Monday, August 27, 2018

When Words Fail: An Oxymoron Marketing Strategy

MJ Tran, MBA, BSN
PhD Student, College of Nursing
University of Utah


Introduction:
The Paradigm Shift of Patient Engagement has interwoven research and implication to offer advancements and resources to patients at all levels of care. This meaning that healthcare services have become more readily available for patients at the right place and the right time through emergency care. This concierge care model filled a distinguishable gap in healthcare. However, as healthcare shifts to a care model focused on patient-centered medical homes, some may now question if emergency care is technically the right service by the right provider. Further, emergency care has continued to serve as a convenient service to patients, as primary care and specialty providers face challenges in being available throughout the span of a day/week. In addition, it has become increasingly uncommon for one healthcare profession to provide longitudinal oversight to patients beyond a single setting, which results in fragmented care. This leaves many to wonder if emergency care has negatively reshaped healthcare by increasing healthcare expenditures and siloed the primary care providers from their patients.  


Background of Emergency Care:
The evolution of emergency care in the United Stated was considered a highly successful solution to healthcare’s major challenge and provided a platform with much promise. Further, the additions of Medicare and Medicaid services in 1965 provided an expansion of services and the quality and availability of health care services that was interwoven to push for specialty status. By the 1970’s, the number of American physicians who were specialists were rapidly rising, and the number of general practitioners declined. Hospitals become more modernized through technology advancement. These shifts in healthcare helped to cause the general population to rely on hospital emergency rooms for care. 

The Challenge:
Currently, the United States healthcare expenditures grew 4.3% in 2016, reaching $3.3 trillion or $10,348 per person. In terms of GDP, health spending accounted for 17.9 percent. It’s evident that the healthcare has become a complicated system focused on improvement initiatives to reduce healthcare expenditures and improve patient outcomes. However, there are many challenges faced as health systems often showcases the “we’ve always done it this way” type of mentality. Without room for advancement, the healthcare system may possibly never evolve to one that is focused on patient-centered initiatives. This may be the very reason changes in care models are currently focused on incentives and penalties rather than the simple hunger to do better than we are.
Further, the power of healthcare interoperability is a platform focused on a central hub of patients’ medical histories despite the location of care. However, no healthcare system currently mirrors another and there is a lack of mandated protocols currently in place to ensure effective communication is streamlined to breakdown fragmented care. Additionally, strategies that have worked historically may have now become one of the major indicators for failed outcomes such as poor marketing strategies or the unwillingness to share trade secrets with competitors to improve patient outcomes.

Lastly, there has been an increase in healthcare provider inability to obtain a healthy work-life balance, which has led to provider burnout amongst physicians and nurses. This often hinders any space for advancement in healthcare models, as this national prevalence has led to patient safety concerns and providers leaving the industry altogether.

The Penalties:
Reflecting back to 2017, more than half of U.S. hospitals were penalized for having hospital readmission rates higher than the acceptable level set by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). In addition to the hefty penalties, over 1,621 hospitals were fined five years in a row, earning payment reductions as high as 3 percent. A detailed list of U.S. hospitals facing penalties can be found here: Crimson Advisory Board 2017 Hospital Readmission Penalties

Poor Marketing Strategies:
As our populations are getting sicker, there’s been an increase in the development of healthcare systems, which has diminished opportunities for competitive advantages. As a result, major hospital systems have resorted in marketing and promotional strategies, in order to increase patient census within their emergency rooms, rather than to their competitors.

For example, the MountainStar campaign displayed above showcases short ER wait times on promotional billboards in all counties throughout Utah. This strategy seemed to focus on, ‘the more beds we fill, the more money generated.’ Historically, these marketing strategies proved to be successful, as it not only catchy, it most likely steered patients to visit their ERs more often. Unfortunately, this same marketing has now possibly contributed to the unintended outcomes they are trying to prevent – reducing readmission rates and avoiding penalties. Although many factors impact the reasons for readmission, it is still important to note that these marketing strategies have continued, despite the many efforts primary care, accountable care organizations and other proactive initiatives have taken place to prevent readmission. Further, St. Mark’s readmission rates impact is presented in the figure below, showcasing a significant increase in hospital readmission penalties.


