What Will Microsoft's HealthVault Mean to the Telehealth Community?

Thursday, October 18, 2007  | Vince Kuraitis and Tim Gee


Authors: 
 - Vince Kuraitis JD/MBA, Principal, Better Health Technologies, LLC and author of the
    e-CareManagement blog
 - Tim Gee, Principal, Medical Connectivity Consulting, and author of the Medical Connectivity blog

What Will Microsoft's HealthVault Mean to the Telehealth Community?

"I've talked about the next wave in remote physiological monitoring.  Mobile technologies, devices and web services will soon allow us to remotely monitor patients suffering from chronic diseases or elderly people living alone in their homes.  The devices and technologies will be easy to use and ultimately quite affordable as the devices and services become commoditized."
Bill Crounse, MD
Worldwide Health Director
Microsoft Corporation
Health Blog; April 17, 2007

We'll start with our bottom line:  HV overall is a positive for telehealth industry growth and scale, even though it will speed the inevitable commoditization of RPM devices.

Microsoft recently announced the creation of their HealthVault (HV) platform:

Microsoft® HealthVault is a new personal health technology platform that lets you gather, store and share health information online. With HealthVault, users control their own health records, so they can privately share their health information with family, friends and healthcare professionals, and have access to trustworthy online health management tools. HealthVault FAQ.

An integral aspect of HV is the Connection Center:

HealthVault Connection Center is a desktop utility that helps you upload the information from your health and fitness devices to your HealthVault account as well as view the information locally on your computer.

While HealthVault is not easy to understand, it lays the foundation for a new ecosystem based on the appropriate, free flow of interoperable and transportable personal health information (PHI).

Telehealth Needs Scale

From Vince:

My roots are in health care and I spent the first 15 years of my career in and around hospitals. Over the last several years I've had opportunities to work with several large consumer technology companies.

I'll share an "aha" moment from my travels. Health care providers start with a unit of one -- the patient.  Technology companies think differently.

I remember a conversation with a client -- a well respected GM at a large consumer technology company.  We were talking about the state of the multiparameter RPM market (companies like Honeywell HomMed, HealthHero, Philips).  Our collective back of the envelope estimate of the size of the current market came to about 150K people being monitored  in the U.S.

I asked "So you'd like to understand what it will take to get this market into the millions?"

My moment of clarity came when she responded "No. We're thinking more like tens of millions or hundreds of millions."

Scale is a very different notion for health care providers than for consumer technology companies.  Neither view is right nor wrong, they're just different.

HealthVault Lays a Foundation to Build Scale for Telehealth Applications

Today, telehealth applications are based on point to point relationships:  home health agency to patient; disease management company to patient; health system to patient.

Telehealth devices and their connectivity are similar. There is a proprietary chain of key components for a remote patient monitoring (RPM) solution:  1) the RPM device; 2) a gateway -- which could be mobile like the Biotronik Cardio Messenger or static like a personal computer -- to aggregate data from multiple devices and move data to a server-based application; and 3) the server application that stores and manages the data in accordance with the application, e.g., glycemic control, medication compliance, etc.

The data flow across these components is proprietary, and data from the server application cannot flow easily across various health care providers and care managers. (For more thoughts on HV and device connectivity see this post.)

Telehealth (and the rest of health care) needs to move toward a network model of data exchange. HV promises to be a platform to facilitate the transfer of RPM device data to multiple care providers and care managers.

RPM data can and should enter the consumer electronics mainstream.  In addition, RPM data should be viewed as just one more type of medical data, similar to lab data, pharmacy data, physician notes, etc., that is equally plug and play.

But...There are Tradeoffs

Depending on whether you are a user or a seller of RPM, you probably reacted differently when reading Bill Crounse's casual reference to devices and services becoming "commoditized".  Regardless of your reaction, he's right.  HV will hasten the already occurring commoditization of RPM devices.

When the RPM market started, many of the devices were priced in the $6-8 K range.  Today prices have dropped to $1-2 K, and will go lower. 

We have all heard stories where RPM devices eventually would become consumer purchases made at Best Buy and Circuit City, and that prices would be in the range of other consumer technology purchases.  That day will arrive in 2008 when Continua Alliance compliant offerings begin hitting the street.

The RPM market is moving from

  • High unit prices rooted in the industry's early focus on medical device markets and business models
  • Proprietary devices, proprietary IT,  non-interoperable data
  • Low unit volume, moderate margins per unit
  • Competition based on the vendor lock-in through high changing costs

To:

  • Low unit prices as the technology evolves toward consumer markets and consumer business models
  • Intereroperable devices, common IT platforms, and interoperable data
  • High unit volume, low margins per unit
  • Competition based on value and service

Where exactly commoditization and HV come together is not clear. The efforts of Continua will bring to market multi vendor interoperability, true plug and play connectivity. Microsoft can deliver plug and play interoperability with your personal computer, but little else.

