Cellular phones and the mobile Internet are converging to revolutionize the way medical professionals wirelessly monitor patients and access their healthcare records. Within the next several years our health conditions could be monitored by cellphones and transmitted to databases around the world. Our blood pressure, heart rate, glucose levels, even our sleep patterns could be measured, and the data transmitted by wireless devices. How will this be accomplished, and will the data be kept private and secure?
The medical profession has been using mobile communications since its early days. Before cellular phones and sophisticated alphanumeric pagers, what doctor didn’t have a beeper? Today, wireless healthcare services are slowly becoming available to consumers. For example, MyFoodPhone enables camera phone users to transmit photos of their meals/snacks and receive video and SMS diet recommendations from nutrition experts. Subscribers may post food photos on the Web, share experiences with other MyFoodPhone members, and use a variety of nutrition resources on the site.
Some of the most influential technology companies in the world, such as Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT), Google (Nasdaq: GOOG), and Qualcomm Inc. (Nasdaq: QCOM), as well as savvy startups like Fullpower Technologies Inc. , are exploring the integration of wireless with healthcare monitoring. Fullpower, led by the successful computer/wireless entrepreneur Philippe Kahn, is creating software for mobile healthcare products, with a major emphasis on sensors. Kahn tells me, for example, that every time you answer a cellular phone, it could measure your body temperature to check for possible diseases or even evaluate a woman’s ovulation cycle.
Qualcomm’s LifeComm
Although Fullpower is quiet about releasing details of its work, Kahn is especially impressed with Qualcomm’s efforts. Last year Qualcomm announced it was establishing a mobile virtual network operation, LifeComm, for life-sciences/healthcare applications. LifeComm’s services are expected to include cellular monitoring of glucose levels for diabetics and aerobic activities for people who are dieting. Mobile healthcare solutions provider HealthPia America already offers a handset with a glucose monitor for transmitting blood sugar data to doctors and posting on the Web.
Paul Hedtke, Qualcomm’s senior director of business development, says LifeComm will be capitalized as a separate company this year and offer services to the public in late 2009 or early 2010.
Google and Microsoft are getting into Internet-based healthcare records, and I’m sure wireless will be a component. Google recently announced Google Health to enable consumers to store their own medical records and search for healthcare information. Eric Schmidt, Google’s CEO, told CNET News, “Everything we do we're doing for the mobile wireless space as well, so the [Google Health] interface you see will be available in our mobile strategies…”
Several months ago Microsoft launched its medical records service, HealthVault. Although Microsoft doesn’t mention any wireless tie-in, the company is separately offering $1 million in grants for the “Cell Phone as a Platform for Healthcare.”
Challenges abound
Wireless healthcare obviously could provide enormous benefits, but it also has significant challenges. One problem is ensuring the cellular sensor information is accurate. Technology can solve this. But what about the privacy and security of millions of medical records stored on the Internet from wireless devices and computers? Certainly these records can employ strong encryption that is impossible or extremely difficult to break, but almost any security system can be subverted.
One interesting challenge is designing phones that don’t embarrass users. Kahn explains that “nobody wants to have a device around that says, ‘I'm old because I use this.’ Devices shouldn’t scream: ‘I’m diabetic’ or ‘I have high blood pressure and heart disease.’ ”
We can -- and will -- solve the technological problems. We will create personal wireless networks that link small external monitoring devices to cellular phones. We will integrate accurate medical monitors into phones that are difficult to distinguish from other smart phones so people won't be embarrassed to carry them. The more difficult challenge is the human element -- convincing people to use these devices and ensuring that the data transmitted is secure and used responsibly.
Whew -- that was a fast reply! (The wonders of the Internet.)
The ability the opt out is a serious issue. What if your doctor or a hospital says -- with the best of intentions -- your medical records are digitized as a matter of course, and they simply don't use paper for many applications. Do you refuse to be treated? Demand they don't digitize your records?
As for the "last frontier" of privacy, we're doing a very good job ourselves of eliminating our privacy by voluntarily providing our location and enabling GPS on phones.
Thanks for sharing some insight on this matter. It is true that security will always be unresolve problem as far this issue is concern. As things stand out at the moment it seems the last frontier of our privacy which is our medical records is now slowly but surely receeding away from us. The question i Posed in my last comments was whether someone can opt not to be included in this hosting of medical records. I'm just afraid that in future we may see legislation that will give more credence to this development there by putting ordinary folks in a position where they may be powerless to act any further.
I'm very sorry for not replying sooner. I don't know how I missed your comment. Online medical records have lots of advantages and disadvantages.
