Archive | Marketing / Communications RSS feed for this section

Key Topics At #WHCC13 In DC

April 9, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I’m at the World Healthcare Congress (WHCC13) in Washington DC this week.  This has always been one of the top 5 events for me to try to come to every year (admitting that there are a few like TED that I haven’t attended due to budget yet).

It’s interesting  how trends start to flow within a conference and how the trends change year to year.  This year, the key themes that I continue to hear are (in no order):

  • Engagement is critical.  Between MD and Patient.  Between social network / influencers and member.  Between employee and employer.
  • We have to get past the barriers to health enablement (i.e., legacy IT systems) and make change happen.
  • Game theory can help improve engagement.
  • Mobile tools are important.
  • Data integration has to happen and employers are doing it themselves.
  • Biometrics are critical path.
  • We can’t solve healthcare if we don’t solve health.  The community.  Our food choices.  Work / life balance.  (I would add sleep and stress.)
  • Rapid innovation.
  • Reform isn’t going to be easy on the employer or the employee.

But, since Twitter is my new note taker…here’s a few sets of tweets for you.

#whcc13 tweets whcc13 tweets3 whcc13 tweets2 whcc13 tweets1

Events, Healthcare, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, mHealth, Press
, , , , , , , ,

Why CVS Caremark Asking For Your Weight Is Good For You

March 30, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I continue to annoyed by all the fear-mongering in the industry around what CVS Caremark is “doing to their employees”.  What about focusing on how they are helping their employees to get better?  (If interested, you should read some of the information they have on their blog.)

Our “Plan for Health” combines an evolving, best-practice approach to health coverage with preventive care and wellness programs. Our colleagues will be more accountable for taking control of their health and associated costs. The first step is getting to know your numbers by getting a health screening and completing an online wellness review each year. If colleagues complete both by the May 1, 2013 deadline, they will avoid paying an additional $600 for the 2013-2014 plan year. (from the CVS Caremark blog)

I was hopeful to hear someone come out strongly and speak about it yesterday on CBS, but instead the CEO of Mercer just talked about “soft” programs that depend upon consumers being proactive around their health.  I would rather hear about the value of screenings and how it helps employees.  In talking with one friend of mine at a biometrics company, he told me that in one case almost 40% of the people that they identified with diabetes (or pre-diabetes) and hypertension (or pre-hypertension) didn’t know they had the disease (or were at high risk).  That to me is a valuable insight to the individual especially when coupled with a program to help them learn and manage their disease (or risk).

For example, companies for years have been using Health Risk Assessments (HRAs) to try to baseline employee health and use that to accomplish several things:

  1. Help the employee to understand their risks
  2. Identify people who should be in coaching programs to improve their health
  3. Learn about their population and how to improve their health benefits

Use of biometrics is the right evolution from the HRA.  People have tried HRAs for years with some success.  Companies pay as much as $600 for people to take this online survey that has no necessary link to reality.  Most HRAs aren’t linked to lab values.  Most HRAs aren’t linked to claims data.  Most HRAs don’t necessarily trigger enrollment in health programs.  They are supposed to activate the employee to be proactive which doesn’t work for many sick consumers especially those in the “pre-disease” phase.  (Here’s a good study that does show some increased activation.)

As I mentioned the other day, this use of biometrics and link between incentives and participation (and ultimately outcomes) is normal and will ultimately improve the link between the workplace and the employee around health.

Let’s take a broader look at insurance to help set some context:

  • For life insurance, you have to disclose certain data and depending on the policy level you have to do other things like get a physical and have blood work drawn.  That effects your costs and their underwriting.  
  • For car insurance, if you get in accidents, your costs go up.  In some case, you can have a monitoring device put on your car to lower your costs.  (like getting blood work done)
  • For home owners insurance, your costs go up if you live in a flood zone or a earthquake zone.  It also goes up if you have lots of claims.

Whether we want to admit it or not, we do determine a lot of our healthcare costs based on decisions we’ve made or had made for us since we were kids.  Some of these are conscious and some are subconscious.  And, obesity which is a large driver of many of these chronic conditions and has an impact on your likelihood of having cancer.  So, a company asking for your BMI and other data to help understand your risks for healthcare costs (of which they typically pick up 80%) doesn’t seem unusual.

Certainly, some are environmental such as those that live in “food deserts” like Detroit.  In other cases, workplace stress can affect our health.  We’re just starting to get smarter about “sitting disease” and it’s impact on our health.  Or, we may take medications that affect our blood pressure (for example).  It’s certainly important to understand these in context of your lab values and discuss a holistic strategy for improving your health with your physician and any care management resources which are provided to you (nurse, social worker, nutritionist, pharmacist).

This idea of learning more about employees in terms of biometrics, food, sleep, stress, social interaction, and many other data points is going to be more and more of a focus.  Companies want to learn how their employees do things.  They want to understand their health.  They want to improve their health.  They want to invest in their workforce to improve productivity, innovation, and ultimately job satisfaction.

While the glass half-empty people won’t see this and there are some companies that don’t always act this way, I generally believe that companies are trying to act in a way to increase their top line and most intelligent executives understand the correlation between health and wealth and the link between employee satisfaction and growth.

Ultimately, healthcare costs are estimated to put a $240,000 burden on us after we retire (even with Medicare) so if someone wants to help me become healthier and thereby save me money which improves my ability to retire and enjoy life I’m happy for them to do.

Books / Articles, Care Management, Healthcare, Leadership, Marketing / Communications, PBM / Pharmacy, Value Propositions
, , , , , , , , ,

How The CVS Program Will Change The Employer – Employee Contract

March 22, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

Have you heard that CVS Caremark is requiring employees to go get biometrics and going to take action on it? OMG!

I’m not sure I understand why people are all upset. Let’s look at the facts:

And, by the way, have we forgotten how much healthcare costs have gone up over time and who pays that bill. It’s either the employer or the government. Both of those things impact our pay as individuals either in terms of lower raises to cover healthcare costs, shifting healthcare costs to us, or taxes. It’s not sustainable so the person who pays the bill has to step in since we’re not. (Which is also why I support the NY ban on soda.)

Now, let’s look at our healthcare system where in the current fee-for-service model, there isn’t an incentive for physicians to address this.

For now, people should be happy. They’re only being required to do the biometrics. The penalty isn’t linked to whether they’re fat or have high blood pressure or smoke or have high cholesterol or have diabetes. A recent study by Towers Watson shows that while 16% of employers do this type of outcome based incentive program today (2013) that this is going to jump to 47% in 2014. So, this will be the norm.

And, guess what…sticks often work better than carrots in some cases.

And, healthcare costs are making us uncompetitive globally as a country.

  • The cost of healthcare is greater than the cost of steel in a car.
  • The cost of healthcare is greater than the cost of coffee in a Starbuck’s cup of coffee.

And, health reform is allowing (even enabling) this to happen. It says that you can treat people differently and create up to a 50% differential in costs associated with their health. (Not a legal definition so read the fine print.)

But, what I think all of us (consumers and employers) will need to realize is that moving to this (which I agree with) will change the employer and employee relationship in several ways.

  1. You can’t put these programs in place without something to help me manage my obesity, cholesterol, and/or other chronic condition. This will drive wellness and disease management programs to be more engaging and successful.
  2. This will put pressure on employers to create a culture of health since we spend so much time at work and work contributes to our health conditions.
    1. Need more time to be active. Less sitting. Treadmill desks. Standing meetings. Nap time. Walking breaks. Use of devices to track steps. Incentives. Gym discounts. Healthy food discounts.
    2. Need less stress.
    3. Need more sleep.
    4. Better food choices at work.
  3. This will drive a lot of the new tools and run counter to some trends about limiting dependent coverage since you can’t address obesity without engaging the entire family and the social network.
  4. This will also create a whole exception process by which people who gain weight due to certain drugs have to be excluded. People who can’t exercise may have to be excluded. People may have to see short-term goals (i.e., dropping BMI from 35 to 32). Physicians will have to be engaged.
  5. Coaching will have to expand to include dieticians, social workers, and others to help people beyond the historical nurse centric coaching model.

