信息技术未能颠覆医疗保健

N. Terry
{"title":"信息技术未能颠覆医疗保健","authors":"N. Terry","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2118653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Information Technology (IT) surrounds us every day. IT products and services from smart phones and search engines to online banking and stock trading have been transformative. However, IT has made only modest and less than disruptive inroads into healthcare. This article explores the economic and technological relationships between healthcare and healthcare information technologies (HIT), asks (leveraging the work of Clayton Christensen) whether current conceptions of HIT are disruptive or merely sustaining, and canvasses various explanations for HIT’s failure to disrupt healthcare. The conclusion is that contemporary HIT is only a sustaining rather than disruptive technology. Notwithstanding that we live in a world of disruption, healthcare is more akin to the stubborn television domain, where similarly complex relationships and market concentrations have impeded the forces of disruption. There are three potential exceptions to this pessimistic conclusion. First, because advanced HIT is not a good fit for episodic healthcare delivery, we may be experiencing a holding pattern while healthcare rights itself with the introduction of process-centric care models. Second, the 2010 PCAST report was correct, the healthcare data model is broken. If Stage 3 of the MU subsidy program or some other initiative can fundamentally rethink interoperability (and we can fix the privacy issues) investment and innovation will migrate to data services built on top of shareable data. The final and potentially most interesting exception may be Mobile Medical Apps; products that are built on hugely disruptive platforms and championed by some of our most disruptive companies. Leveraging the growing computing power of smartphones and linkable biometric sensors, these apps hold the promise for “healthcare everywhere” and may be where the real disruption of healthcare will begin.","PeriodicalId":198476,"journal":{"name":"Nevada Law Journal","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Information Technology’s Failure to Disrupt Healthcare\",\"authors\":\"N. Terry\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2118653\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Information Technology (IT) surrounds us every day. IT products and services from smart phones and search engines to online banking and stock trading have been transformative. However, IT has made only modest and less than disruptive inroads into healthcare. This article explores the economic and technological relationships between healthcare and healthcare information technologies (HIT), asks (leveraging the work of Clayton Christensen) whether current conceptions of HIT are disruptive or merely sustaining, and canvasses various explanations for HIT’s failure to disrupt healthcare. The conclusion is that contemporary HIT is only a sustaining rather than disruptive technology. Notwithstanding that we live in a world of disruption, healthcare is more akin to the stubborn television domain, where similarly complex relationships and market concentrations have impeded the forces of disruption. There are three potential exceptions to this pessimistic conclusion. First, because advanced HIT is not a good fit for episodic healthcare delivery, we may be experiencing a holding pattern while healthcare rights itself with the introduction of process-centric care models. Second, the 2010 PCAST report was correct, the healthcare data model is broken. If Stage 3 of the MU subsidy program or some other initiative can fundamentally rethink interoperability (and we can fix the privacy issues) investment and innovation will migrate to data services built on top of shareable data. The final and potentially most interesting exception may be Mobile Medical Apps; products that are built on hugely disruptive platforms and championed by some of our most disruptive companies. Leveraging the growing computing power of smartphones and linkable biometric sensors, these apps hold the promise for “healthcare everywhere” and may be where the real disruption of healthcare will begin.\",\"PeriodicalId\":198476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nevada Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nevada Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2118653\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nevada Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2118653","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

信息技术(IT)每天围绕着我们。从智能手机和搜索引擎到网上银行和股票交易,IT产品和服务已经发生了变革。然而,IT对医疗保健的影响并不大,也不具有颠覆性。本文探讨了医疗保健和医疗信息技术(HIT)之间的经济和技术关系,询问(利用Clayton Christensen的工作)当前的HIT概念是破坏性的还是仅仅是维持的,并对HIT未能破坏医疗保健进行了各种解释。结论是,当代HIT只是一种维持性技术,而非破坏性技术。尽管我们生活在一个颠覆性的世界,但医疗保健更类似于顽固的电视领域,在这个领域,同样复杂的关系和市场集中度阻碍了颠覆性的力量。对于这个悲观的结论,有三个潜在的例外。首先,由于先进的医疗保健技术并不适合偶发医疗保健服务,我们可能会在引入以流程为中心的医疗保健模式时,经历医疗保健权利本身的停滞模式。第二,2010年PCAST报告是正确的,医疗保健数据模型被打破了。如果第三阶段的MU补贴计划或其他一些倡议能够从根本上重新思考互操作性(我们可以解决隐私问题),投资和创新将转移到建立在可共享数据之上的数据服务上。最后一个可能也是最有趣的例外可能是移动医疗应用;这些产品建立在极具颠覆性的平台上,并得到了一些最具颠覆性的公司的支持。利用智能手机不断增长的计算能力和可连接的生物识别传感器,这些应用程序有望实现“无处不在的医疗保健”,并可能成为医疗保健真正颠覆的开始。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Information Technology’s Failure to Disrupt Healthcare
Information Technology (IT) surrounds us every day. IT products and services from smart phones and search engines to online banking and stock trading have been transformative. However, IT has made only modest and less than disruptive inroads into healthcare. This article explores the economic and technological relationships between healthcare and healthcare information technologies (HIT), asks (leveraging the work of Clayton Christensen) whether current conceptions of HIT are disruptive or merely sustaining, and canvasses various explanations for HIT’s failure to disrupt healthcare. The conclusion is that contemporary HIT is only a sustaining rather than disruptive technology. Notwithstanding that we live in a world of disruption, healthcare is more akin to the stubborn television domain, where similarly complex relationships and market concentrations have impeded the forces of disruption. There are three potential exceptions to this pessimistic conclusion. First, because advanced HIT is not a good fit for episodic healthcare delivery, we may be experiencing a holding pattern while healthcare rights itself with the introduction of process-centric care models. Second, the 2010 PCAST report was correct, the healthcare data model is broken. If Stage 3 of the MU subsidy program or some other initiative can fundamentally rethink interoperability (and we can fix the privacy issues) investment and innovation will migrate to data services built on top of shareable data. The final and potentially most interesting exception may be Mobile Medical Apps; products that are built on hugely disruptive platforms and championed by some of our most disruptive companies. Leveraging the growing computing power of smartphones and linkable biometric sensors, these apps hold the promise for “healthcare everywhere” and may be where the real disruption of healthcare will begin.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Behavioral Ethics, Deception, and Legal Negotiation Narrative-Erasing Procedure Truth, Lies, and Copyright "Liquidated Damages" in Guest Worker Contracts: Involuntary Servitude, Debt Peonage or Valid Contract Clause? Evolution of the Arbitration Forum as a Response to Mandatory Arbitration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1