September 24, 2012

Medical Devices Fit With ACO & PCMH by Jim Bloedau of Information Advantage Group

Joe Hage who moderates the largest (138,000 members) medical device group on LinkedIn and I were talking about disruptive care and reimbursement models last week. As a pulse watcher of the medical device industry, he felt moved to offer some of my thoughts to his group.  

"How are you adapting?"Providers and payers can agree on one thing: Economics demands we provide better care at a lower cost.

Medical Devices Group member Jim Bloedau, a highly-regarded healthcare marketing strategist and frequent speaker, says this gives rise to the “new middle market in the U.S.” where these traditional competitors pursue similar models to gain a market advantage.

“On one hand we have the Accountable Care Organization (ACO), typically a hospital or physician-based entity, to handle payments for large groups of patients. On the other, the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH), which redirects care from hospitals to ambulatory and home settings and encourages remote-care monitoring to catch patient situations before they become episodes of care,” Jim explains.

“These changes are mainly driven by the flow of money. It’s still about moving product, controlling share, and optimizing returns. Each vendor is retooling its products, services and value to capture this new middle market.”

For your comments below: How are you, the medical device manufacturer, adapting?

You probably make your money at the point of care. How do you (or should you) integrate and position yourself to take advantage of these new structures and remote technologies?

Do you see these market shifts as an opportunity or threat to your business?" 

A sage and brilliant response by Grant Senner, MD  offers a very clear physician understanding of the risk medical device vendors face if they ignore these emerging competitive dynamics:

"An excellent discussion.... For the device manufacturer, the challenge is to have a complete understanding of trends in clinical delivery and of subsequent payer reimbursement, deploying new technology that can survive the rigors of both. Meeting this need has become increasingly challenging; many device efforts continue to operate in a relative vacuum and without a clear strategy regarding actual product commercialization. As a result, these realities typically represent substantial risk for those manufacturers unwilling or unable to thoroughly scrutinize medical reimbursement and commercialization dynamics. The concept of "multiple paths" to commercial success is becoming increasingly rare, with only one truly viable path available"

Thanks Joe and Grant I couldn't agree more.

No comments: