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!!

Healthcare AI Needs a Breadth and Depth of Data

Posted on May 17, 2018 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.

Today I’m enjoying the New England HIMSS Spring Conference including an amazing keynote session by Dale Sanders from Health Catalyst. Next week I’ll be following up this blog post with some other insights that Dale shared at the New England HIMSS event, but today I just wanted to highlight one powerful concept that he shared:

Healthcare AI Needs a Breadth and Depth of Data

As part of this idea, Dale shared the following image to illustrate how much data is really needed for AI to effectively assess our health:

Dale pointed out that in healthcare today we really only have access to the data in the bottom right corner. That’s not enough data for AI to be able to properly assess someone’s health. Dale also suggested the following about EHR data:

Long story short, the EHR data is not going to be enough to truly assess someone’s health. As Google recently proved, a simple algorithm with more data is much more powerful than a sophisticated algorithm with less data. While we think we have a lot of data in healthcare, we really don’t have that much data. Dale Sanders made a great case for why we need more data if we want AI to be effective in healthcare.

What are you doing in your organization to collect data? What are you doing to get access to this data? Does collection of all of this data scare anyone? How far away are we from this data driven, AI future? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

#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.

Healthcare Dashboards, Data, and FHIR

Posted on March 30, 2018 I Written By

The following is a guest blog by Monica Stout from MedicaSoft

We live in a dashboard society. We love our dashboards! We have mechanisms to track, analyze, and display all sorts of data at our fingertips any time of the day or night and everywhere we turn. We like it that way! Data is knowledge. Data is power. Data drives decisions. Data is king.

But what about healthcare data? Specifically, what about YOUR healthcare data? Is it all available in one place where you can easily access it, analyze it, and make decisions about your health? Chances are, it’s not. Most likely, it’s locked up inside various EHRs and many tethered (read: connected to the provider, not shareable to other providers) patient portals you received access to when you visited your doctors for various appointments. In some cases, the information that is there might not be correct. In other cases, there might not be much data there at all.

How are you supposed to act as an informed patient or caregiver when you don’t have your data or accurate data for those you are caring for? When health information is spread across multiple portals and the onus is on you to remember every login and password and what data is where for each of these portals, are you really using them effectively? Do you want to use them? It’s not very easy to connect the dots when the dots can’t be located because they’re in different places in varying degrees of completeness.

How do we fix this? What steps need to be taken? Aggregating our health information isn’t just collecting the raw data and calling it a complete record. It’s more than being able to send files back and forth. It’s critical to get your data right, at the core, as part of your platform. That’s what lets you build useful services, like a patient dashboard, or a provider EHR, or a payer analytics capability. A modern data model that represents your health information as a longitudinal patient record is key.

Many IT companies have realized HL7 FHIR (Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources) is the preferred way to get there and are exploring its uses for interoperability. These companies have started using FHIR to map health information from their current data models to FHIR in order to allow information exchange.

This is just the beginning, though. If you want robust records that support models of the future, you need a powerful, coherent data model, like FHIR, as your internal data model, too.  Then take it a step further and use technologies similar to those used by other enterprise scale systems like Netflix and LinkedIn, to give patients and caregivers highly available, scalable, and responsive tools just like their other consumer-facing applications. Solutions that are built on legacy systems can’t scale in this way and offer these benefits.

Our current healthcare IT environment hasn’t made it easy for patients to aggregate their health information or aggregated it for them. If we want to meet the needs of today and tomorrow’s patients and caregivers, we need patient-centric systems designed to make it easy to gather health information from all sources – doctors, hospitals, laboratories, HIEs, and personal health devices and smartphones.

About Monica Stout
Monica is a HIT teleworker in Grand Rapids, Michigan by way of Washington, D.C., who has consulted at several government agencies, including the National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). She’s currently the Marketing Director at MedicaSoft. Monica can be found on Twitter @MI_turnaround or @MedicaSoftLLC.

About MedicaSoft
MedicaSoft  designs, develops, delivers, and maintains EHR, PHR, and UHR software solutions and HISP services for healthcare providers and patients around the world. MedicaSoft is a proud sponsor of Healthcare Scene. For more information, visit www.medicasoft.us or connect with us on Twitter @MedicaSoftLLC, Facebook, or LinkedIn.

Cybersecurity Report Card:  Better Performance, But Not Great

Posted on March 29, 2018 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.

