Archive | Methodology RSS feed for this section

Dynamic Journey Mapping and P2P

September 1, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I’ve talked several times about what P2P (peer-to-peer) healthcare is.  We have examples of PatientsLikeMe and CureTogether.  This is something that Pew has talked about several times over the years.  Additionally, here’s a blog post by Susannah Fox on this.  The point is that people turn to Dr. Google and social media often before they talk to a healthcare professional.  That’s critical to understand. 

Interestingly, as I was reading the IMS whitepaper on Journey Mapping, it really got me thinking about how all this social listening and patient content can influence and shape the Patient Journey (see example).  We’ve already heard about the influence this channel is having on clinical trials.  And, we know that Big Data trends are driving lots of new data sources for analysis and insights.  I think this JAMA list is a good starting point.  But, as Jane Sarasohn-Kahn points out, we can’t forget about the Open Notes initiative and the power that it will bring with it. 

The question of course is how this will all be reflected in the way we think about the consumer in all the “patient experience” and “consumer engagement” hype in healthcare.  For example, this image from a Deloitte whitepaper shows some of the ways a health plan can influence the consumer experience.

Consumer Experience Payer

We all know this is tricky, and it’s critical to establish trust between the consumer and the entity influencing the journey.  Health plans and pharmaceutical companies are usually not high on the trust scale. 

That being said, the IMS whitepaper does a good job of pointing out the need to expand beyond the traditional effort of focusing on key influencers.  It’s important to understand the payer view and the patient view in new ways.  It’s also important to understand what matters to each group.  While adherence may seem like the right metric, I would argue that it’s simply the easy metric.  It’s important to really understand the overall health of the patient.  They care about their experience.  They care about their quality of life.  These all need to be factored into the patient journey. 

Books / Articles, Consumerism, Healthcare, Innovation, Leadership, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, Research, Social Media
, , , , , , , ,

Book: My Healthcare Is Killing Me

August 31, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 2 Comments

“A hospital bed is a parked taxi with the meter running.”  Groucho Marx

While I was flying last week, I had the chance to read My Healthcare Is Killing Me.  I could probably think of a few other titles for the book like:

  • Don’t let healthcare bankrupt you
  • Navigating the healthcare billing maze
  • Negotiating to better health
  • The $20 disenfranchisement fee

Those should give you a hint about the topic of the book.  It’s written by Chris Parks, Katrina Welty, and Robert Hendrick who are all part of the founding team at Change Healthcare.  If you’re not familiar with Change Healthcare, you should look at them and others in the transparency space.  (You can look at Jane Sarasohn-Kahn’s series on cost transparency for more information.)

Here’s a few of my notes from the book:

  • Hospitals and doctors view their patient’s bills as Days Sales Outstanding (which is why you can negotiate for prompt payment).
  • 22% of people have been contacted by a collection service for a medical bill
  • 60% of consumers that asked for discount on a medical bill were successful
  • The bill is NOT what the provider will (or expects) to get paid…It is the most that they will get paid
  • The chance of getting the right diagnosis and treatment on the first visit is 50% (scary)

The book has an interesting analogy from Patsy Kelly comparing healthcare to a restaurant:

“In healthcare, the patient does not order the service or have the primary responsibility for payment.  Additionally, the person who pays for the service does not order it or consume it, and the person who orders it does not pay for it or consume it.”

Another quote from Unity Stoakes was:

“We must arm ourselves with knowledge, wisdom and information.  Demand transparency in pricing by researching alternatives.  Negotiate!  Take control of your own healthcare now.  The more you know, the more power you have.”

The authors do a good job of simplifying down some of the complexities of the healthcare payment system.  Some things have changed with health reform, but the fundamentals are the same.  For someone taking on a large, complex condition which is likely to result in lots of costs, its worth reading.  For someone trying to change healthcare and understand the fundamentals, it’s also a great quick read which you can then follow-up on to see how this became the foundation for Change Healthcare. 

 

Consumerism, Healthcare, Managed Care, Methodology, mHealth, Press
, , , , , ,

Lessons Learned And MVPs

August 7, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

 I’m a big believer in trying to capture and learn from everything you do.  When you work in the start-up and turnaround space, not everything will be a clear success. 

After looking back on my time at my last turnaround, there are several clear takeaways:

  1. Demonstrate Incremental Benefits…All The Time.
    1. Taking on long-term projects is dangerous.  Sponsors change.  Markets change.  New technology comes out.  If you’re working on a multi-year transformation, you need to demonstrate incremental wins and have clear milestones.  You should assume you don’t have the next round of funding and build for success at each point.   I could say this is using an Agile approach, but it’s more than that. 
  2. FOCUS, FOCUS, FOCUS. 
    1. This one probably seems so obvious from the outside looking in, but it’s easy to get carried away with trying to take on too much.  In this particular case, we thought we had a 3-year timeframe to build and deliver on the vision.  We created a vision of care coordination that was really innovative, but we knew that no one had pulled it off before.  We then tried to coordinate care coordination and cost management which also hadn’t been done.  It would have been better to deliver one thing at a time and make ourselves incredibly sticky in that area.
  3. Know Your Customer…Really Well.
    1. When coming into a business, it’s so important to know the customer base and what they feel about the business.  Do they love it?  Do they engage regularly?  Is it just a commodity?  And why.  In this case, clients seemed to love the business, but it was because it was a massively customized business doing all the wrong things.  As we brought the business into compliance and created re-usable processes, it changed the relationship with the customers.  The relationships weren’t sticky, and we didn’t have clear alignment of goals.
  4. Partner Well.
    1. When you’re in the early stages of growth, it’s tempting to try to partner with people bigger and leverage their brand.  While that can help, it’s often a big distraction.  Some times, you commit to something that you can’t achieve putting pressure on a key relationship.  And, other times, you put so much at risk tied to the big company that when you realize that you’re not important to them then you have real challenges.  This gets back to the traditional understanding of buy, build, or partner and understanding your core competencies.
  5. Have A Clear Value Proposition.
    1. You’ll always find early adopters especially when you have a compelling vision, good sales people, and good management.  But, they won’t make your business for you if you can’t clearly demonstrate value.  You have to have access to data.  You have to be able to report on what you do and demonstrate how you’re creating a ROI.  In today’s competitive market, companies without a clear value proposition don’t last long.
  6. Be Different.
    1. This is a tough one.  We all watch the competition and see a path towards success, but as a younger company, trying to compete on price is a sure path to disaster.  Like the Blue Ocean Strategy, you want to compete in a different area.  Find your niche and do it better than anyone else in a way that is really different.  Trying to build something to just catch up always puts you behind. 
  7. Hire Slow and Fire Fast.
    1. This is something many people say, but they don’t always do.  It’s important to get the right team.  It’s important to hire in a logical sequence.  For example, getting a great sales team before your solution is built is great for the pipeline but frustrating to everyone in between.  On the flipside, in a smaller company, a toxic personality or someone that doesn’t fit can kill you.  You need to realize that quickly and let them go.  No one likes to do it, but you do a disservice to everyone else if you keep them. 

The past few years have been really interesting as I learned more about case management, disease management, utilization management, oncology, kidney care, and many other parts of our healthcare system.  The key is leveraging all of this as I move forward in my new role. 

I think another related topic to think about here is some of the lessons around MVPs (minimum viable products). 

I always use the Apple 1 as my case study for an MVP.  

Apple Minimum Viable Product

Books / Articles, Care Management, General Business, General Thoughts, Healthcare, Leadership, Methodology, Technology, Value Propositions

Is There A Future For Community Oncology?

August 6, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

Cancer costs are expected to reach $174B in the US by 2020.  Right now, it’s about 10-11% of total healthcare spend which makes it a big area of focus within the healthcare industry.

The question is how to manage this spend:

  • Is it about site-of-care and where the care is provided?  (community oncology; Centers of Excellence; outpatient clinics; inpatient)
  • Is it about specialty drugs and how they are managed and charged?  (Buy-and-bill; white-bagging; brown-bagging; on-site pharmacy; 340B)
  • Is it about evidence-based care and following NCCN guidelines or clinical pathways?
  • Is it about palliative care and managing spend in the last 3-6 months of life?
  • Is it about personalized medicine?

One of the challenges is the survival of the community oncology practice (see ASCO report) that is an issue that physicians have struggled with in other specialties.  Over the past few years, we’ve seen continued consolidation of practices with many of them being acquired by hospitals and hospital systems.

In some cases, oncologists have seen a reduction in their income tied to a reduction in buy-and-bill and are looking to be employed in order to continue to maintain their incomes.  They are one of the few medical professions that have seen a reduction in income recently.  At the same time, this trend is also driven by hospitals taking advantage of the 340B pricing which allows them to generate approximately $1M in profit for every oncologist they employ.  And, the complexity of oncology treatment also is prompting the need for a more comprehensive care model which requires a broad set of services which is sometimes difficult for a small practice to provide.

Of course, this shift in care from community oncology to hospitals is driving up costs without a demonstrated improvement in outcomes.  This is driving a lot of payer focus and driving discussions of payment reform whether that’s in the form of ACOs, PCMHs, or bundled payments.  United Healthcare recently released some data from one of their pilots.

This seems like another classic example of misalignment across the industry.  Hospitals clearly see an opportunity to buy up more oncology practices while payers and others are going to push for reform around 340B and payment differences.  Oncologists are struggling to continue providing care but replace the income they were making of buy-and-bill of specialty medications.

