News roundup: Current Health’s Class II, Healthware Italy’s €10 million boost, the low state of Latin America telemedicine, weekend reading on digital health in health systems

Scottish startup gains FDA Class II clearance, pilots with Mount Sinai Brooklyn. Edinburgh’s Current Health has received FDA Class II clearance for its AI-enabled remote patient monitoring wearable monitors. The single arm-worn wearable sends data every two seconds on oxygen saturation, respiration rate, pulse rate, temperature, activity, and posture. Algorithms analyze the data and alert clinicians to patient status and deterioration. The Mount Sinai pilot follows on Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust for a post-discharge monitoring program, with a 22 percent reduction in home visits plus fewer hospital readmissions and emergency department visits. Current Health is the renamed snap40. Mobihealthnews, BusinessWire release

Healthware, a Salerno, Italy-based consultancy group primarily concentrated in marketing and sales, has received a €10 million investment from Fondo Italiano d’Investimento SGR (FII Tech Growth). The investment will be used over the next two years has received to expand Healthware’s business transformation for life sciences companies and product development and services for digital health start-ups which improve health outcomes through new technologies. Release.  Hat tip to Healthware’s Antonietta Pannella

Telemedicine adoption in hospitals ranges from 65 to below 30 percent in Latin America. A study published this week in Health Affairs Global Health Policy (paywalled) looks at the different rates of hospital-based telemedicine adoption in nine Latin America countries. Leading is Chile with the aforementioned 65 percent; Argentina, Costa Rica, Mexico and Peru with less than a 30 percent. In the middle: Panama (35 percent), Uruguay and Guatemala in the 40 percent range. Despite supportive official policies in many of these countries, “Efforts to implement telemedicine are isolated and scattered, often left to the public sector or taking the form of insulated projects that are not sustained” or scaled up nationally and regionally. Mobihealthnews

For weekend reading. Intersecting with the Latin America story above is this. This Editor missed the October issue of Global Health: Science and Practice published out of Johns Hopkins, but here it is. The focus of the six articles is digital health integration into health systems in the US and internationally. Hat tip to Alain B. Labrique via Twitter

A basket of reflections, considerations on CVS-Aetna: Epic, Cerner, the model, and hospitals’ role

[grow_thumb image=”http://telecareaware.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/canary-in-the-coal-mine.jpgw595.jpeg” thumb_width=”150″ /]With the holidays and the end of the year coming in a little over two short weeks, there’s plenty of room for thoughts, reasoned speculation, and some unusual takes on the CVS-Aetna merger. This Editor remains in her belief that among us, there’s a bit of exhaustion and an attitude of ‘wait and see’ around the topic among us. The canaries have a case of the vapors….

Let’s sort through some of the more interesting POVs expressed of late by our fellow pressies, which Readers can consider in between cups of good cheer and bites of All That Food. Bear in mind that this merger has a long road to go on a hard road, with potholes marked DOJ and (in this Editor’s opinion) HHS, before it’s a done deal in 2018.

