Michael Dahlweid

Brain scans, vocation choices and why being bad at something is good for you

2010-07-23T08:27:00Z

Have to confess that I'm a bit perturbed by this recent piece of research. We all know about aptitude tests and mental ability tests being used for vocational guidance. What if you could use brain scans to do the same?

Researchers, led by Richard Haier from the University of California took up the challenge. Writing in the open access journal BMC Research Notes they explain how they investigated how well eight tests used in vocational guidance correlate to gray matter in areas throughout the brain.

The researchers investigated the neurological basis for performance on each of the tests. Haier says: “Individual differences in cognitive abilities provide information that is valuable for vocational guidance. There is some debate, however, as to whether results on individual tests of specific abilities may be more helpful than results on tests of broader factors, like general intelligence. We compared brain networks identified using scores on broad cognitive ability tests to those identified by using specific cognitive tests to determine whether these relatively broad and narrow approaches yield similar results”.

Using MRI, the researchers correlated gray matter with independent ability factors (general intelligence, speed of reasoning, numerical, spatial, memory) and with individual test scores from a battery of cognitive tests completed by 40 individuals seeking vocational guidance. They found that, in general, the grey matter correlates for the broad and narrow test types were different. The team is naturally cautious about taking this further, but speaking about the results, Haier says, “A person’s pattern of cognitive strengths and weaknesses is related to their brain structure, so there is a possibility that brain scans could provide unique information that would be helpful for vocational choice. Our current results form a basis to investigate this further."

So where does this leave us? We know that genomics can help us identify the hereditary risks associated with disease from the most deadly cancers to chronic conditions that severly impact quality of life. At the same time neurology powered by ever more sophisticated research tools suggests that we emerge into the world equipped with a sophisticated (neural) network with much of the software pre-installed. As the two converge, free-will is increasingly squeezed out of the picture.

Ok, let the philosophers ruminate on that one. Here's another thought. One of the delights of parenthood and teaching is exploring the aptitudes of the child as he or she matures; the serendipity of uncovering a new skill by accident or by simple trial and error. I once had a friend who said that parenthood was never complete unless you'd introduced your offspring to the joys of pole-vaulting. He was exaggerating, of course, but the point was well made: the role of the parent is to intelligently introduce the child to new experiences and stimulate new cognitive appetites while the brain is still forming.

So here's my question. If genomics and brain scans provide us with a map of our abilities, how great is the temptation to steer the child towards activities and - eventually - professions that correspond to these findings? More to the point, being bad at something isn't necessarily bad for our well-being. It forces us to be resourceful and provokes humility. What's more it introduces us to groups of people who push us beyond our comfort zone. I'll never be more than a competent saxophone player to put it mildly. But I'm glad my parents introduced me to music because I lerant how to stay dedicated and express myself - and I made lifelong friends at the same time.

So that's my story. What's yours? Should we use brain scans and genomics to steer career choices? And on a lighter note, what do you enjoy being bad at, and why?

Using EMR and smart search to harness the power of hindsight

2010-07-20T09:57:00Z

There are many powerful diagnostic tools. But, sadly one of the most effective is hindsight. How many times has a patient delayed a visit to the doctor either misreading or ignoring symptoms? The human cost can be enormous and the impact on budgets and resources almost as dramatic.

So what if there was a way for some form of artificial intelligence to anticipate and act on our behalf? To analyse and compare structured medical data, as well as the vast cloud of data that we carry with us every day from our electronic shopping lists, to our state of mind on social networks, to our location and local environment?

In a sense, this already happens. Search engines, such as Google, are already finely attuned to our desires as consumers. Think of the times when an advertisement or recommendation pops up next to your email inbox or web search that's relevant to an idea half formed in your mind. In the pursuit of commerce, clairvoyant algorithms are already well advanced.

It's exciting, scary and thought provoking in equal measure, but what if these algorithms could be tuned to our health? There's a fascinating article on this subject in New Scientist online, where one of Google's leading researchers considers the future of search:

"In future, your Google account may be allowed, under some as-yet-unidentified privacy policy, to know a whole lot about your life and the lives of those close to you. It will know birthdays and anniversaries, consumer gadget preferences, preferred hobbies and pastimes, even favourite foods. It will also know where you are, and be able to get in touch with your local stores via their websites."