I’ve talked to a lot of people about this struggle.  It doesn’t seem clear whether community oncologists are destined for extinction or will payers will find a way to enable them to survive.  The other question is how things like teleoncology, tumor boards, big data, and the focus on prevention and survivorship will ultimately change the care delivery approach to oncology which may impact the role of the community oncologist in the future.

Books / Articles, Care Management, Healthcare, Innovation, Managed Care, Methodology, PBM / Pharmacy, Technology, Value Propositions

Why Unhealthy People Want Outcomes Based Wellness Programs

July 10, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

On the surface, the “Holy Grail” of sophisticated wellness and incentives programs are based on outcomes.  This means that the individual gets rewarded for achieving a goal.  For example, you can structure your incentives different ways.  You could have a reward for enrollment (i.e., I register for a program).  You could have a reward for activity (i.e., I talk to a nurse or watch a video online).  You could have a reward for an outcome (i.e., I lose 10 pounds).  

But, those have different implications in terms of structure.  [Note: I’m not a lawyer or an accountant so don’t take this as legal advice.]  I think Andrea Davis at Employee Benefit News did a good job of touching on this in her article “No Good Deed“.  

I did have a chance to implement a large outcomes-based rewards program for 1/1/14 where we had to address a lot of these changes from the ACA.  One of the key terms that she hits on is this idea of “Reasonable Alternative Standards”.  This basically means that if you implement an outcomes based incentive program that people have to be able to get the same incentive without achieving the outcome.  This seems to defeat the purpose in my mind.  

I always used to say that it was like having a guard dog with no teeth.  We implemented a very interesting program with lots of expectations, but there was a huge gapping loop hole.  Everyone could apply for a Reasonable Alternative Standard and achieve the same payout without really doing much.  Of course, most people don’t realize this, but this is why I would argue that people that aren’t healthy or engaged with their health programs at work would rather have these outcomes based programs.  

Books / Articles, Care Management, Healthcare, Methodology

12 Innovation Lessons from 2014 (Fast Company)

June 10, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

Back in March 2014 (yes I’m behind), Fast Company put out a report on the World’s Most Innovative Companies.  I thought the list of 12 trends or lessons from their research was worth sharing.

  1. Exceptional is the Expected…Google is the case study here, but they make a point that for most companies, the best businesses focus on less not more.
  2. Innovation is Episodic…Innovation ebbs and flows so people don’t stay on the list every year.  This is also known as regression to the mean or the Sports Illustrated curse (of being on the cover).
  3. Making Money Matters…This is very true for mHealth.  I’ve seen so many really cool ideas, but if they’re not self-sustaining, that’s a problem.
  4. Sustainability Has Found A New Gear…”Green” is no longer a gimmick.  Companies are innovating and using alternative fuels and recycling as part of that.
  5. Unlocking Global Talent Unlocks Possibility…I can’t believe companies still don’t get this.  To innovate, you need diversity and a culture which allows those different opinions and perspectives to hash it solutions.  (Just look at the graphic at the bottom of this post for Silicon Valley which makes that point.)
  6. Passion is Underrated…While crowdsourcing sounds like old news to many industries.  I think there’s still a huge patient empowerment push that will happen in healthcare.  (Just look at this article in the WSJ.)
  7. Conflict Isn’t Required…This is the perfect Blue Ocean example.  You don’t always have to try to change the establishment but sometimes you have to figure out a whole new way.
  8. Happy Customers Make You Happy…Not much to say here.  Healthcare is about to learn this lesson with exchanges, but we have a long way to go.
  9. Software Beats Hardware…YES!  A great computer with a horrible data entry process which messes up the physician workflow and consumer experience is bad.  We need outside-in design to develop user-friendly software that takes into account workflow and regulation but improves the overall experience and outcomes.
  10. “Made In China” Is A Compliment…I’d expand this point to say that while we’ve outsourced for years for cost that’s building up knowledge and a middle class abroad.  As their expectations and experience rise, we’re going to see more innovation and quality from abroad.
  11. The Biggest Winner In The App Economy Remains Apple…And, now, Apple is taking it’s “moral obligation” and bringing it to healthcare.
  12. Dreaming Big Isn’t Folly; It’s Required…Eliminating cancer.  Changing payment paradigms in healthcare.  Getting patients to take action.  Changing food at schools.  We have to have some BHAGs in healthcare and make them happen.  (Perhaps some of the HealthPeople 2020 initiatives will get us thinking.)

Silicon Valley Workers

Above: Tech Immigrants: A Map of Silicon Valley’s Imported Talent (from VentureBeat article)

Image Credit: Graphic by Bloomberg Businessweek

 

Books / Articles, Consumerism, General Business, Healthcare, Innovation, Leadership, Methodology, Research, Technology

Curing Camden: Book Review

June 10, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

Curing Camden is a quick read on how different groups collaborated to change the healthcare cost curve in Camden, NJ.  Here’s the official language from the Amazon site, but after reading it, I thought I’d highlight a few things that caught my attention.

As the federal health reform debate played out in the national media spotlight, author Christina Hernandez Sherwood was reporting on the American medical system from the street level. From 2010 to 2012, she wrote a half-dozen stories for thePhiladelphia Inquirer that focused on an innovative healthcare nonprofit: the Camden Coalition of Healthcare Providers. These stories centered on the nonprofit’s role in combating falls, violence, diabetes, and other issues in Camden, New Jersey, a city known nationally as one of the country’s poorest and most violent, but that is now making a name for itself as an innovation leader in the public health sector.

In Curing Camden, all of Sherwood’s articles have been collected into a single book, including the unpublished final installment profiling the nonprofit’s founder. This book takes readers from the living rooms of Camden residents to the halls of the New Jersey State House in Trenton and beyond. Sherwood highlights how Camden could be the first US city to bend the cost curve by lowering healthcare costs while improving care. The ideas revealed in this book could be translated into practice across the country, and Camden could become a national model of 21st century medicine and public health.

The book goes through several core chapters.  The first one is on creating a citywide health record by working with the 3 primary health systems in the city.  The core part of the success here is that they used the framework of opt-out not opt-in which would drive more participation at the consumer level.  This behavioral economics framework called “active choice” has been used by several companies that I’ve worked with in the healthcare space to shift behavior patterns.  This obviously has the opportunity to reduce duplicate testing and improve care coordination.

The second chapter is about create an ACO for Camden with a 3-year Medicare demonstration project.  It’s an interesting discussion about how Dr. Jeffrey Brenner began using data to learn things about the Camden population.  For example he found out that most of the population will vista a hospital at least once in a 2-year period (which is 2x the national rate).  He also found that most of the top reasons for going to the emergency room were all primary care issues.  He makes a great point in the book that while people think that complicated patients simply like going to emergency rooms the reality is that they don’t have better choices.

The third chapter was about protecting against the risk of falling.  From 2002-2009, Camden residents made more than 17,000 trips to the hospital (the number one cause of hospital visits in Camden).  This isn’t a localized issue either.  Falls affect 1 in 3 seniors every year and drive $19B in costs according to the CDC.  In the book, they make an interesting point about the “vicious cycle” of falling which leads to less activity which leads to weaker patients increasing the likelihood of another fall.

The fourth and fifth chapters are about diabetes.  In Camden, almost 13% of adults have diabetes.  These patients can be high utilizers which is something they talk about along with their focus on the 13% of patients that drive more than 80% of the costs in Camden with one patient having over $5M in charges over 5 years.  Of course, people in dangerous communities are at higher risk of obesity due to lack of access to food and safe places to exercise which contributes to the diabetes issues.

The sixth chapter is about violence and helping victims.  Camden’s 77,000 residents experience more than 13 aggravated assaults per 1,000 residents (which is 5x the national rate).  This lead to 9,361 trips to the hospital from 2002-2009.

It’s an interesting read.  They had a lot of grant money, but at the end of the day, it was about several things:

  • Coordination and collaboration across the different systems
  • Localized care – being in the apartment building with a clinic or going into people’s homes
  • Using data to target the areas where they could make a difference
  • Caring to make a change
Books / Articles, Care Management, Healthcare, Innovation, Managed Care, Methodology, Value Propositions
, ,

$83,000 In Savings On 3 Procedures – The Driver Of Transparency & Reference-Based Pricing

June 9, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

At the front of the HealthLeaders Magazine, they have a FactFile every month with data from Truven Health.  The one from March 2014 focused on price variation and transparency.  I thought I’d share a few of the charts.

This first chart shows their projections about the impact of a price transparency tool on cost savings over three years.  (BTW – If you’re looking for information on price transparency tools, I would go to Jane Sarasohn-Kahn‘s blog HealthPopuli and look at her posts on transparency – Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, and Part V).  Their projection was $6,786,000 in year 3 for an employer with 20,000 employees (or about 46,000 total covered lives if you assume a ratio of 2.3).

Image

 

 

 

The other topic in the FactFile is about price variation and potential savings.  They looked at three procedures and the variation in pricing for them.  They then estimated the savings from those three procedures for an Chicago based employers.

As you can see, the variation is dramatic.  What this will eventually lead to is called “reference-based pricing” where payers will agree to pay a fixed amount (or reference price) for a procedure and consumers will have to use transparency tools to figure out which providers will meet that price or pay out of pocket to go elsewhere.  The hope is that this will drive down prices, make consumers aware of differences, and finally help people understand that price and quality are NOT correlated in healthcare.