If none of this motivates you, then just think about the “gift” we’re giving our kids and maybe that will be a wake-up call why someone has to do something here. (As I shared the other day, I struggle with my weight so don’t think I’m some super skinny, high metabolism person who thinks this is easy.)

Books / Articles, Business Tools, Care Management, exercise, Healthcare, Leadership, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Research, Value Propositions
, , , , , , , ,

What’s Your #Moment4Change?

March 20, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I’ve being doing a lot of work lately on how to tackle the obesity problem in the US. This has been great personally as it has forced me to look at lots of research to understand all the tools out there.

  • Diet
  • Exercise
  • Coaching programs
  • Devices
  • Social networks
  • Physicians
  • Centers of Excellence

It’s also made me look at different drivers of obesity including sleep and stress. The new report out showing that sitting is a huge problem (even if you exercise) is very eye-opening also.

For years, I’ve talked about my challenges is managing my weight which lead to some fluctuations, but at the end of the day, I think a lot of this boils down to a “Golden Moment” or a “Moment4Change”. Even people who do this every day (e.g., doctors or sports coaches) are often overweight. We have to have something which prompts us to change our life. We aren’t generally motivated by dropping our HDL. We’re motivated by being able to play with our kids or living long enough to see our kids get married.

In my life, there have been several Moment4Change points so I thought I would put this out there to hear what’s motivated others:

  • In 2002, I went to the doctor for the first time in a decade. He saw some health risks in my blood work and sent me to another physician. He told me I was obese. (Something less than 50% of physicians actually tell their overweight patients.) I was shocked. I was 215 pounds and 5′-10″. After 2 days of agony, I decided that I couldn’t accept that diagnosis and proceeded to lose 40 pounds in the next 60 days (all through exercise and social motivation through a running group).
  • Last fall after letting much of that weight creep back on over the decade, I decided to do a 5K with one of my kids. I’d run 3 marathons and was running several days a week (although at an average pace of 9 minute miles). I got killed as my kid ran at a 7:30 pace in their first race ever. Not only did I feel old, but I felt like I wasn’t being much of a role model. That motivated me to change. Now, after using the FitBit (see several comments), I’ve had good success losing 25 pounds in 3 months and seeing my cholesterol drop 120 points in that same time frame.

So, I’m interested. What has motivated you to changed? And, how do you measure success? I suggested that while women may use the “skinny jeans” test that men might be more likely to use the “belt buckle” test.

 

 

I think this image below from the AON Hewitt 2012 Health Care Survey is a good one about the fact that 80% of our costs are driven by 8 behaviors.

I also thought that this presentation at the FMI by The Well which was a GSW project was right in line with this.

Books / Articles, Care Management, Consumerism, exercise, Healthcare, Leadership, Marketing / Communications
, , , , , , ,

Short Sighted View Of Freedom With NY Soda Ban

March 12, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

pouring-on-the-pounds

There are lots of fundamental issues here:

  • Was the law legal?
  • Does soda make you fat?
  • Should the government be able to steer you to positive choices?
  • Did this impact our freedom?

At the end of the day, I look at it very differently.  I think the proposed ban was great.  I was very annoyed last night to find out it was overturned.

Why?

  1. I don’t see this as any different than moving unhealthy foods to a less obvious place in the food line at school.  It simply was meant to help steer people to make healthier decisions.  We should all be thankful for someone helping us since we generally don’t seem to be able to help ourselves.
  2. Government has to be run like a business.  (It usually isn’t.)  Obesity is a big driver of costs.  It requires more power for public transportation.  It requires bigger chairs.  It requires bigger hospital beds.  It requires bigger ambulances.  And, all of us taxpayers pay for this.
  3. 80% of healthcare costs are driven by personal decisions that we make mostly around diet and exercise.  Since most people will end up on Medicare at some point, we need to change the cost curve in healthcare sooner rather than later.  Otherwise, we either bankrupt our country or we bankrupt Medicare.

So, enjoy your big 64 oz soda now, but when you’re 69 and Medicare has been rolled back to 70 due to funding challenges, you can smile and remember that you got to enjoy all that sugar for years without anyone trying to help you. (I can picture a great political cartoon here of the patient getting a healthcare bill looking over their shoulder from their wheelchair to see a big pile of soda cups!)  Never mind the fact that you’re bankrupt due to your healthcare bills and not able to walk around to keep up with your grandkids.

The Business of Obesity
Source: top-nursing-programs.com

Consumerism, Events, exercise, Healthcare, Infographic, Leadership, Marketing / Communications, Politics
, , ,

Why It’s So Hard To Improve Consumer Engagement In Healthcare?

March 11, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

I spend a lot of my personal and professional time trying to figure out how to better engage consumers in healthcare.  If you can’t engage them, you can’t improve outcomes.

Never mind the fact that people experience about 5,000 messages a day so you have to cut through that clutter.

Even if we do cut through the clutter, people are busy living their lives.  They’re worried about their family.  They’re worried about the economy.  They’re trying to keep food on the table.  They are generally overwhelmed with too little sleep and too much stress.

But, let’s even assume that you can cut through the clutter and get them to listen, you still struggle with getting a person at a time when they are open to change.  These “golden moments” require them to see value in the change and feel like the short-term effort is worth the long-term gain.  This “value exchange” doesn’t often exist.  And, with 30% variance in the healthcare system, people often don’t trust the system.

Even with all that in mind, people still don’t engage.  They don’t get flu shots.  They don’t fill their medications.  They don’t understand the messages that are delivered to them.

Here’s a quick image I created for a presentation later this week.

Consumer

A few of the sources for this are:

Books / Articles, Care Management, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Research
, , ,

A Web Strategy Is NOT A Digital Strategy

February 26, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I was monitoring a pharma conference over in Europe this morning.  I found a few of the dialogues really interesting.  One of them was about a company creating all these websites to allow consumers to engage with them.  There was then some debate.

On the on hand, I can agree that you can do some creative things with the channel, and therefore, I should be too down on someone who is very web centric.  (i.e., focus on the strategy)  On the other hand, digital is much bigger than web.

I’m sure there’s a lot of views here, but let me share mine in terms of what to consider from a digital strategy:

  • A website or series of sites along with a mobile web optimization for devices
  • Search engine optimization
  • Social (e.g., Facebook, Google+)
  • Communities
  • Video
  • Mobile apps
  • Device integration (e.g., BodyMedia)
  • Software integration (e.g., EMRs, PHRs)
  • Blogging
  • Twitter
  • Gamification
  • Telehealth
  • Remote monitoring
  • Big Data
  • Predictive algorithms
  • Location based services (e.g., FourSquare)
  • Use of SMS

While there are a lot of complicated images out there trying to show everything around digital strategy, I found this one pretty simple and concise.

Digital Strategy

Healthcare, Innovation, Leadership, Marketing / Communications, mHealth, Social Media, Technology
,

2013 PBMI Presentation On Pharmacy Need To Shift To Value Focus

February 19, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

Today, I’m giving my presentation at the PBMI conference in Las Vegas.  This year, I choose to focus on the idea of shifting from fee-for-service to value-based contracting.  People talk about this relative to ACOs (Accountable Care Organizations) and PCMHs (Patient Centered Medical Homes) from a provider perspective.  There have been several groups such as the Center For Health Value Innovation and others thinking about this for year, but in general, this is mostly a concept.  That being said, I think it’s time for the industry to grab the bull by the horns and force change.

