Five observations from the 2009 Healthcare Internet Conference

[Christopher Boyer]

I had the pleasure to attend this year's Healthcare Internet Conference in Las Vegas this year - sponsored by greystone.net. This was the first time I attended, and will return again. It featured great keynote speakers and topics, breakout sessions facilitated by hospitals that have learned best-practices, and (above all) the ability to learn new ideas and engage in great conversations. It was also a bonus to meet people that I have only had conversations with online (through Twitter and this blog).

Many topics were covered - far to many to cover in one blog post. But five ideas in particular I consider to be major themes that affect hospitals building online marketing strategies. Here they are (in no particular order):

1. The patient owns their own health data - a revolutionary concept in healthcare
This idea, presented by Grad Conn representing Microsoft's HealthVault product, was an interesting observation on how patients want to manage their healthcare - for themselves and their families. While this may not seem like a revolutionary concept (after all, we've all been managing our health for years), many hospitals and EHR providers forget that patients are at the focus of their services. Because of this, patient should be able to easily access, manage and - most importantly - share their health records. Patients own their health data - and simply lend it to healthcare providers to ensure they are informed enough to make the right care decisions for them.

Hospital should shift the emphasis of their marketing to allow consumers to easily manage their health. With the internet and social media, content is being distributed to patients easily. Savvy hospital marketers have a duty to ensure relevant healthcare information is given to patients. Open doors instead of building walls.

Still don't believe that this is a new concept in healthcare? Try this test - go to your doctor and request a copy of your patient records. More than likely, you will have to pay for it! But ask for that same data to be sent to another doctor, and they will do it free of charge. This simply doesn't make sense.

2. Consumers want healthcare reform and change, but they are still unsure of what type
Another speaker presented findings from numerous polls and surveys regarding healthcare reform. The results were mixed and contradicting - it's clear that the majority of people surveyed want healthcare reform, including universal access to insurance. However, they are unsure of the sacrifices they would take to achieve that goal. Those surveyed were mixed on how to fund these changes - most don't want to increase taxes, nor participate in a government "public" option (the inherent fear of government-run programs drives this). Consumers want access to quality data on hospitals and doctors, and the ability to seek the highest level of care from the best organizations. How to accomplish this is another matter.

The speaker implied that this was due to the inherent selfish nature of Americans (I want everything now, but don't want to pay for it). I (being a natural skeptic of polls and surveys) am not as convinced. I believe that consumers are still not empowered enough to understand the complexities of the healthcare process, let alone know how to solve them. Yet, fundamentally they have a right to see this data. Hospital marketers that realize transparency of cost, quality, satisfaction and safety are critical to their consumer-focused online marketing strategies, are at least illustrating they have nothing to hide. In effect, this conveys a sense of trust in your organization, in a time when trust is a precious commodity,

3. The era of the destination website is over
This is not a new saying, but when Shel Holtz said this to a packed room, you heard a collective gasp. After all, many people in that room made their living managing hospitals websites. How could authoritative websites not be important anymore?

Hospital websites are still important, but the trend is drifting to fewer and fewer consumers going to one website to seek out information. With the ease of Google the the trust of their online social media circles, consumers can actively research many different locations to piece together the information they need. Don't get me wrong - for a hospital, your authoritative site is still important. SEO still matters. But good online marketing strategies involve ways to distribute your content to many places, so that no matter where the consumer is looking, they could still be driven back to your authoritative site. As Shel further explains in his latest podcast (the Hobson & Holtz report), the move is from stickiness to spreadability.

4. An integrated marketing campaign should include physician marketing...consumerism drives choice, doctors still control access
In order for hospitals to be effective with their consumer marketing strategies, they also need to realize that physicians are still a primary access point to their hospitals. Many of the conference breakout sessions illustrated creative ways that hospitals are including their doctors in their outreach efforts - even getting them to engage in social media.

Megan O'Dea and Matt McCahill from Alegent Health facilitated a discussion showing how they have found tremendous success interviewing their doctors on film, and streaming these short videos both on their hospital's physician profile pages and on YouTube. Not only did this simple effort yield a significant number of appointments, they now have engaged their physician staff to a level where doctors are now volunteering to blog and podcast. Don't overlook your doctors in your marketing strategy!

5. Failure to understand social media is the the same as committing media malpractice
The kickoff presentation of the conference was done by Lee Aase, of the Mayo Clinic in which he outlined his "35 Theses on why Social Media are Essential to Healthcare's Future." While every theses was important and interesting this one was the most resounding. If an organization continues to fail to understand how to use and embrace social media as part of their marketing and communications strategy, that hospital is at a disadvantage and could even be hurting them in the long-term.