Scenario:
A 87-year-old patient recently discharged from the hospital after a five night stay due to a UTI event. The patient’s daughter is currently taking the patient to the pharmacy to pick up a new prescription upon a primary care appointment. While driving, the patient expressed that she feels a bit nauseous. The daughter becomes panicked and contacts and attempts to contact the primary care via phone. She is placed on hold for several minutes. In this very moment, the daughter and patient drive past a billboard indicating that a particular ER currently has a wait time of 7 minutes. This immediately offers the most convenient option for the daughter, in order prevent delaying care for her mother. She immediately hangs up the phone and heads straight for the ER. Upon admission to the ER setting, the doctor indicates that the patient is just experiencing a common side effect of her antibiotic and just needs to ensure she eats prior to taking the medication.


Future Direction:
In this particular scenario, it’s clear it did not warrant a need for emergency care services, however, from the patient perspective, there genuinely was no other option to be treated timely than to turn to the ER. In order to overcome the challenges that have been addressed in this situation, it’s important for healthcare to lift silos and work collaboratively in sharing services that are not only convenient to the patient, but also can offer strategies to avoid emergency care and utilize urgent care services upon screening. Further, marketing strategies absolutely need to be shifted to a model that offers providers to be available in a short period time via phone or in-person for triaging matters rather than indicating the ER is available for non-emergency hours. Lastly, interoperability needs to take a national precedence to ensure that patients’ health histories at all points of care are available, so providers are able to serve patient with confidence and avoid duplication of services.

References:
Atzema, C.L., Maclagen, L.C., & Stevenson, M.D. (2017). The transition of care between emergency department and primary care: A scoping study. Academic Emergency Medicine, 24(2), 201-215.

Cameron, P.A. (2014). International emergency medicine: Past and future. Emergency Medicine, 26(1), 50-55.

Koehler, B.E., Richter, K.M., Youngblood, L., & Cohen, B. (2009). Reduction in 30-day postdischarge hospital readmission or emergency department (ED) visit rates in high-risk elderly medical patients through delivery of a targeted care bundle. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 4, 211-218. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.427


Photo Credit:
Barker, J. (Photographer). (2018). The Brompton Intensive Care Unit [digital image]. Retrieved from The Sunday Times website: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/in-pictures-70-years-of-the-nhs-t6jxldzkv
Jibe Media. (Photographer). (2012). MountainStar 2012 ED Outdoor. Retrieved from: http://jibemedia.com/portfolio/40




How do we teach about social determinants of health in nursing education?

