Health inSite: Consumer-directed Healthcare Part III

Standard

This is part III in a four part series. Links for Part I, Part II, and Part IV

And now, we get to the purpose of this series. What does the sharing economy have to do with the consumer-directed healthcare system? First, let’s look at what is at the core of purchasing: economic offering.

Levels of economic offering

In their book The Experience Economy (I did a post on this too, forever ago!), Joe Pine and James Gilmore explain the value pyramid.

As products increase in differentiation (customization), a higher asking price for that product can generally be realized. In this way, value to the consumer comes in the ability to match the need with the offering and in healthcare, this means enabling smart, simple decisions.

In a consumer-directed healthcare system, shifting healthcare transactions to goods, rather than experience, and focusing the overall healthcare purchasing and maintenance up to that of an experience will be critical to success. This can be done when the exchange, for example, becomes broker, maintenance organization (think HMO), and coordinator of one’s health record (not an Electronic Health Record as we know them, but a coordinator of the health profile mentioned earlier). For such a situation to work, the exchange then will need to either build out, or partner with organizations with experience in guiding human behavior, to successfully engage those patient-consumers in maintaining their profile as well as actively pursuing greater levels of health.

Examples of how they work

The sharing economy is also making significant changes to the way that we engage as consumers. This economic shift allows for individuals to make transactions with little to no broker (for example, a bank) in order to make purchases. Most of the sharing economy relies heavily on technology to enable people to come together. A chart of examples is below:

 

Organization Primary offering Industry disrupted Innovation Description
Uber/Lyft Car service Taxis By allowing individuals to directly contact a driver, users interact with an app that can manage their payment and reservation.
AirBnB Housing Hotels Users submit their social network credentials as “proof of trust” for user-to-user reservations of rooms
Car-2-Go and many others Cars Every car company Cars placed around the city, can be “rented” for one-direction travel.
Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies Currency Banks Distributed, “proof-of-work” based cryptocurrency which allows for peer-to-peer exchange of value.
Kiva Microfinance Lending companies Individuals can register their needs for financing and other members of the Kiva network can make those loans direct to the borrower without a traditional lender.
GoFundMe and other crowd-sourced finance platforms Project Funding Investors Individuals can create a project page with donation-level rewards for contributing to the financing of a project or product.

Considering these examples, I believe that there may be some interesting opportunities for alternative funding and insurance when it comes to healthcare. Consider this: what would it look like if traditional insurers were no longer the primary location to insure oneself. In the current healthcare system, some groups (usually smaller companies with less leverage than bigger companies) might choose to pool their collective employees into what’s called a captive insurance group. What if a similar model were to be contemplated where individuals were to select a captive group of similar patients, almost self-selecting to become a part of a patient-centered medical home model. Exchanges could do the same with their patient population by segmenting those patients into population groups.

Now, what if those groups could be funded by individuals wanting to bet on the success or failure of those groups. This allows for more direct funding for investors and patients that could result in dividends for the patients and investors when benchmarks are achieved or maintained. What other possibilities for alternate funding models might still be out there to be explored?

The core of the sharing economy

Trust

At the very core of the sharing economy is a redistribution of trust networks. By decentralizing trust models from institutional to peer-to-peer, the sharing economy refocuses and reinforces a community around the exchange of goods and services by moving brokerage to a fluid, and seemingly direct, brokerage for those exchanges.

Supply/Demand

The other side of this change to the sharing economy is supply and demand monitoring and coordination. Uber has the ability to simplify the exchange of need for transportation with the supply of excess time (and access to a vehicle) on the part of the driver all while it is in the process of cutting out the institutional (and very infrastructure-heavy) taxicab industry.

What that means for institutional healthcare

So WHAT DOES this mean for institutional healthcare? Great question! It could mean realignment around roles within the healthcare system. It could mean small market-share loss if the idea doesn’t take off easily. It could mean more competitive models. I’m interested to hear your thoughts.

The Conclusion: Part IV

Advertisements

Health inSite: Consumer-directed Healthcare Part II

Standard

This is part II in a four part series. Links for Part I, Part III, and Part IV

Behavioral economics

The complexity of the healthcare system as it currently is already embroils patients in the very difficult position of having to make decisions with imperfect, nonexistent, and unintelligible data. When individuals are forced to make a decision in a situation where these factors are present, depending on the cognitive capacity of the individual (complexity of thought, for one – see Thinking, Fast and Slow), sometimes results in fast thinking that may include cognitive bias (errors). When this occurs, decisions are poorly conceived and may result in catastrophic results. For that reason, we need a single, comprehensive, coordinated, and collaborative profile.