Here’s a few articles to read on price transparency:

Image

Image

Books / Articles, Consumerism, Healthcare, Managed Care, Methodology, Value Propositions
,

Great #BigData JAMA Image Missing Some Data Sources

May 27, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

JAMA image data

When I saw this article and image in JAMA, I was really excited.  It’s a good collection of structured and unstructured data sources.  It reminded me of Dr. Harry Greenspun’s tweet from earlier today which points out why this new thinking is important.

 

But, it also made me think about this image and what was missing.  The chart shows all the obvious data sources:

  • Pharmacy
  • Medical
  • Lab
  • Demographic
  • EMR / PHR

It even points out some of the newer sources of data:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Online communities
  • Genetics

But, I think they missed several that I think are important and relevant:

  1. Structured assessments like the PHQ-9 for depression screening or the Patient Activation Measure.
  2. Communications data like:
    • How often do they call the call center?
    • What types of questions do they have?
    • Do they respond to calls, e-mails, SMS, letters, etc?
    • Have they identified any barriers to adherence or other actions (e.g., vaccines)?  Is that stored at the pharmacy, call center, MD notes?
  3. Browser / Internet data:
    • This could be mobile data from my phone.
    • What searches I’ve done to find health information.  What have I read?  Was it a reliable source?
  4. Device data (e.g., FitBit):
    • What’s my sleep pattern?
    • What am I eating?
    • How many steps do I walk a day?
  5. Income information or even credit score type data

These things seem more relevant to me than fitness club memberships (which doesn’t actually mean you go to the fitness club) or ancestry.com data which isn’t very personalized (to the best of my knowledge).

In some cases, just simply understanding how consumers are using the healthcare system might be revealing and provide a perspective on their health literacy.

  • Do they call the Nurseline?
  • Do they go to the ER?
  • Do they have a PCP?
  • Do they use the EAP?

We’d like to think this was all coordinated (and sometimes scared into believing that it is), but the reality is that these data silos exist with limited ability to track a patient longitudinally and be sure that the patient is the same across data sources without a common, unique identifier.

Books / Articles, Care Management, Healthcare, Infographic, Managed Care, Methodology, mHealth, PBM / Pharmacy, Research, Social Media
, , , , ,

Fail Fast To Succeed Sooner – The Big Company Challenge

March 12, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 6 Comments

I was reading an article this morning about asking the question “are you afraid to fail?”  It’s an article about innovation which reminded me of one of my favorite quotes from David Kelley at IDEO.

Fail Faster

It also reminded me of another article from 2006 in Business Week about How Failure Breeds Success which was when I left Express Scripts to pursue several entrepreneurial opportunities.

Stefan H. Thomke, a professor at Harvard Business School and author of Experimentation Matters, says that when he talks to business groups, “I try to be provocative and say: ‘Failure is not a bad thing.’ I always have lots of people staring at me, [thinking] ‘Have you lost your mind?’ That’s O.K. It gets their attention. [Failure] is so important to the experimental process.”

BW Failure Cover

It also got me thinking about success rates in companies.  We all hear so much about the success of entrepreneurs and these 20 year old billionaires.  Is that reality?  Here’s a few stats from an article in the WSJ and a study by the Census Bureau.

  • 80% of companies make it to year one
  • 60% of companies make it to year three
  • 50% of companies make it to year five
  • 35% of companies make it to year ten

Sounds pretty depressing.  What about the fact that according to the WSJ article, only 5% of them achieve the projected ROI and 30-40% of them liquidate all their assets returning nothing.

“People are embarrassed to talk about their failures, but the truth is that if you don’t have a lot of failures, then you’re just not doing it right, because that means that you’re not investing in risky ventures.  I believe failure is an option for entrepreneurs and if you don’t believe that, then you can bang your head against the wall trying to make it work.” (David Cowan – Bessemer Venture Partners in WSJ article)

Just watch the show Shark Tank sometime.  There are amazing entrepreneurs with interesting ideas who have sacrificed so much to try to make it work.  I always try to tell people that it’s not just about passion and hard work otherwise people would succeed all the time.  Some things you do learn from Shark Tank along with the book The Art of the Start is how to frame and present your ideas.

So, why is this so important?  We’re on the the verge of huge transformation in the healthcare industry.  I think Oliver Wyman did a good job of discussing this in a whitepaper last year.  You can read article after article about mHealth, telemedicine, and remote monitoring.  (I’ll point you to Rock Health or The Center For Connected Health as two starting points.)

Of course innovation has been the buzz for several years now.  I think Jim Collins does a good job of teeing up this issue in discussing churn in the Fortune 500 list.  With the technology and VC crowd, the more recent term for business model innovation is “pivot“.  I think you’ve seen a lot more Chief Innovation Officers and innovation labs in healthcare companies these days.

I came across an interesting blend of technology consulting, investing, and innovation last night in the BCG Digital Ventures group.  In watching part of a YouTube video by their CEO, I think he does a great job summarizing how consulting maps to the investment paradigm.

  • Innovation is like seed capital
  • Product development is like venture capital
  • Commercialization is like growth capital

Interestingly, I probably get 1-2 calls a week from people in big companies that really want to get out of the big company and come work in the exciting start-up space.  I always tell them that the grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence so be careful.  It can be great, but it can be really tough.  It’s just a different type of risk and not everyone can take the emotional and potentially financial risk.  On the flipside, I also get people that look at the different entrepreneurial things I’ve done and say “why?”  They want to know why I didn’t just stay in a F500 company.  Sometimes, I think of this 8 years as a boomerang where I’ll end up back in a F500 company, but I’ll be a much more valuable product development, strategy, and innovation executive.  [This idea of boomeranging was one that Gensler introduced me to years ago in architecture where they encouraged people to work at different companies and come back if relevant.]

Depending on the day, I also think about what I’ve learned since I’ve never had one of those huge exits that everyone talks about.  I’m not cashing in on all my options to make money.  I’ve summarized many of those learnings on the blog, but here’s a few that I’ll call out.

  1. Firepond was my first venture into this space.  It was a 20-year company that General Atlantic had invested in to turn around as a product configurator in the CRM space.
    • Learned about CRM (customer relationship management) technology.
    • Learned about how to develop, structure, and manage alliances.
    • Learned the importance and how to structure offshore deals.
    • Learned about global sales and embedding technology into different solutions.
    • Learned about evaluating and buying companies.
  2. CentralScript was my second venture I started it from an idea I tried to sell at Express Scripts (and later was suggested to them by Clayton Christensen).
    • Learned about writing a business plan and financial modeling and projections.
    • Learned about the legal structure of businesses.
    • Learned about raising money and how to work with and evaluate angels and VCs.
    • Learned about building a team and structuring contracts with them.
    • Learned about selling and evaluating partners.
  3. Talisen Technologies was my third venture which was another turnaround where I worked with a friend of mine who had raise some private equity to do a technology services consulting roll-up.
    • Learned about Business Process Management technology.
    • Learned about how to build support companies around a technology platform.  (The opposite of Firepond where I was the technology company.)
    • Learned about the difficulties of transforming an existing company and evaluating new companies.
    • Learned about how to use blogging and create exposure using social media.
  4. Silverlink was my fourth venture (and most successful experience) and first real start-up where it wasn’t trying to turnaround an existing asset but building off what the founders had built.
    • Learned about how to present to and work with the Board of Directors.
    • Learned about managing a sales force.
    • Learned about product development, training, documentation, and product lifecycle.
    • Learned about sales and marketing and being responsible for growth and a team.
    • Learned about account management.
    • Learned the value of using thought leadership, social media, and the press to drive awareness and pipeline.
    • Learned how to develop competitive analysis and differentiation.
    • Leraned about pricing and analytics.
  5. inVentiv Medical Management is my current venture which is part of a broader entity, but it’s still the same concept which is a 20-year old company that we’re transforming into a new platform and new business model.
    • Still in-progress so more to come…

So, I wrote all this to make the point that innovation is difficult.  You have to take some risks.  Like the article said upfront, you have to believe you can fail.  You have to have a plan for what to do if you do fail.  Big companies should provide a safety net to people to fail fast.  I think I’ve learned a ton that I wouldn’t have learned staying in the big company.  At the right time, that will be a huge asset as I look to help drive the transformation and pivoting of a larger entity!

Books / Articles, General Business, General Thoughts, Healthcare, Innovation, Leadership, Methodology, Research, Value Propositions

Healthcare Gamification

March 3, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 4 Comments

If you believe all the hype about digital health, you might think gamification was a natural solution.  Of course, if you’ve never heard of gamification, let me provide a basic definition from Wikipedia.

Gamification is the use of game thinking and game mechanics in non-game contexts to engage users in solving problems.

Here’s several articles for more information:

  1. Four Factors Driving Gamification in Healthcare
  2. From FitBit to Fitocracy
  3. The Wellness Game
  4. Gamification: Drugmakers And Health Campaigners Turn To Games To Promote Health

I think this quote from the Perficient white paper on this topic is a good one.