Let's consider again the data that many of us carry in our pockets or in some unspecified 'cloud' network: personal details (dates of birth of families and friends); diet (online grocery orders); environment and location (travel history); sense of well being (varying degrees of engagement with social networks); meetings and schedules (work/life balance); even the pattern of our tastes in music, photography and media might reveal a psychological or physiological symptom.

All this information could be turned to our advantage when it comes to healthcare. So why isn't it happening? The main challenge is that for personal data to be truly valuable for health, it needs to link back to information in our electronic medical records that have an open, but secure link to the 'cloud'. But imagine if that could happen: search engines as powerful as Bing or Google with a secure bridge to healthcare information systems. Add in simple security settings that enable you to keep the results to yourself or share them with your family or your doctor and you have some idea of the future of online healthcare.

We may have to wait a while - as New Scientist points out,"searching without searching" in any scenario, is going to take a lot of innovation. But the fundamental building blocks are in place. And once EHRs and commercial equivalents, such as Microsoft Healthvault, gain momentum, patients will be more easily convinced. As will policy makers and insurers when they see the potential revenue savings generated by earlier diagnoses and more self-management based on reliable medical information.

How healthcare is shaping semantic search

2010-07-05T16:17:00Z

How do clinicians search for information? The question becomes more and more pertinent - and more complex - as the semantic web expands to influence medical data. But one thing's for sure: clinicians behave very differently depending on the search tools at their disposal, and this has enormous implications for the future of search technology in medicine.

That's why the results of this Australian study at the Australian Institute of Health Innovation and published by the Journal of Medical Internet Research make fascinating reading (this needs a little explanation, so bear with me). 75 clinicians - all of whom had at least 17 year's experience and rated themselves as having good to excellent computer skills - were asked to find the answers to eight clinical scenarios. But they were divided into two groups: one that used resource-based information retrieval systems such as PubMed and MIMS; the other used the task-based Quick Clinical system, which uses meta-search filters to search across many disparate information sources.

The research, led by Annie YS Lau, showed a clear difference between the behaviour of the two groups. Those using the resource-based system tended to use the same query across several sources, rather than drilling down deep into the first tool at their disposal. The task-based group, on the other hand, reformulated query keywords while keeping to the same task profiles. Why does this matter? The team conducting the study think that the resource-based group were scanning "multiple sources with the same term to gauge the competence of each before committing to a more detailed conversation with the resource they felt best qualified to help."

The task-based group, however, were "simultaneously receiving answers from multiple resources and so should be able to quickly form a view of the overall capabilities of the group of resources being simultaneously searched". In other words, this group had fewer concerns about the competence of their system and focused on "improving the dialogue with the system". The conclusion, unsurprisingly, is that users of task-based systems conduct fewer searches and consult fewer documents.

You can see plenty of similarities with here when it comes to the way that more mainstream search engines are refining their focus. Microsoft's Bing, for example, returns not just a page of links, but also a series of tabs that highlight creditable sources of information. On the 'front' tab you get a series of popular links, but organised under logical headings such as symptoms, impact on different age group and causes. A second tab, 'Health' takes you to further information from a trusted source of information, typically Mayo Clinic. Other tabs include Wikipedia, offering a 'crowd-sourced' option that is typically more current.

When you look again at the Australian study and the way that mainstream search engines are refining their focus, you see a good example of where health once again is steering online behaviour. Because search plays such a prominent role in the professional and private worlds of medicine, it's inevitable that this trend will translate to other audiences and industries. 75 clinicians in a university library might not sound like the future of the internet, but it's a clear sign of where the semantic web and 'smart search' are taking us.