A personal profile/avatar

Which brings us to the core of a consumer-directed healthcare system’s BIG need. A longitudinal profile. The fantastic Jenn Dennard replied to a question posted on twitter recently

to which I say, Yay! There is a need, in a consumer-directed healthcare system, for the individual to be empowered in their decision-making by having the data on their past, present, and future outlook in the same way that we have the ability to understand our financial wellbeing over time. Organizing this information in a comprehensive, yet easily summarized way can help the consumer make determinations about what works for their short- and long-term investment in their healthcare options. While I’m tempted to refer here to the SAMHSA model of wellbeing to outline the information that should be collected in this profile, I’ll speak briefly on a few that I think are critical to the goal and then finally how they might work in tandem to help with decision-making.

Physical

Obviously, if we’re going to talk about a profile related to healthcare decisions, a comprehensive health record, complete with genetic profile, risk-factors, behaviors, and the like should be consolidated and coordinated. Something that looks along the lines of the EHR that is contemplated in this TED talk by Thomas Goetz comes to mind.

Financial

I’ve long said that healthcare is as much a financial decision as about providing care, but in more than just from the payer perspective. The provider’s ability to understand the financial impact in concert with the patient’s needs should be coordinated through this profile. But in a consumer-directed healthcare system, this also means empowering the patient with projections based on their health record that helps to estimate the financial burden that they may experience based on their health reality.

Social

If you’ve not read any of my previous posts, I recommend checking the various postings on the importance of ‘social’ in shaping our health reality (I’ll point you to the latest here). The way we interact with our friends, family, neighbors, co-workers, etc. all shape our health reality. Incorporating and ‘animating’ those connections – really analyzing and understanding them – is a key element to making significant changes in our behavior as well as helping to alter the health reality of each consumer.

Psychological

The psychological aspects of healthcare range from simple awareness (or lack thereof) to the complex co-occurring conditions to their interactions as the patient tackles their health reality. Further, the interpersonal experiences available to the consumer through their social network is sometimes limited by the psychological reality of the consumer – the functions or dysfunctions of cognition, personality, etc.

Game-state evaluation

In all of these components, it’s important to keep in mind that we are not static over the entire course of our lives and rarely so even when looking at only one factor. While research points to potential for adjustments in things like resiliency, literature also shows that we have hard-coded tendencies such as temperament. For more on game-state evaluation and other related topics, see my post on Decision Support, Games, and Making People Healthier.

Why tracking is important

A method for tracking those changes and dynamically responding to those changes along all axes can provide context for how the consumer should, and can, act on their purchasing, but also their locus of control and potential efficacy in using the system through the plan they intend to use/purchase.

Part III

Health inSite: Consumer Directed Healthcare Part I

Standard

Intro

I was recently invited to participate in an interview for Stride (on twitter), a developing local Health Information Technology ecosystem that is the first of its kind in scope and vision. I’ll let you check out their site for details and spare them here, but I was excited to participate in helping to promote this project as a local member of the Health IT community in Colorado. While reading through the questions that had been prepared, I was thinking about the way in which Stride is poised (intentionally) to disrupt our current healthcare delivery model by bringing together stakeholders from startups and the institutional healthcare system. As a company that’s been around for 35 years, MINES & Associates is certainly in that latter category in many respects; however, one of the reasons that I have decided to make MINES my home is that, as a company, we have embraced technology as a tool to reach our organization mantra: to “save lives, and influence the course of human events.”

This is part I in a four part series. Links for Part II, Part III, and Part IV

A shifting landscape

The Affordable Care Act has caused a seismic shift in our healthcare landscape and some are preparing for the fault lines’ impact on what were once the prairielands of the healthcare system. The new mountain ahead of us consists of layers of changes that I will attempt to outline as I see them. These are the result of following some very bright people that I will try to mention as I go. Follow these people! They are making huge steps toward preparing for these changes.