Shawna Sisler
PhD Student
College of Nursing
University of Utah


Social determinants of health (SDH) has emerged as a critical health care priority over the last decade due to the increasingly unequal distribution of basic social resources in our society and its correlation with poor health outcomes (World Health Organization [WHO], 2017). Federal guidelines from the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) assert the importance of screening all patients for their unmet social needs with the hopes to improve self-management of chronic conditions, reduce health service utilization, and decrease overall health care costs (Institute of Medicine [IOM], 2014a; IOM, 2014b; Billioux, Verlander, Anthony, & Alley, 2017). As our health care systems builds the targeted infrastructure to address these avoidable health inequities in clinical settings, it behooves our nursing education community to ask ourselves what we are doing, as faculty, to prepare the next generation of providers to actively engage in SDH-informed clinical practice.
 Dahlgren & Whitehead, 1993
Nursing education has a long history of caring for the holistic needs of the patient and their environment (Theofanidis & Sapountzi-Krepla, 2015); this includes the screening and intervention on the basic social and ecologic needs of our families. To date, nursing curricula has yet to come to a formal agreement on how and what pieces of SDH education should be prioritized in teaching our students. While there is a national credentialing mandate to educate about vulnerable populations in graduate nursing programs, the delivery medium is not specified. This leaves the curriculum focus up to the individual teacher or program. Current strategies most commonly center around didactic/classroom learning, service-learning, and community partnerships (Martinez, 2015), but there is little evidence that this is the best practice. Additionally, with such disparate practices, faculty lose the ability to formally learn from each other and push the teachings forward in a methodical fashion.
It may be that nursing can borrow a page from our medical education colleagues in this case. There is mounting evidence of an interesting paradigm shift is beginning to occur in regard to the current landscape for teaching SDH within residency program hallways. Over the last couple years, there is a growing discontent that SDH teaching is being reduced to an epidemiology equation, a static perspective that unintentionally encourages provider disassociation from the patient experience (Sharma, Pinto & Kumagai, 2018). It attacks the more didactic formats and prescribed community rotation as a dangerously framing of SDH, likening it to a “laundry list” of social risk factors and relationships for resident to know “about” yet neglects the “how” (Sharma, Pinto, & Kumagai, 2018). In my experience as nursing faculty, this criticism has a great deal of truth. SDH is not a statistic to be studied, rather it is a dynamic, diverse, bidirectional ecosystem, one that can vary with patient that walks in our clinic doors.
In reaction, large portions of the medical education community are choosing to move away from the pedagogy of stigma and inequality and toward a framework utilizing innovative models, such as structural competency and critical consciousness (Metzl & Hansen, 2014; Sharma, Pinto, & Kumagai, 2018). Structural competency, as a concept, implores providers to take elaborate on the individual’s circumstance (e.g. symptomatology, self-efficacy, risk factors) and apply their knowledge about the upstream drivers to hone in on what is influencing the patient’s downstream behaviors (Metzl & Hansen, 2014). It aims to move the clinical conversation about health outcomes past that of individual interactions to an interactive dialogue where the provider uses critical consciousness to integrate additional interventions at the neighborhood, institutional, and policy levels (Sharma, Pinto, & Kumagai, 2018). 
What does that mean to nursing, though, and where do we start? The WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health (2017) argues that the most critical to help providers (and trainees) acknowledge the role that targeted interventions and policies can play in mediating these social determinants. For example, within an education setting, a structural competency approach would advocate that students learn to better “recognize the structures that shape clinical interactions” and help the system develop a standardized language, intervention system, and cultural humility around our patients’ ecosystems (Metzl & Hansen, 2014, p. 1). Essentially, we need to seek out and identify how SDH factors affect our patient population, ask meaningful questions around the context, and then explicitly and intentionally address these SDH factors in our treatment plans. In terms of trainee development, this means that we need to help students learn to sensitively ask the right questions within a clinical encounter to reveal the humanity and dive deep into the “why” of their patient’s unmet social needs. We must help them uncover the structures that create these issues and connect their awareness to the drivers.
United Nations (2018)
This prompt would, indeed, be a lot to ask of some seasoned clinicians, let alone first-year graduate students. What I offer below may be an interesting first step in our nursing curricula that leans us toward the greater goal of SDH fluency: 
First off, we need to start at the beginning – patient trust. Before our trainees go into the room with a patient, armed with their extensive clinical task lists and differentials, faculty need to ensure that students actually know how to have an authentic interaction with their patient, which includes competency in interpersonal skills, an understanding of the community they serve, and a general comfort level with patient care. In all likelihood, this is not where our students are at this point in their education journey. Therefore, we need to help them learn about it.
By utilizing a basic simulation experience, faculty can create a lower-stakes clinical situations with standardized patients (SP) that encourage the trainee to ask more thoughtful, empathic questions and dig at the humanity of the clinical encounter. Scripts for the SPs would be preloaded with social ecological puzzles for the students to elicit within the simulated encounter, and then students should be asked about why they think such things are happening and what they can do about it. 
While this seems like a simple exercise, it contains thoughtful, pre-built layers that scaffolds student learning in a safe yet meaningful way. First, having a frank conversation about their unmet needs and being able to ask the patient about how he or she would prefer to be asked/counseled has tremendous value. Second, by learning about what barriers and protective factors exist for this unique patient and how the patient would like the social needs addressed, the power paradigm shifts the providers into learners and the patients into their teachers. 
Call it a throw-back to the days of Freire and liberation education, if you will. The more perspectives and active listening experiences that a trainee has, the more powerful the exchange is. It is then the job of the faculty to help trainees face head-on any discomfort and confusion regarding a patient’s sensitive concerns, and they can discuss any complex care issues that arise.
This small step may be able to push the conversation of SDH education to a more action-based solution with structural ramifications (a vast improvement on classroom learning!). Given its holistic approach to care, nursing is certainly capable to help lead the way.  Once we help our students understand that patients are more than a MRN or eChart, using activities like the simulation experience above, we can more dynamically help our future providers intervene on health inequity and becomes stronger patient advocates. At that point, the first step of structural humility can be laid and an emerging empath and provider gains the basic human functioning needs to better contextual and integrate SDH into his or her everyday practice.

