continued growth in chronic disease, and resulting cost burdens.

Subaiya and Holt see the original mission of HIMSS as a beneficial one: to create technologies that enhance physician workflows. Old technologies turned out to be brittle and unable to evolve, though, as workflows radically changed. As patient engagement and collaboration became more important, EHRs and other systems fell behind.

Meanwhile, the mobile revolution brought new attention to apps that could empower patients, improve monitoring, and connect everybody in the health care system. But technologists and venture capitalists jumped into health care without adequate research into what the users needed. Health 2.0 was created several years ago to represent the users, particular patients and health care consumers.

Holt says that investment is still increasing, although it may go into services instead of pure tech companies. Some is money moving from life sciences to computer technologies such as digital therapeutics. Furthermore, there are fewer companies getting funded than a few years ago, but each company is getting more money than before and getting it faster.

Subaiya and Holt celebrate the continued pull of health care for technologists, citing not only start-ups but substantial investment by large tech corporations, such as the Alphabet company Verily Life Sciences, Samsung, and Apple. There’s a particularly big increase in the use of data science within health care.

Some companies are integrating with Alexa to make interactions with consumers more natural. Intelligent decision support (as seen for instance in IBM’s Watson) is taking some of the burden off the clinician. For mental health, behavioral health, and addiction, digital tech is reducing stigma and barriers to those who need help.

In short, Health 2.0 should not be constrained by its new-found partner. The environment and funding is here for a tech transformation of health care, and Health 2.0’s work is cut out for it.

Patient Engagement Platforms Are 2017’s Sexiest Tech

Posted on January 3, 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.

Over the last few months, I’ve become convinced that the predictable star of 2017 — population health management — isn’t going to be as hot as people think.

Instead, I’d argue that the trend to watch is the emergence of new technologies that guide, reach out to and engage with patients at key moments in their care process. We’re at the start of a period of spectacular growth for patient engagement platforms, with one analyst firm predicting that the global market for these solutions will hit $34.94 billion by 2023.

We all seem to agree already that we need to foster patient engagement if we want to meet population health goals. But until recently, most of the approaches I’ve seen put in place are manual, laborious and resource-intensive. Yes, the patient portal is an exception to that rule – and seems to help patients and clinicians connect – but there’s only so much you can do with a portal interface. We need more powerful, flexible solutions if we hope to make a dent in the patient engagement problem.

In the coming year, I think we’ll see a growing number of providers adopt technology that helps them interact and engage with patients more effectively. I’m talking about initiatives like the rollout of technology by vendor HealthGrid at ColumbiaDoctors, a large multispecialty group affiliated with Columbia University Medical Center, which was announced last month.

While I haven’t used the technology first hand, it seems to offer the right functions, all available via mobile phone. These include pre- and post-visit communications, access to care information and a clinically-based rules engine which drives outreach regarding appointments, educations, medications and screening. That being said, HealthGrid definitely has some powerful competitors coming at the same problem, including the Salesforce.com Health Cloud.

Truth be told, it was probably inevitable that vendors would turn up to automate key patient outreach efforts. After all, unless providers boost their ability to target patients’ individual needs – ideally, without hiring lots of costly human care managers – they aren’t likely to do well under value-based payment schemes. One-off experiments with mobile apps or one-by-one interventions by nurse care coordinators simply don’t scale.

Of course, these technologies are probably pretty expensive right now – as new tech in an emerging market usually is — which will probably slow adoption somewhat. I admit that when I did a Google search on “patient engagement solutions,” I ran into a vendor touting a $399 a month option for doctors, which isn’t too bad if it can actually deliver. But enterprise solutions are likely to be a big investment, and also, call for a good deal of integration work. After all, if nothing else, health systems will want to connect patient engagement software to their back-office systems and EMR, at minimum, which is no joke.

Still, to my mind there’s little question that patient engagement technologies are going to be the sexiest health IT niche to watch in 2017, one which will generate major buzz in healthcare boardrooms across the country. Whether you invest or not, definitely watch this space.

