Somewhat off our normal beat….but of interest.
Ardigen and The BioCollective are collaborating on early detection research for Parkinson’s Disease, based on a microbiome-based biomarker. Ardigen has developed an Artificial Intelligence (AI) Microbiome Translational Platform. The BioCollective has a bank of metagenomic and patient metadata generated from an unexpected source: Parkinson’s patients’ stool samples. Release
The BioCollective is headed by Martha Carlin, who came from well outside of healthcare and pulled together a research group to address her husband’s diagnosis. A visit to this website is worth an examination on how these samples are collected for microbiome extraction. An interesting twist is the marketing of a probiotic mix developed using their BioFlux metabolic model for ‘gut health’.
Ed Marx, the former CIO of the Cleveland Clinic, has written a new book, ‘Healthcare Digital Transformation: How Consumerism, Technology, and the Pandemic are Accelerating the Future’. It’s billed as a wake-up call for healthcare systems and hospitals under challenge by Big Retail, Big Pharma, and Big Tech. This Editor met Mr. Marx when he premiered his entertaining memoir, ‘Extraordinary Tales from a Rather Ordinary Guy’, a few years ago. On treatment for COVID patients, except for the very sickest, he advocates it being done from home. From the release: “When the pandemic hit, a lot of progressive organizations would send most of their Covid patients home with monitoring equipment hooked up to phones unless they needed a ventilator. It’s a lot cheaper than staying in the hospital.”
Many of our Readers may consult HIStalk on occasion, especially the provocative weekly columns by a physician known as Dr. Jayne. She has a great deal to do with HIT for her practice, was a CMIO, and her Monday Curbside Consult is about the high cost of changing EHR platforms in a healthcare organization–an event that’s happening a lot lately (think DoD and VA). It’s the story of her friend who worked in IT for a health system that migrated to a single vendor platform and practice management system. The friend was given the option to remain with the legacy platforms support team for the transition, with the employer promising that those people would move to the new platform team following the migration. Routine, correct?
Not so routine when the cutover completion resulted in two weeks notice for those perhaps two dozen people. It wasn’t about headcount, because the organization posted jobs, but all new hires are required to be certified on the new system which the transition staff were not. And this health system, a non-profit, spent half a billion dollars for an EHR migration.
What’s the cost, in Dr. Jayne’s book?
- The health system jettisoned a group of its most experienced people, with 15-20 years experience on average, with long-standing customer relationships (customers being doctors, practices, and health facilities). The knowledge base and track record they have in handling ‘Dr. Frazzled’s high maintenance billing team’, now wrestling with a new system, walked out the door.
- These people, due to age, may never work, or find positions at the same level, ever again–and may very well wind up in the uncompensated healthcare system.
- The health system may, through getting rid of experienced people, evaded the hard work on its own legacy of people and process. She points out that they “treated this migration simply as a technology swap-out” versus an “opportunity for further standardization and clinical transformation”. New people can freshen an organization, but will they be allowed to, or be fitted into the same stale setup?
Dr. Jayne is optimistic about her friend finding a new position. This Editor will let her write the conclusion which applies beyond HIT in how healthcare is being managed today, from small to giant organizations:
Too often, however, that mission is keeping up with the proverbial Joneses rather than being good stewards. It reminds me of when I was in the hospital this winter, when I didn’t get scheduled medications on time due to a staffing shortage. Is it really cheaper to risk a poor outcome? When did people become less valuable of an asset than mammoth IT systems or another outpatient imaging facility or ambulatory surgery center? And do we really need another glass and marble temple to healing when the actual patient care suffers?
We normally don’t feature corporate or sponsored surveys, but are making an exception here as it demonstrates two trends: that hospital systems can’t fight consumer telehealth** anymore, and that the future mix of usage is starting to change. Teladoc’s/Becker’s Healthcare Hospital & Health Systems 2016 Consumer Telehealth Benchmark Survey projects that by 2018, 76 percent of health systems will adopt consumer telehealth (vs. site-to-site), double from 2016, and that most who have it will be expanding offerings. As a benchmark survey, it tracks services offered or plan to offer, organizational priorities, and goals.
An interesting part is how the mix of services under telehealth is evolving. Presently, the top three among current users are urgent care, primary care, and psychiatry/mental health. For new users, their priorities are ED/urgent care (45 percent), readmission prevention (42 percent), primary care, including internal medicine and pediatrics (42 percent), chronic condition management (41 percent). Nearly one in five (18 percent) plan to include cardiology services.
As implemented by health systems, telehealth has run into problems that were totally predictable and will provoke the ‘Duh?’ response from our Readers. From the report:
- They didn’t measure patient or physician satisfaction with their telehealth programs, even though improving patient satisfaction is a leading motivator for offering telehealth services.
- Gaining physician buy-in was cited by 78 percent of respondents, and rated as the #1 lesson learned
- The second most important? The importance of aligning telehealth initiatives with organizational goals (75 percent). (more…)