Article links





Website links

References
Billioux, A., Verlander, K., Anthony, S. & Alley, D. (2017). Standardized Screening for Health-related Social Needs in Clinical Settings: The Accountable Health Communities Screening Tool. Washington, D. C.: National Academy of Medicine. Accessed on June 22, 2108 at https://nam.edu/standardized-screening-for-health-related-social-needs-in-clinical-settings-the-accountable-health-communities-screening-tool
Dahlgren, G. & Whitehead, M. (1993). Tackling inequalities in health: what can we learn from what has been tried? Working paper prepared for the King’s Fund International Seminar on Tackling Inequalities in Health. Ditchley Park, Oxfordshire. London, King’s Fund, accessible in: Dahlgren G, Whitehead M. (2007) European strategies for tackling social inequities in health: Levelling up Part 2. Copenhagen: WHO Regional office for Europe. Accessed on June 11, 2018 at: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/103824/E89384.pdf
Institute of Medicine (2014a). Capturing Social and Behavioral Domains and Measures in Electronic Health Records: Phase 1. Washington DC: Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, Author. Accessed on June 22, 2018 at http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2014/Capturing-Social-and-Behavioral-Domains-in-Electronic-Health-Records-Phase-1.aspx
Institute of Medicine (2014b). Capturing Social and Behavioral Domains and Measures in Electronic Health Records: Phase 2. Washington DC: Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, Author. Accessed on June 22, 2018 at http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2014/EHRdomains2.aspx
Martinez, I. L. (2015). Twelve tips for teaching social determinants of health in medicine. Medical Teacher, 37(7), 647-652. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.975191
Metzla, J. M. & Hansen, H. (2014). Structural competency: Theorizing a new medical engagement with stigma and inequality. Social Science Medicine, 103, 126–133. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.06.032.
Sharma, M., Pinto, A. & Kumagai, A. K. (2018). Teaching the social determinants of health: a path to equity or a road to nowhere? Academic Medicine, 93(1), 25-30. 
Theofanidis, D. & Spountzi-Krepla, D. (2015). Nursing and caring: An historical overview from ancient Greek tradition to modern times. International Journal of Caring Sciences, 8(3), 791-800.
United Nations (2018). Sustainable Development Goals: 17 Goals to Transform our World. Geneva: United Nations, Author. Accessed on June 22, 2018 at: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
United Nations General Assembly (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, A/RES/70/1. Geneva: United Nations, Author. Accessed on June 22, 2017 at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/57b6e3e44.html 
World Health Organization (2010). A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants of health. Social Determinants of Health Discussion- Paper 2 (Policy and Practice). Geneva: World Health Organization, Author. Accessed on June 22, 2018 at http://www.who.int/sdhconference/resources/ConceptualframeworkforactiononSDH_eng.pdf.
World Health Organization, Commission on Social Determinants of Health (2017). Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Final Report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva, World Health Organization. Accessed on June 23, 2018 at http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/43943/9789241563703_eng.pdf

The Medical Reformation

Sebastian Romero
PhD Student
College of Nursing
University of Utah


“What is it?” My patient asks nervously.
“114.” I reply.
“That’s great! That’ll my fifth level in normal range, right?”
“Yeah, I think you’re right. I’ll check.” I reply, now back at my computer looking at her previous four blood glucose levels.
Not surprisingly, my patient is right, her blood sugar levels have been below 120 since yesterday morning. She thanks me as I start walking out of the room. I promptly respond but she doesn’t hear me, by then she is too busy manually inputting her blood sugar level into one of the many glucose monitoring applications (apps) one can download to their phone.

The growth of health apps
This is the age we live in. The age of the e-patient. The “E” stands for both electronic and empowered. Long gone is the day that the doctor or nurse is the source of all health knowledge. The invention of smart phones and mobile health applications has done for patients today what the translation of the bible did for common people during the Reformation. This is the medical reformation, the age when the patient is empowered with access to seemingly endless information at their fingertips. Over 320,000 health applications like the one my patient was using are available on app stores today. Like the religious boom that was seen during the Reformation, in today’s medical reformation, companies are scrambling to throw their hat in the ring and get a slice of this expanding tech market estimated to be worth more than 27 billion dollars. The annual growth rate is estimated to be in the 32nd percentile translating to an average of 200 health apps being added each day to the app store. This means more options for my patient with diabetes and any other person looking to improve their health and health literacy, but it can also create a source of potential danger.