Doing more with what we have

2010-06-25T10:48:00Z

A global economic crisis and shrinking budgets shouldn't be a barrier to innovation. In fact the current conditions challenge us to be smarter and more resourceful than ever before. I keep hearing people talking about 'making do with what we have', but to me this sounds like defeatism. Instead we need to look at how we can continue to innovate by taking advantage of existing solutions on the one hand, and the falling costs of commoditised technologies, such as storage and high bandwidth wireless networking on the other.

Here's a great video showing all these elements in action. Sponsored by GE and Intel, the solution uses simple motion detector devices combined with data crunching software to protect seniors in care homes. Put simply, motion detectors in individual appartments feed information to a central database. Here, the system 'learns' the movement patterns of an individual resident and looks for outlying patterns of behaviour that indicate an accident, or symptoms of ill-health.

I like this approach because it's so elegant and efficient. It also underlines the importance of gathering large volumes of data that can help prevent serious illness or accidents that are the most expensive to treat. And it demonstrates how healthcare solution providers and their customers can exploit new models of storage that drive down prices and make data-driven healthcare so attractive.

Hat tip to Sam Basta and his excellent Innovation by Design blog, which originally brought this story to our attention. In his article, Sam describes this model as the "Future Care equation": Sensors + Big Data + Designed Care Exprience - a good summary. There's also a great presentation on this approach to personalised medicine given by Rajiv Mehta and Hugh Dubberly. It cleverly reframes the healthcare design process by making patients themselves the designers and architects and is well worth an hour of your time. Most of all it reminds me that we still lack the knowledge to work with and listen to patients, the one and only decision maker in a personalised healthcare setting.

View Video
Format: html
Duration: --:--

A doctor in your pocket?

2010-06-18T09:42:00Z

The concept of concierge healthcare services (or personal vital coach) has been with us for some time. But only a few examples that take advantage of the latest mobile technology are actually available. So I'm intrigued by a new mobile phone launched in conjunction with a round the clock call centre that offers a mobile ECG device, plus glulcose, blood pressure and cholesterol monitoring.

At the moment the phone is available in Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong. According to EPI, the manufacturers, the ECG functions without gels and electrodes and transmits readings to a health centre, which returns the results in a matter of minutes. EPI claims that if there are any warning signs, a 'personal health concierge' will call the end user and recommend treatment, the nearest specialist and hospital if the situation requires.

With a price tag of U.S.$371 (€300), plus monthly service fees starting at U.S.$71 for 10 ECGs per month, it's clearly aimed at individuals with existing conditions or in high risk categories. Then there's the technology itself. iMedicalApps has a good critique of the device, and asks just how effective the ECG system actually is. I'm also curious about the concierge proposition. It's one thing to be told that you are experiencing heart irregularities by the doctor across the desk, it's another thing altogether when someone calls you on your mobile phone, however well trained the employee.

Personally I don't see a huge market for a device like this today and this illustrates the major challenge facing organisations who offer personalised health technology. Once these features are commoditised, however, then it becomes a much more interesting proposition. Apple, for example, has already patented heart rate measuring technology, althought this probably a potential authorisation method for future devices. But a system that combines inexpensive, but medical quality monitoring, and that is integrated with all tiers of care is far more compelling. We're not there yet, but at least the EPI device is starting to show the way.

How healthcare maps are taking over the world

2010-06-04T10:16:00Z

Launched a couple of days ago, Bing Health Maps is a great example of how to make geographically tagged healthcare data meaningful and useful for citizens, clinicians and policymakers alike.

It's also beautifully simple. By layering data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services over existing electronic maps, it enables end-users to filter and compare metrics from county to county in a given state. The example below shows incidences of coronary heart disease in the state of New York. Other filters include birth and death measures, and health risk factors such as obesity, high blood pressure and diabetes.

Look closely and you'll see a scattering of Tweets, where I've added a Twitter layer based around a search for 'exercise'. However I'm more sceptical about this feature. Applying anecdotal information to structured health data opens up a larger risk for misinterpretation. It's fun, but there's a risk involved. That said, the mapping application itself is pretty transparent and far easier for citizens to use than a table of data. And that has to be a good thing. You can give Bing Health Maps a spin here.