Gabe Zichermann, the author of Game-Based Marketing, speaks of balancing the fun and frivolity of gamification with the task of making life easier for cancer patients. He says, “I don’t presume to think that we can make having cancer into a purely fun experience. But, we have data to show that when we give cancer patients gamified experiences to help them manage their drug
prescriptions and manage chemotherapy, they improve their emotional state and also their adherence to their protocol.”

You can also look at a post by Jane Sarasohn-Kahn (one of my favorite bloggers) on this topic where she highlights several trends from a recent paper on gamification in healthcare.

Now, why should you care?

  1. Gamification should improve engagement which is critical to changing behavior.
  2. Gamification creates opportunities to make healthcare fun which can be difficult.
  3. People are different and respond to different “incentives”.  Competition and leader boards are concepts that excite lots of people to take action.

The forecasts for the gamification market are huge.  They show a nice hockey stick which gets every investor excited.

1

Of course, the important question is who uses games.  Is it just teenage boys?  It’s not.  Here’s a good report which shows you breakdown by age, gender, and many other stats.

Gaming

Another quick article about gamification is from TEDMED.  The video is below, but it reminds me of some of my personal perspectives.  The sites also lists out several vendors and solutions in the obesity gamification space.

While one “easy” opportunity in my mind is to use gamification to address the rising number of kids with chronic diseases and to help address childhood obesity, there are many other opportunities like adherence.  A few examples of games out there include:

Companies like Ayogo, Mango Health, and Akili are ones that I’ve heard about, but I know there are a lot more out there.

One example I think of from watching my kids play games is from Webkinz which was a blend of real stuffed animals with online digital personas.  The animals could get sick if you didn’t nurture them and visit them.  It made me think of how an avatar could get fatter or slower based on their pedometer or eating habits.

Books / Articles, Business Tools, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, mHealth, Software, Technology, Value Propositions

Listing of Medication Adherence Solutions

January 23, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 10 Comments

It’s been a few years since I’ve worked on medication adherence solutions.  It seems to have become a big focus again in the industry both with the Medicare Star Ratings program and with all the emphasis on waste.

As I started thinking about adherence, I thought it would be good to create a list of solutions and vendors.  I couldn’t find one anywhere on the web.  So, here’s my initial list of almost 100 companies.

I’ll make this a dynamic list so please comment or send me suggestions to add.

Here’s some old posts on adherence that I think are still relevant here:

I’ve divided the list of solutions and vendors into the following:

Devices

  • Adherence Solutions LLC – develop programs to create alliances between different players, sell Dose-Alert which is a smart pill bottle cap, and provide a mobile tool
  • AdhereTech – smart pill bottles
  • Automated Security Alert – medication dispensers to complement their medical alert system
  • Biodose – electronic tray for monitoring time and day of use
  • CleverCap – smart cap for pill bottle
  • Didit – manual tracking device that attaches to a pill bottle
  • DoseCue – smart pill bottle
  • eCap – electronic compliance monitor
  • ePill – medication reminder devices
  • eTect – biocompatible tag on the pill with connectivity and a mobile solution focused on clinical trial adherence
  • iRemember – smart pill bottle cap with voice reminder and smart phone synching
  • MedCenter – monthly organizer and reminder system
  • Med-E-Lert – automated pill dispenser
  • MedMinder – automated pill dispenser
  • MedVantx – medication sampling at the physician’s office
  • Proteus – smart pill technology
  • Quand Medical – uses Near Field Communications and mobile to do medication management and reminders
  • SMRxT – smart pill bottle
  • TalkingRx – audio device attached to pill bottle
  • uBox – smart pillbox
  • Vitality GlowCap – smart pill bottle with communication programs

Mobile / Digital

  • 2Comply – patient portal with web coaching
  • ActualMeds – online medication management for consumers, caregivers, and providers
  • AI Cure Technologies – digital health solution
  • AssistMed – web and mobile based adherence solutions
  • Ayogo – social games and apps to improve engagement and adherence
  • CareSpeak – mobile solution
  • Care4Today – two-way messaging platform, app, and website
  • CellepathicRx – mobile solution
  • CloudMetRx – cloud based solution to help caregivers with medication management
  • Dosecast – mobile medication management and pill reminder
  • GenieMD – mobile medication management and reminders as part of broader solution
  • iPharmacy – mobile pill identifier, medication guide, and reminder app
  • Mango Health – mobile medication management with gamification and incentives
  • Medacheck – mobile reminder system that incorporates caregivers
  • MedCoach – mobile medication management and pill reminder
  • MedHelper – medication compliance and tracking app
  • mHealthCoach – reminder based solution creating a digital support system
  • Mscripts – mobile solution
  • MyMeds – mobile and web medication management and pill reminder solution
  • MyMedSchedule – mobile Rx management tool with reminder service
  • Nightingale – mobile solutions for reminders, engaging your physician, and notifying your caregivers
  • PillBoxie – mobile medication management and reminder app
  • PillManager – mobile medication management and pill reminder
  • PillMonitor – mobile medication reminders and logs
  • PillPhone – mobile phone solution with biometric authentication
  • Prescribe Wellness – automated, digital interventions
  • RightScript – platform to manage prescriptions through mobile reminders that connect patients, caretakers, practitioners, and health plans
  • RxCase Minder – mobile medication management
  • RxNetwork – mobile medication management and reminders with rewards
  • Quintiles – building digitally, connected communities
  • Virtusa – multi-dimensional interventions across the patient’s journey

Platform

  • Adheris – adherence suite and advanced analytics (just acquired Catalina Health) [note: they are owned by inVentiv Health who I work for]
  • Avanter – an adherence program for pharmacies in Argentina
  • Capzule – pill reminders as part of PHR
  • Dr. First – embedded tools into EHR
  • HealthPrize – platform with gamification, incentives, education, and communications
  • LDM Group – suite of compliance products
  • McKesson – sampling, coaching, coupons, and messaging
  • MediSafe – mobile medication management app and adherence platform
  • MedPal Health Solutions – platform for medication adherence solutions
  • MedSimple – medication management, pill reminders, coupons, and PAP programs
  • mHealthCoach – care collaboration platform using machine learning to personalize communications
  • Tavie – virtual nurse for improving adherence focused on several conditions

Communications

  • Ateb – multi-channel communication programs for pharmacies
  • Atlantis Healthcare – custom adherence solutions
  • Eliza – multi-channel communication programs
  • Intelecare – multi-channel adherence communications
  • MemoText – messaging platform
  • Patient Empowerment Program – medication adherence program for pharmacies
  • Pleio – adherence solutions for the first 100-days (when most people stop taking medications)
  • Silverlink – multi-channel communication programs [note: this is the company that I used to work for and still use]
  • Varolii (now Nuance) – multi-channel communication programs
  • Voxiva – web and text messaging solution
  • West – multi-channel communication programs

Big Data

Tools / Enablers

  • 5th Finger – assessment and personalization tools
  • GNS Healthcare – using data and predictive models to identify targets and fuel intervention programs
  • HumanCare Systems – creating patient and caregiver support solutions
  • Insignia (PAM) – measure of patient activation for segmentation and scoring
  • MedMonk – help pharmacists obtain funding for patients who can’t afford their out-of-pocket pharmaceutical expenses
  • MedSked – low tech, high impact labeling solution
  • Merck Adherence Estimator – screening tool available as a widget or online at Merck Engage
  • NaviNet – communications network to enable adherence
  • NCPA – toolkit and ROI calculator for pharmacies
  • ScriptYourFuture – tools and text reminders
  • Walgreens API – an application programming interface for developers to use to connect their adherence solutions to Walgreens

Medicare focused

  • Dovetail – pharmacist led programs including MTM, in-home visits, and telephonic coaching (focused on Star Ratings)
  • Mirixa – incorporated into the MTM program
  • Outcomes – data and tools as part of their MTM solution
  • Pharm MD – Medicare STARS program

Condition specific

  • GeckoCap – adherence offering for kids with asthma
  • MyRefillRx – mobile adherence app focused on high blood pressure

Packaging

Pharma

  • 90Ten Healthcare – providing adherence programs in 23 countries
  • TrialCard – voucher and co-pay programs for consumers to stop Rx abandonment
  • Triplefin – customized programs for pharma brand managers
  • Adherence Engagement Platform – a Pfizer program of adherence materials and tools (I couldn’t find it online only in hard copy)
  • RS Associate – a company working with manufacturers in India
  • Rx.com – MTM, pre-edit messaging at the POS, and print-on-demand messaging at the pharmacy

International (recommendations send to me without English sites)

What other companies am I missing?  Send them to me directly or add them in the comments section here.  Thanks.

Healthcare, Innovation, Leadership, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, mHealth, PBM / Pharmacy, Research, Software, Technology
, , , , , , , , ,

Should Photos Replace Texting For Healthcare

January 1, 2014 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I’ll admit that several people have asked me about this over the years.  If a picture is really worth a thousand words, would it be better to send someone a picture than a text message.  Perhaps a picture of me in my skinny jeans if I’m trying to lose weight.  Perhaps a picture of my grandkid if I’m trying to get healthy to run around the yard with them.  Perhaps a picture of my favorite vacation location to motivate me to stick with a health goal.  It’s an interesting question.

So, let’s start with tex messaging in healthcare.  When I think of using SMS (or texting) in healthcare, my first example is always Text4Baby which was a unique coalition of companies that worked with Voxiva to get this launched.