Regulation is crucial
Despite information becoming more accessible, questions remain on the quality of information patients are gaining access to. Meaning that the information and claims stated by some of these applications may be erroneous, misleading and even potentially harmful. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) warns about this and estimates that only about half of all health sites and apps are doctor reviewed. This can be especially dangerous if people are relying on the information they are receiving from their apps and not seeking a second opinion from a trained health professional. Unfortunately, a second opinion is not always obtained and now app companies are going to great lengths to protect themselves from potential lawsuits, with many apps incorporating multiple layers of consenting before the downloader can finally use the applications settings. Along with the FTC, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversees the regulation of these mobile health applications. These regulations can be found in the Mobile Medical Applications Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff, a 45 pages document written to reduce the negative consequences of this medical reformation. Consequences that although very real, may still be outweighed by the positives.

Positive may be too big
A staggering 96% of health app users report improved health when using an app, according to a 2015 study done by Research Now. Not only are patients benefiting from mobile health apps, health care providers are too. In the same study, 86% of health professionals agreed that health apps will improve their own knowledge of their patients condition as well as increase their patients sense of responsibility for their health. This excitement is being shared by hospitals, many of which are now seeing the adoption of such apps as a necessity. Dr. Shafiq Rab, Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer at Hackensack University Medical Center, said:
The delivery of healthcare is moving from large buildings and big offices into patients’ homes and mobile devices… The new model means that we as healthcare providers must step up our game and… provide the convenience, access, quality and transparency required to acquire and retain patients (n.d. para. 1)
Other primary care providers (PCP) are also aware of this shift and are already seeking ways to “step up [their] game”, 46% of all PCPs state plans of incorporating apps into their practice within the next five years. Additionally, different from many priests during the Reformation, doctors seem to be open to the shifting distribution of knowledge as job satisfaction levels and patient-doctor relationships are being left unstrained during this shift.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the age of mobile health apps has led to a medical reformation that distributes knowledge and responsibility back to the patient. With this shift in knowledge, regulatory measures must be used to protect patients from inaccurate and misleading information. With protective measures in place, apps have the potential to not only improve the patients’ health but also improve health care system as we now know them. As doctors work to incorporate such technologies in their practice, patients’ will increase in health literacy and become more significant role players in their own care.

References
Conn, Joseph. (2015). Easy of those apps: Mobile medical apps gain support, but lack clinical evidence. Modern Healthcare. Retrieved from http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20151128/MAGAZINE/311289981/easy-on-those-apps-mobile-medical-apps-gain-support-but-many-lack
Health information on internet is often unreliable. (2000). BMJ : British Medical Journal321(7254), 136.
Rab, S. (n.d.). The paradigm shift in medicine and how it affects technology. CIO Review. Retrieved from https://healthcare.cioreview.com/cioviewpoint/the-paradigm-shift-in-medicine-and-how-it-affects-technology-nid-3823-cid-31.html
Research Now. (2015). Are mobile medical devices good for our health? A new study by research now reveal that doctors and patients say yes. Retrieved from https://www.researchnow.com/newsroom/mobile-medical-apps-good-health-new-study-research-now-reveals-doctors-patients-say-yes-infographic/
The Growing Value of Digital Health: Evidence and impact on human health and the healthcare system (2017). IQVIA Institute Report. Retrieved from https://www.iqvia.com/institute/reports/the-growing-value-of-digital-health
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration. (2015). Mobile medical applications guidance for industry and Food and Drug Administration staff. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/UCM263366.pdf


The Other Half of Postpartum Depression

Ryoko Pentecost
PhD Student, College of Nursing
University of Utah


What is PPD?

Postpartum depression (PPD) is a form of depression that comes after childbirth. It occurs in 10-15% of women aged 18 to 44 and is therefore the most common complication after having a child. It occurs anytime between a month and a year after birth, and the impact of PPD extends to infants, women, and families. Maternal PPD has been recognized in some form for several years. For example, the term baby blues has long been used to describe mood swings that occur after pregnancy. It is great that society is starting to acknowledge PPD to offer support for suffering mothers. However, as far as PPD is concerned there is an elephant in the room, as it takes two to make a baby.

