On Episode 101 of Health in 2 Point 00, there are some scandals and competitors brewing in the health tech space! Jess and I discuss Outcome Health’s investigation and charge by the FBI for $1 billion in fraudulently obtained funds; Mint’s founder starting Vital, a new EHR company, to reinvent the overall EHR experience (even though I believe it is currently one of the toughest markets to enter into); Amazon launching Amazon Transcribe Medical which will be a tool medical professionals can use to dictate their notes and streamline them into EHR systems; and Wellframe raising $20 million to advance digital health management. If you are in Japan, catch me at Health 2.0 in Tokyo, Japan where they will be showcasing new health tech startups in the space or if you are in Vegas, go hang with Jess at the American Society of Hospital Pharmacies conference! Last but not least, Guidewell launched its Aging in Place Accelerator that is looking for startups in the senior health tech space (applications are due December 8th). — Matthew Holt
Maternal Mortality – Separating Signal from Noise

By AMEYA KULKARNI, MD
When Samuel Morse left his New Haven home to paint a portrait of the Maquis du Lafayette in Washington DC, it was the last time he would see his pregnant wife. Shortly after his arrival in Washington, his wife developed complications during childbirth. A messenger took several days on horseback to relay the message to Mr Morse. Because the trip back to New Haven took several more, his wife had died by the time he arrived at their home. So moved was he by the tragedy of lost time that he dedicated the majority of the rest of his life to make sure that this would never happen to anyone again. His subsequent work on the telegraph and in particular the mechanism of communication for the telegraph resulted in Morse code – the first instantaneous messaging system in the world.
Mr Morse’s pain is not foreign to us in the 21st century. We feel the loss of new mothers so deeply that, when earlier this year new statistics on the rate of maternal death were released and suggested that American women died at three times the rate of other developed countries during child birth, doctors, patient advocates, and even Congress seemed willing to move heaven and earth to fix the problem. As someone who cares for expectant mothers at high risk for cardiovascular complications, I too was moved. But beyond the certainty of the headlines lay the nuance of the data, which seemed to tell a murkier story.
First at issue was the presentation of the data. Certainly, as a rate per live births, it would seem that the United States lagged behind other OECD countries – our maternal mortality rate was between 17.2 and 26.4 deaths per 100,000 live births, compared to 6.6 in the UK or 3.7 in Spain. But this translated to approximately 700 maternal deaths per year across the United States (among approximately 2.7 million annual births). While we would all agree that one avoidable maternal death is one too many, the low incidence means that small rates of error could have weighty implications on the reported results. For instance, an error rate of 0.01% would put the United States in line with other developed countries.
Surely, the error rate could not account for half the reported deaths, right? Unfortunately, it is difficult to estimate how close to reality the CDC reported data is, primarily because the main source data for maternal mortality is a single question asked on the application for death certificates. The question asks whether the deceased was pregnant at the time of death, within 42 days of death, or in the 43 to 365 days prior to death. While pregnancy at the time of death may be easy to assess, the latter two categories are subject to significantly more error.
Continue reading…THCB Spotlights: Mike McSherry, CEO of Xealth
Today on THCB Spotlights, Matthew talks to Mike McSherry about Xealth—which is an “X” not a “Z” as in, the missing variable in health. How did Mike end up in health care from Swype, the touch screen keyboard that is now ubiquitous on all touch screen phones? Find out how Xealth facilitates adoption of a vast range of digital health services by making it easy for providers to prescribe them as well as track engagement levels. Within the complexity of Epic and other EMR systems, how does Xealth fit in?
Will Omada Health be Digital Health’s Next Big IPO? | Sean Duffy, Omada Health
By JESSICA DAMASSA, WTF HEALTH
Sean Duffy, CEO of Omada Health, proves why his company is one of those digital health startups everyone’s watching in the chronic condition management space. Never mind the buzz around their latest massive funding round or Livongo’s IPO, the real story here is Sean’s idea about building a “completely digital” care provider for folks with pre-diabetes, type II diabetes, hypertension, and mental health issues — or, at least that’s the goal for the next decade. What does a “full-stack view of supporting someone’s care look like? How do you get there? Tune in to find out about Omada’s proprietary tech-testing litmus test, “The Sean Duffy’s Mom Test,” and some good advice for other health tech startups about what it takes to win over clinicians with your tech.
Filmed at Health 2.0 in Santa Clara, California in September 2019.
Jessica DaMassa is the host of the WTF Health show & stars in Health in 2 Point 00 with Matthew Holt. Get a glimpse of the future of healthcare by meeting the people who are going to change it. Find more WTF Health interviews here or check out www.wtf.health.
Applications for GuideWell’s Scale Up Accelerator Closing Soon!
SPONSORED POST
By CATALYST @ HEALTH 2.0

There are only a few days remaining to apply for GuideWell’s 2020 Accelerator: Aging in Place! The program is seeking innovative, easy-to-use solutions that enable seniors to improve overall physical and emotional wellness, connect seniors to their communities, and increase the affordability and accessibility of health care for seniors that are economically challenged or cared for by a working family member.
