 Your new post is loading...
|
Scooped by
rob halkes
|
Ecosystems are the new bedrock of digital healthcare. Platforms are enabling smart cities, connected machines, robust customer analytics and more. In healthcare, they provide the underlying technology that can make healthcare experiences more connected. Some companies have taken the plunge into platforms, while others are just beginning to use digital technologies and cloud foundations as a first step into the platform world. Platform potential The power of platforms should not be underestimated. More than ever before, they can link the entire healthcare ecosystem—from patients to providers to health plans. Imagine a future when healthcare consumers will go to one central place to book an appointment, check their electronic medical record or pay an out-of-pocket expense. Providers will track a patient’s activity from hospital to home. Upon discharge, data from a patient’s blood pressure monitor, coupled with analytics, could indicate a pending complication and give providers ample time to take corrective action. Health plans will use platforms to connect with consumers in more meaningful ways. For example, some are using engagement platforms, such as Rally Health and Welltok, to collect data from wearables and give rewards or premium discounts for progress. Platform privileges Platforms can help reduce out-of-pocket costs by supporting healthier lifestyles among consumers. Furthermore, they make previously difficult to access services more mainstream. Take for instance leading health plans that are making wellness programs available to the masses because platforms make it easy and cost-effective to scale such offerings and integrate into existing experiences.
|
|
Scooped by
rob halkes
|
Patients are demanding care and solutions that are coordinated, convenient, customized, and accessible, and a number of nontraditional health companies are coming forward to address these emerging expectations, even as many large pharmaceutical companies focused on traditional markets have lagged behind. Life sciences companies have a window of time to frame their patient engagement strategies (Deloitte Review, 2016,18) for operating in the new, customer-centered, digital ecosystem— or risk the new players keeping them constrained within the traditional pharma model. [...]
Changes in technology and the health care ecosystem are increasing the patient’s role in decision making and reshaping their expectations from health care companies and is driven by several factors, including patients’ ability to change their own outcomes based on behavior, financial scrutiny due to cost-sharing models that push more costs onto the patient, the industry’s shift toward evaluating out- comes to determine value delivered to the patient, and the availability of technology solutions empowering patients with more information and the ability to play an active role in managing their well-being.
We’re also seeing a broad “consumerization” of health care products, expanding the ecosystem beyond the traditional players of providers, payers, big pharma, and health care data companies to include retail giants such as Nike, Apple Inc., and FitBit, as well as thousands of innovative mobile-application developers. As such, patients need to be thought of and engaged as traditional consumers when it comes to their use of health care products and services. [...] The explosion of research in the area of patient engagement further speaks to the need for timeliness on the part of pharmaceutical companies implementing and executing engagement strategies, and nonprofit and public sector organizations can play a key role in making this happen. [...] It makes sense that pharmaceutical companies would look to establish their brand for patient engagement services. Being able to deliver consistent service to patients and health care providers alike is paramount in building trust and loyalty. Conversely, and unsurprisingly, poor execution can drive the optics of a company’s brand in the wrong direction. With regard to patient engagement, there is emerging support for moving away from a reactive approach, in which coordination between stakeholders, therapy, and care is limited or ad hoc, to a proactive model in which engagement tools and support bolster both patients and health care providers.
The bottom line is that there are any number of ways to structure patient services within an organization; so if the current structure isn’t effectively supporting and executing the patient engagement strategy and therapeutic outcomes, alternatives and precedents should be considered.[...]
No matter where patient services resides, a common platform across the organization and its vendors is becoming increasingly important, and is an effective way to leverage data as a strategic asset. [..] Over the last three to five years, we have observed life sciences companies beginning to implement cloud-based platforms on which internal and external users can access the same platform, allowing the company to centrally control data access, ensure data quality, easily generate real-time reports, and quickly distribute system updates to all users. [...]
INSIGHT: This report is great and pharma organizations should be aligning their organizations to increase patient engagement and think of new ways to reach and interact with patients. This means striving to continually improve engagement through a patient centered approach at a time when a lot of people are going to have a hard time justifying the ROI. Read on here: http://bit.ly/1TSpvQD
|
|
Scooped by
rob halkes
|
{…] The title of my talk was “Giving Up Control: Leading in the Digital Era”. One key data point from Gallup that continues to astound me is that worldwide only 13% of people are engaged in their work. It’s higher in the US, standing at 30% but that’s still terrible! I believe that a big reason for this is that we don’t give enough autonomy to, and respect the growing agency of our employees, especially for the Millennials who crave purpose and meaning in their work. The hierarchies that exist in our organizations were designed for a bygone era where efficiency and scale were paramount. But today, speed, innovation, and creativity are the sources of competitive advantage. Companies have been responding, deploying collaboration platforms and enterprise social networks to connect people throughout the organization. Shrinking the distance between previously siloed departments, or between executives and the front lines sounds great — unless you’re a middle manager. The biggest problem leaders face in the digital era is that power and influence are being decoupled from titles and organizational structure. So how can you be an effective leader? Here are the three things that organizations can do: - Create a Culture of Sharing. Instead of hoarding information to be powerful, leaders have to become facilitators who accelerate the sharing of information across a networked organization.