New types of PPD
           Paternal PPD is a very real complication that gets little attention. From an analytical standpoint, it’s easy to imagine how a father can suffer from depression after having a baby. In the best case, a new dad must deal with lack of sleep, and caring for a new baby who will cry at all hours of the day. Now, imagine those common and somewhat expected stresses combined with a complication that renders a mother unable to assist in caring for the baby, such as maternal PPD. The result could very well be a depressed dad. In fact, based on this American Academy of Pediatrics report, between 2 and 25% of fathers were depressed, and that number jumped by 50% when the mother experienced PPD.
Currently, when fathers and PPD are paired together, the focus isn’t specifically paternal PPD. Instead, the conversation is framed based on how fathers experienced maternal PPD. One example can be found here. Granted from the point of maternal PPD it could be encouraging to view how fathers can step in and provide support, but from the point of paternal PPD videos like that one could make a new father feel as if something is wrong with him, because no other father feels the same way.
I feel the root of the problem stems from outdated thinking that the mother is the primary caregiver of children. Historically, from an external perspective the mother was expected to be the one on duty to care for the kids. However, in more recent years dads are encouraged and even expected to take a more active role, as the benefits of an involved dad are becoming well understood.

Paternal PPD and Research

Now it’s time for research and thinking on PPD to shift to catch up with this new (and very positive) trend of active fathering. After all, the healthiest child is one where all parents are available and engaged.
In my opinion, this is one area where society is ahead of some areas of research. I say that because I see numerous examples of families where the father takes an active role (such as my own), but I don’t see many studies concerning paternal PPD. In other words, there are several areas that are understood for PPD mothers that are not as understood for PPD fathers. For example, how might a father exhibit signs of PPD? How should a father be screened for PPD? What is the risk to the infant if a father has PPD? Can early identification and treatment of maternal PPD prevent paternal PPD, and vice versa? Is maternal PPD more or less prevalent in societies where fathers take an active role?
With that said, there are a few resources out there for fathers who feel they need support with their PPD. For example, postpartum.net provides information about a monthly chat around PPD. PostpartumDads.org provides a Facebook support group for fathers dealing with PPD. Finally, The Postpartum Husband by Karen Kleiman (cover shown below) offers tips for fathers concerning PPD.


Telemedicine: Embracing Virtual Reality to Improve Healthcare Access


Sarah Neller, PhD Student
College of Nursing | University of Utah



Imagine living in a place where it was difficult to access healthcare, where specialty healthcare providers refused to practice, and where it was more than 50 miles to the nearest hospital. This may seem like a remote possibility, but it’s the reality for many Americans who live in rural areas. Access to care continues to be a challenge that divides socioeconomic strata and creates disparities that could be reduced with appropriate access. Telemedicine is one avenue that can bridge the gap to reach those around the world who otherwise would not receive appropriate care.


What is telemedicine and how is it different from telehealth?
You may be asking yourself, “What’s thedifference in telehealth vs. telemedicine?” A lot of entities use these terms interchangeably, so if you’re researching the topic, it’s important to determine how the article or entity defines their terms. Telehealth is really an overarching term that encompasses all parts of health or anything related to healthcare that is mediated through technology – this can include non-clinical services including training, continuing education, even health advice, like talking to a health coach online through your insurance company. 

rmmagazine.com

Telemedicine on the other hand, is a subset of telemedicine that involves clinical services mediated through technology – think anything that would involve the EHR or seeing a provider – physical assessment, diagnosis, and ordering of labs, tests, and treatments.


History of telemedicine
The history of telemedicine trackswith the development of communication over time. In ancient times, signals like smoke and light were used to communicate plague outbreaks. Inventions of the telegraph and telephone were early mediums of telemedicine. In the 1950s, specialties like radiology and cardiology began to use telemedicine as we know it today to transmit medical data such as x-rays and electrocardiograms (EKGs). The growth of the internet has allowed for continued development of telemedicine capabilities including virtual office visits, like those projected by this Jetsons cartoon from 1962, because it allowed for easier and cheaper applications.
       

How is telemedicine delivered?

There are many different modalities of telemedicine. It can involve a patient to provider interaction or provider to provider interactions. Note that these interactions can go both ways (though it’s important to note that the patient’s primary provider does need to obtain consent from the patient before sharing information with the consulted provider to comply with HIPAA laws). These interactions can occur synchronously, which is in real time or asynchronously, which does not occur in real time. Examples of synchronous interactions can include “office” visits, which are mediated through technology like video conferencing, and asynchronous interactions could involve messaging through an electronic health record (EHR) portal or even communication with wearable patient monitors like pacemakers, Holter monitors, etc.



