Deloitte Center for Health Solutions has created an interesting six-minute video in which Paul Keckley, the Center’s executive director, describes the seven mega-trends that will influence the healthcare industry in 2013.
All seven reinforce an undeniable reality — that business as usual won’t do — and present a “new normal.” It goes without saying that simply recognizing the mega-trends won’t do. Accepting them and changing is key. In other words, the dictum — using another well-worn cliche — is “change or die.”
Here are the mega-trends as defined by Keckley:
- Demanding demographics: The U.S. population is changing — it’s more diverse and older than it used to be. There are also large income disparities within that population. The ability to access insurance and the desire to have more healthful lifestyles are creating the a unique set of demographics that is engaging with their healthcare and demanding more from the healthcare industry than previously.
- Strategic globalization: U.S. companies involved in healthcare are looking to expand overseas. Not only is there inherent demand from the local population but medical tourism is on the rise: 25 percent of consumers report that they are willing to travel for a medical procedure. It’s important to look beyond U.S. borders for growth given projections like the U.S. share of global drug sales will drop 31 percent by 2015. And it’s not just pharma or device companies that need to look for growth in foreign soil, but insurance companies, providers, information technology companies as well.
- Unconstrained connectivity: Smartphones and mobile devices have heralded an era of unconstrained connectivity, and consumers now can access personal health records and electronic medical records online. But users want “control over their technologies that deliver information they want and need.” The healthcare industry will be forever changed by this “unconstrained connectivity” through the leveraging of technology.
- Constrained resources: Alongside unconstrained connectivity stands the challenge of constrained resources in healthcare. Like other industries, healthcare industry suffers from a shortage in talent and faces difficulty in accessing capital. But sometimes the bill for healthcare services gets passed on to others, so sometimes the constraint is not immediately felt.
- Accelerated consolidation: Functioning under constrained resources requires the need for a bigger platform especially to achieve sustainability and scalability are important. In healthcare, a fragmented system — with more than 400 insurance operators, 5,800 hospitals, long-term care and home care industries — will see a heightened focus on consolidation.
- Big data: Massive amounts of data is being generated but in healthcare what has changed is the availability of tools to translate that data into relevant information. What is also new in healthcare is how much demand there is from consumers to access that data. Big data is what will separate winners from losers in healthcare.
- Consumer discontent: Six out of 10 consumers are satisfied with the cost they pay for healthcare. More people view healthcare and its underperformance as a result of its waste and inefficiency. And as we move forward, people will talk less of patients and clinical trial subjects and more of consumers.
See the video here:
This country needs Insurance reform in the worst way. But If that is done, I am afraid that the insurance company lobbist and attornies will mold the reform new rules and regulations to better protect the insurance industry and not make is easier or protect the patient more. The only ones making money are the Insurance companies and mail order pharmacies, thru voluntary rebates coerced from drug manufactors to get on drug formularies or better tier statuses. All this does is cost shift from one group to the general public. You know the drug companies don't absorb the rebates they allow, but pass them on to the local retailers, chains or independents. When you must give a 28.5% voluntarily discount to do business with the Federal government, and non-profits get 20-60% discounts, and insurance companies get 20-40% discounts, and mail order pharmacies get the same, where do you think make up for this discounting, then there is Medicare Part D. Is there any wonder why a bottle of Doxycycline goes from $30.00 a bottle to $3000.00 a bottle in 4 months? Let's get real Insurance reform is needed. Also, copays need to come back into reality. It was fine when a prescription costs $30.00 25 years ago and you pay a $5.00 copay, but you loss sight of the value of the prescription or health care when the prescription now costs $300.00 or $3000.00 and you copay is only $20.00. It does not smart enough to contain costs. This holds true for Doctor visits, lab tests, procedures, Hospitalization, Tests of all kinds. But then the insurance companies have taken it out on the providers, when they limit the re-imbursements for services provided to unrealistic levels or levels that are 3-5 years old. Whether you are for profit or non-profit you still have to make a profit to cover expenses or you will no longer exist. That is American enterprise and basic business fundamentals. Cut out the rebates, limit them to no more than 15%, give more money to the providers, which is where the health care is being provided. $0.00 to $2.75 to dispense a prescription is way too low. heck with label costs of $0.50, transmission fees of $0.25, vial cost of $1.00, does that pay for the pharmacist time and any profit to pay the pharmacy's rent, lights, pharmacist and technician time, insurance, etc.
