The healthcare industry doesn’t need disruptive tech but worker empowerment

Photo credit: Pixabay.

Globally, startup success stories are often paralleled to David and Goliath. Southeast Asia is also buying in and embracing radical ideas from tech people in hoodies and besuited investors. The past decade has seen more of these unlikely partners venture into more traditional industries such as healthcare. However, they’ve been having difficulties in retaining users acquired through free trials and discounts, leading to a poor performance.

Only few incumbents provide convincing case studies of the lean startup methodology producing sustainable solutions that integrate with heterogeneous health systems. This has prompted bleeding investors to take a step back and survey the situation, confused about the apparent impotence of tried and tested strategies that have worked in other industries.

Although healthcare is riddled with inefficiencies and opportunities for innovation, it has numerous barriers to adoption and propagation. This article highlights the recurring problems that aspiring innovators in healthcare and users face.

Human touch

The relationship between a patient and their healthcare worker is a key component of health interventions. Proponents of the notion that clinic visits can be replaced by a robot fail to appreciate this “therapeutic relationship.” It builds upon the trust of patients, provides solace to them, and encourages perseverance in the management of chronic diseases.

Health tech companies would do well to respect the value of the human touch and build their innovations to enhance rather than bypass it. The latter approach may diminish the impact and undermine the sustainability of interventions in the long term. Ultimately, healthcare is not ripe for disruption but poised for digital empowerment.

Healthcare without a doctor is an airport without a control tower

Health innovators are often under pressure by investors to quickly demonstrate returns after fundraising. Armed with a prototype or MVP, they splurge on marketing but struggle with acquiring users. This is due to the staggering levels of information asymmetry between patients and health providers unlike in any other industry.

Patients/users may not adopt medical technologies based on a viral video, discount, or promos particularly in Asia. Instead, they often first approach their physicians for advice, physicians whose confidence will not be inspired by a Frankenstein prototype jolted alive with rudimentary software. Respectable physicians wouldn’t just turn their patients into guinea pigs without proper procedures in place.

Businesses that employ this B2C approach in healthcare may face an invisible barrier to adoption. Without a doctor as an advisor or co-founder, it may be hard to understand where in the health ecosystem an innovation may fit. Innovators will end up frantically and aimlessly running into high walls such as regulations or physicians’ quality concerns waiting around every corner.

Without a doctor as an advisor or co-founder, it may be hard to understand where in the health ecosystem an innovation may fit.

“You are the doctor. Shouldn’t you decide what treatment I need?” This is a very common response practicing doctors in Singapore receive from patients after listing the risks and benefits of their treatment options. Although patients have begun to appreciate the premise behind informed consent, this dialogue perfectly illustrates this dependent relationship.

“Digital health enthusiasts” argue that the information age will rid patients of this kind of reliance on doctors. However, this could not be further from the truth. The onslaught of information from wearables and questionable sources online is confusing the public. Consultations that typically take 10 minutes take longer today, as doctors have to dispel their patients’ misconceptions.

A preemptive solution would be early engagement with physicians. Being able to clearly demonstrate enhanced patient education or outcomes through physician engagement will greatly facilitate tech adoption and help an innovator prioritize developmental goals. Healthcare does not need simplistic solutions and uberization. What it needs is a commitment to work with stakeholders. This way, healthcare workers can enhance their capabilities and provide better care for their patients.

Conclusion

The next point is about the context of healthcare. It is a dominion of heterogeneous corporate behemoths over end users, who are highly trained professionals, and patients enslaved by the shackles of licensing and inelastic demand, respectively. The bureaucratic processes, checks, and balances of health systems are absolutely crucial for ensuring patient safety and should always remain. Unfortunately, these may cause a tunnel vision where innovation is concerned, as these safety processes may distance leaders from users and innovations on the ground.