Innovation can't happen in isolation

2010-05-20T14:50:00Z

This weekend I read two articles that reminded me of how healthcare innovation is playing a pivotal role in the future of mankind and introduced me to the latest thinking in this space.

Matt Ridley's new book, The Rational Optimist, goes straight to the top of my reading list. This book focuses on the relationship between innovation, well being and prosperity. If the financial and international news pages have been full of grim news recently, this book is a good reminder of how science has continuously improved the well being and health of millions. The Economist review is a good place to start. The following lines in the review go right to the heart of what innovation means:

"Some have suggested that perhaps it [innovation] is the chemistry of big brains that leads us to tinker. Others that man’s mastery of language or his capacity for imitation and social learning hold the key. Mr Ridley, a zoologist by training, weighs up these arguments but insists, in the end, that the explanation lies not within man’s brain but outside: innovation is a collective phenomenon." (my italics).

That's what Ideaworks is all about: Bringing together thought leaders with smart solutions that reach new heights through the ideas. So why does it matter so much in healthcare? That's where the second article comes in, this time from McKinsey Quarterly. Called The emerging market in health care innovation, this is a good overview of how bright ideas for healthcare are springing up all over the world. But it also contains a strong warning. In a section about the the delveloping world, the authors, Tilman Ehrbeck, Nicolaus Henke, and Thomas Kibasi, write:

"Unfortunately, healthcare can be an isolated and local activity: innovations are not widely known across different systems or beyond sector boundaries. Merely identifying and promoting innovations isn’t enough, however—leaders need to understand whether, and how, the lessons of innovators can be replicated elsewhere."

For this reason, I hope you'll continue to visit the Ideaworks web site community and attend the event in October this year. Ideaworks is dedicated to bringing together policy makers, innovators, clinicians and patients to swap ideas and build partnerships that take healthcare to the next level. Innovation can't happen in isolation. That's why I hope you'll join us.

Your brain, this week

2010-03-30T14:57:00Z

This week I found out how to avoid temptation, resist addiction to junk food and erase bad memories. Yes, it's another week of news about the brain, which continues to fascinate and delight researchers worldwide.

So here we are. Five things we learnt this week;

1. We're close to understanding the area of the brain that makes moral judgements.

2. Junk food is addictive (just in case you were wondering).

3. We'll soon be able to wipe out bad memories.

4. Deferring rewards (or avoiding temptation) is good for you. There's a part of the brain for that.

5. Why some people become compulsive hoarders.

Reading through these stories, I'm intrigued by the use of electromagnetic fields to temporarily and harmlessly disrupt specific areas of the brain. Until recently, some of the most successful research has taken place using subjects who have damaged or lost parts of their brain through an accident or intentional surgery.

Studying these individuals has allowed us to better understand the workings of the mind. Replicating this effect using electromagnetic fields with a group of subjects offers fresh insights in a more controlled setting.

This also sent me back to one of my favourite presentations from TED in recent years, Vilayanur Ramachandran talking about three fascinating delusions suffered by brain damaged individuals.

(Please visit the site to view this media)

How epigenetics could turn personalised healthcare on its head

2010-03-23T09:06:00Z

For anyone excited about the potential of genomics to deliver truly personalised healthcare, the latest discoveries concerning epigenetics, and described in this article from the Guardian in the UK, are bound to be of enormous interest.

Here's why it matters. Until recently, our understanding of evolution and the human genome has been founded on two simple ideas. Firstly, that random genetic mutations occur during reproduction. And secondly, that traits that increase chances of survival in a given environment are more likely to be passed down to future generations.

Epigenetics, on the other hand, proposes that the environment and our behaviour can also have an impact on the genetic inheritance of our offspring. To quote the above article: "The epigenome plays a crucial role in determining which genes actually express themselves in a creature's traits: in effect, it switches certain genes on or off, or turns them up or down in intensity. It isn't news that the environment can alter the epigenome; what's news is that those changes can be inherited."

We've been aware of this for almost a decade, following this study from Sweden, which showed how food abundance in early 20th century populations affected cardiovascular and diabetes related deaths in future generations. Recent studies also suggest that stress has a role to play.

