Skip to main content

Putting Apple's iPad To Work In Your Hospital

Lots of uses for the iPad. Doctors crave it.  Employees want it.  Legacy IT vendors...ahh...maybe not.  They didn't invent it, can't control it, don't like it.  Still, it's more a question of 'how soon' not 'whether.'  Get in front of the wave or get steamrolled.

From IT Business Edge Network: a slideshow of 10 business uses for your iPad.  I can give you 50 more if you're curious.

From the American Medical Association: Health care embraces the iPad as physicians jump on board.

From MedCity News: now there's an FDA-approved radiology app for the iPad.

Still unsure about Apple's platform?   Diabetes apps (this one from London-based Cellnovo) are being described as the "iTunes of diabetes care."
"David Kliff, an independent diabetes analyst, who publishes the Diabetic Investor, wrote on his web site that Cellnovo’s approach is a “somewhat radical departure from the traditional approach to the market, which is more concerned with building a cheaper version of what’s already on the market while ignoring how patients actually use these systems in a real world setting.”
Finally, from Network World: Adventist Health System struggles with integrating the iPad into legacy systems.

A morning after afterthought:  Fact A: Physicians are jumping on the iPad bandwagon.  Fact B: in many markets, providers still compete fiercely for physician loyalty.  So does Fact A plus Fact B mean we'll see providers "competing on apps?"  Just a thought...

Even More: From KENS Channel 5 in San Antonio, TX: Physicians at San Antonio's WellMed Clinic embrace iPad technology as an important clinical tool.  
“I don’t have to go run to my office or I don’t have to run home and carry around these great big 20 pound textbooks,” Dr. Robin Eickhoff explained. “I can just hit a button. It’s wonderful.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Michael Porter On Health Care Reform

Michael Porter, writing in the New England Journal of Medicine, proposes "A Strategy For Health Care Reform - Toward A Value-Based System." His proposals are fundamental, lucid and right-on, meaning they're sure to be opposed by some parties to the debate, the so-called "Yes, but..." crowd. Most important, in my opinion, is this: "... electronic medical records will enable value improvement, but only if they support integrated care and outcome measurement. Simply automating current delivery practices will be a hugely expensive exercise in futility. Among our highest near-term priorities is to finalize and then continuously update health information technology (HIT) standards that include precise data definitions (for diagnoses and treatments, for example), an architecture for aggregating data for each patient over time and across providers, and protocols for seamless communication among systems. "Finally, consumers must become much mor

Being Disrupted Ain't Fun. Deal With It.

Articles about disrupting healthcare, particularly those analogizing, say, Tesla's example with healthcare's current state, are frequently met with a chorus of (paraphrasing here) "Irrelevant! Cars are easy, healthcare is hard." You know, patients and doctors as examples of "information asymmetry" and all that. Well, let me ask you this: assuming you drive a car with a traditional internal combustion engine, how much do you know about the metallurgy in your car's engine block? I'll bet the answer is: virtually nothing. In fact it's probably less than you know about your own body's GI tract. Yet somehow, every day, us (allegedly) ignorant people buy and drive cars without help from a cadre of experts. Most of us do so and live happily ever after (at least until the warranty expires. Warranties...another thing healthcare could learn from Tesla.) Now, us free range dummies - impatient with information asymmetry - are storming healthcare

My Take On Anthem-Cigna, Big Dumb Companies and the Executives Who Run Them

After last Friday's Appeals Court decision, Anthem's hostile takeover of, er, merger with Cigna has but a faint pulse. Good. Unplug the respirator. Cigna's figured it out but Anthem is like that late-late horror show where the corpse refuses to die. Meanwhile, 150 McKinsey consultants are on standby for post-merger "integration" support. I guess "no deal, no paycheck..." is powerfully motivating to keep the patient alive a while longer. In court, Anthem argued that assembling a $54 billion behemoth is a necessary precondition to sparking all manner of wondrous innovations and delivering $2.4 billion in efficiencies. The basic argument appears to be "We need to double in size to grow a brain. And just imagine all those savings translating directly into lower premiums for employers and consumers."  Stop. Read that paragraph again. Ignore the dubious "lower premiums" argument and focus on the deal's savings. $2.4 billion saved