A new research report from HIMSS has concluded that while healthcare organizations are improving their cybersecurity programs, there’s still a number of things they could do better.

The study drew on responses from 239 health information security professionals. Their responses were gathered from December 2017 to January 2018. While respondents came from a number of settings, the largest number (31.5%) were with hospitals, multi-hospital systems or integrated delivery networks.

One key point made by the study was that significant security incidents are projected to continue to grow in number, complexity and impact. That’s reflected by responses from survey participants, 75.7% of whom said that their organizations experienced a significant security incident in the past 12 months.

The top threat actors attacking these organizations included online scam artists deploying phishing and spear phishing attacks (37.6%), followed by negligent insiders (20.8 %) or hackers (20.1%). In many cases, the initial point of security compromise was by email. Time it took to discover the incident included less than 24 hours (47.1%), one to two days (13.2%) and 3 to 7 days (7.4%).

Despite these risks, and the effort required to protect their data, healthcare organizations with cybersecurity programs are improving their performance. They’re devoting more resources to those programs (55.8% of current IT budgets), responding to problems identified by regular risk assessments (with 83.1% adopting new and improved security measures in the wake of those assessments) and regularly conducting penetration testing and security awareness training.

On the other hand, HIMSS found that most healthcare organizations, cybersecurity programs still need improvement. For example, staffers face major obstacles in remediating and mitigating security incidents, particularly having too few cybersecurity personnel on board and a lack of financial resources. HIMSS also noted that educating and testing “human components” for security vulnerabilities is critical, but may not be included in many efforts.

In some cases, organizations don’t have formal insider threat management programs. While many respondents (44.9%) said they do have insider threat management programs and policies in place, another 27% said those programs were informal. And 24.2% said their organization had no insider threat management program at all.

In addition, risk assessments vary widely across the industry. Popular sources used to gather cyber threat intelligence include US CERT alerts and bulletins (60%) and HIMSS resources (53.8%), but many others are used as well.

The net of all of this seems to be that while healthcare organizations have gotten smarter where cybersecurity is concerned, they need to invest more in specialized personnel, improve staff training, remediation and risk assessments and stay alert. As the number of attacks continues to grow, nothing else will get the job done.

Hopes for Big Impact from Validic: Making Use of Consumer Device Data

Posted on March 20, 2018 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.

Validic, a company that provides solutions in data connectivity to health care organizations, came to HIMMS this year with a new platform called Impact that takes a big step toward turning raw data into actionable alerts. I talked to Brian Carter, senior vice president of product at Validic, about the key contributions of Impact.

Routinely, I find companies that allow health-related monitoring in the home. Each one has a solution it’s marketing to doctors: a solution reminding patients to take their meds, monitoring vital signs for diabetes, monitoring vital signs for congestive heart failure, or something else fairly specific. These are usually integrated solutions that provide their own devices. The achievement of Validic, built through years of painstakingly learning the details of almost 400 different devices and how to extract their data, is to give the provider control over which device to use. Now a provider can contract with some application developer to create a monitoring solution for diabetes or whatever the provider is tracking, and then choose a device based on cost, quality, and suitability.

Validic’s Impact platform actually does many of the things that a third-party monitoring solution can do. But rather than trying to become a full solutions provider for such things as hospital readmissions, Validic augments existing care management systems by integrating its platform directly into the clinical workflow. With Impact, clinicians can draw conclusions directly from the data they collect to generate intelligent alerts.

For instance, a doctor can request that Impact sample data from a sensor at certain intervals and define a threshold (such as blood sugar levels) at which Impact contacts the doctor. Carter defines this service more as descriptive analytics than predictive analytics. However, Validic plans to increase the sophistication of its analysis to move more toward predictive analytics. Thus, they hope in the future not just to report when blood sugar hits a dangerous threshold, but to analyze a patient’s data over time and compare it to other patients to predict if and when his blood sugar will rise. They also hope to track the all too common tendency to abandon the use of consumer devices, and predict when a patient is likely to do so, allowing the doctor to intervene and offer encouragement to keep using the device.

Validic has evolved far beyond its original mission of connecting devices to health care providers and wellness organizations. This mission is still important, because device manufacturers are slow to adopt standards that would make such connections trivial to implement. Most devices still offer proprietary APIs, and even if they all settled on something such as FHIR, Carter says that the task of connecting each device would still require manual programming effort. “Instead of setting up connections to ten different devices, a hospital can connect to Validic once and get access to all ten.”