One of the opportunities (or threats, depending on your viewpoint) of consumer-directed healthcare may be the collapsing of the system within which the decisions in healthcare are made at an administrative level. Those changes could result in significant, down-stream implications for how the future healthcare consumer engages with their health. As a fellow Health 2.0 Denver/Boulder chapter member of mine, Sumanth, mentioned while on a panel regarding open-innovation models in healthcare, ‘We have a sickcare system, we’re working toward a healthcare system, but I’m interested in a health system.’ When we begin empowering people by giving them purchasing power, we also saddle them with the responsibility of that decision and we need systems in place to make those decisions reasonable.

Institutional vs. startups

If there is one person that I’ve heard that captures this coming change the most succinctly from the institutional perspective, it’s Aetna CEO, Mark Bertolini. A keynote at HIMSS 2014, Mr. Bertolini explained how Aetna is preparing for a more engaged, consumer-like patient in the Aetna model. If you don’t believe it, simply look at their acquisition of iTriage (among other advances, led by Michael Palmer, Chief Innovation and Digital Officer) that put the power of access and empowerment in the hands of their future patient.

Aetna made the right move by acquiring iTriage. By purchasing tech, rather than trying to build it out themselves, Aetna’s model is to scout and engage experts trying to help quell the shift in the landscape by harnessing technology. This means that rather than developing that internally, at a potential loss to the organization if it’s unable to deliver, Aetna can focus on its core offering. It also highlights a bigger shift in the healthcare ecosystem – one that Stride is very interested in nurturing – coopetition. Because these lean startup organizations have the ability to make changes quickly and bring in top talent to tackle tough, smaller issues – issues that can then be used in many different arenas. In my opinion, that nature of coopetition is a critical element to the new model of healthcare delivery, as I hope to illustrate in this blog series.

This is what disruption looks like

Telemedicine

There’s no question that telemedicine is becoming a more regular part of the healthcare industry with companies like CirrusMD, Call-a-Doc Plus, and AccessCare Technologies’ Aveo platform and many others (disclosure: MINES currently has business relationships with CADR+ and AccessCare Technology) making strides to disrupt the traditional delivery model for healthcare by enabling secure text messaging, prescriptions by phone, and HIPAA-compliant video telemedicine, respectively – this isn’t an exhaustive list of what these platforms do, but just a couple of examples. This enables asynchronous, non-geographically-specific, and convenient communication between a provider and patient. While our current model of on-site care is relatively new compared to the entire history of medicine where patients go to the provider, the bigger disruption here is in the fact that the premises is moving away entirely.

Retail health

The weekly #HITsm chat had a great discussion on January 24th (transcript) regarding retail healthcare – the movement of retail organizations into the healthcare space. Companies like CVS, Walgreens, and Target are making movements to put clinics in their retail locations to decrease barriers to accessing care for routine events like physicals and non-urgent medical needs. If you want to check out a really cool aspect of this, Theranos is partnering with Walgreens to make onsite blood testing a realistic part of this system.

Wearables

If you’ve not heard of wearable tech or the Internet of Things (of which wearables are only a part), you soon will. While Nike took early steps in tracking the efforts by athletes with the Nike+ system, this sub-industry has exploded with newcomers like Jawbone UP, Misfit Shine, FitBit, and even a tracker that will shock you into behavior change. While these various tracking devices are great at providing data to the person using them, efforts to make them usable in healthcare have been lacking. That said, there are efforts between Apple, the Mayo Clinic, and Epic EHR to solve this problem through Apple’s HealthKit. However, this change is only helpful to those that are on the iOS ecosystem. As you probably know, Google’s Android continues to gain ground in market share and as these devices continue to become more customizable and cheaper, iOS will either need to adapt or face staying in an ever-growing, niche market.

These are only the first step in a long development cycle of devices (and even things that don’t look like devices) that will someday be a part of our daily lives. In fact, watch the sequence a few minutes after Ewan McGregor’s character wakes up in the movie The Island, and you’ll get a sense for how this might play out in our daily lives. Actually, while trying to find that toilet scene where the character’s urine is tested while he is excreting, I found this article on a real-life example! Which now has my mind wandering on sample integrity…

Other major tech innovations

In fact, there are A LOT of people – very smart people – working on a number of innovations related to healthcare. Look no further than the IBM 5-in-5 if you’re ever wondering what some of those things might be. But we are quickly moving into a world where the things that are imagined in movies and TV are becoming reality – or are being worked on now to become reality. If you want a great example, check out the Tricorder X-prize. If you’re not familiar with what a tricorder is, here ya go!

