Wearables Need to Pivot Toward Healthcare Outcomes
Without a focus on outcomes, wearables are another gadget
Much attention has been paid to wearables being used to help individuals track their health and wellness. However, there hasn’t been much success in making wearables contribute to measurable and meaningful health outcomes. They are currently just another forgettable gadget.
A different perspective and approach is needed else wearables will continue to be a hot topic but remain an accessory worn for a few weeks then put aside. For instance, they need to become part of important contexts so their data are related to particular health results. Heart rate, blood pressure, or step readings by themselves are not meaningful enough unless used in conjunction with other indications to achieve a particular goal such as improvement in cardiovascular performance.
A different perspective and approach is needed else wearables will continue to be a hot topic but remain an accessory worn for a few weeks then put aside. For instance, they need to become part of important contexts so their data are related to particular health results. Heart rate, blood pressure, or step readings by themselves are not meaningful enough unless used in conjunction with other indications to achieve a particular goal such as improvement in cardiovascular performance.
WHERE ARE WE TODAY AND WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE?
Wearables are a consumer driven product today as the general public is willing to take the output of the devices at face value. Competition is intense and is based on brand image versus any other measurable differences. The technologies used by leading brands are not that different from those used in lesser known names. Almost all devices use a common set of components made by a few manufacturers and it is each company’s data capture software that provides a degree of competitive advantage.
To create real strategic differentiation based on contributions to users health, wearables should be integrated into programs that targets measurable health outcomes.
To create real strategic differentiation based on contributions to users health, wearables should be integrated into programs that targets measurable health outcomes.
CASE EXAMPLE
One the best examples, where wearables have a place but not as yet, was when at Centura Health “2016 The Future of Medicine” symposium Dr. Dean Ornish, Professor of Medicine at UCSF, presented case studies from his Lifestyle Medicine program that integrates nutrition, fitness, stress management, and personal support systems to help reverse heart diseases. This intense program is devoid of medication. Dr. Ornish program appears to have delivered some convincing results to date. It is within this type of context or program framework where wearables can be adapted to provide additional indications to help provide continuous fact-based data on whether a person’s cardiovascular health is improving.
Dr. Ornish’s program focuses on seeking out the root cause of a person’s heart problems. Using an analogy, think of the program in this way. One can spend a great deal of time mopping up a flooded floor but the floor will continue to be covered in water unless the source of the water flow is found and terminated. In other words, what is the root causes of a person heart problems—be it the lack of a proper diet, enough exercise, or life stressors that need to be managed. Whenever a program like Lifestyle Medicine integrates exercise to improve health and prolong or save lives, wearables have a role to play.
Lifestyle Medicine is a multi-week, intense class-room program where individuals learn how to manage different aspects of their everyday life leading to a reversal of their particular heart condition. The program appears successful based on case studies presented by Dr. Ornish. However, the one flaw in the program, like other health interventions, is that once individuals leave the class, there is no means to monitor some of their basic vital signs or whether they are following the program regimen in terms of continued exercises or activity intensity.
There many other similar programs to Life Medicine, some include medications and others don't. Regardless, the goals are the same--to treat the whole person with activities being a key and integral part of the curriculum.
Whenever an active lifestyle is part of the the course--wearables should be an natural part of the ecosystem that is used to help track and measure a person's progress.
Dr. Ornish’s program focuses on seeking out the root cause of a person’s heart problems. Using an analogy, think of the program in this way. One can spend a great deal of time mopping up a flooded floor but the floor will continue to be covered in water unless the source of the water flow is found and terminated. In other words, what is the root causes of a person heart problems—be it the lack of a proper diet, enough exercise, or life stressors that need to be managed. Whenever a program like Lifestyle Medicine integrates exercise to improve health and prolong or save lives, wearables have a role to play.
Lifestyle Medicine is a multi-week, intense class-room program where individuals learn how to manage different aspects of their everyday life leading to a reversal of their particular heart condition. The program appears successful based on case studies presented by Dr. Ornish. However, the one flaw in the program, like other health interventions, is that once individuals leave the class, there is no means to monitor some of their basic vital signs or whether they are following the program regimen in terms of continued exercises or activity intensity.
There many other similar programs to Life Medicine, some include medications and others don't. Regardless, the goals are the same--to treat the whole person with activities being a key and integral part of the curriculum.
Whenever an active lifestyle is part of the the course--wearables should be an natural part of the ecosystem that is used to help track and measure a person's progress.
THE PIVOT TO OUTCOMES
Wearable companies need to start pivoting and creating a much better understanding of the healthcare landscape where these technologies can be adapted to contribute to consumer health outcomes that are valued by both individuals and healthcare providers alike.
If not, they will not become as valuable as smartphones--that is, if we left home without it, we will return to get it.
The following are key considerations for the wearable companies and healthcare providers.
If not, they will not become as valuable as smartphones--that is, if we left home without it, we will return to get it.
The following are key considerations for the wearable companies and healthcare providers.
- Neither the wearable companies nor the healthcare industry understand each other. They need to come together to start moving toward a meeting of the minds on what is expected of the technology in healthcare environment.
- Paint a wide vision but focus quickly on one (maybe two) specific diseases and outcomes. An approach is to assess where there is relatively good alignment today between the technology and the probability of achieving real health outcomes in reasonable time with investment. Anything more will create too much inertia and spread the effort too thin. Build it, test it, learn, and iterate.
- Accept that today's generic wearable technologies are not ready for prime time, at least not right now. However, what exists can be used a launching point on the journey to creating to more robust and reliable solutions.
- See that the wearable technology is only one part of a more complex and integrated set of challenges--including but not limited to legal, organizational competencies, to patient acceptance. Focusing on one challenge without the addressing the others will be akin to taking two steps forward and one step back. A holistic approach is needed.
- Wearables data by itself does not tell the whole story about a patient but it also a new set of patient data that did not previously exist. Therefore, new analytical competencies need to be developed by care givers—something that has not been historically important. Care givers should not rely too much on technology companies for this capability.
- Realize that no single entity has all the capabilities to solve this problem--even the largest of the technology companies. It is an ecosystem issue and must be treated as such by identifying and bringing together players who have vested interested in designing, testing, then scaling the solution.
- Do not lose sight that it's about a combination of business factors, for example: population management and care quality, managing risks, alternative revenue streams, and reducing costs.
WE SHOULD TALK
Vaxa works with wearable companies who wants to deeply today's healthcare ecosystem for mobile technologies--and-- with care providers to mobility strategies.
Please contact us.
Vaxa works with wearable companies who wants to deeply today's healthcare ecosystem for mobile technologies--and-- with care providers to mobility strategies.
Please contact us.
Status of Wearables
- There is a slow transition from health and wellness to more consideration for health delivery and clinical research.
- As population health becomes more important to hospitals, more time will be spent on thinking about how wearables can be used as a patient engagement.
- Care providers have to develop new competencies in analytics in order to maximize the usefulness of this new data.
- Bring Your Own Device or BYOD will not be reality unless some technology standards are created.
- The patient engagement model must be reassessed in light of the value wearables can provide to care givers and patients alike.
Related Consulting Services
Proudly powered by Weebly
Vaxa Inc. © 1998-2020 All Rights Reserved
|
CONNECT WITH US
|