Calling in sick may be a thing of the past, but not for the reason you might think: A poll by www.ehealthforum.com shows that more than 30 percent of people surveyed feel guilty about taking the time to attend a doctor’s appointment during office hours. According to the results, 29 percent of U.S. residents felt “mild to extreme” guilt, while 28 percent of Canadians and 35 percent of British respondents carried the same feelings. Mark Turkovic, co-founder of eHealth Forum, said people often want to be seen as the hardest, longest worker in an effort to preserve their jobs - especially in a down economy. “Sadly, taking the time out to visit the doctor all too often falls by the wayside,” Turkovic said.

At Your TeleDoctor, we believe that such a behaviour can lead to the following consequences:

-Increased Illness and death from stress, hearth disease, cirrhosis and suicide.

-Loss in competitivness due to lack of energy and lack of focus at work. Ultimatly, this situation can lead for you to lose your job.

As discussed in an earlier post, we believe that being able to consult your physician remotely can greatly reduce the likehood of missing a whole day to arrange a doctor visit. This is even more important in the current economic downturn where employers want to keep their jobs at any cost.

Experience shows that doctors are far from being early adopters, electronic health records (ER) being one of the most recent cases. However, the publication of a study of 222 patients about how webcams can help in decision making when someone shows up in a rural emergency suffering from a stroke. Doctors made the right decision in 98% of the time when using a webcam while they would make the right decision only 82% of the time over the phone.This report should convince that telemedicine is important, as it is not more than a technology gadget but a necessity that can save lifes.  

The consulsion that can be drawn from these results is that using video conferencing helps doctors in decision making, the right decision that can save a life, while it decreases the risk for patients. At TeleDoctor, these facts conforts us and shows that we are heading to the right path as we are developping the most compelling tool to help doctors in decision making as well as offer the best medical service for patients.

I won’t reinvente the wheel by telling the story behind Health 2.0 Accelerator. I have pasted the original article for more details. However, I want to talk about how I can be benefical to be involved in this project. For example the first project in which members will take part is about moving pharmaceutical data. The advantage of such an initiative is inspired from the opensource contribution widely common in software communities. People in healthcare  could then focus on solving more complex problems that plague the actual healthcare sector. Stay tuned, the wiki is up and running at Health2Accelerator.org

“For several months there has been discussion amongst Health 2.0 companies about the concept of a Health 2.0 Accelerator. It started with Marty Tenenbaum’s introduction of the concept in September 2007. It continued with the discussion at the San Diego meeting in March 2008. Since then conversations and meetings among a small group have continued to define a first cut at what the Health 2.0 Accelerator should be.

The basic idea is for organizations to collaborate to create “public goods” —frameworks and strategies that will help all concerned to advance the industry. The way to do this is via projects that tackle particular problems, and leave behind frameworks and utilities that all can use.

The reality is of course going to be more complex, but we’re delighted to announce that the first project concerning moving pharmaceutical data has been announced, and the first principles and statements about the future of the Accelerator are now up at its own wiki at Health2Accelerator.org.

We are now asking for everyone in the Health 2.0 Community to become members, suggest projects, and contribute to the wiki. This is very much a work in progress, but we believe that the potential is huge. Please go to the new site, and contribute by giving us your comments.”

By Mathieu Hault and Indu Subaiya

I was reading Scott Shreeve’s crossoverhealth blog the other night, and I stumbled upon maybe the most insightful article on IT and healthcare I read in the last couple weeks. He is stating that governments are spending more and more money in Telemedicine projects that use their proprietary network and hardware software. These guys have missed the train, and are doing an anachronism. Sadly, this article just clearly states the IT medical space is still taken from another perspective than other fields and is still in its infancy while it should clearly be mainstream nowadays. In fact, all technologies needed to support it are available.

But we need to not forget that people are driving the revolution themselves, by using web 2.0 tools to communicate, find information about health and wellness, and even practice auto diagnosis. People are then ready to use more advanced tools to perform other tasks, like auto managing their health, their medications intakes, and health in general. They also want to use these tools to talk to their doctors. 

Some startups have seized the opportunity, and are developing tools, using technology that has existed from some time now, to enhance patient experience with health care, making the end user happier and healthier.

I have been thinking all day long about ways to enhance the experience for the people that will be using a teleconsultation service over the Internet. One simplistic idea will be to allow patients to consult a doctor without caring about his/her location. This is what I call the global healthcare marketplace. As for any disruptive idea, there will be many hurdles that should be surpassed:

• Developing countries physicians are not as competent: A number of doctors in developing countries have degrees outside their country and attend international conferences to keep up to date.
• Laws protecting doctors like in Quebec, Canada and North America in General: Like for any other service, the globalization and internationalization of medicine is something that cannot be fought against for a long time from now on. Medicine is becoming more and more transparent. The people that want to keep it opaque are doing it to protect their interests and those of a community of doctors. This has nothing to do with the consumer. The consumer/patient should be empowered and should be the central piece of the puzzle. We need to give the consumer its lost place. (Rate my doctor).
• Cultural Difference: Most doctors in the United States and in Canada are immigrants. There are some minor specificities to the medicine and sicknesses but a doctor has the same formation and the human body is the same wherever you go. Many studies have reaveled common traits in humans no matter their ethnicity or skin color.
• Remote consultations are not as reliable as face to face: There has been many studies in the subject. In Ontario for instance, it was shown that patients resent no major difference compared to face to face visits with their psychiatrists. Also, it has been shown that more than 80% of the visits to a general practitionner end up without having a physical contact with the patient.This idea to develop the service into a world wide advice network of physician has grown up and could present an alternative to the shortage for doctors in Canada and the States.