What Data Do You Need in Order to Guide Behavioral Change?

Posted on June 2, 2016 I Written By

Andy Oram is an editor at O'Reilly Media, a highly respected book publisher and technology information provider. An employee of the company since 1992, Andy currently specializes in open source, software engineering, and health IT, but his editorial output has ranged from a legal guide covering intellectual property to a graphic novel about teenage hackers. His articles have appeared often on EMR & EHR and other blogs in the health IT space. Andy also writes often for O'Reilly's Radar site (http://oreilly.com/) and other publications on policy issues related to the Internet and on trends affecting technical innovation and its effects on society. Print publications where his work has appeared include The Economist, Communications of the ACM, Copyright World, the Journal of Information Technology & Politics, Vanguardia Dossier, and Internet Law and Business. Conferences where he has presented talks include O'Reilly's Open Source Convention, FISL (Brazil), FOSDEM, and DebConf.

This is an exciting time for the health care field, as its aspirations toward value-based payments and behavioral responses to chronic conditions converge on a more and more precise solution. Dr. Joseph Kvedar has called this comprehensive approach connected health and has formed both a conference and a book around it. BaseHealth, a predictive analytics company in healthcare, has teamed up with TriVita to offer a consumer-based service around this approach, which combines access to peer-reviewed research with fine-tuned guidance that taps into personal health and behavioral data and leverages the individual interests of each participant.

I have previously written about BaseHealth’s assessment engine, which asks individuals for information about their activities, family history, and health conditions in order to evaluate their health profile and risk for common diseases. TriVita is a health coaching service with a wide-ranging assessment tool and a number of products, including cutely named supplements such as Joint Complex and Daily Cleanse. TriVita’s nutritionists, exercise coaches, and other staff are overseen by physicians, but their service is not medical: it does not enter the heavily regulated areas where clinicians practice.

I recently talked with BaseHealth’s CEO, Prakash Menon, and Dan Hoemke, its Vice President of Business Development. They describe BaseHealth’s predictive analytics as input that informs TriVita’s coaching service. What I found interesting is the sets of data that seem most useful for coaching and behavioral interventions.

In my earlier article, I wrote, “BaseHealth has trouble integrating EHR data.” Menon tells me that getting this data has become much easier over the past several months, because several companies have entered the market to gather and combine the data from different vendors. Still, BaseHealth focuses on a few sources of medical data, such as lab and biometric data. Overall, they focus on gathering data required to identify disease risk and guide behavior change, which in turn improves preventable conditions such as heart disease and diabetes.

Part of their choice springs from the philosophy driving BaseHealth’s model. Menon says, “BaseHealth wants to work with you before you have a chronic condition.” For instance, the American Diabetes Association estimated in 2012 that 86 million Americans over the age of 20 had prediabetes. Intervening before these people have developed the full condition is when behavioral change is easiest and most effective.

Certainly, BaseHealth wants to know your existing medical conditions. So they ask you about them when you sign up. Other vital signs, such as cholesterol, are also vital to BaseHealth’s analytics. Through a partnership with LabCo, a large diagnostics company in Europe, they are able to tap into lab systems to get these vital signs automatically. But users in the United States can enter them manually with little effort.

BaseHealth is not immune to the industry’s love affair with genetics and personalization, either. They take about 1500 genetic factors into account, helping them to quantify your risk of getting certain chronic conditions. But as a behavioral health service, Menon points out, BaseHealth is not designed to do much with genetic traits signifying a high chance of getting a disease. They deal with problems that you can do something about–preventable conditions. Menon cites a Health 2.0 presentation (see Figure 1) saying that our health can, on average, be attributed 60 percent to lifestyle, 30 percent to genetics, and 10 percent to clinical interventions. But genetics help to show what is achievable. Hoemke says BaseHealth likes to compare each person against the best she can be, whereas many sites just compare a user against the average population with similar health conditions.

