How Can The Government Improve Smartphone Health Apps?

Every week I see a flood of new smartphone apps hitting the market that help users make better health decisions. And every week there are some great ideas I want to write about, but I’m dissuaded by two things:

1) The apps are usually micro-targeted towards a certain consumer and do very specific things

2) I’m overwhelmed by the number of apps and how many of them feel like clones of each other

This is why I’m intrigued by a new program from the UK’s National Health Service, which is recommending 500 apps and tools for doctors to prescribe to patients. As I mentioned in my last post, we need more health curators to guide us to the best solutions. While you can argue whether or not the government should be recommending services (although, at 500, it’s tough to say there’s any conflict of interest or they’re limiting choices), they have two big advantages that can improve public health:

1) Scope: Unlike other public health organizations, the government can reach all doctors and patients

2) Credibility: The government seal-of-approval gives users confidence that these apps have been vetted by health experts and are provide value

Now, I’m not advocating the government go into the app business - attempts by our government can be mixed at best (see TSA app – functional, but not innovative) and they’re served best by leaving development up to private companies.

But they can play a powerful role by leading people to the most promising solutions. By highlighting the most functional products, these apps may build a user base and encourage their designers to continue innovating. It would also be great to see the government providing small grants or awards to select companies to help fund this expansion.

Ultimately, I think the industry needs to consolidate so smart engineers and health professionals can concentrate efforts on the apps that work. One day, I hope I don’t have as many choices because a smaller number of apps provide the range of services I need and do it best. And I think government can help catalyze this process through similar recommendations.

Can Independent Health Advisors Help Consumers Make Better Decisions?

I attended a presentation this past week discussing health plan reactions to reform. One of my key takeaways was how new consumer attitudes and beliefs were driving change in the industry. A man-on-the-street video highlighted, among other topics, the diverse views around selecting health insurance and the trade-off between quality and price. While there was no consensus around what plans should specifically do, it was clear that consumers yearn for more empowerment as they make decisions about their health.

One of the new solutions described was deploying insurance-backed advisors to help patients choose the right coverage, especially in exchange markets. I think this is a good idea – having a representative walk consumers through the wide range of products can help match a person’s needs to the right product.

However, I’m not sure this model will work for all consumers, especially younger patients. The Internet has created savvy consumers, and any whiff of bias could turn these people off. I like the concept, but I think it could be taken a step further by creating health advisors independent of the industry.

I see this working like financial advisors today (or even rolled into existing financial services). These people would answer basic health questions and help improve health care literacy, whether it’s selecting the right insurance, settling a hospital bill, or understanding preventative medicine. While this could range in engagement (from an annual “checkup” to a 24/7 concierge service), the main focus would be to make healthcare understandable, especially the financial side that is rarely discussed.

The challenge is the business model. A fee-for-service model seems most logical, but could put this out of reach for many Americans. Any sort of rebates or kickback from insurers defeats the purpose and savings calculations, whether it’s vs. their previous plans or vs. expected medical costs, seem complex. Regardless of how this makes money, I think this hands-on service is the right way to customize healthcare to the individual and provide the empowerment consumers are looking for.

What Does The Weather Teach Us About Improving Health?

It was a beautiful day in Chicago and running outside this afternoon reminded me how much weather can impact health. As I observed people walking around, it struck me that this phenomenon is probably motivated by a few things:

- After being cooped up indoors all winter, people are anxious to get outside and change their routine

- Nicer weather leads to shorts and t-shirts, meaning people need to look better as they start to shed the bulky coats

- Sun provides vitamins that folks have been deprived of during the cold winter

Obviously the combination of these factors creates a perfect storm to motivate people to run or bike outside, but there may be lessons health companies can take from this. For example, gyms could have special events that change up routines, encourage people to try a new type of exercise, and even tap into that summer anticipation to reinvigorate folks. Similarly, health insurers could host exercise or social events to get people moving during the winter by encouraging them to prepare for the event by taking steps to look good around others. Finally, providing support for Seasonal Affective Disorder (e.g., having sun light therapy at gyms) could be a differentiator and contribute to improved mental health.