6 things physicians wish health IT developers knew
Physician interest exists
- @jkvedar: “Where I am, many want to innovate—so not too much nudging required.”
- @Geneia: Physician involvement “allows for their insight so that solutions fit seamlessly into existing work flow [at the] point of care.”
Start with the problem, not the solution
- @BreastDocUK identified the problem: Physicians are “too often presented with a solution for [a] problem we didn’t recognize.”
- @Geneia added: “Which actually doesn’t solve anything—but increases frustration.”
- @Cascadia offered a suggestion: “Have docs identify problems they want solved and do a reverse pitch to [the] tech community.”
- @AmerMedicalAssn pointed to a simple way: “A tangible way for physicians to connect to entrepreneurs is via our new network.” The Physician Innovation Network, which aims to put physicians in direct communication with developers from the beginning of projects based on interests and needs, is part of a recent collaboration between the AMA and Chicago health tech incubator MATTER.
- @jkvedar noted another option: There are “lots of hackathons and pitch offs in the Boston area,” but he added that he is “not sure that is the best way.”
- @HavasLifeMetro offered a resource to learn more about the effectiveness of hackathons.
Get both physician and patient feedback
- @nxtstop1: Physician feedback is “very important. … [There is] a LOT of unhappiness that's scattered thr[ough]out [the] clinical landscape, with no one listening.”
- @VerbalCare: “As a company designing these solutions, involve physicians AND patients in the dev[elopment]. Take into acc[ou]nt their feedback!!”
- @jashenson: “Close the feedback loop. Help doctors see how their feedback leads to new [and] improved digital health tools.”
- @drnic: “Build the feedback mechanism into the app/work flow and make it easy.”
Simplicity in design leads to efficiency … and happy end users
- @StevenStackMD: “They really need different tools and different designs. EHRs fail by trying to be too many things to too many people.”
- Michael Hodgkins, MD, via @AmerMedicalAssn: “The common ingredient and most important factor, no matter who the user is, is accurate and easy data/info sharing.”
- @StevenStackMD: “Too many ‘tools’ cause inefficiency without creating better work flow.”
So how many “tools” are too many? Thousands of medical apps already exist from multiple developers.
- @mandl: “HIT should resemble the iPhone so that ‘apps’ can be substitutable. Substitutable apps drive innovation—they can be deleted if they don’t satisfy [with the] end user in control.”
Check out how SMARThealthIT is developing substitutable, user-friendly apps that allow connection to health care data at the point of care and for patients in their homes.
- @nxtstop1: "Poor usability for tools designed [for] MDs … many tools asked to serve too many, serve none well.”
Physician-patient engagement is a two-way street
- @Geneia: “Patient engagement & good physician-patient relationship helps involve the patient as a key contributor to their [own] care. ... We’ve found w[ith] remote monitoring when patients see their data, they’re more empowered.”
- @BreastDocUK: “We engage patients by showing that we are interested and that they are genuinely central. Give [patients] the tools to lead.”
Developers need to understand physician work flow
- @jashenson: “Need for efficiences is well accepted, but lack of work flow understanding prevents efficient tools.”
- Dr. Hodgkins: “We have a chance to avoid that disconnect with this new wave of technology intended to improve patient care.”
- @drnic1: “Let’s hope it’s a chance we grab with both hands.”