While this is still a relatively young field of study, the impact on personalised healthcare isn't hard to predict. If the data adds up and cause can be established, imagine the interest that insurance companies, banks and others might take in your ancestors and the potential impact on premiums. Then there's the very notion of what constitutes an electronic medical record. To create a truly personal healthcare experience, will we soon need to overlay data that describes our parents' or grandparents' behaviour? And what about privacy? Adding information from six ancestors, for example, could trigger an ethical nightmare, not to mention the effort required to manage the additional data.

And there's something else to consider. So far, behaviour that has a negative impact on future generations corresponds to our general understanding of well-being. We accept that stress and toxins are bad for us, so why not for our descendants. But what if an epigenetic connection is made with activities that are good for individuals, but bad for their children? Dieting puts the body under stress, as does exercise, for example. Take this argument one step further and what happens if government policy has an impact and there's a link with delayed childbirth, deferred or early retirement, or income support?

Whatever future studies discover, there's a strong possibility that we're going to have to completely rethink our notion of personalised healthcare. Perhaps we will be coaching individuals not just to improve their own well being but also the health of citizens in the 22nd century. It's a strange scenario, but at same time it has a the ring of optimism that appeals to me, in spite of the complexities. We may never become immortal, but we’ll have a greater opportunity than ever to pass on a lasting gift to our descendants.

HIMSS? Dull? Count your blessings

2010-03-08T13:49:00Z

A British colleague tried summing it up. "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Was HIMSS 2010 really that subdued?

A week or so ago, I predicted that the event would be extremely sober, and that while the U.S. healthcare market is in a dramatic state of flux, this wouldn't necessarily translate to the exhibition and conference halls. To a large extent, this was borne out by much that went on in Atlanta. I was inspired by David Blumenthal's presentation, but by and large the rest of the sessions left me cold.

As for my fellow vendors, it's pretty clear where resources - from developers to marketeers - are being focused. In fact it was pretty much impossible to escape the shadow of 'meaningful use', wherever you looked. And while you can't blame suppliers for talking up their chances in this space with so much money available, there was a strong sense of businesses abandoning innovation for the checklist, ticking off criteria and broadcasting the fact to anyone prepared to listen.

A new survey confirms this outlook. The 21st Annual HIMSS Leadership Survey shows that some 47 percent of hospitals and providers will definitely increase their operating budgets, and that in 49 percent of cases this is in order to meet the requirements for financial incentives promised by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).  Perhaps most striking of all, Meaningful Use Criteria was the top IT priority, with 42 percent signalling that this was their area of focus.

Perhaps it's time to be realistic here. This is innovation being driven government, and it might not be such a bad thing. Bear with me. Perhaps the first phase of meaningful use is best seen as a platform, or the foundation point where we agree the common framework upon which innovation will flourish. And perhaps a bit of 'boring' isn't such a bad thing. One step at a time rather than two steps forward and one step back.

But what you cannot dispute is the sheer appetite for change. When David Blumenthal said that information is the lifeblood of medicine, while IT is its circulatory system, nobody blinked. When you spoke to delegates, vendors, CIOs and clinicians almost every person, without exception, said that they expected EHR running on interoperable systems to become the norm in the next five years.

Maybe that's an achievement in itself. We've stopped arguing about whether or not EHR will happen. It will. And now that there's a lot less shouting and a lot more doing, we call it dull. Perhaps, instead, we should count our blessings.

Blumenthal's bold statement of intent at HIMSS 2010

2010-03-03T14:02:00Z

Back to writing about HIMSS today.

Nobody wins any prizes for guessing that the hot topic at this event is meaningful use. Vendors see this a great opportunity to win business and their customers are here in huge numbers to see what the future holds. But, I'm astonished by the way that everybody has their own interpretation of the U.S. government's criteria. Disclosure here - I work for a healthcare IT vendor myself - but to me the criteria are pretty clear. Maybe that's a job that we, as vendors, should do even better. If we know the rules, we shouldn't be afraid to correct customers whatever the impact on our own business.

