Trends in Personal Health Information Mgmt


Published on

Presentation given in Washington DC to Dept. HHS Sec. Michael Leavitt and the AHIC on July 29, 2008.

Published in: Technology, Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Trends in Personal Health Information Mgmt

    1. 1. American Health Information Community Managing Personal Health Information Current Tools & Products John Moore Chilmark Research [email_address] July 29, 2008
    2. 2. Today, Three Dominant PHI Modalities Value Connectivity Web-Based PHI Solutions Will Dominate
    3. 3. PHR Market has Moved to B2B Model <ul><li>High Barriers to Entry in Provider Market </li></ul><ul><li>Employer & Health Plan Markets Similar </li></ul><ul><li>Consumer Plays are Often Legacy </li></ul>
    4. 4. Stand-Alone, Consumer PHI Apps: Manage Health Content Highly variable across vendors Modest Tools Self-entry key detriment, Highly motivated only Low Adoption Generic, simplistic solutions dominate Low Personalization Highly variable across vendors Medium Portability Standards adoption increasing (CCR dominant) Medium Interoperability Owned & managed by consumer High Control Self-entry, Cumbersome, Current/Trusted? NA Data Source Notes Rating Attributes
    5. 5. Employer & Health Plan Sponsored Platforms: Manage Risks, Lower Costs Significant activity, behavioral change Good Tools Trust, Incentives often required Medium Adoption Leverage HRA & claims data High Personalization Tethered to employer or insurer Low Portability Potential there, more talk than action Medium Interoperability Sponsor controlled Low Control Claims, PBM & HRA, Partial View NA Data Source(s) Notes Rating Attributes Claims Data Content HRA Tools
    6. 6. Provider Sponsored Platforms: Consumer Retention Communication for engagement/retention Medium Tools Perceived value? Variable Adoption Most do poor job, some exceptions Low-Med. Personalization Tethered to EMR Low Portability Disparate systems, competitive pressures Low Interoperability Portal to host EMR Low Control EMR, Gold Standard, Myopic NA Data Source(s) Notes Rating Attributes Content Clinical Data
    7. 7. Utility Service Model for PHI: Create an Ecosystem Multiple tools/widgets, communications??? Very Good Tools Perceived value? High Adoption Farther down the road High Personalization Still under development Medium Portability Adoption of Open Systems and standards High Interoperability Strong consumer control of data High Control Virtually any pertinent data source NA Data Source(s) Notes Potential Attributes Data Sources Secure Repository Applications
    8. 8. Conclusion <ul><li>Visibility & Interest in PHI Platforms is Accelerating </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Significant increase in press mentions/articles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Vendors reporting strong double digit growth </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Consumer Expectations May be Higher than Reality </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Solution capabilities vary greatly </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Most solutions still require too much consumer input </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data Liquidity is Paramount </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Incentives to create, compile, access and share data </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Internet-based PHI Platforms Evolving Rapidly </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Too early for prescriptive definitions and requirements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Defer to frameworks and guiding policies </li></ul></ul>
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.