A word on purchasers

The purchasers of the past are slowly slipping into the fog of a system going the way of dinosaurs. While our current healthcare system relies on someone purchasing insurance on behalf of a group of people, the new model of consumer-directed healthcare would include patients insuring themselves in a similar way to most other insurances – life insurance, car insurance, etc. In this model, the purchaser is correctly aligned with the responsibilities for maintenance. During deliberation of the Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court actually highlighted how insurance could be mandated because cars can be mandated to be insured by the state. To ensure protection for all others in the pool of “drivers,” in much the same way that maintenance of one’s health and insurance for that health is a responsible act for the pool of citizens.

Consumers

Consumers make this sort of decision regularly. When purchasing electronics, for example, there are often options for insuring the item from damage and even loss. When confronted with this decision there is, in the mind of the consumer, a cost:benefit decision to be made. When making a decision regarding level of coverage to insure one’s vehicle, a similar cost:benefit decision must be made for the consumer regarding their risk tolerance related to the value and potential loss in value of the vehicle. But in these situations, consumers are aware of their role as a consumer; that same level of awareness needs to be at the core of a consumer-directed healthcare system if we expect those decisions to be more straight-forward and realistic.

Millenials

Millenials are fast becoming the largest part of the consumer segment of the economy; and they do things a little differently than their predecessors. As the CTO of Connect for Health Colorado (the health insurance exchange in Colorado), Proteus Duxbury, mentioned in a Prime Health Collaborative event that Millenials are soon to make up as much as 50% of the purchasers through the exchange in Colorado and they are preparing for this group which prefers peer-reviews to authoritarian ones. When I asked him about this posting, he shared this report from the White House on Millenials that you might find interesting for more details. Keeping an eye on the factors that make up this group is going to be important for their continued planning and development and healthcare organizations from insurance to consumer-facing wearables should take heed to the particulars of this shifting landscape. Community-focused, socially-aware, technology-forward, and averse to traditional signals of “growing” up like marriage and purchasing a home are all key differentiating factors. As those factors become more pronounced, healthcare will need to be aware of, and respond to, the way that these individuals view themselves and the world. Further, the section on a personal profile below will become even more pronounced and necessary to keep these individuals engaged and aware.

Is 4PHealth going away?

If you’re not familiar with my concept of 4PHealth, check out my earlier blog post for details (secretly hoping I can stop linking to this post at some point!) but the long and short of it is that there are four P’s in the healthcare system: payer, patient, provider, and the patient’s peers. Truthfully, there’s actually a fifth P that was not originally contemplated in that post but comes to light when you consider a consumer-directed healthcare model: purchaser. For most people in the US, the purchaser is an employer, or in the case of labor organizations, a trust into which employers contribute along with the dues from the members. But now that is shifting as smaller organizations are actually sending their employees to the health insurance exchange. Increasingly, I expect this to grow; and that’s a good thing. When the purchaser and the patient are the same, there is a shift in the financial onus for having a particular benefit plan; which means we need more informed consumers (patient-purchasers). But it also creates an opportunity for further collapsing of our very tiered silo. If the consumer could then also become the payer (see more in shared-economy model, below), we could very well see a one-to-one relationship between the provider and the consumer (patient-purchaser-payer). Hold on to your seats, kiddos. It could happen.

Part II

Health inSite: The Sharing Economy in HealthIT

Standard

This is a draft of Part III in a three-part series on the current, and potential future, of healthcare delivery economic models. The full series will be available on xchangehealth.wordpress.com in the next week. A quick synopsis of parts I and II are extracted as an introduction.

Intro

I was recently invited to participate in a Storyvine for Stride (on twitter). While reading through the questions that had been prepared, I was thinking about the way in which Stride is poised (intentionally) to disrupt our current healthcare delivery model by bringing together stakeholders from startups and the institutional healthcare system.

As a company that’s been around for 35 years, MINES & Associates is certainly in that latter category in many respects; however, one of the reasons that I have decided to make MINES my home is that, as a company, we have embraced technology as a tool to reach our organization mantra: to “save lives, and influence the course of human events.”