10 health technology companies or innovators will have the incredible opportunity to participate in an eight week accelerator program that consists of a two-day kickoff boot camp, followed by weekly mentoring sessions and a series of virtual workshops that focus on challenges in the health care industry (e.g. customer acquisition, regulatory compliance, etc.).The program begins January 23rd, 2020 and will culminate in a curated Investor Matchmaking Showcase at GuideWell’s Innovation Center in Orlando, FL., on March 9th, 2020.
Continue reading…The F Word …
Fragmentation, Fee-for-service and Futile care are the trifecta of what is supposedly ailing our health care system, or non-system, as it is fashionably described nowadays. Modern health care has reached its crisis point not due to hordes of people keeling over and dying in the streets, as they did during historical health care crises brought on by plagues and famine, but due to exploding costs of delivering decent care to all people. Since the issue now is mostly financial, health care as a discipline is attracting the interests of those who practice the dismal science of Economics. Over the last two centuries, economists have successfully addressed the F words in other industries with spectacular results in developed countries, so why not apply lessons learned to health care?
The obvious reason to treat economists with suspicion in health care is the quintessential argument that people are not widgets, but there is another problem. Most tried-and-true solutions for increasing availability and quality while lowering costs of products are not accounting for the other explosion occurring as we speak – the Internet. How can this assertion be true when we are in the midst of a government sponsored spending spree to computerize medical records and adopt Health Information Technology (HIT)? Apparently, even those who lead and define the HIT revolution are reluctant (or unable) to grasp its full implication, thus they are consistently underestimating the power of the Internet to serve the individual, and as a result are hedging their bets on technology with classic industrial models from days gone by.
Pressed to Demonstrate Utility, Digital Health Struggles — Just Like Traditional Medicine
After absorbing several years of increasingly extravagant promises about the remarkable potential of digital health, investors, physicians, and other stakeholders are now unabashedly demanding: “Show me the data.”
By now, most everyone appreciates the promise of digital health, and understands how, in principle, emerging, patient-focused technologies could help improve care and reduce costs.
The question is whether digital health can actually deliver.
A recent NIH workshop, convened to systematically review the data on digital health, acknowledged, “evidence is sparse for the efficacy of mHealth.”
As Scripps cardiologist Eric Topol and colleagues summarized in JAMA late last year,
“Most critically needed is real-world clinical trial evidence to provide a roadmap for implementation that confirms its benefits to consumers, clinicians, and payers alike.”
What everyone’s asking for now is evidence – robust data, not like the vast majority of wellness studies that experts like Al Lewis and others have definitively shredded.
The goal is to find solid evidence that a proposed innovation actually leads to measurably improved outcomes, or to a material reduction in cost. Not that it could or should, but that it does.
Continue reading…
Do Dogs Watch Oprah?
As an incurable compulsive introspect, I tend to brood, ponder, contemplate, and (of course) muse on “big ideas,” such as:
• What makes people choose things which cause themselves harm?
• Are some people better people than others, or are they just more skilled at hiding their problems?
• Is pain really a bad thing, or is our aversion to it a sign of human weakness?
• Does God ever wear a hat?
• Do dogs watch Oprah?
• Why did I put “big ideas” in quotes?
Tough questions.
Lately I’ve been contemplating the nature of human awareness:
• Is self-awareness (the ability to think of ourselves in the third person) a uniquely human trait, and is lack of self-awareness the essence of mental illness?
• Is empathy, or other-awareness the highest of human traits? Is this what the biblical idea of being “made in the image of God” really means?
Yeah, that’s a lot deeper than about dogs watching Oprah. The second of these questions seems to be a very important dividing point in people’s ability to have good relationships with others. Our ability to put ourselves into the place of others, pondering their motives, thoughts, and emotions, goes a very long way in helping us develop deep relationships and avoiding causing inadvertent pain.
It also seems to be a trait that is in short supply in our health care system. I am amazed and deeply disturbed by how callously many of my patients have been treated by some of my colleagues. Patients are seemingly treated as a commodity, a necessary evil required for billing of services.
I do understand that doctors and nurses are drained of their ability to show compassion by a system that puts them in an adversarial relationship with patients, hospital administrators, insurance companies, lawyers, and their fellow doctors and nurses. That feeling of burn-out in me was one of the big reasons I left my old practice. Either I had to change my compassion, or my situation.
Should Death Row Inmates Be Able to Donate Their Organs Before They Die?
Several people have asked me lately whether I think that death row inmates should be able to donate their organs before they die. In effect, to commit suicide through organ donation. Culminating in donation of the heart, of course. They are going to be executed anyway, why not bring benefits to others en route?
I see the logic of this position. Why inject someone with lethal medications and then dispose of their remains when so much good could come of their death?
But that’s where I have a problem with this policy: of making people feel that so much “good” can come out of executing people. I oppose organ donation from prisoners on death row because I oppose capital punishment. I think people should always have a chance at redemption, no matter what crimes they have committed. I do not think that capital punishment is, or can, be administered fairly in the United States. I do not think the criminal justice system is accurate enough to make me confident that people who are executed necessarily committed the crimes they had been accused of.
I oppose death-by-organ-donation because I don’t think we need any more reasons to look favorably upon the death penalty. We are practically alone amongst Western democracies in still using this form of punishment. I’d like to see that change.
The New FDA Nutrition Labels Are Here. And They’re Freaking Brilliant!
Source: FDA.gov