Text4baby_522f5f55154ee_w1500

Of course, Voxiva has since expanded to offer other programs:

Voxiva

And, I think there are some business cases out there around using SMS to interact and change behavior in healthcare.  The Center For Connected Health in Boston with Dr. Joseph Kvedar has been studying this in several settings.  Here’s one poster from them on a pilot.  Here’s a good summary of what had happened as of 2012 from MobiHealth News.

Here’s a few other studies:

I could go on, but I think you get the point.  Lots of people have tried using text messaging as a low-cost but potentially effective way to get messages to consumers about a specific health behavior.  Especially in other countries, this can be the preferred method.

But, we always talk about the fact that people remember pictures better than words.  And, culturally, we’ve become a society that takes pictures of everything.  We share those pictures on Facebook and Pinterest and Twitter and other social media tools.  And, in many cases, we’re obsessed with infographics as a means of delivering information.  So, why not use them more in healthcare communications?

There is some research out there to support this topic:

I was thinking about my interview with Aetna about CarePass and what CarePass was doing, and it seemed to create a good example.  Would I rather a text that reminded me about my goal or the picture on the right?

whats your healthy ad2

Additionally, I know in discussions with Vic Strecher, co-founder of HealthMedia, that we’re talked about the value of customizing imagery on letters to personalize and engage consumers.  I just can’t find anything published by them right now to show that they studied that.

So, as we think about motivating people and sending them reminders, I think it would be really interesting to see the results of a picture driven process versus a written communication.  Is it the same effect?  Does it vary?  By age, gender, type of action?  Of course, the one thing I would recommend is letting the consumer upload and pick their picture not picking from some general list of canned photos.

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

Pharmacy Satisfaction – Retail Beats Mail

November 29, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 2 Comments

With the new JD Powers survey, the gap between retail pharmacy satisfaction and mail order has widened. The average mail order satisfaction score was 797 for mail versus 837 (out of 1,000) for retail.

I think one key comment from Scott Hawkins, director of the healthcare practice at JD powers was:

“One of the key things we’ve seen in the data is that if someone is feels compelled to use a mail-order [pharmacy] their satisfaction score is going to be lower than someone who chooses to use it on their own.” (From Nov 2013 Employee Benefits News article by Andrea Davis)

If I was still at a PBM, I’d push to see the results broken out both ways so I could compare apples to apples the then say the drag was from clients choosing mandatory mail.

The rankings for mail order were:

Kaiser – 868
Humana – 845
Walgreens Mail – 812
OptumRx – 798
Prime Therapeutics – 794
Express Scripts – 783
Aetna – 778
Cigna – 771
Caremark – 760

The two I find the most interesting are Prime Therapeutics and OptumRx as both of them have moved their mail order services in house in the past few years and seem to be doing well with it. Aetna has outsourced their solution to Caremark and Cigna just recently outsourced their mail order to Catamaran which wasn’t on the list (but may be in the survey).

Books / Articles, Consumerism, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, PBM / Pharmacy, Value Propositions
, , , , , , , ,

Trajectory Modeling On Adherence By CVS

November 2, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

No one who works with consumers or who studies adherence should too surprised that people are different in how they fill their medications. I think companies are finally getting a better handle on longitudinal member records and ways of studying those patterns to determine how and when to intervene.

Our past behavior is always a great place to learn from about our future behavior but at the same time, people view different drugs and conditions differently. For example, I might be very likely to take my pain medication everyday since it’s a symptomatic condition versus my cholesterol medication since it’s an asymptotic condition. I also may take a different approach yo medications that have significant side effects.

At the same time, these data is well known so the quest for the “best” segmentation approach and behavior change model continues.

With that in mind, I finally got a chance to look at some research from September that researchers at CVS Caremark and Brigham and Women’s Hospital published in the journal Medical Care. They used trajectory modeling to follow statin users for 15 months and came up with six groups:

  • Brief gap in medication use or filled irregularly during the first nine months, but improved during the last six months (11.4 percent)
  • Slowly declining adherence throughout the 15 month period (11.3 percent)
  • Used statins only occasionally across the 15 month study period (15 percent)
  • Rapid decline in statin use after initiation (19.3 percent)
  • Virtually no fills after their initial fill (23.4 percent

They also identified some characteristics associated with adherence:

  • Higher adherence was seen with patients who were older, had higher incomes and held a high school diploma.
  • The highest adherence rates were associated with Medicare Part D clients and people who live in New England.
  • Those with the lowest adherence rates tended to be generally younger, male and less likely to have an initial prescription that provided them with more than a 30-day supply of medication.

Troyen A. Brennan, MD, MPH, Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Officer of CVS Caremark:


“The use of trajectory models could help us more accurately identify patients at risk for medication nonadherence so we can develop and implement targeted interventions to help them stay on their medications for chronic health conditions.”

Books / Articles, Care Management, Healthcare, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, PBM / Pharmacy, Research
,

Aetna’s Metabolic Syndrome Innovation Program

October 22, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I’ve been closely following Aetna’s innovation for the past few years (see post on CarePass and Healthagen).  I had the chance last week to speak with Adam Scott who is the Managing Director of the Aetna Innovation Labs.

Here’s Adam’s bio:

Adam Scott is a Managing Director within Aetna’s Innovation Labs, a group developing novel clinical, platform, and engagement solutions for the next generation of healthcare.  Mr. Scott specializes in clinical innovation, with a focus on oncology, genetics, and metabolic syndrome, as well as “big data” analysis.  His work is aimed at conceptualizing and developing products and services that better predict illness, enable evidence-based care and lengthen healthy lives.  Prior to joining Aetna, Mr. Scott’s 15-year healthcare career has included management roles in consulting, hospital administration, and most recently health information technology.  Mr. Scott holds a bachelor’s degree from Washington University in St. Louis and a Masters in Business Administration from Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management.  Mr. Scott resides with his family in Needham, MA, where he actively serves as a director on community boards.

This is one of my favorite topics – Metabolic Syndrome (although yes…I still hate the term).

Definition of Metabolic Syndrome from the NIH:

Metabolic (met-ah-BOL-ik) syndrome is the name for a group of risk factors that raises your risk for heart disease and other health problems, such as diabetesand stroke.

The term “metabolic” refers to the biochemical processes involved in the body’s normal functioning. Risk factors are traits, conditions, or habits that increase your chance of developing a disease.

The Aetna Innovation Labs are focused on bringing concepts to scale and staying 2-3 years ahead of the market.  They are looking to rapidly pilot ideas with a focus on collecting evidence.  In general, Adam described their work as focused on clinical, platform, and engagement ideas.  They are trying to collaborate with cutting edge companies that they think they can help to scale quickly.  It’s pretty exciting!

As stated in their press release about this new effort:

“During the course of the last year, Aetna Innovation Labs has successfully piloted an analysis of Metabolic Syndrome and the creation of predictive models for Metabolic Syndrome. This prior work showed significantly increased risk of both diabetes and heart disease for those living with Metabolic Syndrome,” said Michael Palmer, vice president of Innovation at Aetna. “With this new pilot program with Newtopia, we are aiming to help members address Metabolic Syndrome through specific actions, before more serious chronic conditions arise, like diabetes and heart disease.”

Aetna selected Newtopia for this effort for their unique approach toward achieving a healthy weight with an integrative and personalized focus on nutrition, exercise, and behavioral well-being. Newtopia’s program begins with a “genetic reveal,” leveraging a saliva-based genetic test to stratify participants with respect to three genes associated with obesity, appetite, and behavior. Based on the results of this test and an online assessment, Newtopia matches each participant to a plan and coach trained to focus on the member’s specific genetic, personality and motivation profile. Through online coaching sessions, Newtopia will help members achieve results related to maintaining a healthy weight and Metabolic Syndrome risk-reduction, which will be measured by changes from a pre- and post-program biometric screening.

“Newtopia’s mission is to inspire individuals to make the lifestyle choices that can help them build healthy lives,” said Jeffrey Ruby, Founder and CEO of Newtopia.

If you’ve been following the story, this builds upon their project with GNS to develop a predictive algorithm to identify people at risk for Metabolic Syndrome.  As you may or may not know, there are 5 first factors for Metabolic Syndrome (text from NIH):

The five conditions described below are metabolic risk factors. You can have any one of these risk factors by itself, but they tend to occur together. You must have at least three metabolic risk factors to be diagnosed with metabolic syndrome.

  • A large waistline. This also is called abdominal obesity or “having an apple shape.” Excess fat in the stomach area is a greater risk factor for heart disease than excess fat in other parts of the body, such as on the hips.

  • A high triglyceride level (or you’re on medicine to treat high triglycerides). Triglycerides are a type of fat found in the blood.

  • A low HDL cholesterol level (or you’re on medicine to treat low HDL cholesterol). HDL sometimes is called “good” cholesterol. This is because it helps remove cholesterol from your arteries. A low HDL cholesterol level raises your risk for heart disease.

  • High blood pressure (or you’re on medicine to treat high blood pressure). Blood pressure is the force of blood pushing against the walls of your arteries as your heart pumps blood. If this pressure rises and stays high over time, it can damage your heart and lead to plaque buildup.

  • High fasting blood sugar (or you’re on medicine to treat high blood sugar). Mildly high blood sugar may be an early sign of diabetes.

So, what exactly are they doing now.  That was the focus of my discussion with Adam.

