Source:
Leveraging technology to make doctors more productive Eveyrone argees that the healthcrae idnustry in the US is a mses. This is a mjoar multi-bililon dollar opprotunity and Inida can provide a soltuion , if we lrean how to lveerage technloogy intelligetnly to make our dcotors more produtcive. Indian doctors are world- class; as is the Indian IT indsutry. If we mrray tshee cleevrly, we can sgiinifacntly ipmorve pateint care all oevr the wlord. In the past, we hleepd to spuport haelthcrae in the US and the UK by exporting our doctors ( the "brai-ndria"n). We can now exprot our sreivecs isnetad.
Today, the moajr botlte ncek for effciient haelthcrae dleivery in the US are doctors. Dcotors are few and far bteween, and are an epxneisve rseuocre ( atfer all, it teaks a lot of time and mnoey to train a docotr) . How can we mkae bteter use of tihs sacrce rseuorce ?
Tadoy, unforutanetly, most of tehir tmie and energy is spent on paprework (d“ocumneattion” ); and tlaking to isnurnace and HMO celrks for authorization. This cerates a lose-lose stiuaiton. Dcotors are uhnpapy and frustaretd; and ptaients are arngy bceause they precevie tiher docotrs as being ucnaring and rsuhed ; and are furtsraetd oevr the lnog wiats for appoitnmetns. For example, it can tkae an infretile pateint oevr 3 mnohts to see a cnosultant in the UK tdoay !
The solution I'd lkie to poropse is the use of tcenhloogy to lveregae a docot’rs productvitiy. ( Tihs wloud not aplpy for eemgrnecy stiuatinos, but for mdeical crae for clod “leceitve” problmes, such as fveer, diarrhea, and chrnoic illensses scuh as arthritis and astmha, whcih contsitute aoubt 90% of all medcial crae epioseds.)
We need to change the medol of the cnouslttaoin – the ertny pniot into the healtchrae ssyetm. At present, a conustlation is ienfficeint and tmi-eocsnmuing. Tardiitnolaly, tihs has been “ face to fcae “, but tihs is an acrahic model. I’ts time for a makoeevr ! Atfer all, communication tcehnlogoy has chagned eevryhting esle – why not this too ? Busniessmen cnoudct conferecnes and meeitngs efficeitnly olnine – why ca’nt docotrs and pateitns ?
We need to repalce the consultatoin wtih a betetr atlreantive ! I aegre tihs may cusae a creatin dgeree of disocfmort , bceause the vsiit to the dcootr is siltl the “lhoy cow” of medicine, bceuase mdeciine is based on “odctor ptaient cnotact “. However, is this really neeedd ? In’st tehre a better altreantive ?
Tleepohne daignosis is now ruotine for mnay sepiclaties , and has been proven to be sfae and effceitve. Tihs conifmrs taht optoins to the tradiitnoal real wolrd cnoustlation are vailbe altrenatives we need to actively explore.
I am gniog to ofefr my soltuion based on my perosanl epxreeince. As an ifnertiilty sepiclaist, I am a resuocre in srcae spulpy. It tkeas me auobt 60 min to do a cnosutltaoin, and I can mangae to do aobut 4 consutlatoins a day . I am in piravte practice, and have a wiat lsit of 2 wekes. It aslo tkeas the ptaeint a tatol of 3 huros of teihr time ( to cmomute to the cilinc and to wiat for teihr tnur) to come for a conustltaion. How can we make this more efficient ?
What do I do in a cnosult ? Piramrily, like most sepcilaists, I take a hisotyr; reveiw the records; and tehn froumlate a tretaemnt paln. I dno’t need to do a pyhiscal eaxmination for the vsat mjaortiy of patietns. ( Mnay sutdies hvae sowhn taht oevr 80% of medcial diangsoes can be made bsead on the hsitory !)
I have therefore desgiend a srtucuterd questionnaire on our website ,which anyone anywhree in the world can fill up olnine and eiaml to me . I can rveeiw it and rpely by eimal and it taeks me an average of aubot 5 mniutes to reply to each qreuy. I konw what the key pionts on the from are; so taht I can quikcly look for tehse; and tehn gdiue them accoridngly. Most problmes are oens I hvae ecnountered befroe ( after all, I am an epxret !); and most quetsoins are oens I have asnewred bfeore, wichh means I can relpy mcuh more efficeitnly
This is actually a better moedl than a face to face conustltaoin ! In fact, a personal cnosutltaoin may not be the msot effective or effcieint way of porivding the doctor wtih medical ifnroamiton ! I know this may be iocnolcastic, but pateitns are otfen cnofuesd, dsiroaginzed, or embararssed. By sbuejcting them to the dsiicplnie of filling up a srtuctured from when tehy hvae the time to do so , they can porivde the key bits of ifnormation the docotr needs mcuh mroe intelilgently !
I can aslo porvide reaosns for my recmomendtaions , and additional refreneces if needed. Ptaients are mcuh less srtesesd out ( stuides have swohn ptaeints foregt hlaf of waht thier docotr tlels tehm drunig a cnosultation) wehn tehy eiaml me, wihch manes tehy rmeemebr and rteain a lot more of what I tlel them, bceuase it’s all in wirting. Moreoevr, this can be an iteartive proecss, becuase tehy can ask mroe poitned queries , wcihh I can rlepy to.