There may be a shift to consumer-directed healthcare in the very near future. One of the opportunities (or threats, depending on your viewpoint) of consumer-directed healthcare may be the collapsing of the system within which the decisions in healthcare are made at an administrative level. As a fellow Health 2.0 Denver/Boulder chapter member of mine, Sumanth, mentioned while on a panel regarding open-innovation models in healthcare, ‘We have a sickcare system, we’re working toward a healthcare system, but I’m interested in a health system.’ When we begin empowering people by giving them purchasing power, we also saddle them with the responsibility of that decision and we need systems in place to make those decisions reasonable.

Is 4PHealth going away?

If you’re not familiar with my concept of 4PHealth, check out my earlier blog post for details (secretly hoping I can stop linking to this post at some point!) but the long and short of it is that there are four P’s in the healthcare system: payer, patient, provider, and the patient’s peers. Truthfully, there’s actually a fifth P that was not originally contemplated in that post but comes to light when you consider a consumer-directed healthcare model: purchaser.

For most people in the US, the purchaser is an employer. But now that is shifting as organizations are actually sending their employees to the health insurance exchange. Increasingly, I expect this to grow; and that’s a good thing. When the purchaser and the patient are the same, there is a shift in the financial onus for having a particular benefit plan; which means we need more informed consumers (patient-purchasers). But it also creates an opportunity for further collapsing of our very-tiered silo. If the consumer could then also become the payer, we could very well see a one-to-one relationship between the provider and the consumer (patient-purchaser-payer).

Part III: The sharing economy

What does the sharing economy have to do with the consumer-directed healthcare system? First, let’s look at what is at the core of purchasing: economic offering.

Levels of economic offering

In their book The Experience Economy (I did a post on this too, forever ago!), Joe Pine and James Gilmore explain the value pyramid.

From Pine and Gilmore’s “The Experience Economy”

As products increase in differentiation (customization), a higher asking price for that product can generally be realized. In this way, value to the consumer comes in the ability to match the need with the offering and in healthcare, this means enabling smart, simple decisions.

In a consumer-directed healthcare system, shifting healthcare transactions to goods, rather than experience, and focusing the overall healthcare purchasing and maintenance up to that of an experience will be critical to success. Again, an awareness of this intentional effort to differentiate based on total experience. This can be done when the exchange, for example, becomes broker, maintenance organization (think HMO), and coordinator of one’s health record (not an Electronic Health Record as we know them, but a coordinator of the health profile mentioned earlier).

For such a situation to work, the exchange then will need to either build out, or partner with organizations with experience in guiding human behavior, to successfully engage those patient-consumers in maintaining their profile as well as actively pursuing greater levels of health.

Examples that work

The sharing economy is also making significant changes to the way that we engage as consumers. This economic shift allows for individuals to make transactions with little to no broker (for example, a bank) in order to make purchases. Most of the sharing economy relies heavily on technology to enable people to come together. A chart of examples is below:

Organization Primary offering Industry disrupted Innovation Description
Uber/Lyft Car service Taxis By allowing individuals to directly contact a driver, users interact with an app that can manage their payment and reservation.
AirBnB Housing Hotels Users submit their social network credentials as “proof of trust” for user-to-user reservations of rooms
Car-2-Go and many others Cars Every car company Cars placed around the city, can be “rented” for one-direction travel.
Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies Currency Banks Distributed, “proof-of-work” based cryptocurrency which allows for peer-to-peer exchange of value.
Kiva Microfinance Lending companies Individuals can register their needs for financing and other members of the Kiva network can make those loans direct to the borrower without a traditional lender.
GoFundMe and other crowd-sourced finance platforms Project Funding Investors Individuals can create a project page with donation-level rewards for contributing to the financing of a project or product.

Considering these examples, I believe that there may be some interesting opportunities for alternative funding and insurance when it comes to healthcare. Consider this: what would it look like if traditional insurers were no longer the primary location to insure oneself. In the current healthcare system, some groups (usually smaller companies with less leverage than bigger companies) might choose to pool their collective employees into what’s called a captive insurance group.

What if a similar model were to be contemplated where individuals were to select a captive group of similar patients, almost self-selecting to become a part of a patient-centered medical home model. Exchanges could do the same with their patient population by segmenting those patients into population groups.

Now, what if those groups could be funded by individuals wanting to bet on the success or failure of those groups. This allows for more direct funding for investors and patients that could result in dividends for the patients and investors when benchmarks are achieved or maintained. What other possibilities for alternate funding models might still be out there to be explored?