If the PBM industry doesn’t disintermediate itself (to be extreme) then someone will come in and do it for them but per an older post, this ability to adapt is key for the industry.  While the industry may feel “too big to fail”, I’m not sure I agree.  If you listened the to the Walgreens / Boots investor call last week or saw some of things that captive PBMs and other data companies are trying to do, there are lots of bites at the apple.  That being said, I’m not selling my PBM stocks yet.

So, today I’m giving the attached presentation to facilitate this discussion.  I’ve also pre-scheduled some of my tweets to highlight key points (see summary below).

 

Planned PBMI Tweets

Books / Articles, Care Management, Healthcare, inVentiv Health, Marketing / Communications, mHealth, PBM / Pharmacy, Technology, Value Propositions
, , , , , , , , ,

59% Of MDs Want To Know About Employer Care Mgmt Efforts

February 12, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I just came across this survey data from January of 2010 where the Midwest Business Group on Health (MBGH) did a survey of physicians. I found it really interesting. Let me pull out a few points with some comments…

  • 72% of physicians agree that employers should have a role in improving and maintaining the health of their employees with chronic disease. [Since they ultimately are the one paying the bill, this seems like a reasonable expectation in today’s world.]
  • 59% believe that they should be informed about employer efforts to help their patients manage chronic conditions. [This is increasingly becoming important as we move from a Fee-For-Service (FFS) world to a value-based or outcomes-based healthcare environment.]
  • 46% agree that employers should have a role in helping employees adhere to their medication and treatment regimes. [Since MDs generally don’t view this as their task, if it’s not someone acting on behalf of the employer, I wonder who they think should be doing this.]
  • 32% agree that employers should play no role in the health of patients. [With healthcare impacting productivity and global competitiveness, I think this is an unreasonable expectation.]
  • 61% want the employer to provide physicians with information on what is available to patients so they can counsel them on the value of participation. [How would they want this information and what would they do with it?]
  • 49% would like to receive workplace clinical screening results to reduce redundancies in testing. [Do the other 51% want duplicative testing?]
  • 48% want to receive actionable reports (e.g., screening results, health coaching reports) to support them in treating patients. [I would hope so. If the employer (or really their proxy) is managing the patient in a chronic program, why wouldn’t the physician want this data?]
The study went on to say that physician’s want employers to provide support around weight loss, smoking cessation, flu shots, and other broad programs. They also want the employer to focus on lifestyle change and health improvement not the chronic disease itself. This makes sense, but in general employees are more focused on trusted information coming from their physician not their employer so there’s a clear gap here. (See graph from Aon Hewitt’s 2011 Health Care Survey, New Paths. New Approaches.)
Books / Articles, Care Management, Healthcare, Leadership, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Research, Technology
, , , , , ,

Only 50% Of Healthcare Companies Respond To Twitter Messages – Test Results

February 11, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

12 Of 23 Companies

As I mentioned a few weeks ago (2/2/13), I wanted to test and see if healthcare companies would respond to consumers via Twitter. To test this, I posted a fairly general question or message on Twitter to see the response (see below). Of the 23 companies that I sent a message to, only 12 of them ever responded even after 6 of them received a 2nd message. Those results are shared below. What I also wanted to look at was the average time to respond along with which group was more likely to respond.

  • PBMs – All of the 3 PBMs that I reached out to responded. (This could be biased by my involvement in this space since two of them e-mailed me directly once I posted a comment.)
  • Pharmacies – Only 2 of the 4 retail pharmacies that I reached out to responded.
  • Disease Management Companies – Only 1 of the 3 that I reached out to responded. (I was surprised since Alere often thanks me for RT (re-tweeting) them, but didn’t respond to my inquiry.)
  • Managed Care – 5 of the 7 companies that I reached out to responded. (For Kaiser, they responded once I changed from @KPNewscenter to @KPThrive.)
  • Health Apps or Devices – Only 1 of the 5 companies that I reached out to responded. (This continues to surprise me. I’ve mentioned @FitBit on my blog and in Twitter numerous times without any response or comment.)
  • Pharmaceutical Manufacturers – Only 1 of the 3 companies that I reached out to responded. (This doesn’t surprise me since they are very careful about social media. @SanofiUS seems to be part of the team that has been pushing the envelope, and they were the ones to respond. I thought about Tweeting the brands thinking that those might be monitored more closely, but I didn’t.)

I will admit to being surprised. I’m sure all of these companies monitor social media so I’m not sure what leads to the lack of response. [I guess I could give them the out that I clearly indicated it was a test and provided a link to my blog so they could have chosen not to respond.]

Regardless, I learned several things:

  1. Some companies have a different Twitter handle for managing customer service.
    1. @ExpressRxHelp
    2. @AetnaHelp
    3. @KPMemberService
  2. Some companies ask you to e-mail them and provide an e-mail.
  3. Some companies tell you to DM (direct message) them to start a dialogue.

From a time perspective, I have to give kudos to the Prime Therapeutics team that responded in a record 2 minutes. Otherwise, here’s a breakout of the times by company with clusters in the first day and approximately 2 days later.

Company

Response Time (Hrs:Min)
Prime Therapeutics

0:02
Aetna

1:12
LoseIt

1:19
Healthways

2:07
Walmart

3:01
Express Scripts

8:35
Kaiser

29:22
BCBSIL

47:32
OptumRx

47:39
BCBSLA

48:18
Sanofi

53:30

I guess one could ask the question of whether to engage consumers via Twitter or simply use the channel more as a push messaging strategy. The reality is that consumers want to engage where they are, and there are a lot of people using Twitter. While it might not be the best way to have a personal discussion around PHI (Protected Health Information) given HIPAA, it certainly seems like a channel that you want to monitor and respond to. It gives you a way to route people to a particular phone number, e-mail, or support process.

As Dave Chase said in his Forbes article “Patient engagement is the blockbuster drug of the century”, this is critical for healthcare companies to figure out.

The CVS Caremark team told me that they actively monitor these channels and engage with people directly. I also talked with one of the people on the Express Scripts social monitoring team who told me that they primarily use social media to disseminate thought leadership and research, but that they actively try to engage with any member who has an actionable complaint. They want to be where the audience is and to quickly take the discussion offline.

If you want to see the questions I asked along with the responses, I’ve posted them below…

Consumerism, Healthcare, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, mHealth, PBM / Pharmacy, Research, Social Media, Technology
, , , , , , , ,

The Prescribing Apps ERA – Will Clinicians Be Ready? #mHealth

February 7, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

Dr. Kraft (@daniel_kraft) recently spoke at FutureMed and talked about the prescribing apps era.  I’ve talked about this concept many times, and I agree that we are rapidly moving in that direction.  And, there’s lots of buzz about whether apps will change behavior and how soon we’ll see “clinical trials” or published data to prove this.

From this site, you can get a recap, but here are the key points that he made:

1) Mobile Phones (quantified self) are becoming constant monitoring devices that create feedback loops which help individuals lead a healthy lifestyle.  Examples include; monitoring glucose levels, blood pressure levels, stress levels, temperature, calories burned, heart rate, arrythmias. Gathering all this information can potentially help the patient make lifestyle changes to avoid a complication, decrease progression of a particular disease, and have quality information regarding his physical emotional state for their physician to tailor his treatment in a more efficient manner.

2) The App prescription ERA:  Just as we prescribe medications prescribing apps to patients will be the future. The reason why this is important is that apps created for particular cases can help the patients understand their disease better and empower them to take better control.

3) Gamification: using games in order to change lifestyle, habits, have been mentioned before. A very interesting concept was that created in the Hope Labs of Stanford. The labs created a game in which children would receive points after there therapeutic regiment, once points were optioned they could shoot and attack the tumor. Helping with the compliance rate of the treatments

4) Lab on a chip and point of care testing

5) Artificial Intelligence like Watson and its application in medicine.

