This Month in Digital Health: Confirming Things We Already Knew

Welcome to This Month in Digital Health. Here, I highlight news articles and trends that recently caught my attention and attempt to explain why they matter. The main theme for the last few weeks has been reports and stories confirming things we already knew – which is still important, because it always helps to hammer home the message.

AI is complicated. AI was a big talking point at HLTH, what with the AMA announcing its Center for Digital Health and AI (to develop policy and training resources, among other things) and the Cleveland Clinic CEO saying AI is necessary for solving big problems like access to affordable care. Easier said than done, though, as 49% of orgs are seeing AI innovation delayed, while AI’s many ethical issues resemble a can repeatedly kicked down the road and healthcare’s slow sales cycles leave AI vendors waiting for the check to come in the mail.

Insurers aren’t popular. Forrester found only 54% of consumers view health insurers are trustworthy, and only 53% understand claims decisions. Insurers are trying to curry favor by streamlining prior authorization, though most consumers said they’ll believe it when they see it. It certainly doesn’t help that 60% of consumers blame insurers for medical debt and 70% say healthcare is unaffordable – a problem that will get worse before it gets better.

Everyone wants ROI. Not everyone gets it. Half of digital health purchasers use performance-based contracts; the Peterson Health Technology Institute expects that number to rise as health plans, hospitals, and employers scrutinize contracts to ensure they deliver value. When it comes to virtual care, fewer than 30% of providers earn significant ROI, as Healthcare Dive put it, citing Sage Growth Partners. That might explain why Amwell is mulling the sale of legacy assets that aren’t part of its virtual care platform.

Private equity likes money. Two fairly damning reports from Health Affairs illustrate what private equity’s doing to healthcare. One found hospice facilities owned by PE had higher profits and lower per-patient spending compared to other ownership models, and another found specialists affiliated with PE negotiated higher prices than independent physicians. Mind you, other for-profit entities exist in healthcare, and non-profits don’t always hold up their end of the bargain; it’s still not a good look.

Other things we already knew or saw coming from miles away:

• Everything old is new again, as text-based engagement has been rebranded as deviceless remote monitoring. I’m all for it by any name: It’s cheap, easy, accessible, and proven to work.
• Apparently, if you cut hundreds of billions in funding for health insurance and medical research, healthcare organizations have to cut staff.
• Financial uncertainty + unpredictable federal policy = not a great time for digital health IPOs. Plus, memories of 2021 aren’t all that distant. (Remember Babylon? Pear? Yeah.)
• Millennial and Gen Z patients rely on tech more to manage and guide their care than older patients, PwC found. Interestingly, they have less trust in primary care physicians. Me guess is access and wait times, especially in markets like Boston.
• Surprisingly, this article with the headline What Republicans’ new healthcare strategy might look like wasn’t just a blank page. One part of it appears to be telling states to divert resources to immigration status verification – well, that and letting kids starve.

That’s all for now. Tune in next month to see if the trends are more of the same.