No surprises then that so many vendors are putting forward an HIE solution. It's the perfect way to position yourself as a 'meaningful use' supplier. But there has to be proof as well. So my message to customers is simple: Don't hold back, challenge vendors until you're blue in the face and make sure you get the evidence, the site visits and more.

David Blumenthal's packed keynote speech today also stressed the importance of evidence and accountability. The National Coordinator for Health IT is, after all, responsible for the dispensation of billions of taxpayer dollars. So while we heard how "information is the lifeblood of medicine and HIT is the circulatory system", and that "we can't afford to keep using the same records management formats and processes that Hippocrates used in 400BC", this was a speech that returned again and again to the pragmatic issues at the heart of healthcare today in the U.S. and further afield.

We heard lots about measurement and standards. We were reassured that performance metrics will be set up and monitored for all HIT initiatives, and that NHIN is a "critical element of the future of health information exchange". Above all I was struck by the emphasis on change being driven from the community upwards, even by patients themselves. This is a government that is prepared to build the framework, but believes that change is the hands of the people at the front line. I was also impressed by his infectious, confident approach. "Healthcare IT will be as important as the stethoscope, the ECG and the X-ray for physicians."

Like the event itself, this was an upbeat performance and you could feel the sense of purpose in the exhibition halls immediately afterwards. Two phrases above all stick in my mind. "The future is with hospitals and healthcare workers who choose to adopt the technologies" and "the last year we spent on policy. We now begin our work to implement."

No one should be in any doubt about the determination of this administration to bring healthcare right up to date in the twenty-first century.

A first class patient journey

2010-03-02T17:16:00Z

Not so long ago I proposed that the industry stop talking about the future so much and focus more on the present. Well, I’m now about to eat my own words. But you know what, I don’t mind a bit because what I saw on Sam Basta’s Healthcare Innovation by Design blog stopped me in my tracks.

Check out the graphic at the top of the post and you’ll know exactly what I mean. It highlights where healthcare can and should be in the not-too-distant future, but just as importantly it makes you think of where we are today and the big changes that are needed.

Maybe you’re thinking this already, but doesn’t that ward look similar to the first-class area of a long-haul flight? What this tells us is that the design isn’t so radical after all, but effectively brings healthcare up-to-date with other sectors - where service delivery is made a priority.

Simply put, what you see here is what healthcare has to aspire to.

The blog also makes a number of interesting design points, a couple of which caught my eye. The first one is that healthcare environments need to be thought out from the top down, not from the bottom up. It’s common knowledge that all too often our environments “emerge” (as Sam points out in his blog) so that you end up with a rather bloated set up resulting in inefficiencies and waste. This has to change.

The other point I really like is the need for flexible spaces. This could have a major impact on the quality of care, giving patients an environment to meet their specific needs. In Sam’s view it means the “better use of small spaces, creating solutions for toileting or more solid dividing walls for better privacy”.

See, I think it was worth eating those words of mine.

First impressions from HIMSS

2010-02-24T16:21:00Z

Like many IT vendors and healthcare professionals, I'm enjoying HIMSS this week.

I can't say for certain what will be the final themes of the event, but I'm going to stick my neck out and make a few predictions.

Firstly, I think HIMSS is going to be one big reality check for the healthcare IT industry. This year we are really starting to come to terms with 'meaningful use'. It would be naive not to see the business opportunity of the Recovery Act, but it would be foolish to overlook the new discipline and accountability that it brings to our sector. We're going to have to put the hype to one side, get our feet firmly on the ground and talk about the present.

Which is why I'm pleased, and slightly relieved, that interoperability is a key theme of the event. I'm anticipating a lot of talk about Health Information Exchanges (HIE). Not because I like the sound of another industry buzzword, but because I really believe that we are close to achieving the levels of integration across the healthcare supply chain that other industries have enjoyed for years, decades even.

The only area where I think we will see some end-user eye candy, is at the HIE front end. Forget the iPAD, it's about time that medical professionals, administrators, and eventually patients had a modern, fluid interface that enabled them to view and manipulate patient records, imagery, schedules, billing and more.