6) Procedure Simulation: Several procedures done by medical professionals follow (not 100%) a see one, do one teach one scenario.  Probably very few people agree with this concept and that is why simulation has great potential. In this case residents, fellows in training can see one, simulate many and then when comfortable do one.

7) Social Networks and Augmented Reality

At the same time, a recent ePocrates study hammered home the point that while this is taking off physicians don’t have a mechanism for which ones to recommend and why.

According to the Epocrates survey, more than 40 percent of physicians are recommending apps to their patients. In terms of the apps being recommended, 72 percent are for patient education, 57 percent are lifestyle change tools, 37 percent are for drug information, 37 percent are for chronic disease management, 24 percent are for medical adherence and 11 percent are to connect the patient to an electronic health record portal.

Physicians also have several different sources for identifying which apps to recommend to their patients. According to the survey, 41 percent get advice from a friend or colleague, while 38 percent use an app store, another 38 percent use an Internet search engine, 23 percent learn of an app from another patient or patients, and 21 percent use the app themselves.

That said, the survey also notes that more than half of the physicians contacted said they don’t know which apps are “good to share.”

As I’ve discussed before, this is somewhat of the Wild West.  Patients are buying and downloading apps based on what they learn about.  They’d love for physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and other trusted sources to help them.  But, those clinicians are often not technology savvy (or at least many of the ones who are actively practicing).  There are exceptions to the norm and those are the ones in the news and speaking at conferences.

IMHO…consumers want to know the following:

  1. Which apps make sense for me based on my condition?
  2. Will that app be relevant as I move from newly diagnosed to maintenance?
  3. Should I pay for an app or stick with the free version?
  4. Is my data secure?
  5. Will this app allow me to share data with my caregiver or case manager?
  6. Will this app have an open API for integration with my other apps or devices?
  7. Is it intuitive to use?
  8. Will this company be around or will I be able to port my data to another app if the company goes away?
  9. Is the information clinically sound?
  10. Is the content consumer friendly?
  11. Is it easy to use?
  12. Is there an escalation path if I need help with clinical information?
  13. Will my employer or health plan pay for it for me?
  14. Is my data secure?

And, employers and payers also have lots of questions (on top of many of the ones above):

  1. Is this tool effective in changing behavior?
  2. Should I promote any apps to my members?
  3. Should I pay for the apps?
  4. How should I integrate them into my care system?
  5. Do my staff need to have them, use them, and be able to discuss them with the patient?  (Do they do that today with their member portal?)

mhealth_infographic_large

Books / Articles, Business Tools, Consumerism, Healthcare, Infographic, Innovation, Leadership, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, mHealth, Research, Social Media, Software, Technology, Value Propositions
, , , , , , ,

Less Than 1/3rd Of Health Insurers Very Confident In Their Big Data Value To Consumers

February 6, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

With all the discussions these days on Big Data and how to use information to create insights and wisdom, I was really shocked when I looked back at this PWC survey from 2011.  In it, less than 1/3rd of health insurers were very confident in their use of informatics to add value around case management, disease management, wellness, and consumer health tools.  WHAT???

This seems crazy to me.  In this interconnected world where everyone is talking about connected devices, mHealth, and ENGAGEMENT, health insurers are in the optimal position to leverage their data to provide insights, to provide transparency, to create algorithms, to be preventative in their actions, etc.  Maybe their technology platforms are too old?  Maybe they’re too silo’d?  I’m not sure.  But, I find this an interesting arbitrage opportunity.

With a system that integrates data from claims, labs, patient reported sources, HRAs, and biometrics, you can add value by creating a personalized patient experience that adapts with their needs.

Clinical Informations for Care Mgmt

Care Management, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, Research
, , , , , , , , , ,

Wellness In The Workplace – Optum Research

February 6, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I found a summary of this Optum Study – Wellness In The Workplace in the January 2013 Employee Benefit News:

  • 56% of companies (surveyed) have a formal, written strategic plan for wellness
  • 28% of companies have an onsite clinic
  • 49% of eligible employees participate in company wellness programs (seems really high to me)
  • 90% of companies with 3,000+ employees say wellness solutions are an important part of their benefits (compared with 79% of employers with 2-99 employees)
  • 83% of companies use coaching to address weigh management
  • The top barriers to employee participation are:
    • Lack of time / energy
    • Lack of interest
    • Effective communications
  • 52% of companies offer wellness programs to employee’s family members
  • Onsite clinics are offering:
    • 77% flu shots
    • 56% wellness communications
    • 43% fitness challenges
    • 42% preventative care
    • 41% health risk assessments

wellness participation

Books / Articles, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Research

How Quickly Do Healthcare Companies Respond To Twitter Comments? (Test)

February 2, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I was intrigued by this test done over in the UK to look at how quickly retailers responded to comments via Twitter (you can see an infographic about similar US data below).  Obviously, more and more consumers are using social media.  And, we know that comments can go viral quickly especially when they’re negative.

“A recent Spherion Staffing Services survey shows that when consumers have a good customer service experience, 47 percent are likely to tell a company representative; 17 percent will express their opinions via social media; and 15 percent will write a review. The same survey from 2010 showed that only 40 percent of consumers were likely to share a great experience with a company representative—proving that consumers are becoming more vocal with companies they interact with. If consumers have a poor experience, 36 percent are willing to write a complaint directly to the company, and one in four will express their opinions on social media. Nineteen percent, the same statistic as last year, will choose to write a review online.” (December 2011 Study)

Of course, some people actively monitor their social media feeds while others view them more as a PR channel.  It also depends on whether the feed management is outsourced or insource and whether it’s monitored by marketing, operations, customer service, sales, or some combined team.

Here’s a good post on measuring response and activity within Twitter accounts.

So, what I’ve decided to do is a Twitter test similar to the one above.  I’m going to post the following to different categories of healthcare companies and see how quickly they respond.

  1. To retail pharmacies:  Are you using social media to handle customer service?
  2. To PBMs:  Are you using social media to handle customer service?
  3. To Managed Care: Where’s the best place to find out about your Medicare products?
  4. To mHealth companies:  Can you share examples of how employers are promoting your products?
  5. To pharma:  Are you doing any value-based contracting with PBMs?
  6. To device companies:  Can you share examples of how employers are promoting your products?

Who do you think will be the fastest to respond?  Will the bigger companies simply have more resources to monitor and staff their teams or with more digital companies be more in tune with social media?

KeepingUpWithTwitter_2

Books / Articles, Business Tools, Healthcare, Infographic, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, mHealth, PBM / Pharmacy, Research, Social Media
, ,

Why We Need Whole Patient Adherence Programs

January 30, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

While prescription adherence continues to be a $290B+ problem, we still address the problem in a drug by drug approach due to silos within our healthcare value chain.

For example:

  • Generic drugs (about 80% of the prescriptions filled) are the lowest cost and most profitable drugs (to the suppliers).  For these medications, you’ll usually have several programs:
    • Refill reminder calls, text messages, letters
      • From the PBM
      • From the retail pharmacy
      • From the mail pharmacy
  • Auto-refill programs
  • Brand drugs are usually higher cost and profitable (to the manufacturers).  For these, you have pharma funded programs such as:
    • Messaging attached to your bill at the pharmacy
    • Letters sent to your house by the pharmacy
    • Specialty drugs which are the highest cost and typically profitable (across the supply chain).  For these, companies often take a higher touch approach:
      • Pharmacy techs calling you
      • Nurses calling you

Additionally, there is additional effort made to keep you adherent if:

  • You’re a Medicare Advantage member in one of the categories where adherence is measured for the STAR metrics program
  • You’re have a condition where adherence is a key metric for HEDIS or some other quality program

For those of us that have studied adherence, you know that this is a multi-factorial issue meaning that there are numerous things that impact your adherence.  Some people will respond to nudging.  Some people need to better understand their disease.  Some people need co-pay relief or patient assistance programs.  Some people need a different medication.