However, interconnection is slowly progressing, so Validic needs to move up the value chain. Furthermore, clinicians are slow to use the valuable information that devices in the home can offer, because they produce a flood of data that is hard to interpret. With Impact, they can derive some immediate benefit from device data, as the critical information is elevated above the noise while still being integrated into their health records. They can contract further with other application developers to run analytical services and integrate with their health records.

The Human Side of Healthcare Interactions

Posted on March 19, 2018 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Sarah Bennight, Marketing Strategist for Stericycle Communication Solutions, as part of the Communication Solutions Series of blog posts. Follow and engage with them on Twitter: @StericycleComms

The week after HIMSS is certainly a rest and reflect (and catch up) time period. So much information is crammed into five short days that hopefully fuel innovation and change in our industry for the next year. We hear a lot of buzzwords during HIMSS, and as marketers in general. This year my biggest area of post-HIMSS reflection is on the human side of healthcare. Often, as health IT professionals, we can be so enamored with the techie side of things that we lose sight of what adding more automation does to our daily interactions.

The digital revolution has certainly made life easier. We can connect online, schedule an appointment, Uber to our destination, order groceries online, and pick them up on our way home with limited interactions with any real human. While the convenience for many far outweighs any downside, the digital world is causing its own health concern: loneliness.

Research by Holt-Lunstad found that “weak social connections carry a health risk that is more harmful than not exercising, twice as harmful as obesity, and is comparable to smoking 15 cigarettes a day or being an alcoholic.” But the digitization of our lives is reducing the amount of human interaction and our reasons to connect in real life. I keep hearing the phrase “we are more connected than ever, but we are feeling more alone”.  How do we avoid feeding another health issue, such as depression, while making healthcare more accessible, cost-effective, and convenient?

In healthcare communications, I want both technological convenience and warm, caring human interaction depending on what my need is at a given moment. If I need to schedule an appointment, I’d better have the option to schedule online. But in the middle of the night, when my child has a 104F fever and I call my doctor, I want a real person to talk and ask questions to, who will listen to the state my child is in and make the best recommendation for their health.

I had the privilege of discussing this balance of human and tech in a meet up at HIMSS last week. We learned that my colleague and friend learned the gender of her baby via a portal while waiting patiently for the doctor’s office to call. This is pushing the line of being ok in my opinion. But what if it was something worse, such as a cancer diagnosis or something equally scary? Is that ok for you? Wouldn’t you prefer and need someone to guide you through the result and talk about next steps?

As we add even more channels to communicate between health facility and patient, we need to take a look at the patient interaction lifecycle and personalize it to their needs. We should address the areas where automation might move faster than the human connections we initiate to ensure we are always in step with our tools and technology. Healthcare relationships rely on confidence and loyalty, and these things aren’t so easily built into an app. Online interactions will never replace the human, day-to-day banter and touch we all need. But I believe that technology can create efficiency that allows my doctor to spend more quality time with me during my visits and better engage me in my health.

So the question stands: how do you think the healthcare industry can find the right tech and human balance?

The Communication Solutions Series of blog posts is sponsored by Stericycle Communication Solutions, a leading provider of high quality call center & telephone answering servicespatient access services and automated communication technology. Stericycle Communication Solutions combines a human touch with innovative technology to deliver best-in-class communication services.  Connect with Stericycle Communication Solutions on social media: @StericycleComms

Seven Types of HIMSS18 Attendees: An Exhibitor’s Perspective

Posted on March 16, 2018 I Written By

The following is a guest blog by Monica Stout from MedicaSoft

The HIMSSanity is over and everyone’s departed Las Vegas and headed for home (or SXSW). This year, my company was an exhibitor in Hall G at HIMSS. Our booth was on the main aisle, or “the thoroughfare” as those of us in the booth liked to call it. As such, I noticed some trends in the types of booth visits we encountered this year during HIMSS. These visits can be summed up into seven different types.

Integration on the Brain. “I need something to connect my disparate systems together.” Whether it’s EHR-to-EHR, EHR-to-other systems, PHR-to-EHR, or many Health IT combinations, there was no shortage of requests at HIMSS for a system or platform to make these connections happen more seamlessly. Inquiries about integration and connecting various technologies came up more frequently at our booth than any other topic at the show. These conversations were great for MedicaSoft because we can help them solve integration problems.