Relative importance of health factors

Figure 1. Relative importance of health factors

BaseHealth gets most of its data from conditions known to you, your environment, family history, and more than 75 behavioral factors: your activity, food, over-the-counter meds, sleep activity, alcohol use, smoking, several measures of stress, etc. BaseHealth assessment recommendations and other insights are based on peer-reviewed research. BaseHealth will even point the individual to particular studies to provide the “why” for its recommendations.

So where does TriVita fit in? Hoemke says that BaseHealth has always stressed the importance of human intervention, refusing to fall into the fallacy that health can be achieved just through new technology. He also said that TriVita fits into the current trend of shifting accountability for health to the patient; he calls it a “health empowerment ecosystem.” As an example of the combined power of BaseHealth and TriVita, a patient can send his weight regularly to a coach, and both can view the implications of the changes in weight–such as changes in risk factors for various diseases–on charts. Some users make heavy use of the coaches, whereas others take the information and recommendations and feel they can follow their plan on their own.

As more and more companies enter connected health, we’ll get more data about what works. And even though BaseHealth and TriVita are confident they can achieve meaningful results with mostly patient-generated data, I believe that clinicians will use similar techniques to treat sicker people as well.

Check Out the New Healthcare Entrepreneurs Chat

Posted on March 29, 2016 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

As most of you have probably seen, I’ve been spending a lot of time interviewing healthcare IT professionals and posting those interviews to the Healthcare Scene YouTube channel. Often I think that there’s no better way to tell a story than to hear it from the people behind the story. Plus, I love trying to suck pieces of insight and wisdom out of someone who knows a lot more about a subject than me.

While my Healthcare Scene videos have focused on various health IT topics, I’m excited to also be doing a number of video interviews in a new series we’re calling Healthcare Entrepreneurs. I’m lucky to have Melissa McCool co-hosting the Healthcare Entrepreneurs chat with me and we’ve already been lucky enough to have a group of amazing entrepreneurs share insights and perspectives on entrepreneurship and healthcare.

A great example of this was our interview with Carissa Reiniger on The Challenge of “Focus” for Healthcare Entrepreneurs. Turns out that these lessons applied well to entrepreneurs from every industry and even apply well to those working for a corporation. It seems that Focus is a universal challenge. Carissa offered some great insights into how to work on this challenge.

2016 March - Telemedicine and Healthcare Entrepreneurship-blog

If you want to watch our next episode of Healthcare Entrepreneurs, you can join us live on Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 7 PM ET (4 PM PT). We’ll be talking with Jamey Edwards, CEO of CloudBreak Health, about Telemedicine and Healthcare entrepreneurship.

We know that entrepreneurship in general is hard and entrepreneurship in healthcare has added idiosyncrasies that can make it even more of a challenge. Hopefully Healthcare Entrepreneurs can shed some light on these challenges, talk about things that can help healthcare entrepreneurs, and create a community of healthcare entrepreneurs who can help each other.

Are We In a Digital Health Bubble?

Posted on January 7, 2016 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

As I walked through the exhibit hall at CES, I must admit that I was extremely overwhelmed by the number of digital health options that were on display. Certainly the size and grandeur of the booths was off the charts. Take a quick look at part of the iFit booth:
Digital Health at CES
Yes, that is 4 girls walking on treadmills on a vaulted stage. Of course, this was maybe 1/3 of their booth. Behind me they had a massive closed room and another girl walking on a different treadmill. Plus, upon closer inspection you might also notice that they have a bed on the vaulted stage and cloth coming down from the ceiling. I think they officially call that cloth “silks.” While I didn’t see it, you can tell that they’re going to have a Cirque du Soleil performer working the silks to attract attention to their booth. For those keeping track at home, there is a great sleep sensor from EarlySense on the bed.