Thanks for this article.
I use it for a post in my (mostly) french blog :
Interesting, but I question #2... does "the industry" realize that the "customers" are going outside of the U. S. for care and medications because they can't afford the cost of the same services here? If these arenas fixed the problem in the U.S. the industry wouldn't need to spend the resources to globalize...their customers would have no reason to seek alternatives if the cost was competitive with what they can get on the global market. Spend the money on lowering medication costs and providing healthcare services here instead of spending it on expanding your market.
I think Deloitte needs to define what a "Trend" means. Some of these are status quo, and not what I'd call a trend. For example, Consumer Discontent is new? Growing? Unlikely.
Paranoia resulting from ACA changes won't help you regardless of how you word it. Face the facts and implement the required changes and remember to keep it simple. Profits will return in the long run.
All points are true. We cannot forget the people side of this change. Administrators are consciously or subconsciously vested in the status quo as it threatens their power base. Clinicians have become cynical due to increasing workloads and less income. Changing a system takes govt. intervention because of this. For a system to change, their anxiety must be high enough. For them to learn, it must be low enough.
Seems to me the major trend of the medical industrial complex is toward "wealthcare" first at the expense of everyone's health. This drives my discontent. I am not a "consumer"; I am a human being. If you force my care giver to ignore that reality in order to keep her job, she can't give me any kind of meaningful care.
Of the Mega trend in healthcare, the link on the page for the EKG APP Preventis is confusing, and part of the problem that looms for the expansion of technology in Healthcare. Namely, access by the clinician. As the website for this product states: " It maintains a constant connection between patients and their care teams." and then lower on the page it states: "The BodyGuardian System continuously records, stores and periodically transmits the following physiological data to a remote computer server for up to 30 days at a time:"
Ok which is it? Does it allow a fluid intereaction of clinican and patient? Can the, or more importantly, does the legal system expect the clinician to have access to the patient's EKG data as fluidly as if they were in the hospital? Which is what they claim to replace. Now, thinking it through, how would the clinician interact with a patient who was allowed to go about their business and travel around? Would the clinician first of all have immediate access to KNOW an event has occurred to even interact with the patient? Will the clinician have the legal duty and responsibility to help the patient under their care, now using the technology the clinician requested? What would be the actual steps the clinician would use to interact with patient undergoing an EKG event? Would they be responsible to contact the local 911 for the patient? Is there a GPS notification within the system? I don't see how the clinician would desire to enter into this milieu for maybe tens or hundreds of their patients, and STILL expect to be productive in their office?
I have been saying this about telemedicine for a long time now. The numbers of specialists do not transpose to the number of needed patients. No clinician can have that mandate of immediacy and still handle the immediate needs of their in-person patients. Where is the benefit. Some states have ruled that all medico obligations and liabilities are still in effect for patients in a telemedicine (remote/local) configuration. So, please tell us all, how is this supposed to work in the real world?
@clynnie One big reason for the tremendous health-care cost in the US is insurance. As long as the US does not attempt to lower the cost for lawsuits and indemnities that are completely out of line with the real damage, the US will never be able to compete with countries like in the EU where we still have reasonable cost and compensations.
The problem with that comment is that the goverment is unable to respond effectively since it is self absorbed. The industry has to wake up and regulate the necessary changes required to become outcome based and therefore become patient oriented and money effective.
@DanReus Thanks for the heads up, Dan. This is fixed now.