Lee refers to a hospital's public relations, legal department and IT organization as the "unholy trinity" - one that prevents them from embracing and using social media. (FYI - I often add a fourth: executive management). It doesn't make sense - a hospital should realize the tremendous value and worth social media has as a means of extending and cultivating their public relations brand. Social media monitoring helps organizations to legally remain at the forefront of where the actual discussions about your hospital are being had. A hospital IT firm can see value from a distributed hosting approach - solving both server costs, implementation fees and redundancy (through numerous social media networks).

Most importantly Social Media removes the barrier between a business and their consumers (or in healthcare, the hospital/doctor and the patients). Business that do not have a current social media approach are already at a competitive disadvantage. The day of social media is upon us right now - hospitals and healthcare companies not heavily invested in social media programs may not survive in the future.

[Lee Aase]

Great summary, Chris. I wish I could have stayed for the whole conference. I think Megan's point in #4 is big, and of course it's now easier than ever to capture those physician interviews. Great getting to see you over the last couple of weeks!

[Christopher Boyer]

Ahava, I agree that #4 is a large factor that differentiates hospitals with good online strategies to those with excellent online strategies.

Suzanne, you raise some good points.As for patients owning their own health record, while some in the industry are advocates of patient ownership of data, many feel that the information contained within health records is "too complex" for a layman to understand. This speaks to a larger notion that many doctors and hospitals think patients can't grasp the complexities of their healthcare, and therefore they "protect them" from making bad decisions by keeping data - quality data, patient safety information, costs of procedures, etc. - from the general public. I simply think this is wrong, and would even position that the active, interested patient can know more about their condition and how to treat it than their primary caregiver. For example, I know more about my diabetes than my family doctor (he's not diabetic, has never experienced low blood sugars, doesn't live with it 24x7, like I do). I do need his guidance, but count on him to partner with me on my care, since I spend more time learning about better ways to treat my condition.

But your point about healthcare organization's "comfort" level at being transparent about releasing this information is insightful. I don't believe they feel comfortable embracing transparency - but I have found that organizations that embrace transparency also seem to develop more loyalty and trust among their patients.

The more that healthcare organizations can move towards lowering the walls between their business and their (potential) patients, trust between patients and providers will return. And while I argue that marketers have the responsibility to move in that direction, remember that marketing extends throughout the organization - from CEOs to CMOs to doctors to the marketing/communications department. We're all in this together.

And Karen, yes - spreadability is part of the new dynamic. It's part of "Being Everywhere".

[Karen Corrigan]

Chris, what a great summary of key insights. I also heard Shel Holtz speak to the 'end of the era for destination websites' (at the Healthcare Executive Forum) and find the concept of 'spreadability' very intriguing.

[Suzanne Dewey]

Chris...thanks for sharing. These are compelling "take aways." While each merits comment, I was most excited just reading #1 because it really is revolutionary if you look at record tending/ownership from a provider’s perspective. Your pay for the info test is telling and useful. Even with old habits and systems, placing the patient as owner/manager of their own health record is the right way to go. Who cares more about their health data than the actual patient? Won't the be the most likely to keep that record accurate? I hope there was some discourse about this ownership notion and the implications. Did it seem accepted?

Your comment/admonition to hospital marketing mavens that it is their, “duty to ensure relevant healthcare information is given to patients” places a great but exciting burden on them. Can organizations feel comfortable releasing themselves from the old ways and see their way forward to give the patient the information and then help them manage it?

As you move into point #2, I wonder if hospital marketers again have a big burden to help patients/consumers understand the information and what it means. Surely we can’t let that fall only to outreach -- hopefully it can become/remain intrinsic to the delivery process itself. I was interested in this morning’s Health Care Blog post in the NYT about the 30% of adults age 25 + who are trying to decipher and understand information with a high school degree and no further formal education. They (and many of us regardless of our education level) need more than marketing outreach and education to help them…they will need the providers to help them navigate their way around their health issues.

Clearly there needs to be a lot more conversation around what this means for the consumer and what it means for the provider (lumping clinicians and marketers together) but just starting the conversation is noteworthy. Thank you!!

[Ahava Leibtag]

#4 is HUGE- I am always asking my clients to break down for me where they get the business and 10 times out of 10 physician referrals are a large part of their patient volume stream.