Benefits and uses of telemedicine
Uses: There are multiple uses for telemedicine including telestroke, teleresuscitation, and telehealth emergency care. Additionally, specialties like stroke, cardiology, dermatology, psychiatry are well suited for telemedicine.  New York Presbyterian Hospital offers virtual OnDemand urgent care visits, so you can access a provider from the comfort of your living room.

Benefits: There are so many benefits to telemedicine including increased access to high quality health care from primary care and specialty providers, increased patient engagement with the healthcare system (largely because they now have increased access to it), and fewer costs related to transportation and time off work. It also offers convenience which can improve patient’s ability to initiate care and maintain ability for follow-up care if needed. Multiple studies have shown that telemedicine aids to lower hospital readmission rates for certain conditions. Through telemedicine consultations, patients in rural areas are able to stay in their communities for treatment rather than be transferred to a larger medical center for a higher level of care. This is beneficial to the patient because it prevents transfer to the big city and keeps them close to their family support system, and it’s beneficial to the community because it can help keep the rural hospital open, which preserves access to care and maintains jobs. In short, it makes healthcare easier for the patient!

Challenges: What’s the hold up?
So why isn’t telemedicine an option everywhere? What’s the hold up?  First of all, not all specialties are suited for telemedicine. Telemedicine should not be used when an in-person exam is required due to high acuity, when there is a language barrier without available interpreter, or when the health care worker on the patient side does not have enough training or experience to aid the remote provider. It is frequently not implemented due to perceived high cost of implementation, provider hesitancy, or state policy.

A changing trend in healthcare
Telemedicine has opened the doors to the ability to deliver healthcare in new and innovative ways around the world. Mobile health units are a way that telemedicine has been able to be utilized in remote areas around the globe, during disasters, and in the fight against opioid abuse. Patients are now able to connect to their health care provider from the comfort of their own home or own community. In the 115th Congress, there have been 1 Senate bill and 2 House bills related to telemedicine that have been passed since December 2017. There are 15 Senate bills and 28 House bills related to telemedicine that are pending for this congressional session. As funding increases and regulation improves, telemedicine will quickly become a recognized standard of care that will improve affordability and accessibility for patients across the globe.


 References
American Telemedicine Association. (2017). Telemedicine/telehealth bills in the 115th Congress. Retrieved from https://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/AMERICANTELEMED/3c09839a-fffd-46f7-916c-692c11d78933/UploadedImages/advoca_115th_Congress_bills_advocacy.pdf
Arndt, R. Z. (2017). Telehealth education leads to lower readmission for West Virginia hospital system. Retrieved from http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20170213/NEWS/170219977
Ben-Assa, E., Shacham, Y., Golovner, M., Malov, M. Leshem-Rubinow, E. Zatelman, A., Shamir, O….Roth, A. (2014). Is telemedicine an answer to reducing 30-day readmission rates post-acute myocardial infarction? Telemedicine Journal and E-Health: The Official Journal of the American Telemedicine Association, 20(9), 816 – 821.
Kim, E. J., Navarro, S. M., Michel, S., Soyars, C., Hilmers, D. Anandasabapathy, S. (2018). Development of a rapidly deployable mobile medical unit for emergency disaster settings. The Lancet Global Health, 6(2), S50.
MD Portal. (2015). History of telemedicine. Retrieved from http://mdportal.com/education/history-of-telemedicine/
New York Presbyterian. (n.d.) Mobile stroke treatment unit. Retrieved from https://www.nyp.org/neuro/services/stroke/mobile-stroke-treatment-unit
New York Presbyterian. (n.d.) Urgent care. Retrieved from https://www.nyp.org/ondemand/urgent-care
Tu, J. H., Profit, J. Melsop, K., Brown, T., Davis, A., Main, E…Lee, H. C. (2017). American Journal of Perinatology, 34, 259-263. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1586505.ISSN 0735-1631.
Wicklund, E. (2018). Mobile health units are latest telehealth tool to fight opioid abuse. Retrieved from https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/mobile-health-units-are-latest-telehealth-tool-to-fight-opioid-abuse
Zachrison, K. S., Hayden, E. M., Schwamm, L. H., Espinola, J.A. Sullivan, A. F., Boggs, K. M…Camargo, C.A. (2017) Characterizing New England emergency departments by telemedicine use. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 18(6), 1055-1060.


Scientist embracing social media from traditional research communication and dissemination to embrace social media: Are they realist or have they abandoned elitism?