We welcome your thoughts.

 

Member Comments


The question of Microsoft's standards vs. everyone else's standards is tricky. Certainly healthvault adds a legitimacy to the remote patient monitoring industry, but many of us would say there is a healthy momentum going on here anyway.

My worries come from thinking about the Microsoft corporate culture and their business needs to sell more licenses to Windows, Office and other software. When Windows became the de-facto standard for computing, several years ago, Microsoft began a deliberate effort to 'embrace and enhance' standards to insure its market dominance. the 'enhance' part of this usually means make it so it only runs on the Windows platform. Remember ActiveX vs. Java? For years it was painful to bring up certain websites in IE if they didn't run ActiveX and in the beginning of the ecommerce boom, Microsoft-certified applications were designed to work smoothly only on IE. You get the picture.... The next frontier is health and personal health information. I will remain skeptical until I see smooth interoperability between devices designed with Continua standards and healthvault. I predict there will be some pain involved in using healthvault that will necessitate the purchase (by someone) of more Microsoft products. This may lead to increased cost in an industry that, as far as we can tell, needs to operate on razor thin margins, and eventually fewer patients in need may be served.

Joseph Kvedar

Director
Center for Connected Health

Joseph C. Kvedar, M.D., is the Founder and Director of the Center for Connected Health, applying communications technology and online resources to increase access and improve the delivery of quality medical services and patient care. Dr. Kvedar is also a board-certified dermatologist and Vice-Chair of Dermatology at Harvard Medical School. In his role with the Center for Connected Health, Dr. Kvedar launched the first physician-to-physician online consultation service in an academic setting. He is also leading important research into novel approaches for connected health in a variety of medical specialties, including post-operative care in the home, wound care, and remote monitoring of patients with chronic diseases. Dr. Kvedar is a past President and member of the governing Board of the American Telemedicine Association (ATA). Dr. Kvedar is also Chair of the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) Task Force on Telemedicine. Dr. Kvedar is internationally recognized for his leadership and vision in the field of connected health and the application of communications technologies to improve healthcare to patients. Dr. Kvedar is co-editor of a new book, Home Telehealth, which was published in May 2006. He is a frequent lecturer and has authored over 60 publications on telemedicine and connected health. In 2003, Dr. Kvedar was honored by the New England Business and Technology Association for his extraordinary leadership in the field.

 

Posted by: Joseph Kvedar
10/28/2007

 

Very interesting. I do hope that telehealth devices go towards commodity pricing. HealthVault has the potential to become the "HIE" for the telehealth network, but as it stands, its platform appears a little hard to understand. With time, I sure there will be more HealthVault based applications and tools which will start to bridge this technology hurdle. Lets wait and see.
Mark Singh MD
www.Clinicore.blogspot.com

Mark Singh


 

Posted by: Mark Singh
11/1/2007

 

Joe, do agree with the basis of your comments. Microsoft is in the business of first and foremost selling desktop software. The Connectivity Center on HealthVault is built upon device makers using MS software within the device that will in turn download device data to their PC (note I did not say Mac) and then upload that data to their HealthVault account where it then can be shared with the provider/caregiver. This will certainly keep Microsoft in the driver's seat.

Certainly quite telling that despite all of MS's pronouncements that HealthVault will be "open" and adopt open industry standards, their lack of commitment to Continua shows quite a different reality.

John Moore


 

Posted by: John Moore
11/2/2007

 

In considering potential for technology lock-in (vs. interoperability), there are at least 3 different levels of HV to evaluate.

1) Health information technology (HIT) standards.  I don’t see any lock in attempt here as Microsoft has embraced a slew of open standards with which HV will be compatible. The mindset of HV "appears" focused on working toward true HIT interoperability.

2) Device compatibility.  While theoretically MSFT could try to compete with Continua, that would be really dumb, and I see no evidence that they are trying to do so.  Yet, as Tim points out there is some level of overlap that device vendors will encounter by having to build drivers and interfaces that are unique to HV.  I think John also is correct is noting that MSFT's lack of commitment to Continua is troublesome.  MSFT could be more transparent here with there thinking and intentions.

3) PC software (Windows OS, IE Explorer, Office etc.)  lock-in.  I think Dr. Kvedar is correct in pointing out opportunity and motive for attempts at lock-in here.   For example, HV requires a "strong" password tied to Microsoft Live; I’ve read several people complaining that HV has glitches working with the Firefox browser.  I wonder what other elements MSFT might be using to try to lock-in usage to Microsoft offerings.