  1. They are running data through the GNS predictive model.
  2. They are inviting people to participate in the program.  (initially focusing on 500 Aetna employees for the pilot)
  3. The employees that choose to participate then get a 3 SNP (snip) test done focused on the genes that are associated with body fat, appetite, and eating behavior.  (Maybe they should get a few of us bloggers into the pilot – hint.)  This is done through Newtopia, and the program is GINA compliant since the genetic data is never received by Aetna or the employer.
  4. The genetic analysis puts the consumer into one of eight categories.
  5. Based on the category, the consumer is matched with a personal coach who is going to help them with a care plan, an exercise plan, and a nutrition plan.  The coaching also includes a lifestyle assessment to identify the best ways to engage them and is supported by mobile and web technology.
    newtopia
  6. The Newtopia coaches are then using the Pebble technology to track activity and upload that into a portal and into their system.

We then talked about several of the other activities that are important for this to be successful:

  • Use of Motivational Interviewing or other evidence-based approaches for engagement.  In this case, Newtopia is providing the coaching using a proprietary approach based on the genetic data.
  • Providing offline support.  In this case, Aetna has partnered with Duke to provide the Metabolic Health in Small Bytes program which he described as a virtual coaching program.

Metabolic Health in Small Bytes uses a virtual classroom technology, where participants can interact with each other and the instructor. All of the program instructors have completed a program outlined by lead program developer Ruth Wolever, PhD from Duke Diet and Fitness Center and Duke Integrative Medicine. Using mindfulness techniques from the program, participants learn practices they can use to combat the root causes of obesity. The program’s goal is to help participants better understand their emotional state, enhance their knowledge of how to improve exercise and nutrition, and access internal motivation to do so. (source)

We also talked about employer feedback and willingness to adopt solutions like this.  From my conversations, I think employers are hesitant to go down this path.  Metabolic Syndrome affects about 23.7% of the population.  That is a large group of consumers to engage, and pending final ROI analysis will likely scare some employers off.

Adam told me that they’ve talked with 30 of their large clients, consultants, and mid-market clients.  While we didn’t get into specifics, we talked about all the reasons they should do this:

  • People with Metabolic Syndrome are 1.6x more expensive
  • People with Metabolic Syndrome are 5x more likely to get diabetes
  • Absenteeism
  • Presenteeism

This ties well with my argument that wellness programs aren’t just about ROI.

Obviously, one of the next steps will be figuring out how this integrates into their other existing programs to address the overall consumer experience so that it’s not just another cool (but disconnected) program.  And, of course, to demonstrate the effectiveness of the program to get clients and consumers to participate.

Two quotes I’ll leave you with on why this is difficult (but yet exciting to try to solve):

“The harsh reality is that scientists know as much about curing obesity as they do about curing the common cold: not much. But at least they admit their limitations in treating the cold. Many doctors seem to think the cure for obesity exists, but obese patients just don’t comply. Doctors often have less respect for obese patients, believing if they would just diet and exercise they’d be slim and healthy.” (source)

Thirty percent of those in the “overweight” class believed they were actually normal size, while 70% of those classified as obese felt they were simply overweight. Among the heaviest group, the morbidly obese, almost 60% pegged themselves as obese, while another 39% considered themselves merely overweight. (source)

Books / Articles, Care Management, Consumerism, Healthcare, Innovation, Leadership, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, Press, Research, Technology, Value Propositions
, , , , , , , ,

10 Healthcare Projects I’d Like To Solve

October 19, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

I always tend to see the glass half full so when I see a problem then I often want to rush in and try to fix it. With that said, here are 10 things that I’ve thought about that I’d like to fix or see as big opportunities:

1. The healthcare experience. While this is the third leg of the Triple Aim, it often seems like the one that is so hard for healthcare companies to get. The system is so fragmented that the patient often is forgotten.

2. Device integration. While devices are better and integration is possible, there is still a huge lift to integrate my data into the typical clinical workflow. This is only going to get much worse with ubiquitous use of sensors and will be the limiting factor in the growth of the Quantified Self movement. (See my post on FitBit)

3. Intelligent phones. This is something that people carry everywhere. They often live life through the phone sometimes missing out on reality. The phone has tons of data as I’ve described before. We have to figure out how to tap into this in a less disruptive way.

4. Consumer preferences. I’m a big believer in preference-based marketing. But the question is how do I disclose my preferences, to whom, and are my preferences really the best way to get me to engage. What would be ideal is if we could find a way to scale down fMRI technology and allow us to disclose this information to key companies so they could get us to take actions that were in our best interest. (see old post on Buyology)

5. Benefits selection. I’ve picked the wrong benefits a few times. This drives me crazy. As I mentioned the other day, the technology to help with this exists and all the data which sits in EMRs and PHRs should allow us to fix this problem.

6. The role of retail pharmacy. This is one of my favorite topics. With more retail pharmacies than McDonalds and a huge problem of access, pharmacies could be the key turning point in influencing change in this country.

7. Caregiver empowerment. Anyone who cares for an adult and/or child knows how hard it is to be a caregiver and take care of their own needs. This becomes even harder with the people being geographically apart. With all the sensors and remote technology out there, I see this being a hot space in the next decade.

8. The smart house. As an architect, I’ve always dreamed of helping create the intelligent house where it knows what food you have. It manages your heat and light. It tracks your movements and could call for help if you fall. I see this being an opportunity to empower seniors to live at home longer.

9. Helping the disenfranchised. For years, we’ve all seen data showing that income can affect health. The question is how will we fix this. Coverage for all is certainly a critical step but that won’t fix it. We have a huge health literacy issue also. Ultimately, public health needs a program like we had to get people to wear seat belts. We need yo own our fate and change it before we end up like the humans in the movie Wall-e.

10. A Hispanic healthcare company in the US. With 16% of the US that speak Spanish, I’m shocked that I haven’t seen someone come out with a health and wellness company that is Hispanic centric in terms of the approach to improving care, engaging consumers, and providing support.

So, what would you like to solve?

Books / Articles, Care Management, Consumerism, Healthcare, Innovation, Leadership, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, mHealth, PBM / Pharmacy, Research, Technology, Value Propositions
,

The Healthcare Mark-up Game – Driving Up Healthcare Costs

October 18, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

The idea of healthcare costs and the need for healthcare transparency has become a front page issue. With the shift to consumer driven healthcare and high deductible plans, the average consumer is increasingly aware of what things cost. And companies like Change Healthcare provide tools to help consumers navigate this maze.

But, what I don’t hear many people discuss is the issue of middlemen and how this adds cost to the system. I’ve worked for several middlemen so I think I understand the model well. Of course, these companies make good (and true) arguments which is that they lower costs due to scale based efficiencies. But, healthcare is big business so everyone has to get paid somehow. Some of the “non-profits” make the most money.

Let’s look at prescription drugs:
– This begins with the manufacturer who adds the marketing and sales costs to the actual ingredient and packaging and shipping costs.
– The drug is then shipped to a wholesaler who stocks the drugs and ships them to pharmacies.
– The drugs are then sold by the pharmacy to the consumer and the pharmacy bills the payer.
– Assuming the payer isn’t the actual employer, the payer will then bill the employer.

So who all gets paid in this process:
– The manufacturer of the drug
– The advertising companies (they name the drug, they create the packaging, they create the ads)
– The marketing companies (they set up the websites, they create the mobile apps)
– The law firms (trademarks, patents)
– The sales companies (they hire and manage the pharma reps)
– The data company (the manage the Rx data to help target the reps)
– The shipping companies (transportation)
– The wholesaler
– The pharmacy
– The marketing and communication companies (refill programs, on the bag messaging)
– The technology companies (switch company, adjudication company)
– The recruiters (hiring, staffing)
– The PBM (contracting, rebating, customer service)
– The payer (adjudication, customer service, risk management)
– The broker (commission)

Still wonder why healthcare is expensive?

I wish I had an easy answer. A lot of these services are needed and it would cost more if the employers all had to do this themselves. There would be no scale. There would be no efficiencies.

This is certainly one argument for the efficiencies of a single payer system but I don’t think that’s very efficient IMHO.

Books / Articles, Consumerism, General Thoughts, Healthcare, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, PBM / Pharmacy, Value Propositions

The 15 Year Old Technology Missing From Healthcare.gov

October 18, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

I talked about my experience trying to use the site day one. I honestly hoped it was an anomaly but it doesn’t seem to be.

But, as I think about Healthcare.gov and the general benefits selection process, I see two huge gaps.

Back in 1999, I was working with a company called Firepond. The had what was called a product configurator. At the time, I was at E&Y and Empire BCBS and several other Blues hired them to build a tool for brokers. The tool sat behind a really slick web interface which allowed the broker to ask a consumer less than 10 questions. They would move a sliding bar across the screen and it would dynamically rank their plan options to tell them what was the best option for them to buy. It seems like that wold be great for Medicare.gov and Healthcare.gov.

What we were missing then which Big Data might actually help us solve now is individual claims data. This is what drives me crazy when you have to pick your benefits at work. Why can’t I upload my benefits information and have a tool actually tell me what to buy? If I had my claims history plus a predictive model, I could make smarter decisions about how to select my benefits.

BPM / Process, Business Tools, Consumerism, Healthcare, Innovation, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, Technology, Value Propositions
,

Should You Care That Obesity Is Now A Disease?

