I just Googled “‘Health Internet’ Aneesh” and found 723 responses. I wonder what the over/under is for 2000 by the end of the month?
Given that the statements from Chopra and Todd Parks have been fairly general, they are treated like ink blots. Each blogger interprets them to find what he loves or hates and writes a brief essay on that. My particular essay will be that I love it and to list the issues that I hope it solves.
In healthcare we have four basic interoperability challenges.
- Reduce the friction of personal health information flow between the providers in the course of care transitions and between providers and other stakeholders for aggregate management of care.
- Reduce and increase the friction of personal information flow among healthcare providers, consumers, and a broad class of stakeholders such as patient advocates, providers of special services. We need to reduce the technical barriers to sharing information with consumers and create a positive incentive to do so. At the same time we need to provide consumers with substantial reason to trust that their intentions to limit information sharing are not betrayed. As they trust their control of this health information the increasingly become a force compelling healthcare providers to provide information. In effect the consumers are both the agents of (good) friction and the lubricant.
- Enable rapid technology innovation without requiring it. Computers are actually doing a lot of good in healthcare now and the challenge that innovators face must include “changing the tires on the moving car,” a sentiment that has often been expressed as “no rip and replace.” This matters particularly when working on the first challenge.
- Avoid “innovation dead ends” such as the fax machine. It was not so many years ago that the pre-fax epitome of healthcare interoperability was pieces of paper sent through the U.S. Mail. In that context the fax was a wildly disruptive piece of innovation. It needed no new infrastructure outside of an extra phone line, had fewer security vulnerabilities than the mail, was fully upgradeable from paper (as long as you didn’t use color and accepted blotches and pixelation), and no standards were required that hadn’t already been hashed out by the telecomm industry. It was the very strength of the fax machine that has limited our ability to replace it. The comparable challenge in today’s interoperability world do establish standards that are easy enough to enable rapid grown and don’t freeze progress just one step forward.
Some will ask if there is truly a difference between the first two challenges or whether meeting the second challenge wouldn’t also take care of the first. I hope to address that more in a future blog and to present ideas on how we can meet all four of these challenges.
Read Complimentary Relevant Research
Predicts 2017: Artificial Intelligence
Artificial intelligence is changing the way in which organizations innovate and communicate their processes, products and services. Practical...
View Relevant Webinars
The Mobile Scenario: Taking Mobility to the Next Level
The definition of "mobile" in the post-app era will involve new interactions such as bots and conversations, new devices such as wearables...
Comments or opinions expressed on this blog are those of the individual contributors only, and do not necessarily represent the views of Gartner, Inc. or its management. Readers may copy and redistribute blog postings on other blogs, or otherwise for private, non-commercial or journalistic purposes, with attribution to Gartner. This content may not be used for any other purposes in any other formats or media. The content on this blog is provided on an "as-is" basis. Gartner shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever arising out of the content or use of this blog.