Health 2.0 – Status and trends – Impact on healthcare

November 7, 2009

Olivier LAURENT

Olivier LAURENT - CEO Coligane group

The introduction of the user-generated healthcare (or the health 2.0) has empowered the patients to a great extent. The users have changed from consumers of information that was available in the internet to generators of information.1 This is especially true in case of individuals who have been suffering from chronic disorders. Patients are also able to access their health records in the form of electronic health records (EHR) which enable them to visit a doctor of their choice without having to wait for the healthcare providers to transfer the information.

The trend has been noted to move from advised care to self care with the ability of the patients to maintain personal health care records that contain self documented and self obtained information or observations. This has helped the patients to form their own diagnosis and treatment options and become active participants in the process of disease identification and management.1, 2

An interesting finding was noted in a study conducted in England wherein the physicians and nurses reported that many patients brought health information obtained over the internet for their consultations. This practice was noted to lengthen the consultation time. Although many of the nurses believed that bringing such information helped the consultation process they also considered that such information was off-putting in many instances. 3 This trend is expected to grow as the awareness about ICT expands further.

Bookmark and Share

References

  1. Randeree E. Exploring technology impacts of Healthcare 2.0 initiatives. Telemed J E Health. 2009 Apr; 15(3):255-60.
  2. Marsh AJ, Biniaris CG, Karanasiou IS, Carroll D. Social prospecting. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008; 137:321-7.
  3. Dilliway G, Maudsley G. Patients bringing information to primary care consultations: a cross-sectional (questionnaire) study of doctors’ and nurses’ views of its impact. J Eval Clin Pract. 2008 Aug; 14(4):545-7.
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: