Uncategorized

The Five Year Plan

John HalamkaWhen my father died 3 years ago,  my comments at his funeral  noted  that the greatest aspiration any of us can have is to make a difference in the world.  My father’s life made a difference.

I’m always self critical and analyzing my own life.  I moved to Boston 20 years ago this month.   In those 20 years of service to BIDMC, Harvard, numerous federal organizations,  international governments, and industry, I’m hopeful that I’ve laid a foundation for 20 more years of trying to make a difference.  It’s hard to forecast the best path to have an impact on the healthcare ecosystem, but I can try.

The past 5 years belonged to government – with $34 billion spent on healthcare IT as a result of HITECH, the Meaningful Use program accomplished the goal of moving clinician practices and hospitals from paper to digital systems.    Although many challenges remain – improving workflow, enhancing quality/safety, and ensuring usability, the basic platform on which we can build future innovation has been created.

The government will continue to be very a important actor, especially CMS,  setting payment policy that will impact the behavior of all stakeholders.  However, I believe the era of prescriptive government direction of the IT agenda has ended.  Provider organizations are begging for an outcomes focus, instead of a process focus.

Where will the next innovations come from?

How about the large incumbent HIT vendors?   Despite rumors to the contrary our major healthcare IT vendors are well meaning and not spending their time information blocking.  They are devoting their resources to creating software which adheres to the thousands of pages of regulations introduced over the past few years.  One major vendor noted that their programming staff is already booked for the next 32 months just to ensure compliance with existing regulations.    The small amount of free bandwidth that incumbent vendors had reserved for innovation has been co-opted by regulation.

How about startups or high tech companies that have a startup mindset?   Startups, such as those making population health/care management, decision support, and consumer facing apps likely have more time to focus on innovation than incumbent EHR vendors maintaining certified EHRs.   Many of these startups lack domain expertise in heatlhcare processes, so they may not produce the products and services the marketplace really needs.      However, that’s ok, since out of many failures often comes one great success.   I think we need to watch companies like Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Salesforce for important healthcare innovations.

How about provider organizations?   Some academic healthcare systems have dedicated innovation resources and they will continue to lead important work.  However, provider organizations are faced with the compliance/enforcement side of the same regulatory expansion that is consuming the incumbent vendors.    Most provider organizations will devote 100% of their IT resources to operations and compliance.

So, it’s an edgy prediction, but I beleive the next 5 years of healthcare IT innovation will belong to the private sector, to companies we’ve not yet heard of and companies outside the usual healthcare IT mainstream.    The incumbent vendors may be able to crowdsource and leverage the resources of these innovators, as Athena will do with the More Disruption Please program and  Epic will do with its app store.

At BIDMC, we’ve launched our own crowdsourcing program and we’re increasingly dedicating resources to innovation.   We’ll continue our collaboration with numerous private sector companies, serving as a learning lab to test new ideas.

In my next 20 years, I hope to oversee innovative work on social networking communication applications, patient-facing mobile applications, population health analytics with workflow tools, and cloud-based healthcare IT services.    I turned 54 this month.   I’m hoping at 74 that I can reflect on 40 years in New England and say that my efforts have made a difference.

Livongo’s Post Ad Banner 728*90

Categories: Uncategorized

9
Leave a Reply

6 Comment threads
3 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
peter.baschmeltootsAdrian Gropper, MDWilliam Palmer MDLeoHolmMD Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
peter.basch
Member
peter.basch

Thoughtful post as always John…. so why don’t I feel better about the future you paint? While I fully respect and appreciate the genius of innovation from apps developers and in particular those outside of the medical establishment, I am concerned that if the next five years belongs to them alone, we are in trouble. There is a long history of very bright people outside of medicine attempting to “brute force” their innovations without a deep understanding of the complexities and nuances of the monster we call a healthcare system in the US. And for the most part, with some… Read more »

meltoots
Member
meltoots

Love Johns posts…although I don’t always agree. First, I think that CMS and ONC will not let go of the reins and are too arrogant and paternalistic to even consider what they have done to medicine is terrible. Even though it is so obvious. They continue to fluff their stats and backslap about the proliferation of EHRs and how great that is. Even though they are failing front line providers and patients daily. Apple, Google, etc are WAY to smart to get caught in the web of complex regulatory activity of this EHR government bureaucracy. If they thought they could… Read more »

Adrian Gropper, MD
Member
Adrian Gropper, MD

Yes, the next 5 years of health IT will probably belong to the private sector. The result will be a massive shift of open medical knowledge into secret decision support databases IT and secret machine intelligence IT. The essential ingredient of secret medicine is access to patient records because it’s the individual details and outcome of millions of patients that are the value in a decision support database or that “teach” a machine learning algorithm. Oh, and how are our health records going into the private health IT for the next 5 years. Through the $34 Billion of HITECH incentives… Read more »

Margalit Gur-Arie
Member

Perfectly stated!

William Palmer MD
Member
William Palmer MD

from American Scientist, May-June 2016: “Cyber insecurity…headline grabbers: U.S Office of Personal Management data breach that compromised the confidential records of 22 million federal employees, the Anthem health insurance system breach that exposed personal data of 79 million people, the Target Corporation heist that harvested credit and debit card information on 40 million people, and the attack on Sony Pictures Entertainment that destroyed data and startup software on more than 3,000 computers, as well as disclosed pre-release films and embarrassing emails of executives. 71% of organizations were victims of successful cyber attacks in 2014.” I realize everyone says that we… Read more »

Margalit Gur-Arie
Member

A few observations: 1) The government is not some incorporeal entity that handed down an overabundance of regulations from Mount Sinai every Friday at 4 pm. There were people actively working within this government entity, creating one batch of insane regulations after another, so let’s be clear about that. 2) Yes, 5 years, tens of billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of burned out doctors later, we got most personal medical data into computers, inefficient, ineffective and by now largely obsolete computers. Was that a great achievement? Was the sole intent here to prime the pump for “Apple, Google,… Read more »

Perry
Member
Perry

I couldn’t have said it better. Except that our supposed organizations may not be begging for “outcomes focus” but they are sure not fighting against it either. Meanwhile, the docs on the frontlines are drowning.

Alan_Pitt_M_D_
Member

Spot on. The government has set a path, but not the solutions. The EHR companies are consumed with regulation. The solutions will need to come from entrepreneurs, may who have yet to be named. Additionally I would note, regulation should be evaluated with the same rigor as drugs and device. Just because regulation is suppose to keep us safe or improve care, if results differ from the expected outcome, the “regulation” should be recalled.

LeoHolmMD
Member
LeoHolmMD

Great point. How did regulation escape scientific and ethical scrutiny when applied to the practice of medicine?