June 20, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 2 Comments

The AMA has opened an interesting discussion in the past few days with their decision to recognize obesity as a disease.  On the one hand, we all know obesity is a problem that’s impacting our overall health and productivity across the world.  On the flip side, will this actually change anything?

Key discussion points:

  • What is a disease?
  • Is BMI a good metric to use?  If not, what should be used to measure obesity – waist?
  • How do you treat it?

Here’s a few quotes from some articles:

“Right now, physicians will treat high blood pressure, diabetes, give patients medications and say, ‘Oh you also need to lose weight,’” Khaitan told FoxNews.com. “I think (this) gives the physicians a little more credibility in pushing patients to address obesity and become healthier. It’s recognized as a disease…not just something that (because) you have poor lifestyle habits, this is your problem.”  (Fox News)

Obesity is not just a health risk but a disease. Estimates of the genetic contribution to weight gain in susceptible families range from 25—40% with a greater heritability for abdominal fat distribution of 50%1>2.  Obviously there is a major environmental effect but this genetic susceptibility alone removes this condition from a social stigma to the disease category.  (British Medical Bulletin 1997)

“The American Medical Association’s recognition that obesity is a disease carries a lot of clout,” says Samuel Klein, director of the Center for Human Nutrition at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. “The most important aspect of the AMA decision is that the AMA is a respected representative of American medicine. Their opinion can influence policy makers who are in a position to do more to support interventions and research to prevent and treat obesity.”  (USA Today)

Telling all obese people that they have a disease could end up reducing their sense of control over their ability to change their diet and exercise patterns. As experience with addictions has shown, giving people the sense that they suffer from a disease that is out of their control can become self-defeating. So the disease label should be used sparingly: just as not all drinking is alcoholism, not all overeating is pathological. (Time)

Here’s a few facts from the Obesity Action Coalition:

  • In the United States, it is estimated that 93 million Americans are affected by obesity.
  • Individuals affected by obesity are at a higher risk for impaired mobility and experience a negative social stigma commonly associated with obesity.
  • Socioeconomic status plays a significant role in obesity. Low-income minority populations tend to experience obesity at higher rate and are more likely to be overweight.
  • In 2001, the states with the top five percentages for obesity were Mississippi, West Virginia, Michigan, Kentucky and Indiana.
  • Almost 112,000 annual deaths are attributable to obesity.
  • In the United States, 40 percent of adults do not participate in any leisure-time physical activity.

Here’s also a few things you might not realize about obesity from Yale:

  • Finding 1: Obesity can raise some cancer risks
  • Finding 2: Obesity is tied to heart attacks in younger adults
  • Finding 3: Obesity can ruin your day
  • Finding 4: Obesity speeds up girls’ puberty
  • Finding 5: Obesity is a cause of diabetes in kids
  • Finding 6: Obesity in middle age increases risk for dementia

Let me give my hypotheses on why this might matter:

  1. In theory, this is supposed to increase the likelihood that physician’s talk about obesity with their patients.  This would be great, but I think most research shows physician’s aren’t prepared or comfortable with this discussion.  Will the fact that it’s a disease make this easier?  Maybe.
  2. This may be a boon for the obesity Rx market (assuming any of them work and have minimal side effects).  Physician’s may be much more likely to write an Rx for a disease than a lifestyle issue.
  3. This may help get obesity Rxs and bariatric surgery to be covered by health insurance.  The downside of this is that more people may not actually change behavior (diet, exercise, sleep) but instead look for a “quick” fix through drugs and surgery.

In my mind, there is a best case scenario here:

  • Calling it a disease drives awareness among the healthcare community.
  • This increases investment in resources to treat obesity.
  • Treatment is viewed more like mental health to include drugs and behavioral therapy.
  • Physician’s get trained on the disease.
  • Pharma details physicians on the disease and creates CME programs.
  • Patients start to take this more seriously.
  • Plans cover obesity – insurers, employers, CMS.
  • Obesity becomes a broad program including diet, exercise, coaching, Rx, and bariatric surgery following a progressive approach to treatment tied to your starting point.
  • Companies link incentives to managing weight.
  • New metrics are designed that are better than obesity.

Of course, one of the more recent articles which was depressing on this topic was that exercising regularly may not overcome the impact of sitting the rest of the day.  That makes it very hard to increase caloric burn while having a job that requires lots of desk, computer, and meeting time.

Costs Of Obesity In America

Books / Articles, exercise, Healthcare, Methodology, PBM / Pharmacy, Research, Value Propositions

Pharmacy Non-Adherence Infographic

June 11, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 2 Comments

While I’ve moved most of the infographics I find to my Pinterest account, I wanted to capture and share this one from Stephen Wilkin’s blog since it hits so many of the points that I try to make with people.

patient-non-compliance-infographic3

Care Management, Healthcare, Infographic, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, PBM / Pharmacy, Research
, , , , , , , , ,

The Role Of Healthcare Technology Curator

June 11, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

When I worked as an IT consultant, you had two clear choices – an enterprise system (e.g., SAP) or a best-of-breed (BOB) strategy.  People liked the simplicity of an enterprise system, but you may have sub-optimized reporting or some flexibility in your solution.  On the other hand, the BOB strategy required more maintenance, effort, and coordination to pull it off in a coordinated fashion.

In today’s healthcare world, I look at and meet with a ton of technology companies.  The struggle is how to keep up with all the change in the industry and be nimble enough to engage the new start-up, but flexible enough to evolve with the market without impacting the consumer experience.

Maybe it draws on my training as an architect, but I was describing my technology vision as one of a general contractor.  The buyer (client) wants a BOB solution.  They want everything optimized – data, reporting, workflow, content, mobile, clinical algorithms, etc.  At the same time, they often underestimate what it takes to manage all of these vendors, integrate the data on the backend, and create an integrated consumer experience across multiple vendors and technology platforms.

That’s where I see some real value add as a “technology curator”.  I see one of my roles in helping manage an evolving ecosystem of healthcare companies and working with a flexible technology platform that can quickly plug and play with different solutions.  This also allows me to have pre-built integrations with certain solutions, but I can also offer consumers the ability to choose their device (for example) and with the right API set up just be device agnostic in my solution.

Over time, this offers clients a lot of flexibility.  The get the BOB approach within an enterprise system environment.  They don’t have to keep issuing RFPs and evaluating vendors (since we’re doing that).  They don’t have to stitch together multiple data sets to create the integrated, longitudinal view of the consumer (since we’re doing that).  They don’t have to pretend that they’re offering a cohesive consumer experience (since we’re doing that).  And, most importantly, they are flexible over time to jump from solution to solution within the architecture without disrupting everyone since it’s behind the “presentation layer” that the consumer experiences.

Care Management, General Thoughts, Healthcare, Innovation, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, Technology, Value Propositions

Why Do People Think Adherence Is So Easy?

May 6, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 5 Comments

I think we all know that medication adherence is a big deal. The most common number quoted is the $290B waste number from NEHI. There are numerous studies that confirm the value of non-adherence even one that just came out.

The amount of money spent on trying to improve adherence is huge! Pharma has worked on. Retail pharmacies have worked on it. Providers have worked on it. Insurance companies have worked on it. Employers have worked on it… And all of these have happened across the world.

At the same time, you see people get so excited about things don’t make any sense to me.

Let me take an easy example. A few months ago, a company called MediSafe put out a press release around moving medication adherence on statins up to 84.25%. Nothing against the company, but I read the press release and reached out to them to say “this is great, but it’s only 2 months of data…most people drop therapy after the first few months so who care…call me back when you get some good 12 month data.”

But, a lot of people got all excited and there was numerous press about this – see list of articles about them.

Now, tonight, I see another technology getting similar excitement. Fast Company talks about the AdhereTech technology which integrates a cellular phone with a pill bottle. And, it costs $60 a month. In my experience, companies wouldn’t even spend $2 a month to promote adherence so $60 is just impractical. The argument is that this is good for high cost specialty drugs that are oral solids not injectables. But, this isn’t a new idea. Glowcaps already built this model with a very slick interface and workflow.

And, I don’t know about you, but I think this would be obnoxious. And, I love data and am part of the QuantifiedSelf movement. I’m not sure I understand the consumer research here. I would have to believe all of the following to buy into this model.

  • Non-adherence people are primarily not adherent due to no reminders to take their medication on a daily basis.
  • People with chronic conditions that require high cost specialty drugs are going to change behavior because some bottle sends them a text message.
  • Manufacturers or some other healthcare company is willing to pay $60 a month for this service.
  • There won’t be message fatigue after a few months (weeks) of messaging.
  • Pharmacies would be have to be willing to change their workflow to use these bottles.

Yes. Will this work for some people…sure. But, if it helps 10% of people, then my cost is really $600 per success.

Should we be working on better solutions to address adherence…of course.

But, let’s stop trying to figure out some gimmick to fix adherence. Let’s look at root cause.

For example:

  • People don’t know why they’ve been given a medication.
  • People don’t understand their disease.
  • People can’t afford their medication.
  • People don’t know what to expect in terms of side effects.
  • People don’t see value in improving adherence.
  • People don’t know they have to refill their medications.
  • People aren’t health literate.

We have a lot of problems.

Books / Articles, Healthcare, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, mHealth, PBM / Pharmacy, Research, Value Propositions
, , , ,

Presidential Physical Fitness Award – Reasonable? Role Models?