  • A big win for Epic. Currently the EHR for CVS’ MinuteClinics and most recently the care management programs of CVS Specialty, Epic is bullish on the opportunities in what their VP of population health termed the ‘gray space’ in the patient experience outside of the traditional sites of care. In October, CVS added Epic’s Healthy Planet population health analytics platform to learn more about drug dispensing patterns and medication adherence–this Editor believes in preparation for merger talks. The open question this Editor has after all the glow in this article is how Aetna’s varied systems (e.g. ActiveHealth, Medicity, and others) would integrate into Epic, and the price of poker, because with Epic it’s never free. Ask any hospital. Healthcare IT News.
    • Certainly, their main competitor Cerner is feeling the heat after a slowdown in its VA plans, the single largest EHR implementation ever. Congress has held up initial funding making the contract effective (Washington Technology). It is geometrically more complicated than their simultaneous DoD implementation, with $10 billion estimated over 10 years (FCW). Other wrenches in the works: a fresh CliniComp lawsuit against Cerner based on infringement against their 2003 patent on remote hosting, and their appeal of the no-bid award to Cerner [TTA 23 Aug] against VA. Kansas City Business Journal, Healthcare IT News
  • Is it going to increase cost? It might. And what about info sharing with providers? A Harvard Medical School professor opined to Marketplace that instead of self-treatment at home for a cold, the patient might actually traipse to a MinuteClinic for care, thus driving up healthcare costs. This resembles the RAND logic around telemedicine consult expense we deflated in a series of articles back in the spring. Information sharing with regular providers is a bigger issue which urgent cares, telemedicine, and clinics already are dealing with. The paradox is that integration with a payer, with a retailer’s ability to track ancillary purchases such as OTC meds and DME purchases, might actually help that issue. But will it? Will a combined CVS-Aetna share information or hoard it, further disempowering patients? This Stat article calls on Mark Bertolini to promote shared information, engagement, and accountability to balance the scales.
  • Do we really need hospitals? If they don’t change, we might need a lot less of them except for highly specialized treatment. And this is likely a good thing. The HBR points out that CVS-Aetna is hardly the only threat to the traditional hospital–there’s Johns Hopkins’ Hospital at Home program for older adults, UnitedHealthcare’s growing network of providers under OptumCare, including the recent deal for DaVita dialysis centers, and free-standing, low-cost “neighborhood” hospitals, almost like pop-up stores. The article doesn’t mention ‘consult stations’ like Europe’s H4D, which is proving that the kiosk idea isn’t dead. 

The reality is that we won’t know what this merger entails until it actually happens, if it happens–and its final shape will take years to mold. Related: CVS-Aetna: the canary says that DOJ likely to review mergerAnalysis of the CVS-Aetna merger: a new era, a canary in a mine–or both?CVS’ bid for Aetna–will it happen, and kick off a trend? (what will Amazon and other retailers, including supermarkets, do?)

Telemedicine’s 25 things to know better–and Better

For those of us who have been Terminology Warriors going back to the oughts (see founder and EIC emeritus Steve Hards’ summary in ‘What is Telecare’), this is a useful summary of not only what is telemedicine and who is authorized to perform it, but also how it is developing (US focus) in state law and reimbursement (private and Medicare). Despite being published earlier this month, it is already dated as reimbursement parity laws have been passed in Connecticut and Delaware [TTA 10 July]. The richly IPO’d Teladoc is omitted on the provider list in point #21; Better is anomalous as it is less telemedicine than a personal health assistance service.  25 things to know about telemedicine (Becker’s Health IT and CIO Review)

About Better: they have joined with Johns Hopkins’ Sibley Memorial Hospital Innovation Hub to provide support for orthopedic episodes of care. These generally are for a 90 day period which extends from scheduling the procedure through post-discharge recovery, and are usually tied into a bundled payment from an insurer or Medicare. Johns Hopkins press release Hat tip to CEO Geoff Clapp.

Is the ‘last mile’ of app certification efficacy metrics?

News and announcements around app certification definitely were hot topics in the past week or so, but are they more heat than light? Do these certifications adequately address efficacy? Stephanie Baum, in her follow-up to the Happtique kerfuffle in MedCityNews, opens up the discussion with the proposition: “It seems like there needs to be some way to prove that apps actually help people.” Bradley Merrill Thompson of Epstein Becker & Green points out “It’s certainly useful to know that an app works from a software perspective reliably, but it is even more valuable to know that the app can actually improve health.” While Happtique certification standards have a gap here, this Editor would point out that they were evolved nearly two years ago when the reporting/analysis needed for this was largely not available. Newer programs such as Johns Hopkins’ mHealth Evidence and the new IMS Health AppScript [TTA 15 Dec] can dip into the ‘big data’ pool far more effectively. Will Happtique be able to address this, or leave the ‘last mile’ to others? And what is the real and quantifiable demand for app certification anyway? Health app prescribing by physicians is a question mark in this Editor’s observation; the larger market may be health plans and programs such as Partners HealthCare’s Wellocracy, Cigna’s GoYou  and Aetna’s CarePass.