Partnership Hustle. “I make APIs, products, or provide services to complement your software offering. I think we’d make great partners.” HIMSS is certainly a place to find synergies and begin conversations for potential win-win situations for companies who want to partner together and go to market. Sometimes these meetings are the start of a perfect “meet cute.” Other times, they fall short. Either way, there are lots of folks out there with a wide variety of products and services making their rounds and searching for perfect business partners.

Swag Gatherer. “I came here for the swag.” You know this person. This person has no desire to interact with you. They’re not sure what your company does and many times they don’t care to ask. This person wants to collect as much free stuff at the conference as possible. Sometimes they are annoyed when you don’t have a giveaway. You know you’ve encountered a swag gatherer by their refusal to make eye contact and how fast they exit your booth once they’ve snatched up whatever swag or tchotchke you have to offer.

IT Spy. “I must find out what the competition is doing right now, let me pretend I’m in the market for IT products and booth hop.” We’ve all seen it. We know when it’s happening. It can be hilarious when the spying company tries to act like they are NOT doing this. It’s pretty obvious. I’m on to you. My only request? Be nice about it. We’ll show you what we have. You don’t have to be obnoxious or play dumb. We are happy to share.

Things You Don’t Need. “You really need our product or service even if you think you don’t need our product or service.” Everyone has this happen at one point or another. Someone comes by and really wants to sell you something you don’t need. Sometimes they politely go on their way. Other times they linger on, refusing to acknowledge that you don’t need their product or service. Sometimes being upfront doesn’t help and they continue to launch into their sales pitch anyway. You have to give these folks credit, they really are trying to sell.

Neighborhood Friendly Booth Staff or First-time HIMSS-goer. “I just thought I’d say hello.” This could be neighboring booth staff coming over to say hello. It could also be an exhibitor or attendee who’s there for the first time. In either case, these are friendly people who want to ask questions. They are getting their bearings for the show and trying to learn as much as possible. Many times they ask for advice or directions.

Match Made in Heaven. “We’re looking to buy or replace our patient portal, PHR, EHR, or integration platform.” The crème de la crème of conference attendees. This person has done their research. They know what they want and what they want is what you offer! These types of meetings leave you jazzed for the rest of the conference and eager for post-conference follow-up. This type of conference attendee actually answers your emails and phone calls when you follow-up because they have a genuine interest in what you do and how you can help them solve their IT problems or challenges.

HIMSS18 exhibitors and attendees, what other types of booth attendees did you see this year at the show?

About Monica Stout
Monica is a HIT teleworker in Grand Rapids, Michigan by way of Washington, D.C., who has consulted at several government agencies, including the National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). She’s currently the Marketing Director at MedicaSoft. Monica can be found on Twitter @MI_turnaround or @MedicaSoftLLC.

About MedicaSoft
MedicaSoft  designs, develops, delivers, and maintains EHR, PHR, and UHR software solutions and HISP services for healthcare providers and patients around the world. MedicaSoft is a proud sponsor of Healthcare Scene. For more information, visit www.medicasoft.us or connect with us on Twitter @MedicaSoftLLC, Facebook, or LinkedIn.

HIMSS Study Shows IT Pay Gaps Persist Between Genders, Races

Posted on March 14, 2018 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.

It would be nice to think that, in a profession focusing on hard, measurable skills, that given the same experience level and skill set, HIT staffers would make more or less the same salaries. However, that doesn’t seem to be the case, according to data from the latest health IT compensation study by HIMSS.

Researchers found that as of previous years, race and gender seem to play a significant role in how much a health IT professional is paid. According to the study, females make 18% less than their male peers, and minorities make 12% less than non-minorities on average across all positions and number of years in a given position.

As the level of responsibility grows, the gap in pay seems to increase as well. The study found that women in executive roles actually face a larger salary gap versus their male counterparts than women at other levels in their organization. Moreover, that gap is growing. Meanwhile, minority females are particularly hard-hit, with the lowest average salaries of the four combinations of gender and racial groups studied, HIMSS reports.

Overall, respondents working in digital health reported being moderately satisfied with the current base salaries, while non-white respondents tended to be less satisfied than respondents who defined themselves as white.

Oddly, despite the substantial pay gap between them and their male peers, females in digital health appeared to be just as satisfied with their pay as their male peers. HIMSS researchers speculate that the reason women are satisfied with lower pay is that they simply don’t know they’re being under compensated. (Given my experience as a professional female, I’d also speculate that some women simply get tired of fighting to close the pay gap and make peace with what they’ve got.)