But, the two things we don’t need are:

  • Being treated like a disease not a patient
  • Getting 4, 5, 10 different communications from different parties on different schedules

So, what’s the answer.  There isn’t a silver bullet (which is what we’d all like).  I believe the best alternative is to drive adherence through the disease management and case management companies.  These nurses are treating the patient.  They are discussing their multiple co-morbidities with them.  They are talking about and understanding their barriers.  They should be able to help “prescribe” information and tools to help them with their adherence.

Of course, the issue here is engagement.  If we’re only getting 10% of the patients with chronic illnesses to participate in our programs (which is about the national average – I believe), what about the other 90%.  This is where a care coordination program that incorporated the provider and the pharmacy into a technology solution which pushed gaps-in-care and messaging through the EMR and pharmacy system to drive coordinated solutions is the answer.

I don’t know when this will happen, but I don’t believe we’re going to put a dent in adherence until we think differently about this problem.

Care Management, Healthcare, Innovation, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, PBM / Pharmacy
, , , , , ,

PHM Is The New Black Post At CCA Blog With Diabetes Examples

January 25, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

This is a partial copy (teaser) of a guest blog I did on the Care Continuum Alliance blog earlier this week.

**********************

With all the talk about Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) and Patient Centered Medical Homes (PCMHs), the adoption curve for the Care Continuum Alliance (CCA) model for Population Health Management (PHM) should move beyond the innovators in 2013 and begin to “Cross the Chasm.” I believe there are several preconditions that would set the stage for this to occur, for instance:

  1. Technology advances leading to the “Big Data” focus;
  2. The changing paradigm from fee-for-service to outcomes-based care;
  3. The realization of the role of the consumer led by the e-Patient movement, the idea of the Quantified Self, and the focus of large healthcare enterprises on being consumer centric; and
  4. The budget crisis that is driving employers and other payers to embrace PHM, wellness, and other initiatives that impact cost and productivity.

Of course, most companies are still in the infancy of designing systems to address this coordinated care model, which does not view the patient as a claim, but longitudinally aggregates demographical, psychosocial and claims data.  Additionally, training staff using Motivational Interviewing and integrating external staff into the virtual care team in partnership with the provider will continue to evolve as do our care delivery models.

To read more especially the diabetes examples that I shared, please click over to their blog.  Thanks.

 

Books / Articles, Care Management, Guest Post, Healthcare, Innovation, Leadership, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, mHealth, Research, Value Propositions, Weblogs
, , ,

Physician Information From The Patient’s Care Manager

January 24, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

Long gone are the days where a small practice can afford to have an onsite case manager.  Aggressive cost cutting, defensive medicine, and other pressures continue to pull at the budget for running a practice for most physicians.

At the same time, the value of a nurse or pharmacist to work with the patient to coordinate care, provide medication reconciliation, and answer clinical questions has been demonstrated in numerous settings.

Of course, most patients with chronic illnesses like diabetes or asthma or even cancer often have a disease manager or case manager provided to them by their employer through a population health management company or their health insurer.  So, if this work is being done, what should be done to coordinate this care with their PCP or their specialist?

I’ve never seen it done when which prompts several questions:

  1. What information a physician would want to receive?
  2. In what format?
  3. And, with what frequency?

Here are some of my ideas:

  1. A copy of the care plan that’s been created for the patient based on evidence-based guidelines.
  2. A list of any gaps-in-care that have been identified and discussed with the patient.
  3. Any assessment that has been made of the patient’s risk level along with information about how that assessment was made – i.e., claims based modeling versus nurse based assessment.
  4. Information about the patient’s Rx adherence and/or barriers to adherence.

But, what about things like:

  1. Benefit information.  Does the physician want to better understand any network limitations, Centers of Excellence, or other clinical pathways to be followed?
  2. mHealth.  Does the physician want to understand any apps that the patient is using and how that data is being incorporated into the care plan?

The more challenging question is how to deliver this information in a valuable format.

  1. Direct mail seems slow and difficult to manage.
  2. Faxing seems quick but an outdated modality.
  3. Secure e-mail could work, but I don’t think most physicians want to have multiple secure e-mail accounts to coordinate.
  4. A physician portal could be efficient, but probably only if there’s a concentration of patients at that office that use the same care management company.
  5. Integration into the EMR is probably ideal, but this is a challenge with all the different vendors out there.

The other question is frequency.  Should this data be provided after every interaction?  Should it be batched and provided weekly or monthly?

And, in the case of print materials, should the data be sent per patient or aggregated per physician?  It would seem overwhelming to get one letter with data on 20 patients, but on the other hand, having 20 letters would allow the information to be more easily filed per patient.

This type of coordination is critical as we move from a fee-for-service to an outcomes-based environment where care coordination is more important than ever.

Care Management, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications

New mHealth App – Interactive HRA – Recommendations – Zuum

January 21, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

In the Winter 2012 Innovate Magazine from Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University Physicians, they talk about a new iPad app that they developed that calculates disease risk and offers a customized plan.

I just downloaded it and used it.  Here’s my quick summary:

  • Nice GUI (graphical user interface)
  • Easy to use HRA (health risk assessment)
  • Cool interactive tool (you can see how your risk for certain diseases changes with your changes in behavior)
  • Content seems to be well written with basic health literacy taken into account
  • Links out to more research and content
  • Messaging feature (which I guess will push me updates and other messages over time)

Overall, it seems like a nicer than normal HRA with the ability to interact with it.  My question would be how it integrates with my care team and how it gets used over time.  If this integrated into my other devices and monitored my data, it would seem more valuable than a standalone app, but I certainly think it’s great for a one-time use.

If you’re interested in downloading it, you can go to iTunes here.

Zuum 2 Zuum 1

Healthcare, Innovation, Marketing / Communications, mHealth, Research
, , ,

3500 Calories To Lose A Pound – Myth?

January 21, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

Well, it’s not that straightforward (of course), but 3,500 calories does equal a pound of fat so it’s a good rule of thumb (in my non-clinical opinion).

So, to figure out when this does or doesn’t work, I looked at the this article in the Journal of Obesity which was very difficult to understand, but here’s a discussion on MyFitnessPal that discusses it in something closer to plain language.  You can also see this article in the NY Times about de-bunking this myth.

So, if it’s wrong, why use it as a rule of thumb?  IMHO  I believe it gives you some numbers to track just understand that it’s not a perfect correlation.  But, if you take in less calories than you burn and focus on creating a deficit, then you’ll be doing the right things – being active and watching what you eat.  Of course, you can go work with a Registered Dietician to help you actually understand and refine your plan to address the gap between this assumption and reality.

mythbusters

exercise, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Research, Value Propositions

17 Healthcare Blogs You Should Read

January 17, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 3 Comments

This is just a list of my favorites.  Feel free to add your own recommendations.  I broke them into 3 categories.

(BTW – I’m sure I missed a few of you so I’m sorry.)

1. Key Foundational Blogs To Follow

2. One’s I Read Frequently

3. Good Blogs That I Use For Certain Topics

I’ll also give a shout out to a new blog that has started that I have high hopes for based on their initial content – http://hoopayzblog.com/.

Blogroll, Care Management, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Research, Weblogs
, ,

Favorite Health Infographics In Pinterest

January 16, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

While I’m sure I’ll still integrate some health infographics into my blog posts, I’ve decided to use a different tool for simply sharing the infographics that I like.  I built a Pinterest account and put 70+ infographics in there to get it started.  Most of those are ones that I’ve used before in the blog, but there are some new ones.  Enjoy.

http://pinterest.com/gvanantwerp/health-infographics/

Healthcare Infographics

 

Healthcare, Infographic, Marketing / Communications, Research
,

Limiting Factor For Behavior Change is We Don’t Believe We Will Change

January 15, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 2 Comments

One of the biggest challenges in healthcare is getting people to change behavior or as Express Scripts would frame it – activating intent.  Since approximately 75% of healthcare costs are due to preventable conditions, it’s important that we can help people see the future value of change.  People often discount that future value of change based on the amount of effort required to get there.  They see the short-term pain not the long-term gain.