While many might consider much of this absurd. The show and staging doesn’t really bother me too much. Since I organize the Healthcare IT Marketing and PR Conference, I understand how hard it is to stand out at a conference. No doubt this booth left an impression. iFit even got exposure in this blog post because of it. We could argue if it was a good investment or not, but that’s a different story.

All I could think about as I walked through the incredible number of digital health solutions at CES was “Not all of these can survive.

Of course, many in the startup world would say that 90% of startups fail and so it shouldn’t be a surprise that so many of the companies exhibiting at CES will disappear. That’s true, but I never felt like this in past years. In past years at CES it felt like a number of players with some overlap and some competitive pressures, but that there was plenty of pie for everyone. This year has me wondering if that’s still the case.

As I mentioned, I’m hoping to publish a list of all the various health tracking devices. I realized that this going to take a lot of work. I’m still planning to work on it, but it’s going to take some time to do it right. One person I talked to said that there are about 700 health tracking devices out there. Of course, the real challenge is that 500 of them still don’t actually deliver (ie. they haven’t gone to market with a product or they can’t deliver the results they say they can deliver). Even 200 legitimate companies makes for a really competitive environment where people still talk about Fitbit and the Apple Watch and don’t know many of the others.

Let me be clear though. I think there’s a ton of tremendous innovation happening in the digital health space. From a consumer perspective all of this competition (bubble if you will) is great! Competition will push vendors to take what they’re doing to a new level. We’ll have a ton of amazing discoveries that will ripple through all of these companies. This is all great and will work out well for consumers and healthcare.

Plus, on the fringes you find some people doing unique things. The problem is that many of those companies have a hard time being heard with all of the other companies making so much noise. Sometimes I’m talking literal noise. I think it was the Under Armour booth that felt like they were a Las Vegas night club. It made it a lot of fun to visit and certainly attracted attention. I just wouldn’t want to be exhibiting at the booth next to them.

Figure 1 – The Quiet Medical Education and Collaboration Platform

Posted on December 22, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

As a healthcare IT blogger, I try to keep up to date with the latest happenings in healthcare IT. Of course, it’s impossible to keep up with everything, but I’ve generally heard of tech companies that are getting traction in healthcare. Either someone tells me about it, I see it on social media, or the company reaches out to me directly to have me write about them. However, sometimes companies quietly do their work and don’t ever hit my radar while they’re gaining significant traction. That was the case with Figure 1 who I first saw on a venture capital blog I read regularly.

The venture capitalist described Figure 1 as instagram for doctors. I’d describe it as a medical education and collaboration platform. Both are pretty accurate depending on your goals. The former is better for raising money and the later is better for understanding what Figure 1 actually does.

No doubt what Figure 1 has built is impressive. They have over half a million healthcare professionals (I think they’re close to a million, but they seemed to be waiting to announce when they actually hit that amazing milestone) on their platform that are viewing images on their platform. Maybe more impressive is that over 50,000 healthcare professionals use Figure 1 on a daily basis and Figure 1’s “medical cases” have been viewed over 1 billion times. They have a very international audience with healthcare professionals from over 100 countries (They verify professionals in over 75 countries). That’s a really significant international medical community.

This is no surprise to me. The first EMR forum I was part of 10 years ago when I started this blog created a section of the forum where doctors posted various medical images. It was a really popular part of the site and doctors seemed to love it. So, it made total sense to me that a mobile optimized version of what was happening on that forum would be even more popular.

Just to put what Figure 1 is doing in perspective, here are some user stories that Figure 1 shared with me:

“I saw a patient who was immunocompromised and had ecthyma gangrenosum on Figure 1 recently, and then later I saw it in person on a child. I’ve never seen that kind of rash before in person, and I knew exactly what it was because I’d
seen it on Figure 1. I treated the patient for exactly what it was instead of something else.”

