brown2020

This is a short blog post on the way home from Connected Health 2009. I’m in the air on Virgin Atlantic typing on my iPhone connected to the web with inflight WiFi — that’s why it’s short and may have some typos.

First of all, Connected Health is a much bigger idea than the original idea of telemedicine, which was all about laying the painful last mile of technology to finally reach those with the greatest needs to communicate about health.

Connected Health, in contrast, is not about devices, sensors and gadgets. It is about the idea that how people connect with each other has a profound impact on health.

As Nicholas Christakis, author of “Connected”, reiterated in his keynote speech, our connections to each other, probably even more so that our connections to our doctors and nurses, has a measurable impact on our health.

Despite the big idea of connected health, too many of the Connected Health sessions followed the same format:

1. Most of the trillions in health spending is the result of chronic illness which in turn is the consequence of our lifestyle and behavior.

2. There is compelling evidence that connected health can improve quality and reduce the cost of care, referring to proactive care models that coach and monitor patients at home.

3. The only barrier to widespread adoption of a more rational model of connected care that will save our health system from impending collapse is Medicare coverage of remote health monitoring technologies.

This is the same conversation we had six years ago when we introduced the first connected health ideas as part of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003. Six years later, it seemed like nothing had changed.

In fact, much has changed, and the next few years will be profoundly different than the past six. The fact is, we are all becoming connected in a tighter web of relationships enabled by technology. 300 million of us are on Facebook, maintaining a constant awareness of how our social network is faring. Soon we all will be able to keep tabs on our most important relationships on our smartphones.

When Grandma is also on Facebook, and her friends and family know how she is doing and she knows they still care, do you think there will be fewer crises that lead to hospitalization? I think so.

In a world where we can blog and tweet from an airplane while watching satellite TV, we surely have the tools to create the kind of connection that will improve healthcare. It’s going to happen, not because of policies and reimbursement, but simply because connected health is far better for everyone than isolation.

Last week, a healthcare executive asked me “What is social media”? I point out that it was a healthcare executive because many people in the $2.6 trillion US healthcare field are having intense debates right now about how to make better use of information technology and possibly how to use Web 2.0 technologies to support patients, accelerate research, and improve care. Most people in the healthcare field, however, know they are coming from behind and they are not sure where to start.

Nevertheless, I was taken aback by the question. Working one block from Twitter in the South Park area of San Francisco, I had taken it for granted that social media has become part of everyday life. When I tried to describe the idea that sharing more of yourself on the web can make life richer and more interesting, the good doctor looked at me with confusion and maybe a tinge of disgust. Sharing in healthcare is not social, and to a lot of healthcare people, “social media” sounds more like a communicable disease than a great new idea or solution.

Sharing in healthcare has always been, and probably for most of us should remain, an intensely personal and private act. It is not surprising that social media and healthcare haven’t come together, at least not under the auspices of major health care institutions. Despite some forward thinking efforts of a few pioneers like Mayo Clinic, which recently even sponsored a “Tweetcamp”, most of the use of social media in health has come from grass roots efforts as people find information and support from other people who share similar needs, experiences and circumstances.

Sharing through social media is an act of faith that the benefits of being “out there” with your ideas and content will outweigh the risks to your privacy and personal space. Millions of people have already gotten over than hurdle and have determined that social media makes life richer and more interesting. Social media is about people having a conversation online. For many, this already includes health. (more…)

Matthew Holt, the author of this presentation on Health 2.0, is the founder of The Health Care Blog and the Health 2.0 Conference, an event that has defined a new paradigm for ehealth and brings together a new generation of creative thought leaders. This year, the Health 2.0 Conference will be held jointly with the Center for Information Therapy on April 22-23, 2009 in Boston.

My Reaction to Health 2.0 and the Convergence with Information Therapy:

Health 2.0 makes Information Therapy practical and possible. Health 2.0 is about individuals creating and sharing more of themselves online in a way that improves their own health, the health of others they are connected to, and the health of the community as a whole.

Information therapy is based on the idea that what we think and believe — the content of our minds — can influence our health, either directly or through our behavior. We can change and influence the content of our minds and therefore also our health through information media.

Personalized health, however, is highly diverse, and if we had to design the right information therapy for the right person at the right time, we would never finish the job. So how does Health 2.0 make information therapy possible?

The needs in health care are complex, personalized, and ever changing. How can information therapy derived from a scripted template ever fully address them? Without Health 2.0, the greater the number and diversity of people with health needs, the more infinitely complex the situation becomes.

Health 2.0, on the other hand, changes the information therapy equation. The participants are co-creators, selectors, navigators, recommenders, and reviewers of content, so the more people involved and the greater their diversity, the more possible it is to meet an ever greater diversity of needs.

While some traditionalists might argue about the need for evidence-based information, the reality is that rich and diverse Health 2.0 communities are enabling an acceleration of evidence gathering. In the social media world, randomized controlled trials or A/B and multivariate experiments on the impact of information and ideas on user behavior are conducted every day.

This same quantitative and experimental methodology of the modern Web 2.0 Internet, when applied in Health 2.0, will start to advance our knowledge about information therapy, so that we may discover how the right information, at the right time, and in the right way can truly improve health.

(more…)