Andrew Hall, a Telehealth Entrepreneur in the UK, reflects on the potential effect of the financial crisis on the future of the market for remote patient monitoring telehealth.
Even when the cash flowed, investment in this technology has been startlingly low and ineffective. It is difficult to see how the new financial environment will improve that track record… (more…)
Skip Rodenbush, Founder and CEO of Interactive Multimedia Artists expounds on why current telemedicine videoconferencing has such high barriers to adoption. See end of the article for information on the new system his company has developed.
The new healthcare delivery system depends heavily on the wide deployment of scalable and manageable telemedicine. Traditional telemedicine technologies do not meet these requirements. Instead they offer expensive, unmanageable and overall impractical solutions. (more…)
In his second Soapbox item, Paul Mitchell, social services consultant and general manager of Icom Technology throws down – in the most helpful kind of way – a challenge to telecare service commissioners to up their game.
An observer could be forgiven for thinking that many commissioners purchase telecare as they would cutlery… (more…)
Paul Mitchell, an experienced consultant and troubleshooter in social care in the UK argues that partnership agreements between councils and telecare providers may be anti-competitive, anti-choice, and not in the best interests of service users.
Many social care authorities who have signed up to so-called exclusive ‘partnership’ agreements may now regret having their hands tied.
All is not lost however because unless those providers can live up to the implicit and explicit terms of those agreements I would urge the customers to review the validity of the agreements. First let’s look at some of the frequently recurring terms in such agreements and their implications. (more…)
Donna Cusano is currently a healthcare services, wellness and supportive technologies marketing consultant based in New York City. Previously she was Vice President, Marketing, for Living Independently Group (QuietCare Systems). The following Soapbox item was triggered by the How the ‘Old Old’ can have best lives item.
So much of our emphasis in the technology area has been to keep seniors active that we tend to ignore planning for and helping seniors (and their families) to manage their last and usually inevitable years of increasing frailty, and the role that technology in the service of care can play. I don’t know of many cultures that support the ‘old old’ and those that have (Asian Indian, Chinese, Japanese) are increasingly not. Here is a moral, right opportunity for both healthcare and technology. I will make a similar case for the disabled and the support telecare/telehealth can be for them as well.
Unfortunately I think the trend towards treating the ‘old old’ – or even the just old – INhumanely is on the rise, despite… (more…)
Adam Wragg, European Managing Director of Honeywell HomMed responds to the previous Telecare Soapbox item: ‘Responsibility of the market leader‘ and throws down a challenge to us all.
I read with interest the anonymous comments of the writer who sent in the July 14th article to which this is a response.
Growing the overall market is not the sole responsibility of any commercial market leader; building a viable business is. By building a viable business the products and services that are offered become less expensive and more effective. However… (more…)
Anonymous commentator applies some concepts from the technology adoption life cycle to consider progress – or not – in the UK’s telehealth market.
Being a market leader has one key responsibility: to grow the overall market. The market leader cannot make significant growth by focusing on taking business from its smaller competitors as there is not sufficient business to be gained. Market growth is achieved by promoting and proving the value to be had from innovative products and by the innovation of the applications, mainstream and niche, for which their products can be used.
So let’s look at what has happened in telehealth in the UK… (more…)
With this headline everyone – in the UK at least – will know what I was watching last week but it set me thinking: where did the English telecare initiative that started in 2004 go wrong? Why has it failed to deliver the stunning performance that seemed so certain after such a strong second round and getting through to the final?
Was the Telecare Policy Collaborative just a flash in the pan?
Did Building Telecare in England hit some wrong notes?
Was the Preventative Technology Grant a flawed act?
Has the PASA National Telecare Framework Agreement lost its glitter?
In short, why is it that
most of Britain is still suffering the same jaded routine (pendant alarm systems) as 10 years ago, albeit re-branded as ‘telecare’, when the Policy Collaborative was trying to boil up something fresh, daring, diverse and dynamic?
Can telecare, as originally envisaged, be rescued from the sidelined losers?
Put yourself in a judge’s seat and have your say in a comment.
We are now approaching a year since Northern Ireland’s Centre for Connected Health published its Prior Information Notice (PDF) for a large-scale, province-wide remote patient monitoring service.
It’s not a happy first birthday because, as far as anyone can tell, the procurement process is not likely to come to a satisfactory conclusion any time soon.
For us on the outside it is hard to tell whether this is due to the complicated nature of the task, or incompetence, or a mixture of both.
However, as a matter of opinion, it didn’t help that the tender invitation did not include information that the selection criteria would exclude ‘small’ suppliers with relevant experience, some of whom committed resources to prepare a bid for a process in which they later discovered they would not be allowed to participate… (more…)
Steve Hards asks “What questions should telehealth commissioners be asking suppliers?”
Now that the laughter in the UK’s telecare/telehealth community over Tunstall’s name change in the UK to ‘Tunstall Healthcare’ has subsided into a rather nervous giggle, it’s an appropriate time to raise the question of what criteria does a company have to meet to be recognised as a healthcare company? (more…)
An appreciative comment on the Telecare Services Association’s 2008 conference in Brighton on 3-5 November by ‘telehealth convert’, Consultant Cardiologist Dr Lance Forbat. (more…)
Steve Hards: Are telecare users – in the UK at least – at risk of being denied an emergency service response? (more…)
James Batchelor, MD of Alertacall, raises a serious issue for councils and other telecare suppliers: what risk is a council running when its employee substitutes a ‘standard’ but inappropriate equipment package for a privately-funded one that was more suitable for the client? Would the person’s consent to the course of action be a defence if the consent were based on inappropriate advice? (more…)
This item by Paul Gee, Chief Executive of the UK’s Telecare Services Association (TSA), was originally published Autumn 2007 in the TSA’s magazine. (more…)
Telecare practitioner Rufus Handy articulates in a forthright manner what many people seem to be thinking about the way telecare is currently being presented and implemented. (more…)
The Smart House movement pre-dates the introduction of telecare. Guy Dewsbury challenges the current trend of branding telecare-enabled accommodation as ‘smart’. Read his Telecare Soapbox item: and here is a links to a press release that exemplifies what he is objecting to. ‘Smart House’ uses new technology to promote independent living (more…)