A new study puts an interesting perspective on this.  It shows that people can generally see the amount of change they’ve made in the past decade, but they fail to realize that change will continue for the next decade.  They appear to see themselves as stable at the current moment without significant change in the future.  I believe this is really important as we think about Motivational Interviewing techniques and communications for engaging consumers.

So, as you think about behavior change in healthcare for things like diabetes, you will likely continue to see more and more emphasis on behavior change and research in this area (see example from RWJF last year or Cigna whitepaper).

To learn more about this topic of behavior economics, you might look a few places:

And, here’s a good list of books to start with.

Blogroll, Books / Articles, Business Tools, Consumerism, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Research, Words Matter

Saturday Evening Post On The Placebo Effect

January 15, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

Do you know what the Placebo Effect is?  There’s lot of information out there.  For example, here’s what WebMD says about it.  Here’s my definition of it.

In general, it’s when someone is told they are given a medication (or procedure) that will work but instead are given a sugar pill or otherwise “deceived” into believing they’ve gotten the prescribed treatment.  It is often used in clinical trials for drugs to establish the baseline of side effects.  The amazing part is that it shows the power of the mind to influence our healing ability.  

Below is a video that I’ve used a few times before.  It’s also been a concept I’ve built on in a few other posts – New To Therapy, Price And Placebo Effect, Guest Post on the Topic.

The amazing thing that captured my attention a few months ago is that this can work not only for medication but also for surgery.  (Maybe this is the key to saving money in the US healthcare system.)  This was tested in the case of knee surgery in a trial that was published several years ago.  This article also points out another trial on patients with Parkinson’s.  The reality appears to be that this is happening in trials but also in real life according to an article in American Medical News (see quote below).

Nearly half of physicians use placebos in clinical care, and only 4% tell their patients the truth about it, according to a survey of Chicago academic physicians that was published this month in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.

This begs all types of questions about who will respond to placebos and when or if it’s ok to use them with patients.

The Saturday Evening Post just published an article on this topic.  They touch on a few of the same studies I’ve looked at, but they also point out several new things that I put below – conditioned response and ritual.  They also share a video on the placebo effect.

Conditioned responses are a third way the placebo response works. In one elegant experiment demonstrating this phenomenon, scientists showed 40 volunteers two male faces on a computer screen for 0.1 second. When the volunteers looked at one face, they got a mild burn on their forearm; when they looked at the other, they got a more painful burn. The volunteers became as conditioned as Pavlov’s dogs. In the next round when they saw the high-pain face and felt a burn, they rated it as more painful than when they saw the low-pain face and felt a burn—even though the applied heat was identical the second time around.

The perception of pain, says Ted Kaptchuk of Harvard Medical School, who helped lead the 2012 study, depends on “what the nonconscious mind anticipates despite any conscious thoughts.”

The placebo effect doesn’t even depend on deception. It can kick in even when people are told they are receiving an inactive drug. For instance, in a 2010 study led by Harvard’s Kaptchuk, scientists recruited 80 people with irritable bowel syndrome, or IBS, and gave half no treatment and half what they were told were “placebo pills made of an inert substance, like sugar pills, that have been shown in clinical studies to produce significant improvement in IBS symptoms through mind-body, self-healing processes.” It was full disclosure. Even without the deception, the placebo-takers’ IBS symptoms improved over the course of three weeks. That response suggests another avenue for the placebo response: ritual.

The author (Sharon Begley) asks the key question which is how does this placebo effect play out in the 21st century.  With all this technology that we have and the physician shortage, is there a greater opportunity here?  Can we tap into this in a positive way?  She also points out how doctors are using other techniques such as relaxation therapy to address the power of the mind.

Books / Articles, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, Research, Words Matter

How Farmers Outmarketed Pharma

January 10, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

When you think of potatoes, where do you want them to come from? Idaho

When you think of citrus, where do you want it to come from? Florida

When you think of US wine, where do you want it to come from? Napa Valley

When you think of generic drugs, where do you want them to come from? [company?, geography?]

This vacuum is a big problem in terms of commoditization. People don’t think of Teva or Ranbaxy or some other generic company. The average consumer probably doesn’t know who they are. And, they’ve competed based on price for years. If I was the CEO of Teva, this would be the number one challenge I would pose to my staff which was how do I get consumers to ask for my generic version of the drug. The next question should be what would we do to justify this?

For the first time, I think that they have a similar problem that brand pharma does which is how to create an offering not just a pill. The quote below from the CEO of Novartis, tees it up well.

“I also started to shift our business away from a transactional model that was focused on physically selling the drugs to delivering an outcome-based approach to add value beyond just the pill. I really believe that in the future, companies like Novartis are going to be paid on patient outcomes as opposed to selling the pill.”

And, I think this reflects what Sanofi has been experimenting with in terms of diabetes for several years. They launched their iBG Star Blood Glucose Meter to get into the meter space. Sanofi also has heavily invested in social media to give them direct engagement and feedback from consumers. Both of these begin to create more consumer branding for them as an entity.

I’ve talked about this several times over the years based on a book that one of the E&Y partners wrote when I was there called BLUR which was about blending products and services to create offerings. I think this notion combined with the lessons learned that commodities like potatoes have gone through in branding their products offer some insights into what pharma has to do to shift their positioning in the value chain. This is part of what I’ll be discussing at the upcoming PBMI conference where this shift to outcomes based contracting and focus for the industry is critical to long-term survival and differentiation.

Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, PBM / Pharmacy, Value Propositions
, , ,

FitBit Review Summary – Device, Apps, And Suggestions

January 8, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 6 Comments

In the spirit of the Quantified Self movement and in order to better understand how mHealth tools like FitBit can drive behavior change, I’ve been using a FitBit One for about 6 weeks now. I’ve posted some notes along the way, but I thought I’d do a wrap up post here. Here’s the old posts.

Those were focused mostly on the device itself. Now I’ve had some time to play with the mobile app. Let me provide some comments there.  And, with the data showing a jump in buyers this year, I expect this will be a hot topic at the Consumer Electronics Show this week.

  • The user interface is simple to use. (see a few screenshots below)

  • I feel like it works in terms of helping me learn about my food habits. (Which I guess shouldn’t be surprising since research shows that having a food diary works and another recent study showed that a tool worked better than a paper diary.) For example, I learned several things:
    1. I drink way too little water.
    2. I eat almost 65% of my calories by the end of lunch.
    3. Some foods that I thought were okay have too many calories.
  • In general, the tracking for my steps makes me motivated to try to walk further on days that I’m not doing good.
  • The ease of use and simple device has helped me change behavior.  For example, when I went to go to dinner tonight, I quickly looked up my total calories and saw that I had 600 calories left.  Here’s what I ate for dinner.  (It works!)