Vince Kuraitis

Principal
Better Health Technologies, LLC

Since 1997 Vince has worked as founder and Principal of Better Health Technologies, LLC (www.bhtinfo.com), a strategy and business development consulting company. BHT creates value for patients and shareholders by leveraging technology, business models and partnerships in areas relating to e-health and chronic disease management. BHT’s clients include both established organizations and early-stage companies. Established organizations include: Samsung Electronics (Global Research Group, Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology, Digital Solution Center), Intel Digital Health Group, Siemens Medical Solutions, Joslin Diabetes Center, Honeywell HomMed, Medtronic (Cardiac Rhythm Patient Management, Neuro Disease Management), HealthPost, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Varian Medical Systems, Disease Management Association of America, PCS Health Systems, VRI, Washoe Health System, S2 Systems, CorpHealth and Centocor. Early-stage companies include Fitsense Technology, Haelan Group, Cardiobeat, EZWeb, Sensitron, Stress Less, Medical Peace, Life Navigator, DiabetesManager.com, CogniMed, Caresoft, Benchmark Oncology, eCare Technologies, Click4Care, and SOS Wireless.

 

Posted by: Vince Kuraitis
11/5/2007

 

TeleHealth is beginning to be one of those terms, similar to EMR, that means different things to different people. For example, at a recent healthcare conference in Beverly Hills we presented for the very first time a truly mobile, secure, and extensible mobile phone PHR platform. This platform sits on top of any PHR software solution or portal, and delivers and manages healthcare information in an organized way. Funny, most people came up and referred to this capability as a potentially powerful "telemedicine" platform. At first I thought, what? How does the mobile PHR relate to remote connectivity for monitoring devices? Then it dawned on me, the key is secure connectivity from anywhere any time. That means a mobile phone! So, perhaps we can add telemedecine and telehealth to the list of terms that is currently being defined through yet another healthcare grant.

Jim O'Reilly

Indepenent Healthcare Executive
Upwind Capital Partners

 

Posted by: Jim O'Reilly
11/13/2007

 

Your Comments


This feature is available for Connected Health members only. Please login now or register to continue.

Login

Discussion

Can Connected Health survive the political economy of health care?
Tuesday, June 24, 2008 | Matthew Holt  | 2 Comments
Connected Health and the Medical Home: Savior or Distraction?
Tuesday, May 27, 2008 | Joseph Kvedar, MD  | 6 Comments
Connected Health in the Developing World
Monday, March 24, 2008 | Paul Heinzelmann  | 15 Comments
Can Second Life serve as a virtual training ground for individuals with poor social skills?
Monday, February 25, 2008 | Dr. Jerome Schultz  | 7 Comments
How Reliable is Reliable in Connected Health?
Monday, January 21, 2008 | Doug McClure  | 9 Comments
Self-Insured Companies: Low-Hanging Fruit for Consumer-Driven Telehealth?
Monday, November 26, 2007 | Malcolm Burwell  | 3 Comments
What Will Microsoft's HealthVault Mean to the Telehealth Community?
Thursday, October 18, 2007 | Vince Kuraitis and Tim Gee  | 5 Comments
Causing What Isn’t
Monday, August 20, 2007 | Joseph Kvedar  | 2 Comments
Revolutionizing Healthcare
Tuesday, June 19, 2007 | Jeff Gruen  | 6 Comments
Personal Health Management
Monday, May 21, 2007 | Joseph Ternullo  | 3 Comments
Medical Education of the Future?
Friday, April 27, 2007 | Ramesh Ramloll  | 2 Comments
Using Telemedicine to Create Intimacy
Monday, April 9, 2007 | Jon Darsee  | 12 Comments
Can we use Web 2.0 in Health Care?
Friday, December 8, 2006 | Sally Lakeman  | 10 Comments
The Changing Care Provider
Wednesday, October 11, 2006 | Ateret Haselkorn  | 4 Comments
A Metric for Connected Health Success?
Friday, October 6, 2006 | Joseph Kvedar  | 9 Comments
Impediments to Technology Adoption
Monday, September 25, 2006 | Neil Wasserman  | 3 Comments
Behavioral Telehealth
Wednesday, July 26, 2006 | Steven Locke  | 5 Comments
Will MediPare Come to Pass?
Wednesday, June 14, 2006 | Ashok Boghani  | 14 Comments
A Home Care Perspective
Friday, May 5, 2006 | Kathy Duckett  | 4 Comments
The True Burden of Connected Health?
Wednesday, March 22, 2006 | Ravi Nemana  | 7 Comments
The Future of the Hospital
Friday, March 17, 2006 | Joseph Coughlin  | 6 Comments
The Role of Consumer Grade Techologies
Sunday, January 8, 2006 | Joseph Kvedar  | 7 Comments
 
 

Newsletter Signup

Go