Mid-week news roundup: CVS Health Virtual Primary Care launches, VA’s two-day Oracle Cerner EHR slowdown, and microsampling blood + wearables for multiple tests

January 27, 2023 | by

CVS Health finally has Virtual Primary Care up and running. First announced by CVS last May, Virtual Primary Care provides primary care, 24/7 on-demand care, and scheduled mental health services to Aetna members nationwide enrolled in eligible fully-insured and self-insured commercial health plans. Members in VPC can schedule urgent care, 24/7 on-demand care (that may vary by plan), an in-office primary care visit, Minute Clinic visits, and expanded virtual mental health services. Amwell announced that it would be the provider in August on their Q2 2022 earnings call. The release mentions that board-certified physicians and nurse practitioners will be delivering primary care services through physician-led care teams and coordinating with CVS pharmacists. This applies to virtual mental health services as well. (One trusts that this in-network approach will avoid the problems they experienced with Cerebral and Done Health on their prescribed ADHD drugs.) Health records, lab results, and medications are shareable via the patient CVS Health Dashboard. At this point, there is no mention of further rollouts to other plans. Becker’s.

Somebody threw sand in the Oracle Cerner EHR gears at the VA–and it started at MHS. A report from the Spokane Spokesman-Review seems to be the only report out there (other than HISTalk picking it up) on the two-day slowdown in the Oracle Cerner Millenium EHR rolled out at the VA and the Department of Defense’s Military Health System (MHS Genesis) that covers active duty. On Monday and Tuesday, there was a “major slowdown” that did not abate until Tuesday afternoon.  It affected more than half of all MHS providers, as well as VA clinics and hospitals in Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and Ohio. Mann-Grandstaff clinicians reported problems to the Spokesman, which contacted the VA. Their press secretary Terrence Hayes confirmed that changes made to the system by the DOD, which shares a database with the VA, “had the unintended consequence of interrupting services that provide connectivity to the network.” The system slowed down from screen to screen, requiring clinicians to work extra time to make all entries, and was not resolved until configuration changes were made. This is another incident adding to a Very Large Dogpile, including interoperability between VA and MHS versions, 498 outages between September 2020 and June 2022, plus two veteran deaths.

And maybe Stanford, forever associated with Theranos, is trying to get its reputation back–in running multiple blood tests on microsamples. A new paper published in Nature Biomedical Engineering by a group of 17 researchers led by Stanford Medicine determined that valid tests could be run on a microsample (10 μl) of blood that could be drawn from a finger prick at home to test for thousands of metabolites, lipids, cytokines, and proteins. This testing would be paired with data captured from wearables. They tested reactions to food (Ensure shake) and the effects of physical activity on blood with wearables monitoring heart rate and step count, plus a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) to profile individual physiological status, including cortisol. Unlike Theranos, it’s not done in a ‘lab in a box’ in a supermarket trying to duplicate (fake?) existing diagnostic tests, and it employs mass spectrometry molecule-sorting technology in a lab. Becker’s.

Rock Health/Stanford U Digital Health Adoption Report: high gear for telemedicine, digital health, but little broadening of demographics

March 3, 2021 | by

It’s good news–and an antidote to the bubble at the same time. Rock Health and Stanford University Medicine-Center for Digital Health’s just-released report found that, unsurprisingly, that telemedicine/telehealth use rocketed during the pandemic and gained ground that would not have been true for years otherwise, as of September 2020. However, the growth was not largely from new demographics, but largely among the adopters of telehealth in 2019 and prior. It also rolled back to about 6 percent of visits. Wearable use also boosted, especially for better sleep, as did self-tracking. But overall healthcare utilization cratered from March onward, barely reviving in the late summer, and telemedicine use declined to a steady state of about 6 percent of all visits–far more than the near-zero it was pre-pandemic. Here’s our rundown of the highlights.

Telemedicine user demographics haven’t changed significantly. It accelerated among those in the 2019 and prior (through 2015) profile: higher-income earners ($150K+), middle-aged adults aged 35-54, highly educated (masters degree and higher), urban residents, slightly male skewed (74 percent men/66 percent women/67 percent non-binary)and those with one or more chronic conditions (78 percent) and high utilizers (87 percent with 6+ visits/year). This profile apparently sustains across racial and ethnicity lines. (page 15) The non-user profile tends to be female, over 55, lower-income, rural, not on a prescription, and Hispanic. (page 23)

More usage of live virtual video visits than before–11 points up from 32 to 43 percent. These reduced reliance on non-video communications: telephonic, text, asynchronous pictures/video, and email. (page 12) And respondents largely accessed live video and phone visits through their doctor, indicating a pivot on practices’ parts: 70 percent of live video telemedicine users and 60 percent of live phone telemedicine users. (page 17) But the reasons why were more acute than this Editor expected: 33 percent for medical emergency, then minor illness (25 percent), then chronic condition (19 percent). (page 16)

Barriers to use remain significant in telemedicine and have not changed year to year except for awareness of options. (page 22-23)

  • Prefer to discuss health in-person (52 percent)
  • Not aware of options (much less this year)
  • Provider didn’t recommend
  • Cost
  • Poor cellular or broadband connection is minimal (3 percent). There is also no barrier of ‘inability to use’, though this may be skewed by the survey group being online (see methodology).

Wearables and digital information tracking accelerated, but ‘churn’ continued. 54 percent of respondents adopted wearables, up 10 points, while information tracking increased by 12 points.  (page 11) Unpacking this:

  • The populations with the highest rate of digital tracking were those with heart disease, diabetes, and obesity as chronic conditions
  • The leading reasons for wearables remained fitness training and weight loss. However, right behind these were major year-to-year spikes in better sleep (27 to 52 percent), managing a diagnosed condition (28 to 51 percent), and managing stress (24 to 44 percent).
  • The surprise uses of wearables? Managing fertility tracking and menstrual cycle.
  • Yet wearables churn continues. From the study: 55 percent of respondents who owned a wearable in 2020 stopped using it for one or more purposes (though they may continue using it for another purpose). The demographics tend to mirror telemedicine users for adoption and stopping use. (pages 24-28)

Healthcare utilization overall, telemedicine or not, has barely revived versus the March baseline, using the Commonwealth Fund data TTA profiled here. The report usefully digs into the groups that delayed care: 50 percent of 35-54-year-olds, women, Northeast residents, chronic conditions, and mental health. (page 34)

Yet trust in health information remains with the person’s physician, family, hospital, payer, and pharmacy. Overall, there is a reluctance to share data with entities beyond these. Health tech and tech companies aren’t trusted sources, along with social media, and lag to less than 25 percent, along with less willingness to share data with them. COVID-19 data is broken out in sharing, generally following these trends except for more willingness to share this data with governmental entities and research. (pages 29-31) 

The report recommends that for telemedicine to go deeper into adoption, refocusing is in order: (page 21)

  • Shift from a transactional model to a continuous virtual care or ‘full-stack’ model
  • Seek a different kind of customer. One-third of telemedicine visits were for emergencies. A more sustainable model would concentrate on chronic condition management and lower-acuity care.
  • Accept that new care models are disintermediating the patient-provider relationship especially in the younger age groups

The methodology of the survey: N=7,980 US adults, matched to US demographics; dates conducted 4 September-2 October 2020; online survey in English only. Rock Health summary, link to free survey report download, Mobihealthnews article.