Meal

But, on the flipside, I think there are some simple improvement options:

  1. I eat a fairly similar breakfast everyday which is either cereal with 2% milk and orange juice or chocolate milk (if after a workout). [In case you don’t know, chocolate milk is great for your recovery.] Rather than have to enter each item, FitBit could analyze your behavior and recommend a “breakfast bundle”. (and yes, I know I could create it myself)
  2. Some days, I don’t enter everything I eat. When I get my end of week report, it shows me all the calories burned versus the calories taken in. That shows a huge deficit which isn’t true. I think they should do two things:
    1. Add some type of daily validation when you fall below some typical caloric intake. (Did you enter all your food yesterday, it seemed low?)
    2. Then create some average daily intake to allow you to have a semi-relevant weekly summary.
  3. The same can be true for days that you forget to carry your device or even allowing for notes on days (i.e., was sick in bed). This would provide a more accurate long-term record for analysis.
  4. The food search engine seems to offer some improvement opportunities. For example, one day I ate a Dunkin Donuts donut, but it had most types but not the one I ate. I don’t understand that since there’s only about 15 donuts. But, perhaps it’s a search engine or Natural Language Processing (NLP) issue. (I guess it could be user error, but in this case, I don’t think so.)
  5. Finally, as I think about mHealth in general, I think it would be really important to see how these devices and this data is integrated with a care management system.  I should be able to “opt-in” my case manager to get these reports and/or the data.

The other opportunity that I think exists is better promotion of some things you don’t learn without searching the FitBit site:

  • They’re connected with lots of other apps.  Which ones should I use?  Can’t it see which other ones I have on my phone and point this out?  How would they help me?
  • There’s a premium version with interesting analysis.  Why don’t they push these to me?

I also think that they would want an upsell path as they rollout new things like the new Flex wristband revealed at CES.

And, with the discussions around whether physicians will “prescribe” apps, it’s going to be important for them to be part of these discussions although this survey from Philips showed that patients continue to increasingly rely on these apps and Dr. Google.

Philips_Health_Infographic_12%2012_F3

Finally, before I close, all of this makes me think about an interesting dialogue recently on Twitter about Quantified Self.

Books / Articles, Care Management, Consumerism, Events, Healthcare, Infographic, Innovation, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, Social Media, Software, Technology, Value Propositions
, , ,

Court Decision Allows Pharma Reps To Discuss Off-Label Uses Of Prescriptions

January 8, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I must admit that I’ve heard very little about this decision from the Federal Appeals Court for the Second Circuit of Manhattan that decided that discussing off-label uses for prescription drugs was an issue of free speech. This could change the way pharmaceutical manufacturers interact with physicians. It could change the job of the pharmaceutical rep. It could change how clinical trials are done. It could change how prescriptions are used. It could also lead to a whole new set of prior authorizations by companies that actually have to actively manage off-label usage as it becomes widespread.

On the other hand, I wonder if this door hadn’t already been opened. Have you looked at some of the peer-to-peer (P2P) healthcare websites out there or the disease based communities (e.g., PatientLikeMe or CureTogether)? Patients are already talking about what medications they are using to treat their diseases and their symptoms. Don’t you think those are leading to requests to the provider and discussions with them about off-label utilization?

And, I’m sure that Dr. Google has helped many patients identify other uses of medications. This process (to the best of my knowledge) is completely un-managed. It’s a popular enough topic that Consumer Reports talked about it earlier this year and even put together the following table on drugs commonly used off-label.

Specific drug, type of drug Examples of off-label use**
Aripiprazole (Abilify), antipsychotic Dementia, Alzheimer’s disease
Tiagabine (Gabitril), antiseizure Depression
Gabapentin (Neurontin), antiseizure Nerve pain caused by diabetes, migraines, hot flashes
Topiramate (Topamax), antiseizure, in combination with phenteramine for weight loss Bipolar disorder, depression, nerve pain, alcohol dependence, eating disorders
Risperidone (Risperdal), antipsychotic Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, eating disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder
Trazodone (Desyrel), antidepressant Insomnia, anxiety, bipolar disorder
Propranolol (Inderal), high blood pressure, heart disease Stage fright
Sildenafil (Viagra), erectile dysfunction To enhance sexual performance in people not diagnosed with erectile dysfunction, to improve sexual function in women taking certain antidepressants
Quetiapine (Seroquel), antipsychotic Dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, obsessive-compulsive disorder, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder
SSRI antidepressants such as paroxetine (Paxil) and sertraline (Zoloft) Premature ejaculation, hot flashes, tinnitus (ringing in the ears)
Prazosin (Minipress), high blood pressure Post-traumatic stress disorder
Amitriptyline (Elavil), antidepressant Fibromyalgia, migraines, eating disorders, pain after shingles infection
Bevacizumab (Avastin), certain types of cancer Wet age-related macular degeneration (eye disease)
Statins such as atorvastatin (Lipitor), simvastatin (Zocor), high cholesterol in adults, children with an inherited cholesterol condition Rheumatoid arthritis, to lower cholesterol in children who lack the inherited condition
Clonidine (Catapres), high blood pressure Smoking cessation, hot flashes, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), Tourette’s syndrome, restless legs syndrome

* Not meant to be a comprehensive list. Many of the drugs listed here are also available as generics.

** Does not imply that use is clinically appropriate or inappropriate, or beneficial or not.

***To find out if a drug’s off-label use is supported by evidence, click on the medication name.

 

I would imagine that pharma is going to tip-toe through this open door not simply crash through it. They’re generally risk adverse so their discussions of off-label utilization will be fact-based (to limit exposure) even if (as we all know) statistics can lie. I would suspect (as I’ve seen on other blogs) that this will ultimately go to the Supreme Court before anyone really takes advantage of it.

I guess I’d also point to the issue that physicians have responsibility here. They prescribe off-label today. Here’s what the FDA says about this:

Good medical practice and the best interests of the patient require that physicians use legally available drugs, biologics and devices according to their best knowledge and judgement. If physicians use a product for an indication not in the approved labeling, they have the responsibility to be well informed about the product, to base its use on firm scientific rationale and on sound medical evidence, and to maintain records of the product’s use and effects. Use of a marketed product in this manner when the intent is the “practice of medicine” does not require the submission of an Investigational New Drug Application (IND), Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) or review by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). However, the institution at which the product will be used may, under its own authority, require IRB review or other institutional oversight.

One way to begin to manage this would be to require the use of diagnosis codes (Dx) on all prescriptions. This would at least great a way of tracking how the medications are being used and allow for better technology oversight across the provider, payer, pharmacy, and PBM.

In the interim, Consumer Reports suggest consumers do the following:

  • When your doctor prescribes a drug, ask if it’s an approved use. If he or she doesn’t know, ask your pharmacist.
  • Check for yourself. Go to DailyMed (dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/) and search for the drug. Then click on the tab for “Indications & Usage” to see if your condition is listed.
  • If it’s an off-label use, ask your doctor if it’s supported by well-designed trials showing significant improvement for people with your condition.
  • Ask your doctor why he or she thinks the drug will work better than approved drugs for your illness.
  • Find out if your health insurer covers payment for the off-label use. Some may require evidence of effectiveness or failure with conventional treatments, especially if the drug is expensive.
Books / Articles, Care Management, Consumerism, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, PBM / Pharmacy, Words Matter
, ,

Fortune Article Questions Generic Equivalency Of Drugs

January 7, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 3 Comments

A new Fortune article “Are Generics Really the Same as Branded Drugs?” (1/14/13) sets a dangerous tone for something that has become a standard across the pharmaceutical industry.  This is either:

(a) giving consumer credibility to a long-standing rumor with a case study or

(b) a dangerous perspective which will only further activate the conspiracy theory consumers and clinicians.

Let’s start with a few basics from the Generic Pharmaceutical Association:

  • There are over 4B prescriptions filled in the US per year.
  • Of those, over 80% are generic medications.
  • Generic medications saved over $190B last year.

For facts on generics, I would point you to the FDA website.  I posted some of their slides years ago on SlideShare which I put below along with their latest infographic.

The article in Fortune focuses on a case regarding an anti-depressant called Wellbutrin and its generic counterpart.  The article goes on to point out that the active ingredients in the generic (compared to the brand) can vary from 80% to 125%.  (I think a good more detailed explanation of this is available here).