The core of the sharing economy

Trust

At the very core of the sharing economy is a redistribution of trust networks. By decentralizing trust models from institutional to peer-to-peer, the sharing economy refocuses and reinforces a community around the exchange of goods and services by moving brokerage to a fluid, and seemingly direct brokerage for those exchanges.

Supply/Demand

The other side of this change to the sharing economy is supply and demand monitoring and connection. Uber has the ability to simplify the exchange of need for transportation with the supply of excess time (and access to a vehicle) on the part of the driver all while it is in the process of cutting out the institutional (and very infrastructure heavy) taxicab industry.

What that means for institutional healthcare

So WHAT DOES this mean for institutional healthcare? Great question! It could mean realignment around roles within the healthcare system. It could mean small market-share loss if the idea doesn’t take off easily. It could mean more competitive models. I’m interested to hear your thoughts.

Questions for Health IT

#HITsm T1: Is a sharing economy model realistic for the healthcare industry, in whole or in part? Where? How?

#HITsm T2: What should a sharing economy model prepare for with the current status of #HealthIT and #Healthcare?

#HITsm T3: If a sharing economy model were to come about, who wins and who loses in #HealthIT and #healthcare generally?

#HITsm T4: What other technology models are out there that #HealthIT can borrow from to enable those changes?

#HITsm T5: Any other thoughts on #healthcare economic models and how #healthIT can help?

#HITsm Chat Summary from 8/29

Standard

In case you missed the #HITsm chat last week and wanted to get a summary of the discussion, check out the storify summary below!

#HITsm T1: Knowing that #health is dependent on daily life, how do we design #HealthIT in consideration of the larger, social world?

#HITsm T2: How do we achieve #patientengagement over time considering that a one-off solution can’t fix #health?

#HITsm T3: What game mechanics in #HealthIT are currently being used appropriately? Which are not?

#HITsm T4: What should be made usable by #enterprise #healthIT to ensure the #Human element does not get lost?

#HITsm T5: What design considerations have you seen that work well in #HealthIT / #mHealth?

[View the story “August 29 #HITsm Chat” on Storify]

To our health,
Ryan Lucas

Healthcare is not just about the people who work in HealthIT, it’s about everyone…

Standard

Special thanks to the many influences that have contributed, directly or indirectly, to my questions leading into this #HITsm chat: @leonardkish @ochotex @avantgame @gzicherm @connected_book @paullikeme @robertamines @kellymcgonigal @joepine @hankgreen

Intro

I’ll be moderating the #HITsm chat on August 28th at 10am MDT and wanted to put together a couple of thoughts related to the topic before going into the chat. Maybe you’ll find these useful. Also, feel free to join us if you are interested in the topic. The more the merrier! Toward that end, let’s have a discussion about what we, in #HealthIT can do to make sure that we’re meeting the needs of those who are our end-users.

Considerations should include #EHR & #App design from #Payer, #Provider, #Patient, and #Peer per this posting on #4PHealth.

It’s the convergence of all four P’s (Provider, Payer, Patient, and that Patient’s Peers) that will allow for greater healthcare reach. When the Payer and the Provider are able to engage the Patient’s Peers, then true health generation is possible and the benefits of one’s social network can then be fully leveraged.

People:Person Design

We have historically looked at healthcare (and by extension, #HealthIT) as though it exists outside the “natural” world, or as though health is outside the realm of our social experience. Yet, we know that health is not divergent from our health reality or our everyday lives.

Healthy behavior is not dependent on what payment models, medical technology, or other innovations come about in the healthcare debate.  We know that your friend’s friend has a great impact on what you do – and vice versa.

How do we reconverge these two realities knowing that what we do in our daily lives result in healthcare outcomes? Framed differently, how do we leverage the way we make decisions every day in considering how #HealthIT is designed?

Our health is not our own. We are bound to others, near and far, and by each decision and every sharing of those decisions, we birth our health.

#HITsm T1: Knowing that #health is dependent on daily life, how do we design #HealthIT in consideration of the larger, social world?

Cognitive Bias, Iterative Decision-making, Behavioral Economics, Game-Theory

Considering the depth of our knowledge related to cognitive bias, are we considerate of this branch of psychology in design? Knowing what we know about iterative decision-making (that decisions have to be made in sequence, often after new or different information) how do we prepare adaptive #HealthIT that responds to new information as it becomes available, like it does for Human Beings? For details on Cognitive Bias and Decision-making, see here and here. For Game Theory (including iterative decision-making), see here.  