And now for an international take on what Figure 1 is doing:

Dr. Hugo Zuniga is a family physician working in the Peruvian rainforest in a rural farming community of about 2000 people. As the only physician in the area, Dr. Ziniga is forced to treat many injuries, illnesses, and infectious diseases. Specialists are only available to the community via larger hospitals outside the rainforest. These hospitals are far and require a planned ride to reach them. The cost of visiting these hospitals is typically more than members of the community can afford, so Dr. Ziniga often lends money to his patients for treatment.

Dr. Ziniga says that Figure 1 helps him treat his patients. As an example, he speaks of one particular case where he was able to aid a five-year-old patient with a recurring infection. The patient was sent to a large hospital outside the rainforest for surgery, but the doctors there sent him back untreated, saying he didn’t need surgery.

When the patient returned to the community, Dr. Ziniga felt the other doctors had made the wrong decision. Suspecting that the patient’s adenoids were causing the recurring infection, he posted a photo to Figure 1 asking others if they agreed. After receiving support from the international Figure 1 community, Dr. Ziniga sent the patient back to the hospital, where he was given the surgery he needed.

Dr. Ziniga has no ambulance and few medical supplies. But now, with Figure 1, he says he doesn’t feel as isolated anymore.

I’m really impressed by Figure 1’s approach. It’s largely being done outside of the medical establishment, but it’s generally complimentary to the medical establishment. It’s not easy getting 100 doctors on any platform. Half a million healthcare professionals is really impressive. I’d love to know what you think of what Figure 1 is doing.

The Benefits of Real-Time Locating Systems in Healthcare

Posted on November 16, 2015 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Stephanie Andersen, Managing Partner at ZulaFly.
Stephanie Andersen
“It is frustrating to not be able to find things you need when you need them.”

This is a recurring theme from professionals I interact with across the entire healthcare spectrum.

The healthcare industry is a setting where assets are seemingly in constant motion. With this movement comes increased possibility for assets to be misplaced or leave the building, creating unnecessary replacement expense that can negatively affect your organization’s bottom line.

Real-Time Locating System, or RTLS, has been on the scene as a dependable solution to tag and locate important, valuable assets that easily go missing and has increasingly become more important to a hospital’s bottom line.

Stop Replacing, Start Locating

Where are assets and how are they being utilized? RTLS answers this question in ways no other technology has been able to before.

In my conversations with healthcare leaders, many express concern over how often valuable assets walk out the door. RTLS possesses the strength to know if assets are moving at hours or in areas they should not be, as well as when assets reach the door.

In the healthcare industry, assets such as PSA and infusion pumps, beds, wound vacs, ventilators, Doppler systems, and workstations on wheels are just a few items staff members are tagging and keeping closer tabs on thanks to RTLS.

Staff can also use RTLS to evaluate whether an asset should be moved from one area to the next to increase utilization, compared to simply buying another one.

As a whole, replacement costs are reduced and the amount of dollars sunk into unused or forgotten rental equipment becomes remedied thanks to RTLS.

At ZulaFly, I am often asked if there is a way for hospitals to track ambulances and other care transport vehicles so that hospitals can have a 360 degree view of what is happening inside and outside of the facility. We have developed a GPS offering that combines with RTLS to create this comprehensive view.

Increased Staff and Patient Safety

A quality RTLS system gives staff members a device that allows them to easily call for help in real-time.

Additionally, RTLS affords patients a button-press solution in case of an emergency. Because the RTLS tag allows staff to quickly locate where the issue is occurring, the situation can be quickly attended to and remedied.

Industry leaders are seeing the value of RTLS within their healthcare facilities, quickly realizing how reduced replacement cost and time saved searching for assets create considerable return on investment.

About Stephanie Andersen
Stephanie Andersen is a 17+ year professional within the software industry, spending over ten of those years working at Microsoft. Through various roles and responsibilities that range from technical support, to project management, to driving sales, to business operations and even product development, Stephanie has become focused on sales, marketing, and business development. This strong skillset and unparalleled experience has been key in developing the go-to market strategy that has brought ZulaFly from concept to completion, and most recently to market.