Could this year mark a turning point for telemedicine?
Do recent legislative moves in Russia, Germany and China legalising telemedicine mark a turning point for an industry which is yet to fulfil its potential? Or will resistance from the medical profession, concerns over cherry-picking and restrictive contracts continue to hold it back?
Primary care is seen by many as the next frontier for healthcare investment and digital will be the spearhead of this charge. AI chatbots can deal with up to 80% of cases while some UK GPs say that only one in ten visiting patients needed to see doctors. Considering the money spent on the sector, the digital opportunity is obvious, and recent moves show policymakers know this.
For example, the German Medical Association (GMA) has just voted to allow doctors to treat or diagnose patients remotely without a physical consultation first.
And in Russia lawmakers have legalised teleconsultations which had until recently classed themselves as ‘information services’ operating in a legal grey area. First diagnosis still needs a face-to-face meeting, but now follow-up diagnoses and prescriptions can be done over apps. Money has flown into providers ever since.
In the biggest market we cover, the Chinese government has confirmed operators will be allowed to diagnose common and some chronic conditions online, also after a physical consultation. The government sees this as a fast-track way to build a primary care ecosystem. Digital players raised US$1.6bn in the month before this announcement while babylon’s partnership with WeChat was described by a consultant as the “most exciting British healthcare deal I’ve seen for some time”.
So what’s in the small print?
Resistance to private sector involvement in Germany looks set to come from the GMA itself, with discussions around how to keep investors out of the development. Digital health liberalisation was welcomed by the health minister but physician associations fear a “cost-saving program for health insurers” and their profession being replaced by call centres. Russia’s bill does not touch the public sector, suggesting some resistance there, too.
Implementing these apps in a public system also comes up against the reasonable suggestion that all they’ll do is cream off the young, tech-savvy and time-poor and lumber existing public systems with older, chronically-ill patients, crippling them financially as they rely on the first group subsidising the second. babylon has faced this charge numerous times in the UK.
Rolling reforms out doesn’t happen overnight, either. The GMA’s decision needs implementation by regional physician groups while things generally take a lot longer to happen locally in China as well. In the UK, we hear that NHS England would welcome more digitalisation while local decision-makers are less keen. Contracts given out to GP practices often include a minimum of 72 face-to-face hours per 1,000 patients per week, which can stifle innovation.
These legislative changes are just the first step in a long road ahead for the role of digital in primary care and health consultations generally. But the large amounts of money being put into the sector, from China to Russia to the UK and elsewhere, shows that investors are starting to look at this as a tailwind to get in front of.
We would welcome your thoughts on this story. Email your views to Cameron Murray or call 0207 183 3779.