Having summed all of this up, HIMSS researchers made a few recommendations as to how health organizations can address pay gaps, such as accepting that these gaps exist, educating managers and why gender and racial equality is good for business and adopting strategies that help to reduce such disparities. The researchers also suggest making tools available that can help all health IT professionals understand what they’re worth and negotiate fair pay agreements.

As for me, I’d go a bit further. I’d argue that professionals whose gender and/or minority status have impacted their pay should speak out. It’s all well and good to have provider organizations recognize that their pay structure may not be fair and take action. But ultimately, drawing attention to these gaps both within and outside of the healthcare industry may have the biggest long-term effect.

Small Grounds for Celebration and Many Lurking Risks in HIMSS Survey

Posted on March 12, 2018 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.

When trying to bypass the breathless enthusiasm of press releases and determine where health IT is really headed, we can benefit from a recent HIMMS survey, released around the time of their main annual conference. They managed to get responses from 224 managers of health care facilities–which range from hospitals and clinics to nursing homes–and 145 high-tech developers that fall into the large categories of “vendors” and “consultants.” What we learn is that vendors are preparing for major advances in health IT, but that clinicians are less ready for them.

On the positive side, both the clinicians and the vendors assign fairly high priority to data analytics and to human factors and design (page 7). In fact, data analytics have come to be much more appreciated by clinicians in the past year (page 9). This may reflect the astonishing successes of deep learning artificial intelligence reported recently in the general press, and herald a willingness to invest in these technologies to improve health care. As for human factors and design, the importance of these disciplines has been repeatedly shown in HxRefactored conferences.

Genomics ranks fairly low for both sides, which I think is reasonable given that there are still relatively few insights we can gain from genetics to change our treatments. Numerous studies have turned up disappointing results: genetic testing doesn’t work very well yet, and tends to lead only to temporary improvements. In fact, both clinicians and vendors show a big drop in interest in precision medicine and genetics (pages 9 and 10). The drop in precision medicine, in particular, may be related to the strong association the term has with Vice President Joe Biden in the previous administration, although NIH seems to still be committed to it. Everybody knows that these research efforts will sprout big payoffs someday–but probably not soon enough for the business models of most companies.

But much more of the HIMSS report is given over to disturbing perception gaps between the clinicians and vendors. For instance, clinicians hold patient safety in higher regard than vendors (page 7). I view this concern cynically. Privacy and safety have often been invoked to hold back data exchange. I cannot believe that vendors in the health care space treat patient safety or privacy carelessly. I think it more likely that clinicians are using it as a shield to hide their refusal to try valuable new technologies.

In turn, vendors are much more interested in data exchange and integration than clinicians (page 7). This may just reflect a different level of appreciation for the effects of technology on outcomes. That is, data exchange and integration may be complex and abstract concepts, so perhaps the vendors are in a better position to understand that it ultimately determines whether a patient gets the treatment her condition demands. But really, how difficult can it be to be to understand data exchange? It seems like the clinicians are undermining the path to better care through coordination.

I have trouble explaining the big drops in interest in care coordination and public health (pages 9 and 10), which is worrisome because these things will probably do more than anything to produce healthier populations. The problem, I think, is probably that there’s no reimbursement for taking on these big, hairy problems. HIMMS explains the drop as a shift of attention to data analytics, which should ultimately help achieve the broader goals (page 11).

HIMSS found that clinicians expect to decrease their investments in health IT over the upcoming year, or at least to keep the amount steady (page 14). I suspect this is because they realize they’ve been soaked by suppliers and vendors. Since Meaningful Use was instituted in 2009, clinicians have poured billions of dollars and countless staff time into new EHRs, reaping mostly revenue-threatening costs and physician burn-out. However, as HIMSS points out, vendors expect clinicians to increase their investments in health IT–and may be sorely disappointed, especially as they enter a robust hiring phase (page 15).

Reading the report, I come away feeling that the future of health care may be bright–but that the glow you see comes from far over the horizon.

Five Not-so-typical meetings at #HIMSS18

Posted on March 7, 2018 I Written By

Colin Hung is the co-founder of the #hcldr (healthcare leadership) tweetchat one of the most popular and active healthcare social media communities on Twitter. Colin speaks, tweets and blogs regularly about healthcare, technology, marketing and leadership. He is currently an independent marketing consultant working with leading healthIT companies. Colin is a member of #TheWalkingGallery. His Twitter handle is: @Colin_Hung.