On a separate topic, I'm also excited that The Obama administration is taking steps to simplify the implementation of its health IT strategy. As you might have seen on the newswires, a memo from the Office of Management and Budget has been sent to a number of Federal agencies, proposing the creation of a new Health Information Technology (HIT) taskforce that will support a coordinated effort to implement goals of the HITECH Act across various government agencies.

I'll certainly drink a toast to that - even if HIMSS is going to be a very sober event this year.

An application of ideas

2010-02-16T18:49:00Z

The iPhone was one of the biggest success stories of the last decade, truly changing the way the most people look at their phones. A large part of this success is undeniably due to the App Store. More than just a communication tool, the iPhone has given the mass market easy access to all kinds of applications, games, maps, web browsers, journals – you name it – with the tap of a touchscreen.

But Apple’s device has potential outside consumer applications. More and more organisations are looking at how the device’s usability and flexibility can be used to improve efficiency. And certainly, the potential of the iPhone hasn’t gone unnoticed by us. At the Ideaworks Amsterdam event last week, I announced that we were developing Lorenzo for iPhone. The application will provide health care professionals with on-the-go access to key functions of our larger healthcare solution, making their lives much easier.

One of the main objectives of Lorenzo for iPhone is to reduce the sizeable administrative burden that nurses experience. With the application, nurses can register basic patient information such as pulse and temperature through their iPhones at the point of care, so that it doesn’t accumulate throughout the day. The application will also provide clinicians with real-time access to patient information. If a doctor wants to look up a patient’s x-ray results or medical history, all they have to do is look at his or her phone. Our goal is to let medical professionals work more easily, more efficiently and, most importantly, provide a better quality patient care.

This type of technology is gaining momentum in the healthcare industry. Whether it’s smartphones, or custom-built devices, doctors and nurse are eager to find ways to simplify administration and increase time spent with patients. The iPhone approach offers some unique benefits: having this technology on employee’s own iPhones could save organisations a fortune in the long term – portable patient management will become a reality, at the cost of a phone application. Plus, with more efficient day to day operations, budgets are likely to stretch a lot further. The concept could even be expanded to tablet PCs, like the new iPad.

In short, it’s a very interesting time for the healthcare industry. Easier access to information and administrative functions through portable devices will revolutionise the way medical professionals work. Personally, I’m excited by the possibilities.

The Buzz around Ideaworks Amsterdam

2010-02-10T14:52:00Z

When Google Buzz went live last night, it was almost the perfect answer to one of the main questions that preoccupied the Ideaworks 2010 event held yesterday.

So many delegates and speakers reiterated the role that social media will play in the delivery of better outcomes and patient care in the next decade. And while there's a huge amount of excitement around this trend, there's still a great deal of discussion about how this will evolve.

That's where I think Buzz has given us some important insights.

Let's start with the obvious. I heard one colleague describe Buzz as Facebook for grown ups. That's definitely an improvement, certainly for the many of us who find that managing privacy and blocking unwanted content is too complicated and tedious on the world's most popular social media platform.

And it certainly has a pick and mix flavour to it. But then again you can't blame Google for choosing the best of what's out there already, and then layering it over existing services, such as Picasa, which were under threat from Facebook's new photo upload tool.

So a future in healthcare? Maybe with early professional adopters. Buzz is certainly a very elegant tool for public or group discussion. It has a simple, clean UX, which might make it suitable for professional to professional, or even professional to patient conversations (think Google Wave but much more accessible to the general user). I also think it's going to be great for real time chat - my experience so far is that comments appear instantaneously. And possibly even crowd sourcing.

Going back to the conversation with delegates at the Ideaworks event, there was a growing sense that the medical profession and social media are evolving slowly towards a common ground. Lucien Engelson, one of our keynote speakers from the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, put it nicely. "There's a growing community of e-patients holding a mirror to professional healthcare. We have to take a look at ourselves." Good point. The sooner we learn how to manage patient expectations and treat them like consumers the better. Buzz is certainly a good step for learning how to make this happen.