But, the author goes on to point out the risks associated with the fillers (or inactive ingredients) and talks about the issue of NTI (Narrow Therapeutic Index) drugs that no one substitutes for anyways.

One big thing that I was always taught was to understand that the difference in active ingredients between brands and generics was similar to the differences in different lots of the same brand drug.  And, given the fact that traditionally, 50% of generic drugs were made by the brand manufacturers, it would seem difficult to believe that they were simply throwing caution to the wind by producing substandard product.

I would hope that Express Scripts, CVS Caremark, Walgreens, PCMA, and many other groups will come out strongly to address this article. This is the type of article that could be a significant setback to the generic industry which has proven itself under lots of scrutiny over the years to save money and have very few negative impacts with the FDA’s scrutiny.

ucm305899

Books / Articles, Consumerism, Healthcare, Infographic, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, Research, Value Propositions

Are You Going To The 2013 PBMI Conference?

December 30, 2012 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

Are you going to this year’s conference (February 18-20th) in Las Vegas? I’ll be presenting again this year, and I hope to see some of you there. If you’ll be there, let me know and we can connect.

This year, I’m going to talk about one of my favorite topics which is how the pharmacy industry needs to transform itself. This touches on several topics which I’ve blogged about multiple times:

  • Health reform and ACOs
  • Turning data into wisdom
  • Predictive models
  • Coordinating medical and pharmacy data
  • The role of the pharmacist in the broader care team strategy
  • Consumer engagement as fundamental to healthcare
  • Outcomes-based contracting
  • Population health management
  • Consumer experience

Do you have a specific example of how you see companies (pharma manufacturers, PBMs, or pharmacies) transforming from a traditional Fee-For-Service (FFS) model to an outcomes based model in terms of payment and how that is changing the way they do business? I’m always interested in learning more.

Here’s the official description from the brochure for the conference.

Pharmacy — Data, COEs, Predictive Models, and Consumer Engagement

George Van Antwerp, Vice President, Product Development, inVentiv Medical Management

ACPE UAN 0221-9999-13-009-L04-P 1.0 Knowledge-based contact hour

Pharmacy is the most used benefit, and for most chronically ill patients, they take multiple medications per day and interact with their pharmacist/pharmacy frequently. With the transformation in healthcare to an outcomes-based focus, PBMs, pharmacies, and pharma are looking at new models and new ways to work with payers, providers, and patients to be part of the care team. We will explore how companies are using this data and technology to intervene, change behavior, and improve outcomes from a broader population health management perspective.

Events, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, PBM / Pharmacy, Value Propositions
, , ,

What Do MDs Tell Patients About Their Rx … with only 99 seconds?

December 21, 2012 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

As part of a new study mentioned on The Doctor Weighs In, it shows that physicians spend an average of 10 minutes and 10 seconds with patients in an average visit.  Of that, 99 seconds (or 16% of the time) they are discussion prescriptions.  The big question is what are they discussing.

MD Rx discussions

A 2006 study showed the following:

74 percent of the doctors mentioned the trade or generic name of the medicine, and 87 percent stated its purpose. Sixty-six percent said nothing about how long to take the medicine, 45 percent did not say what dosage to take and 42 percent failed to mention the timing or frequency of doses. Physicians mentioned adverse side effects only 35 percent of the time.

Of course, research on the physician and patient dialogue around prescriptions should also include looking at these studies:

That is asking a lot of the money spent by the manufacturers on the physicians.

Detailing to physicians, nurse practitioners, and physicians’ assistants cost $12 billion, accounting for more than half of that promotional spending (see Figure 1). Drug companies spent another $3.4 billion sponsoring professional meetings and events and about $0.4 billion placing advertisements in professional journals. Pharmaceutical manufacturers spent the rest of their promotional budgets, $4.7 billion in 2008, on direct-to-consumer advertising.

Books / Articles, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, PBM / Pharmacy, Research, Value Propositions

Diabetes Discussion – Clinical vs Technical vs Plain Language

December 20, 2012 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

One of the big issues in healthcare communications which is a rate limiting factor on health engagement is the language we use with patients. Here’s my attempt to talk about diabetes using different frameworks to drive home why this is important.

A clinical discussion:

You have diabetes mellitus. Because of that, you’re at increased risk for multiple co-morbidities including atheroscelerosis, hypertension, periodontal disease, retinopathy, neuropathy, and renal disease. Diabetes is considered a progressive disease. As our first line, I’m going to start you on monotherapy. Based on comparative effectiveness, this has the best clinical end points and lowest DUR issues. You will also need to maintain glycemic control and modify your physical activity level and caloric intake to minimize the long-term probability of getting ESRD and to lower your risk of myocardial infarction.

A mHealth discussion:

Based on our predictive algorithm and quantified self-tracking, I’m 90% confident that you have diabetes. To manage your diabetes, there are numerous widgets for assessing your risk along with online tools leveraging embodied conversational agents to support your efforts to self-monitor your condition. There are also apps which you can download which use gamification and location based services to address your intrinsic motivation to change. These tools will leverage the Trans Theoretical Model to understand your readiness for change and tailor messaging to you. Additionally, there are clinical staff available to help address your symptoms post-encounter.

A plain language discussion:

As you know, diet and exercise are important to maintain a healthy lifestyle. The test I had you take confirms that you have diabetes. Diabetes is a manageable disease, but it can lead to other health problems including gum disease, high blood pressure, and problems with your heart. We are going to start you on a prescription called metformin which will help to manage your diabetes, but you will still need to make some lifestyle changes. There are lots of technology tools on the Internet and your smart phone that can help you. I’d be happy to show you a few. They will help you track your calories, your exercise, and provide you with reminders about taking your medication. They can also help you learn about diabetes and answer some of your questions.

(And the above is at 7.8 grade level which is still too high for Medicaid and many programs.)

Here’s a summary from the CDC on Health Literacy…

What is Health Literacy?

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, Title V, defines health literacy as the degree to which an individual has the capacity to obtain, communicate, process, and understand basic health information and services to make appropriate health decisions. This definition is almost identical to Healthy People. The only difference is the addition of “communicate” to the legislative definition.

Why Does Health Literacy Matter?

Every day, people confront situations that involve life-changing decisions about their health. These decisions are made in places such as grocery and drug stores, workplaces, playgrounds, doctors’ offices, clinics and hospitals, and around the kitchen table. Obtaining, communicating, processing, and understanding health information and services are essential steps in making appropriate health decisions; however, research indicates that today’s health information is presented in ways that are not usable by most adults. “Limited health literacy” occurs when people can’t find and use the health information and services they need.

  • Nearly 9 out of 10 adults have difficulty using the everyday health information that is routinely available in our healthcare facilities, retail outlets, media and communities.1
  • Without clear information and an understanding of the information’s importance, people are more likely to skip necessary medical tests, end up in the emergency room more often, and have a harder time managing chronic diseases like diabetes or high blood pressure.2

What Needs to Be Done to Improve Health Literacy?

We can do much better in designing and presenting health information and services that people can use effectively. We can build our own health literacy skills and help others—community members, health professionals, and anyone else who communicates about health—build their skills too. Every organization involved in health information and services needs its own health literacy plan to improve its organizational practices. The resources on this site will help you learn about health literacy issues, develop skills, create an action plan, and apply what you learn to create health information and services that truly make a positive difference in people’s lives.

References

1 Kutner, M., Greenberg, E., Jin , Y., & Paulsen, C. ( 2006 ). The health literacy of America’s adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006-483). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

2 Rudd, R . E., Anderson, J . E., Oppenheimer, S., & Nath , C. (2007). Health literacy: An update of public health and medical literature. In J. P. Comi ngs, B. Garner, & C. Smith. (E ds.), Review of adult learning and literacy (vol . 7) (pp 175–204). Mahwa h, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Care Management, Consumerism, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications
, ,
Newer Entries
Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: