Ehealth 2009 Van Ooteghem

404 views
353 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
404
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Ehealth 2009 Van Ooteghem

  1. 1. Modeling Market Shares of Competing (e)Care Providers J. Van Ooteghem , T. Tesch, S. Verbrugge, A. Ackaert, D. Colle, M. Pickavet, P. Demeester eHealth2009, Istanbul September 24th 2009
  2. 2. IBBT TranseCare project Transparant ICT platforms for eCare Project duration 2007 - 2010 Project website http://projects.ibbt.be/TranseCare
  3. 3. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND MODEL MECHANISMS <ul><li>Modeling Market Shares of Competing (e)Care Providers </li></ul>
  4. 4. Competing (e)Care model
  5. 5. Tier 3 <ul><li>Characteristics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Elderly requiring near constant (medical) attention </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Competing care providers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Retirement Homes (RH) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Multi-residence housing facilities intended for highest-level dependency elderly </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>WaitingList (WL) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>High-dependent elderly not able to receive adequate care at the time of need, due to capacity limitations </li></ul></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Tier 2 <ul><li>Characteristics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Elderly requiring extended external attention </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Staying in their private homes is therefore impossible </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Competing care providers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Service Flats (SF) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Assisted living facilities for elderly already needing a certain level of continued care </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Retirement Homes (RH) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>WaitingList (WL) </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Tier 1 <ul><li>Characteristics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Elderly requiring (some) external attention and care </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>They can stay in their own homes </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Competing care providers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>HomeCare (HC) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>On-demand supportive care provided in the patient's home by professionals </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>HomeCare augmented with eCarePlatform (HC+eCP) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Professional homecare facilitated by an eCarePlatform </li></ul></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Tier 0 <ul><li>Characteristics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Elderly still living in their private homes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No need for (professional) homecare </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Competing care providers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>SelfSustained (SS) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Independent living </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>eCarePlatform (eCP) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Own initiative for subscribing to an eCarePlatform </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Model mechanisms <ul><li>Vertically </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Inflow (Tier 0) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Outflow (Death) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Churn between services </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Horizontally </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased level of care </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tier 0 Tier 1 </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. SIMULATION RESULTS <ul><li>Modeling Market Shares of Competing (e)Care Providers </li></ul>
  11. 11. Case study <ul><li>Flemish situation </li></ul><ul><li>10 year period: 2010 – 2020 </li></ul><ul><li>Data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Obtained from public sources </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Model refined and assessed by professionals </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Goal </li></ul><ul><ul><li>To indicate the trend in how competition between care providers in the sector will evolve </li></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Capacity <ul><li>Capacity is limited for service flats and retirement homes </li></ul><ul><li>Uptake of eCarePlatform services has a positive effect on the length of the waiting list </li></ul>
  13. 13. Market shares of competing care providers Tier 3 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 0
  14. 14. CONCLUSIONS FUTURE WORK <ul><li>Modeling Market Shares of Competing (e)Care Providers </li></ul>
  15. 15. Conclusions <ul><li>Conceptual framework </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Allows forecasting evolution of market shares of competing care providers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Market mechanisms </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Based on the dependency level of the elderly </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Competition within tiers (churn) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Capacity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tier 3 capacity always needs to be guaranteed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Waiting list problem situated in Tier 2 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Market shares </li></ul><ul><ul><li>eCarePlatform will gain market share as soon as efficiency and added value has been proved. </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Future work <ul><li>Techno-economic analysis of eCare platform business cases </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Input from the presented model </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>eCare value network models </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Quantitative cost/benefit model </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Multi-actor analysis </li></ul></ul>
  17. 17. CTTE 2010 Ghent, Belgium June 16-18, 2010 Conference of Telecommunication, Media and Internet Techno-Economics <ul><li>Call for papers: </li></ul><ul><li>user and service adoption </li></ul><ul><li>pricing strategies for new services </li></ul><ul><li>value network analysis and competition opportunities </li></ul><ul><li>regulatory impacts on industry structure and competition </li></ul><ul><li>OPEX and CAPEX models for network and service providers </li></ul><ul><li>direct and indirect revenue modeling </li></ul><ul><li>comparison of novel versus classic investment decision techniques </li></ul><ul><li>sensitivity studies, risk analysis and real options </li></ul><ul><li>multi-actor analysis </li></ul><ul><li>game theoretic analysis </li></ul>http://www.ctte-conference.org/
  18. 18. Thank you for your attention Questions ? Jan Van Ooteghem [email_address] www.ibcn.intec.ugent.be/te INTEC Broadband Communication Networks (IBCN) Department of Information Technology (INTEC) Ghent University - IBBT

×