Institute For The Future

IBM's vision for . . .

So says IBM.  It also proclaims:

 

Technology alone can't cure what ails us. But it can help those who treat our illnesses, heal our injuries, and find new ways ot battle diseases do it even better. It can also help healthy individuals to make smarter choices about their health and care.

 

IBM's Ideas page includes a story about how the Japanese government now requires that all citizens between ages 40 and 74 measure their waistlines during annual checkups.  "Diet recommendations and further weight-loss education await those whose girth exceeds established limits." A sign of "big brother" health care, or simply a more proactive wellness story?

More of IBM's wisdom:

 

[M]uch of smarter healthcare is not focused on the next big breakthrough in medical research. Smarter healthcare solutions start with the individual. Take the Medical Home model, for example. Primary care physicians act as "coaches," leading a team that manages a patient's wellness, preventive and chronic care needs. The doctor spends more time with each person, is available via e-mail and phone for consultation, offers expanded hours and coordinates care across the individual's entire care team.

 

Personally, I like this model of care, but as my fellow blogger/researcher Bradley Kreit and I were discussing last night, this country doesn't have enough primary care physicians (PCPs) to make this model viable. Possible solutions? How about the idea that medical school reform has to be a part of the health care reform equation? Or pay parity between PCPs and specialists?

IBM goes on to share a piece of data I have not come across before or even considered, at least not in terms of images:

I certainly have been troubled by how "disconnected" our health information is across systems.  Interoperability is woefully lacking in the world of electronic health records (EHRs). So I think IBM is right when it says, "Smarter healthcare is interconnected."

I do take a bit of issue with the example IBM goes on to use.  It (somewhat misleadingly) cites to Spain's public health care system (it is really only a regional system) as an example of having done interconnectivity right. Servicio Extremeño de Salud (SES) uses IBM (of course) to manage its patient records.  IBM goes on to brag that it connects "almost 13,000 professionals with a scheduling system that manages nine million outpatient visits a year" (my emphasis added). I dunno. It seems to me that running a connected scheduling system is different than maintaining interconnected EHRs.  IBM doesn't really say much about how SES is doing that.

I'll include one more image from this IBM Web page:

The medical home model, interconnectivity for vast amounts of medical data, the patient-centered care model . . . these are all ideas that we have been looking at as we prepare for our June conference on Health and Health Care in 2020. Stay tuned for more.