Roneka Muhammed
PhD Student, College of Nursing
University of Utah


Communication of science is multilayered

Communication of science is multilayered and must be tailored according to the desired audience. For the purpose of this blog post consider two distinct audiences: Scientist and non-scientist. The spectrum of the documentation of science communication with different forms of media is broad and it is necessary to pay attention to the pulse of the shift of public attention.

Traditional methods of research communication and dissemination

The traditional methods of research dissemination include publications in peer-reviewed professional, technical and academic journals. Other publications like books, research reports, conference papers, news letters and research forums are also classical methods of the way that research scientist disseminate research data. These traditional methods offer low information accessibility to the lay person. They are aimed only toward the scientific community as an audience.

The scientific community’s responsibility to laymen

In this digital age the world is becoming smaller. Although laymen do not have the training nor capacity to discern good from bad science, nor what a quality research article should entail. The science is neither visible nor transparent. Scientist bear the burden of fundamentally looking at results and determining whether research study designs, analysis appropriation and assertion of reproducibility. We must find novel ways for scientist to engage and communicate with non-scientist in the world community.

Communication of and dissemination of research and the relationship with technology

Chronology of the history of the change in the methods of the communication and dissemination has followed alongside of advances in technology and communication. A paradigm shift from traditional forms of publications that began in the mid-1970’s with the emergence electronic journals. In 1983 when the Academic American Encyclopedia was published in a CD-ROM. The introduction of the world-wide-web made electronic publishing more popular. Several traditional newspapers launched online versions in 1996. In this present time social media forums, open access formats, the media and electronic press, post-publication peer-review, and on-line reference managers make research more accessible to the layman as an audience.

The application of social media in research

Social media is the most common form of emerging information, communication, and internet application use. According to Cann, Dimitriou, and Hooly in their publication Social Media: A guide for researchers, applications for research include identification of knowledge and more access to knowledge that was formerly nonvisible to non-scientist. They also noted quality assurance of knowledge as a significant application.

Tangible examples of ways to certify and make research data available to the public using media

There are novel ways for scientist to disseminate research being explored. Pre-publication, which is posting an article on-line with a set comment period to allow comment and critique. The authors would then be given opportunity to edit with the publication house maintaining the authority to accept or reject the article with weight given to feedback received from the public. Another interesting discussion is in the experimental stages. With this method the focus is videotaping and publishing the media in an on-line platform. The public and scientific entities can see the experiment being performed. Researchers are vulnerable to public comment about rigor and adherence (or non-adherence) to the proposed methods. This latter method may help the general public better understand what scientist do because the would have access to the written proposal and the visual aid to follow.

A word about Predatory Publications

Predatory publications publish articles with little or no reviews in exchange for charging the author a monetary fee. The editors of these publications sometimes have perverse incentives because they are volume motivated. Resulting in a high acceptance rate and lower quality articles. These publications may be very attractive to new academic faculty members as they have incentive to maximize their number of citations to show that they are having an influence in the science of their discipline. In contrast, there are a number of on-line and open source publications that are reputable. These publications utilize the traditional blind reviewer journal review process. The quality of the articles presented in these publications are considered to be of high quality.

Benefits of using social media to communicate and disseminate research

The increase in sharing and visibility of science would increase the value of science in public and political arenas. Networking, feedback and discussion of the science would reduce the time that research results reach the stakeholders and the general public.

No substitutions

There is a place for both the traditional forms of research dissemination and new forms of dissemination through electronic and media forums. According to Dr. Mollie Cummins, at the University of Utah’s School of Nursing, “We as scientist new to use new media forms of communication of science, however, these new forms do not replace peer reviewed journals. Rather they are paired with peer reviewed journals to communicate science with the end user audience.”

Conclusion

Initially, my thoughts about scientist’s initial distaste and criticisms of social media and open-source forums had to do with elitism. A closer look at those in academia that are embracing these new formats of research communication and dissemination highlight the reality that the non-scientist are not equipped with the tools and understanding of how to decipher good science from bad science. Indeed, the burden of translation of what constitutes that distinction falls to scientist. It is a pragmatic way that we can use our influence and knowledge to help advocate for the advancement of research priorities to improve the human condition.




References

Cann, A., Dimitriou, K., Hooley. T. (2011) Social Media: A Guide for Reseachers. London:
Research Information Network.