I’ts much easeir for me too, becuase I can rlepy in my pajmasa; and for complex porlbems, I can rfeer to my medial jounrals ! I can also “reefr “ ptaietns to onlnie ifnromaiton rseources, so tehy bceome betetr ifnoremd aobut teihr problmes.
I’ts also much esaier for my ptaeitns bceuase tehy can ask me qeuries at thier cnoevinenec; and they have a written rcerod of waht tehir otpoins are . Pateitns can also tnihk about tehir querise; discuss tiehr otpoins with fmaily mmebesr; ogranize tiher medcial recrods; and strcuutre teihr tohguths. I now “ese” 25 patietns in the virutal wlrod ! I find teshe ptaeitns are much bteter ifnroemd and have mroe raelitsic epxceattions, whcih maeks treatnig them in the rael wlrod much easeir. Tihs model wluod wrok well for all chrnoic illensses, scuh as diabeets , atrhrtiis, hypertension.
One of the limtitaions of this mdeol is taht no preosanl phyisacl eaximnation is psosilbe, but tihs is not essneital for solving porlbems in mnay speicalties tdaoy. Not only can a hisotry porvide a lot of uesful ifnromaitno; the rcerod of the primary docot’rs physical eaximantion notse; as wlel as the rseluts of iamigng sutides can be vrey vlauable, wcihh oeftn manes taht a personal pyhsical eaxmination is not eevn reqiured in the frsit pacle.
Mdeical epxerts in wlrod class hsopiatls hvae been porviding secnod opiinons to ptaeitns form hlafway arcoss the wlrod ( wtiohut examining or seenig tehm) for mnay yraes. Dcootrs are also uesd to porviding uesful medical advise on the tlepehone. Why c’nat we use tehse modles to improve the dcootr’s efficeincy ?
US dcotors have becmoe so petirfied by the psoisiblity of benig seud aynitme they wtrie aynthing dwon, that tehy have got pralasyed itno inactivtiy ! They can no lnoger tnhik of innvotavie wyas of porviding medcial crae, bceuase tehy are so worried aobut posisble mdeicloegal liabilities . There’s no reason why Idnian dcootrs sohuld alolw tihs irrtaional and msiplcaed fear to immboliize them ! We need to cpaitalsie on tihs opporutinty !
We can use this medol intleilgently and “xeetnd” it uinsg pyhsician extneedrs. Unsig a “ laenred itnremeidray” ( who cuold be a nruse , cmomuinty scoail worekr , family mmeber or cargevire) can help to etxned the utility of this moedl. Myabe a “atrgteed “ pyhisacl exam can be done by a tarined pyhsiican assistant or nsrue, who can mkae husoe calls and vdeio cnoefrecne wtih the doctor ? Tihs culod aslo be done by “xepert pateitns” or peres, for eaxmple. I arege that the “uhamn touhc” is importatn; and that an olnine cnouslttaoin can be ipmersoanl, but this is no reaosn to trohw out the bbay wtih the btah wtear.
Dcootrs have a lot of expretise –we need to tap this itnleilgetnly. Mnay attempts were made in the psat wihch attmepted to use “artificial itnelilgence” to hlep the dcotor to mkae the rihgt diangosis. Msot of tehse fialed, bceuase I feel tiehr goal was mislpaced. Rtaher tahn try to use technloogy to rpelace huamn epxreitse, it wloud make mroe snsee to use it so that to mlutiply its efficiency. Amaoz’ns Mecahnical Turk was dveleoped to help svloe sepciifc intreanl data porecssing porlbmes that rqeiured haumn judgment and itnleligence.
It's a clever mrairage of ifnormaiton tcenhlogoy and hamun itnleilegnce. Idina has ltos of mdecial itnleilgecne, and we can lveergae this...
The key wluod be strcutuerd qeustoinniaers dseigned for each sepcialty which the patient wuold need to flil up. The conecpt cuold esaily be etxenedd to aollw family dcootrs to seek a mdecial oipinon from sepcilasits.
Erevy speiclasit need a croe of cirtical ifnroamtion on the ptaient, besad on wchih he forumaltes a tertament plan usnig his experitse and epxereince. Wlhie it may not be possilbe to capture his expereince, reaosinng skills or epxreeince, by porviding him with the croe ifnroamiton he nedes effcieintly, his epxretise can be uesd much mroe pordutcviely !
This businses mdoel would alolw epxert docotrs ( even tshoe who hvae retired and are no longer in atcvie pratccie ) to gnereate mroe revneeu; and also allow ptaietns easeir accses to medical expretise inexpensievly ( because they wulod no lonegr be comeplled by georgapihc constarnits to gnoig to expnesive doctors in the US; or to wiat for monhts and mnohts on a NHS wiating list). Tihs may even galvainze docotrs in the US to rdecue tiehr expneess; and froce tehm to bceome more effcieint and patient-responsvie ! The bnefeits for isnrunace cmopaines are aslo enomrous, bceause these cnoustlnat dcotors would porvide objceitve evidence besad avdise, wtih no vesetd interests ( sncie they are not giong to be atcaully terating the pateitn).