So what does a salutogenic framework look like?  Mindfulness, resilience, focus on daily health-promoting activities that increase our ability to get healthier, rather than fend off illness.  Of course, a fee-for-service model doesn’t bode well with this concept, so unless you’re enrolled in a highly visionary health promotion healthcare system, you’re probably on your own – for now.  

Antonovsky’s explanation of Salutogenesis was well depicted by a river.  His concern with the current model of health (Pathogenesis) is that it’s generally believed that we are healthy from the beginning but that because of environmental / circumstantial events, we become sick.  Antonovsky expressed this as a river, where all healthy people stand on the bank, safe from the raging river’s flow.  Once one stepped into the river – got sick – then something needed to be done.  Salutogenesis, however, sees all people already in the river; but at different distances from the mouth.

There are some obvious benefits to these advances in Health IT, but one of the things that may not be fully clear yet is the application of Watson to understanding more about human behavior. While Watson can absolutely tell a clinician the likelihood of a set of symptoms’ association with a given disease, I’ll bet Watson can’t tell you how the patients’ family impacts their overall wellbeing through behavior reinforcement. If Watson knew who the patients’ workout buddy was, Watson might be able to help identify with a high confidence whether that workout buddy was a statistically-sound partner in the overall health management of the patient. Further, Watson would be able to weigh in on the evaluation of treatment adherence based on real-time data pouring into the health record for the given individual.  This is the game state evaluation of the health of the individual in a real and meaningful way.  With this, a total and complete understanding of the long-term treatment of chronic conditions (and even more important to the salutogenic framework that I’ve discussed previously in this blog series, total health production) through the understanding of actual human behavior devoid of the clinical separation from reality is the “social human” version of epigenetics that will become more useful in the coming years.  This is where the data comes to life.

#HITsm T2: How do we achieve #patientengagement over time considering that a one-off solution can’t fix #health?

Gamification

A recent post mentioned that Gamification is failing due to a lack of accurately applying the concepts of gamification; in short, supplanting “badges” for increasing levels of difficulty appropriately. If Gamification is going to solve the #engagement problem, why can’t we quite figure this out? Gamification in health, generally, see here.

Whether we admit it or not, it is the promise of the potential emotional pay-off that lures us into working ridiculous hours already. But unlike gaming environments where we are totally immersed, our modern work environments seem contorted — almost criminally — to keep us from feeling blissfully productive. And once we give up hope that epic wins are possible, our careers turn into drudgery.

It takes more than a website to do this – including focus on using the resources available to a company’s natural habitat, the worksite, to engage employees during the 40 hour work week, and more, by creating a story.  As described in the burgeoning world of Alternate Reality Games and Transmedia Storytelling, the ability to tell a cooperative narrative – on and offline – among those with which you work is an opportunity to actively create health, the benchmark of Salutogenesis.  When you have many platforms for engaging in this storytelling, you increase the modes of access to actively engage all employees where they are, rather than forcing them into a platform that they may not be comfortable with, or is not ideal for their way of engaging in their health generating behaviors.

 #HITsm T3: What game mechanics in #HealthIT are currently being used appropriately? Which are not?

Integration with the larger #healthIT world

Specifically looking at the #payer and #provider perspective, how can we ensure that the same #psych principles are being used to ensure adoption of #HealthIT throughout the Healthcare continuum? When we consider #wearables and #IoT, what do we focus on in terms of integration versus simple cataloging?

#HITsm T4: What should be made usable by #enterprise #healthIT to ensure the #Human element does not get lost?

Free-for-all on Design

#HITsm T5: What design considerations have you seen that work well in #HealthIT / #mHealth?

In review:

#HITsm T1: Knowing that #health is dependent on daily life, how do we design #HealthIT in consideration of the larger, social world?

#HITsm T2: How do we achieve #patientengagement over time considering that a one-off solution can’t fix #health?

#HITsm T3: What game mechanics in #HealthIT are currently being used appropriately? Which are not?

#HITsm T4: What should be made usable by #enterprise #healthIT to ensure the #Human element does not get lost?

#HITsm T5: What design considerations have you seen that work well in #HealthIT / #mHealth?

To our health,

Ryan Lucas
Manager, Engagement & Development