As the first day of the #HIMSS18 exhibit hall dawned, I had mentally prepared myself for a series of meetings where we would be discussing the product updates, client signings and releases of new thought-leadership content. Fortunately, the universe decided to throw a curveball and I ended up with no fewer than five meetings that were completely different than what I expected.

Meeting 1 – Nuance

I had the opportunity to sit down with Nuance at #HIMSS18. I wrote an earlier post about their #AI Marketplace and I fully expected to listen to an update on that effort plus learn details about the company’s recent announcement of a multi-year collaboration with Partners Healthcare. They surprised me by speaking instead about the importance of their work in the area of incidental findings.

Brenda Hodge, Chief Marketing Officer of Nuance Healthcare spoke passionately about the work that Nuance is doing to help ensure incidental findings are brought to the attention of primary care physicians. Through their AI prioritization algorithms and natural-language-processing capabilities, Nuance has plans to capture this potentially vital imaging information and highlight it so that the right clinical interventions can be applied sooner.

It was the fervor and fire with which Hodge spoke that was the not-so-typical part of our meeting. It was fun to share that moment with a kindred spirit, passionate about improving healthcare.

Meeting 2 – Voalte

The good folks at Voalte provided me the opportunity to do something I have never done at HIMSS – moderate a meetup. We assembled a fantastic group of panelist: @ShahidnShah @innonurse @drandrew76 and Angela Kauffman (from @Voalte) had a lively discussion about Physician Communications. The meetup was even better than I expected.

The conversation flowed easily. Online engagement was high. A good sized crowd gathered to listen. It was a fantastic way to start the day. We captured the meetup on video so watch for clips from the meetup on the Healthcare Scene YouTube channel once we recover from #HIMSSanity.

Meeting 3 – TigerConnect (Formerly Known as TigerText)

I stopped by for a quick chat with the team at TigerConnect – the company formally known as TigerText – to talk about their recent rebrand. This meeting was atypical of ones I have had at HIMSS because it was solely focused on their marketing rather than on their products. It was refreshing to have the chance to get a behind-the-scenes view of their recent rebranding initiative.

TigerText is a pioneer in the field of secure communications in hospitals and their brand had become well-established. Unfortunately the “Text” portion of their name was becoming a limitation as their company expanded into adjacent spaces and extended their platform’s capabilities. In just a few months, they made the decision to rebrand and executed it in time for #HIMSS18.

I’ll be writing a more in-depth piece on this after HIMSS, but felt it was worth mentioning because I have never had this type of frank, honest marketing conversation at HIMSS before.

Meeting 4 – Lenovo Health

I stopped by the Lenovo Health booth to see what new things were happening – especially since I had the chance to attend their HealthIT Think Tank event last year. I came for news and I ended up taking a selfie with a custom-made sign. It was energizing to just do something fun in their booth. It was 10 minutes of being creative and capturing a moment in their space. You can see how big our smiles are in the pictures we took.

Meeting 5 – Cerner

The team at Cerner reached out a few days ago and asked to get together. By pure chance, they suggested a time that had recently freed up on my calendar (one of the few open spots I had). I honestly did not read the request carefully before agreeing to it. I thought I was going to be part of a press briefing that was being broadcast. It turned out that the Cerner team wanted to me to be part of their onsite podcast.

We ended up have a wonderful conversation about Day 1 of the HIMSS18 exhibit hall. It was a free-flowing discussion that I was not expecting. You can listen to the podcast here.

It was so much fun that we continued chatting for 20min after we wrapped the recording. At the end I had the opportunity to officially welcome the Cerner podcasting/social media/marketing crew to #pinksocks. Like the Lenovo Health meeting earlier, it was a rare chance to create a lasting memory. I will not soon forget that #pinksocks gifting – the enthusiasm, surprise and good feeling was just incredible.

Day 1 takeaway – small moments, lasting memories

For me, Day 1 of the HIMSS18 exhibit hall was all about creating lasting memories from small moments. It wasn’t about the big splashy announcements, but the open/honest conversation. As I reflect on the day, I can’t help but smile at the how the stars aligned to give me a day at HIMSS that is the ideal we strive for in healthcare. Imagine if all across the healthcare ecosystem, clinicians were able to have small moments with patients that were open, honest, free-flowing as well as conversational and where both left the encounter feeling energized.

We need more days like this.