Patient Centricity currently holds the role of a leitmotiv converging the greater inclusion of other treatment approaches.
Feeding from people’s engagement with digital technology in general, and in particular with people as patients and with them as a blueprint roadmap these options feature behavioral modification, education; as well as personal health state monitoring. Sending out an image of trendy toys and tools to motivate, steer and empower their users promising a better life, yet with an underlying social competitive edge of not wanting to be left behind as the immobile, helpless old-world person.
With patients and their status quo embedded in their overall world and lifestyle milieu, they are also no longer just biological recipient “objects” to treatment, but challenged as subjects and contributors to their own health condition and health management.
They themselves are put on the spot and “investigation”, e.g. by the many researches carried out. The human dimension here becomes highly important.
The twist with patient centricity is the role of the self-reliant and self-responsible patient attitude and behavior
Given the main reasons for the large common illnesses esp. in Western countries, this creates a disturbing, conflicting knot. They are embedded in a complex web of attitudes and behaviors engrained in upbringing, families, social class and socio-cultural standards (such as fast food; exercise-defying desk work, couch potato rituals, family quality time meals) spinning a hard to evade norm of an accepted, well-being and togetherness cocoon. Leaving the cocoon with nothing to substitute what is giving up creates a loss in structure and identity. For very many it means having to become someone else. With most individuals to do so presents a high, if not insurmountable barrier. Changing these engrained cultural factors by health policies is a long, stony road and without cultural changes a Herculean task. Patients put in charge of themselves to actually change might take repressive measures such as high financial burden for not changing. Not to mention the psycho-somatic illness and secondary illness gain aspect. With the often given situation of older age, co-morbidity and mood disorders up to depression, motivation and energy.
For payers these new tools present a new scenario for health care management and “CRM”
Payers are already providing on the ground and online education and training programs, help and support lines, and bonus programs. The new technology instills major shifts to a more low risk condition and preventive approach by operating monitoring and control devices, which hold conflicting intentions like a Trojan Horse as they can also head towards the transparent patient with their world being intrusively monitored and their health-related behavioral habits tied to bonus and insurance rate programs.
All at once, this aspect alone brings up the sensitive question of politically correct patient care and empathy versus a strong feeling of anger and rejection. When understanding HCP, the inherent ambiguity of feelings and perceptions is a major area of research ahead. Still, doctors are the main link to the patient and the prescriber of drugs.
Interactions, compliance, adherence throughout the many touchpoints in a patient’s journey need much attention to newly assess and evaluate their drivers, the mood states and the resulting effectiveness.
In many studies, we have seen that with the cost-efficiency control pressure and patient well-being priority, HCPs professional and personal situation is seen as getting over-shadowed. Improving the former increases the risk of burning-out HCP professional and personal resources and motivation. HCP care and well-being from this is becoming another yet to unfold value-based area. Sales forces are well aware of this and they need further tools of practical support offers for the greater outcome alliance.
PATIENT CENTRICITY – RESULT
The gap between traditional pharmaceutical drug and medical treatment-centered offerings and patient-centered care strategies is widening. It sets-off the need to studies understanding the basic socio-psychological grammar of how this all works together and to how to adjust or innovate.
Our activities here span through all the major issues shown. Our morphological psychology model framework converges the many different stakeholder perspectives, the relevant dimensions, as well as project depending many methods such as traditional qualitative, online and quantitative or combination for a mission-relevant client outcome.
