healthcare technology

Wearables, devices used to sense data and process it into information, are generating quite the buzz in healthcare these days. But down the line, does that buzz come with a sting?

A newly published Apple patent application that details ways to improve a wrist-based pedometer could represent another piece of evidence pointing to an iWatch.

The application, “Wrist Pedometer Step Detection,” came out of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office today. This is part of the standard patent process toward issuance. It details ways to improve step detection when someone is wearing a pedometer on a wrist.

In the patent application’s implementation, the pedometer might be able to “automatically determine that the pedometer is being worn on a user’s wrist.”

Pedometers, the application points out, are often attached to a user’s trunk – on the waist or pants or shirt pocket. A commonly used algorithm to measures steps, however, doesn’t work as well when the pedometer is on a wrist, because the arm’s movement can interfere with the measurement of acceleration.

Patient engagement, defined as the process of placing patients at the center and in control of their own healthcare, is becoming a chief healthcare priority

Concurrently, a number of national information infrastructure initiatives are targeting increased patient engagement and the design of health information systems that improve the availability of health information and integrate it in meaningful ways for patients.  So far, these technology goals have been advanced primarily through the design of personal health records (PHRs), patient portals, electronic health records (EHRs), and health information exchanges (HIEs).  However, we remain far from achieving the goal of truly engaging patients in their care.

Generation and exchange of health data with patients is a requirement for Stage 3 EHR meaningful use incentives. Patients are entitled to an electronically generated copy of the record of their encounters with providers. 

Sharing provider-generated data with patients is expected to promote patient engagement and accountability, but our own experiences suggest that the data that are being shared are currently a mixed blessing.  For example, one encounter report took the form of a 6-page document in which the vast majority of information was copied and pasted from previous encounters and in which there were several factual errors. The errors will be discussed with the provider during the next visit.

Certainly the report got our attention; whether empowerment will result remains an open question.  On another occasion, although the visit itself had included making decisions about future treatment, the plan was not mentioned in the document, leaving the patient to rely on her own memory and notes.