- Encourage the Practice of “Followership”. The size and quality of your network, not your title, determines how much power and influence you have, and thus, how much you can get done. If employees could build their “followership” across the organization and even outside the organization, then even if their titles or jobs changed, they could still be highly effective. This creates tremendous security that allows these managers to make tough decisions that might otherwise jeopardize their livelihood.
- Ensure Networks are being used to Make Meaningful Decisions. People are smart — they won’t devote time to engaging unless they know it’s going to make a difference. The biggest mistake I’ve seen organizations do when trying to transition into the digital era is to use these new tools to create the equivalent of a digital water cooler — talking rather than getting work done. No wonder they don’t last! Get leaders to pay attention, make key decisions on these networks and people will come.
What each of these has in common is the need to give up control. In the talk, I shared the journey I’m going through as the parent of teenagers, as they push for greater autonomy and trust to make their own decisions. In our work, if we truly want to have an engaged workforce, then we’re going to have to lead differently, and establish a new kind of relationship and trust that’s created and deepened with these digital tools.
|
|
Scooped by
rob halkes
|
Health care is very much „in transition”. Have a quick look at the trends in health care 2014 . Now, try to predict what the outcomes will be of all these well intended developments?
Due to changes in structure of processes, organizations, patients’ journeys, devices, drugs, apps, telemonitoring – health care will run the risk of becoming highly fragmented, maybe even chaotic. Let’s hope that professionals and their patients still do know their way around. Can this be prevented? As costs will drive change for the coming years, I guess not. Health care is fundamentally being transformed. Why? Because it has been righteously disrupted and it will take time before a new satisfactory system has emerged. Do we need to wait for that? No! We have to see how we can construe things in a more informed perspective. .. ..there is a sure direction to give that constitutes the basic principle for moving forward: both because it is immanent to all needed developments to better care, and because it creates the opportunity to developments in oversee-able steps of change. Every party can draw its own choice on this to design a proper blue print to their process of change. This principle directive is: Integrate, integrate, integrate. Integration in care is about the unification of both parties and activities, aided by technology, devices, information and medications, to create better care for health and its outcomes.
Integration will lead to better connections of different partners who are needed for a specific path or process of care. It will stimulate collaboration and coordination of activities between them. They will aim for better outcomes and higher effectiveness of care. It will lead to opportunities for more efficient arrangements of expertise and allocation of capacity of care givers.
With the compound of the interests of the key players in care (and I mean of course, patients included), costs can be more rationally arranged and may lead to lowering prices of care per patient per year. Also, it will inspire higher transparency of processes and clarity to patients about details of the caring activities themselves. There are three different kinds of integration. Each, open to start with. So, any party may pick and start its own game changer. Even any couple of parties as intended partners, may do so too. Choose the most easiest entry to your future development together and enjoy the ride! 1. Integration by Co-Operation
2. Integration by Co-Creation. 3. Integration by “Experience Co-Creation”...
|
|
Scooped by
rob halkes
|
Survey shows UK doctors value medical journals and their websitesGPs in the UK rate journals, educational materials and events over literature, websites and reps from pharmaceutical companies when it comes to communicating information, according to the 2013 National Medical Readership Survey (MRS).NMRS 2013, which was run by the Joint Industry Committee of Medical Advertisers for Readership Surveys (JICMARS), also found that GPs are turning increasingly to digital media to fit their needs. The survey was intended to determine GPs' attitude to, and use of, print and digital media when it came to their work, with key findings including that speed is of the essence, with online sources increasingly the first port of call for quickly checking clinical information. Other key values of online for GPs included the ability to look for specific information. Printed publications still have their place, however, with the survey discovering that GPs value print read for 'longer, serendipitous and more leisurely reading', as well as to keep up-to-date with developments in clinical practice and for ongoing professional education. Regarding the medium for information, the survey found that GPs consider search engines the most useful source, following by medical educational materials. Social media for GPs was considered second least useful, ahead of pharmaceutical company and product websites. The survey also set to find out GP behaviour when it came to the types of information they look at, regardless of the medium. The top five information areas were those which fulfil surgery information needs: clinical information on diseases and conditions; information on drugs/treatments and prescribing; clinical guidelines; local protocols; and patient information. The 2013 survey included – for the first time – an online element. Combined with the established postal survey, this provided extensive data on the 'media landscape' as used by GPs, and the survey now delivers data on print readership, digital edition/ app usage and website usage.
|
|
Scooped by
rob halkes
|
Pharmacists would like pharma companies to provide them with online access to resources to help them support their patients
|
From disrupted care to #ehealth #integratedcare #iot and #platforms: see the strategic roadmap for health as imagined by Accenture: a scenario to think about! #pharma are you "in" ?