From Capsil Wiki

A recent Accenture report (1) noted that “Cost and complexity continue to hold back the development and adoption of converged digital home solutions”. The survey findings indicate that more than three-quarters (80%) of consumers cite cost as the number one barrier to purchasing a digital home solution. A 2004 Frost and Sullivan Report (2) stated ”Foremost among these [obstacles to telemonitoring growth] is the challenge of gaining reimbursement in a market perceived to be lacking the critical mass and evidence of cost-effectiveness. The absence of reimbursement impacts manufacturers investing in the innovation, adoption, and deployment of telehealth programs. While technology is a strong differentiator, industry participants realize that the prime driver of the market is reimbursement".

Therefore the evidence suggests that people in general are unwilling to invest in out-of-pocket home healthcare monitoring technologies at this time. A major reason for this comes down to the lack of awareness of the benefits of the technology placed alongside the out-of-pocket costs of purchasing the technology. As there are no coherent and consistent reimbursements strategies available from healthcare insurers (other pay-for-service or case by case type models), at present this is a cost that people are not willing to forego. Major progress on reimbursement, incentivisation and risk management is therefore needed and will probably be the single biggest factor in the adoption of home health monitoring solutions particularly among older people.

Aside from the patient, there is also very little incentive for the healthcare provider to get involved in telemonitoring. Take for example a physicians practise with a busy staff and patient base. For the practise to get involved there needs to be some form of out-of-pocket payment from the physicians (PCs, server, and software licenses etc). As there are no means of re-cooping this from insurers, the physician has to essentially take a risk on adoption of the technology. Also, if the physician misinterprets data from a telemonitored patient, he/she will potentially be sued with no insurance protection to fall back on. So why should he/she take this risk?. Best for him/her to wait until all these issues have been ironed out and the proper policies, best-practises (and protection) is in place.

References

• 1. http://digitalforum.accenture.com/DigitalForum/Global/ViewByTopic/NewMediaTechnologies/0705_digital_home_study.htm
• 2. Frost and Sullivan, Overview of the U.S. Diabetes Remote Patient Monitoring Devices Market August 29, 2004]

• Back to Government Policy