Business - Written by on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:34 - 4 Comments

The true costs of healthcare

Some very interesting numbers on the cost of the Canadian healthcare system were released yesterday as part of a report published by the Canadian Medical Association. Of note, the report claims that waiting times associated with four key medical procedures in Canadian hospitals cost the Canadian economy a whopping $14.8 billion in productivity related losses, as well as an additional $4.4 billion in associated tax revenue losses.

There is evidently some scepticism about this report, notably due to its provenance from an association which has campaigned for a move to a private health care system, but t once again begs the question of how can healthcare systems re-invent themselves in the face of increasing demand and stagnant, if not decreasing, funding. Reversing the latter issue is evidently tops on most lists but it may actually blind us from the partial solutions that may lie in new technologies.

Now the report published by the CMA targets four surgical procedures where technology may do little to alleviate the backlog but the whopping costs outlined by the report got me thinking about how one might use various Web 2.0 technologies to offer up partial solutions to what may be perceived as less pressing wait times at emergency rooms and clinics. While the examples that follow are far from exhaustive, they do point to the potential efficiency gains made possible by Web 2.0 tools and mobile technologies.

My to do list might start with this:

  • A mobile messaging system that alerts patients as to the shortest wait times at local clinics or ER’s – thus reducing lost productivity and keeping per patient compensation maximized;
  • An expansion of services such as Ontario’s Telehealth hotline to the Web to create an always on, NHS-like, system of content and connections that keeps people out of the ER when they don’t need to be , and keeps the ill at home when they should be;
  • Electronic health records with patient interfaces and a system of compensation (and litigation protection!) for online consultations – thus allowing less pressing questions and issues to be addressed outside of core work (read costly) hours;
  • And while you’re at it, that interoperable EHR might be built on an open source platform such as myOSCAR; significantly slashing the cost of initial investment.


4 Comments

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

Denis
Jan 16, 2008 12:39

I think the electronic records one is absolutely vital. It would seem REMARKABLY easy to have a central data repository where medical records are kept and updated, which the patient can make accessible to any medical practioner they choose “on demand”… and one would think that would save a lot of time and lead to better outcomes. Beyond remarkably easy, in fact.

I’m not sure all the reasons this hasn’t happened yet, but the struggle I’ve seen some people go through in order to see their OWN medical records gives me a hint on what one of the problems is…

Martha
Feb 22, 2008 16:33

According to my brother who is a systems consultant to some large healthcare providers there are several obstacles to electronic health records.

- lack of standard systems and file formats
- lack of full adoption of electronic records in hospitals and doctors offices
- back log of work – doctors sometimes take weeks/months to dictate and put documentation in a patient’s file

In order to drive the necessary change patients must be proactive in pressing for their own information and in electronic format.

As an example – I just followed the course of my father’s complicated blood disorder. He had blood draws several times per week and each time we would have to call the doctor’s office and ask for a FAX of of the printed results. It was like the dark ages. It seems to me they could have had some simple download format from a secure website. Looking at these blood readings in a trended format is key to analyzing the data and understanding the patients progress. But even the doctors don’t have the data in a trended format -or at least we were never shown anything in that format. On top of that different labs present the data in different formats and different order for the same basic blood test.

This is just an example but what would seem to be a relatively straightforward data set. As the patient, it would be nice to have a file with the information fromt he blood work over the 5 year course of the disease that could be easily accessible by the patient and any new specialist he might want to consult. Instead, there is an onerous process of obtaining paper copies of records to be sent to any consulting doctor. Its crazy in this day and age of technology that some sort of database hasn’t been developed and healthcare consumers aren’t pushing doctor’s and hospitals to use it.

Wikinomics » Blog Archive » Free-market global healthcare
Mar 19, 2008 15:39

[...] global healthcare Earlier in the year I blogged about the true costs of healthcare and the role technology and the Web 2.0 might play in reducing those costs. But maybe we should [...]

Free-market healthcare? « My Global Classroom
Apr 6, 2008 19:26

[...] Earlier in the year I blogged about the true costs of healthcare and the role technology and the Web 2.0 might play in reducing those costs. But maybe we should [...]

Coming soon in paperback! Help rename the paperback version of Macrowikinomics and win a one-hour webinar for you and your colleagues with Don Tapscott. Ends 5:00pm ET, August 31. Learn more.

Business - Oct 5, 2010 12:00 - 0 Comments

DRM and us

More In Business


Entertainment - Aug 3, 2010 13:14 - 2 Comments

Want to see the future? Look to the games

More In Entertainment


Society - Aug 6, 2010 8:19 - 4 Comments

The Empire strikes a light

More In Society