This episode is a little bit of a thought experiment, so hang with me as I bumble my way through it and then hit me up with your comments. The plan is to do another episode in the future where some of you with thoughts share your version of your own thought experiment.
Here’s the topic: The ultimate impact of telehealth—in 20 minutes or less.
In my version of this thought experiment, I want to do something a little bit different (maybe) than everybody who seems to be putting up a poll on Twitter right now. I want to look at telehealth as a leading indicator, not as a trend. The goal here is not to inform you of things that you don’t already know because I am entirely confident that much of what I’m gonna say right now the majority of you are already eminently familiar with—probably more familiar with than I am, frankly. So, the goal here is to put this information into a context that maybe is new—at least I hope it’s new. The goal of that is to hopefully inspire some of you to take action, right now, with all haste.
This whole telehealth thing started in the middle of one of the many conversations I’ve had lately about what will be the future of telehealth. You have probably had similar chats about the future of telehealth and know what I am going to say. They all seem to devolve into someone ticking off all of the states who have extended temporary telehealth measures and the 1000 telehealth bills pending in state legislatures that might mandate public and private payers cover it. Anyway, in the middle of one of these “let’s all study this updated spreadsheet” exercises, I started to wonder if we were missing the bigger takeaway.
So, let me tick through a few background points which are all pillars in my “what’s the ultimate impact of telehealth” contemplation and the realization that telehealth in and of itself has no impact. What has impact is who is using it and whether their goals are reactionarily (if that’s a word) short term and/or shortsighted, or if there’s anything that approximates a strategic long game in that mix.
For more information, go to aventriahealth.com.
Each week on Relentless Health Value, Stacey uses her voice and thought leadership to provide insights for healthcare industry decision makers trying to do the right thing. Each show features expert guests who break down the twists and tricks in the medical field to help improve outcomes and lower costs across the care continuum. Relentless Health Value is a top 100 podcast on iTunes in the medicine category and reaches tens of thousands of engaged listeners across the healthcare industry.
In addition to hosting Relentless Health Value, Stacey is co-president of QC-Health, a benefit corporation finding cost-effective ways to improve the health of Americans. She is also co-president of Aventria Health Group, a consultancy working with clients who endeavor to form collaborations with payers, providers, Pharma, employer organizations, or patient advocacy groups.
02:30 Should provider organizations be getting rid of telehealth?
02:40 EP330 with John Marchica.
04:36 EP349 with Lisa Trumble.
05:07 Should telehealth be viewed as a threat?
05:40 “Virtual is a ‘head in the bed at the hospital’ demand destroyer.”
06:45 “‘Virtual’ is the scapegoat.”
07:42 Patients/Consumers: Is in person really better?
10:42 EP338 with Nikki King; EP347 with Ian Tong, MD; EP320 with Christian Milaster; and EP302 with Blake McKinney, MD.
11:06 How one VP of finance justifies a facility fee for a telehealth visit.
11:54 Do patients actually act like consumers in the digital age?
12:12 Why are virtual-first entities steering patients to clinically integrated networks?
13:08 How is telehealth changing healthcare costs?
14:21 “It adds up to telehealth being inexorable. It’s a done deal. It’s not a trend.”
15:17 “If telehealth is a leading indicator, anybody in the care delivery business who isn’t … trying to figure out how to make telehealth work in their core business is gonna find themselves … in a very problematic position.”
16:50 “When will tele-whatever become an existential problem for laggard traditional provider organizations?”