May 6, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

I must admit that I don’t remember taking the presidential fitness test as a kid. With that being said, I was surprised to learn from my daughter that in her class of club soccer, volleyball, and baseball players she was the only kid to meet the highest level (greater than the 85th percentile across several measures). She made it today by running her mile in 7:37.

So, what does this require? It made me curious. Here’s what you have to do:

benchmarks_presidential_large

Could you do that?  These seem pretty difficult to me.  I could probably do the mile in 6:06, but I doubt I could do 53 pull-ups.  And, I doubt I could sit and reach 7 inches beyond my toes.  (Looking at the 17 year old male standards.)

On the other hand, we certainly need our kids to be more fit.  We have a big childhood obesity issue.

Childhood Obesity

But, it also made me think about Michelle Obama’s efforts in this space.

Lets Move

I think these programs are good starts, but lets not forget that obesity is a social issue and kids learn from those around them.  Let me ask the uncomfortable questions about those who our kids look up to.

  • How many overweight coaches do you know?
  • How about overweight teachers?
  • How about policemen and firefighters?
  • How about clergy?

These are all key role models…not to mention us parents who are often overweight.

I guess my suggestion here to the President would be to think about how to use our massive government payrolls as a foundation for change. Let’s think about the Presidential Fitness Challenge and create a broader wellness solution to change the visual role models for our kids and figure out how to help companies invest in this.

For example, we know that sleeping is correlated to weight and health.  I was talking to my brother-in-law who is a police officer when he told me that they are expected to get 8 hours of sleep a night.  Imagine if companies set this expectation for their employees (sleep impact on work).  

“Sitting Disease” may make a great late night comedy story line, but it’s a reality of our information economy that has to be addressed.

sitting-disease-how-sitting-too-long-can-affect-your-health_5123e1818a55e

Books / Articles, Business Tools, exercise, General Thoughts, Healthcare, Infographic, Innovation, Leadership, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, Value Propositions

How Aetna’s Pivoting With Healthagen – #whcc13

April 9, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 0 Comments

Do you know the term “pivot“? It’s all the rage now in terms of describing how companies continue to evolve their models with this rapidly changing business environment.

Of course, Aetna is one of the big healthcare players in the US. They’re not going to abandon a model that’s been working for well over 100 years. But, thanks to some great leadership from people like Mark Bertolini, CEO of Aetna, they’ve created a new business unit called Healthagen (building on the company they bought known mostly for iTriage). The screen shot says it all.

I got the privilege to sit down with Dr. Charles Saunders who runs Healthagen at the World Healthcare Congress in DC (#whcc13).

Charles E. Saunders, M.D., is responsible for leading the strategic diversification of Healthagen’s products, services and global opportunities. He focuses on identifying new growth opportunities and developing market strategies that can help Healthagen and Aetna profitably manage quality and cost for its customers.

Prior to joining Healthagen, Dr. Saunders served as executive in residence at Warburg Pincus, one of the world’s largest and oldest private equity firms. He has held a number of other significant leadership positions during his career, including CEO of Broadlane, Inc., President of EDS Healthcare Global Industry Solutions; Chief Medical Officer of Healtheon / WebMD; Principal of A.T. Kearney; and Executive Director of San Francisco General Hospital Managed Care Programs.

Dr. Saunders received a B.S. in biological sciences from the University of Southern California and an M.D. from Johns Hopkins University. He is board certified in Internal Medicine and Emergency Medicine and has served on the faculty of several universities, including the University of California, San Francisco; Vanderbilt University; and University of Colorado.

I also got to hear him speak right before I talked to him. (As a side note, he is a great presenter which is something that I really respect in a world of people who present too many slides, use notes, talk to the screen, and can lose you quickly.)

He hit on several key themes in his presentation that we then discussed further face-to-face:

  1. Social Caregiver Model
  2. Game Theory
  3. Digital / Mobile

One of my first questions was to really understand Healthagen and what it was set up to do. (As you can see from the screen shot below, they’re doing lots of things in this group.)

He boiled it down nicely to three things:

  1. Physician (provider) enablement
  2. Patient engagement
  3. Population Health Management IT

Our next discussion was really around why and how to create and innovate within a large company like Aetna. He reiterated what I believed that Mark Bertolini championed this new vision along with several of the other senior leaders. But, I think the key was that they recognized that issue of trying to do that internally and were willing to form a group to be different. To minimize bureaucracy for this group. And, to leverage their capital and assets to support this group. Not many big companies do this well. My impression is that Aetna is and will continue to be successful here. (Full disclosure – I own a minor number of Aetna shares and have believed this since I bought them about a year ago.)

Of course, in today’s market, there’s an explosion of innovation with questions on the short-term and long-term ROI of many initiatives and start-ups. With that in mind, Dr. Saunders pointed out that they don’t want to own everything. They want to create a plug and play platform of enablement. iTriage is a great example of this where they brought in a mobile technology with 2M downloads in 2011 and now have over 9.5M downloads of the tool (on top of massive increases in functionality and integration). You can download it here – https://itunes.apple.com/app/itriage-health-doctor-symptoms/id304696939?mt=8.

Certainly, one concern others have historically had in this space was how to own solutions and sell them to their peers (competitors). Dr. Saunders talked about their ability to do this with ActiveHealth and a perception that the industry is over that issue as long as Aetna can continue to demonstrate that they are good stewards of the data and are keeping the appropriate firewalls in place.

We wrapped up the conversation talking about the social caregiver and game theory. I think both are important in our mHealth / digital world. With the sandwhich generation, this is increasingly important. That is where Aetna is focusing…enablement of the caregiver for infants and seniors leveraging a social approach. This reminds me of their recent announcement of a pilot with PatientsLikeMe. We also talked about game theory and the role of that in healthcare which is a common theme from my discussion with Keas this morning and a theme from the overall conference.

It should be interesting to watch Dr. Saunders and his team and how Aetna continues to pivot.

Consumerism, Events, Healthcare, Leadership, Managed Care, Marketing / Communications, Methodology, mHealth, Press, Technology, Value Propositions
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Life Through #QuantifiedSelf Glasses

March 25, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

No…this is not about how Google Glass can impact healthcare although I do believe it can and will (something many are talking about). 

This is about how the QuantifiedSelf movement can change your view of the world.  Ever since I’ve been using the FitBit (see my review) and focusing on getting 10,000 plus steps per day, I’ve noticed a change in how I view the world. 

Here’s some examples:

  1. We got 12″ of snow yesterday.  I was immediately thinking about how great of exercise it would be to shovel the snow.  I was excited to go out several times and shovel.
  2. When I was flying today, I was thinking “hopefully we’ll get dropped off at a far gate so I can get in some extra steps.”
  3. I’ve been excited to clean the house and get in the steps from cleaning.
  4. I look forward to grocery shopping.
  5. I park farther away in the parking lot.
  6. I’m sometimes intentionally less productive at home to get a few extra sets of stairs in for the day.
  7. When I’m cutting brownies, I’m calculating out how many brownies are supposed to be in the recipe and making sure I cut them to the right size.
  8. When I eat something, I think about how many steps I’ll have to walk (or run) to burn off that food. 
  9. When I pick meals at a restaurant, I’m always looking for their nutritional menu or going online before ordering.

It’s a totally different way of thinking about life when you look through these “quantified self glasses” to see the world through a “health lense” about calories, exercise, sleep, stress, and other dimensions.

Healthcare, Methodology, mHealth, 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
, , , , , , , ,

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
, , , , , , , , , ,

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
, , , , , ,

Google Glass Plus The Checklist Manifesto

January 29, 2013 by George Van Antwerp 1 Comment

I continue to think about all the cool ways that Google Glass could be used to change healthcare.  Here’s my thought from today.

You could combine The Checklist Manifesto concept with Google Glass to allow surgeons to be reminded of the things they need to do with a patient while they were during the encounter or during the procedure.

In complex situations – such as those which arise in almost every profession and industry today – the solutions to problems are technical and demanding. There are often a variety of different ways to solve a problem. It’s all too easy to get so caught up dealing with all these complexities that the most obvious and common sense immediate solutions are not tried first. To overcome this problem, take a leaf from the commercial aviation industry and develop checklists people can use to make sure every base is covered quickly and concisely. Checklists are a forgotten or ignored business tool. It’s time for them to come in from the cold. 

“Here, then, is our situation at the start of the twenty-first century:We have accumulated stupendous know-how. We have put it in the hands of some of the most highly trained, highly skilled, and hardworking people in our society. And with it, they have accomplished extraordinary things. Nonetheless, that know-how is often unmanageable. Avoidable failures are common and persistent, not to mention demoralizing and frustrating, across many fields – from medicine to finance, business to government. And the reason is increasingly evident: the volume and complexity of what we know has exceeded our individual ability to deliver its benefits correctly, safely, or reliably. Knowledge has both saved us and burdened us. That means we need a different strategy for overcoming failure, one that builds on experience and takes advantage of the knowledge people have but somehow also makes up for our human inadequacies. And there is such a strategy – though it will seem almost ridiculous in its simplicity, maybe even crazy to those of us who have spent years carefully developing ever more advanced skills and technologies. It is a checklist.”

(This is from this PDF on The Checklist Manifesto.)

Here’s an example of a checklist from the WHO.

 

Books / Articles, Business Tools, Healthcare, Innovation, Methodology, mHealth, Technology
Older Entries