Every time you go to a new doctor, you wouldn't have to complete medical forms with the same information. If you're in an accident, doctors and emergency healthcare workers could access your records. In the future, perhaps even photos and X-rays could be posted online for doctors to examine.
In addition, with "smarter" software, your online information could be used as a basis for sending you relevant information, such as new medical procedures and drugs for your medical conditions. Online information might be -- probably will be -- a lot easier to read than a typical doctor's handwritting!
The disadvantages also are numerous. The potential for security breaches by hackers is, obviously, a huge concern. Your information could be used in medical studies, perhaps without your express permission.
Hospitals and many doctors already digitize many of your health records, but these are stored in, supposedly, secure private servers.
My gut reaction is that Google, Microsoft and any similar company offering to host medical records will have to prove the efficacy of their security. The problem, however, is even secure storage can't be guaranteed. Today's "unbreakable" security is tomorrow's wide open information.
And then there's simply the human element of placing medical information on, for example, a laptop or portable hard disk that's stolen or misplaced.
It was reported last week that doctors in the U.S. are still struggling to keep elcetronic records and i don't see how this deal will help alleviate some of the difficulties facing medical practitioners in keeping electronic medical records.
Should patient have the right to refuse that the medical records be digitalized as tis piece suggest?
You certainly bring up a crucial point -- logistics. If tens of thousands or millions of people begin to use cellular monitoring devices for both known medical conditions and wellness/fitness preventive monitoring, how will all this data be examined and evaluated?
Indeed, what if a single physician has many patients with these devices? How does the physician and his/her staff deal with all the data?
Some of the data won't be transmitted continuously, such as glucose levels where the cellular subscriber would manually take his/her own glucose levels and then send it. But it also is and will be possible to monitor people -- non-invasively or invasively -- 24 hours a day.
I assume that computers will ** have ** to be used to monitor continuous medical telemetry so if there's an abnormality, the computer will spot it, instead of healthcare workers staring at computer screens. Computers are very good at spotting fluctuations (and patterns) in data. It's sort of a, uh, no-brainer for them!
I think people, in general, wouldn't mind computers checking their data. Some people might prefer it specifically because of the non-personal aspect.
The type of devices you are describing have the potential to generate huge amounts of patient data. From a physician's standpoint suddenly the idea of other devices helping us cope with this data, being "on call" or "sharing call" with us seems quite attractive.
My writing partner Nikki Olson writes:
As for the 'creepiness' aspect of doctors continuously receiving information from their patients bodies via cell phone... well, I think it has the potential to seem creepy on both ends doesn't it? It is like an invisible thread that links patient to doctor 24/7...suddenly the doctor has less of a normal life than before, tied to patients 24/7, constantly being a doctor on call... Is that too much to expect from an individual? Should a doctor not get time off from receiving information from the bodies of their patients? Perhaps there could be a computer that this information is sent to, that could record all information and only send on information if requested or if an emergency takes place. In this scenario, the computer and cell phones combined act as a virtual nurse! But now we have removed the patient from the doctor by two degrees of separation and increased the potential for error by virtue of the fact that we would be relying on at least two technological devices, one of which trusted to act as a triage! Beyond reliability, there seems to be (to me) something less creepy about an actual human being checking a patient's vital signs...or is this simply my bias against robots revealing itself? I don't know. I guess virtual medical care doesn't seem too bad if we know there is a human involved somewhere in the process.
Your comment about the importance of cellular phones being good looking certainly is in line with Philippe Kahn's view in my column, where he said it was important to create medical monitoring phones that didn't embarrass users by "screaming" their medical function. Of course, the better looking the phone, the greater the chance a consumer will purchase it....price notwithstanding.
Very good point. Thanks for commenting (and I enjoy your columns on "Internet Evolution.")
The cool factor is a major reason consumers buy cellular phones. Geeks, the tech-savvy and business people often look for specific high-end features, but for most people, coolness might be the most important feature. For some people, the medical value of a cellular phone might trump its design, but for most consumers, the phone's medical function can't be obvious or the phones won't sell.
As tech devices become more and more mainstream in our society and convergence takes place their physical attractiveness becomes important. A "purely functional" look makes no sense for an object so central to human activities. For two years now there has been a listing of "the ten most beautiful cell phones" and one can imagine that this is only the beginning of such rankings which people will pay more and more attention to.
With this in mind it is important that devices performing medical functions have high beauty and low creepiness factor. Their basic appearance should not reveal the special features they provide, a cell phone for a diabetic that can measure blood glucose should look like a cell phone a healthy nondiabetic person would use. These medically-connected devices should not find themselves in the listing of the 12 Ugliest Gadgets of All Time but instead should look like desirable high end phones others are using. In this way privacy protection in medicine reaches a whole new dimension appropriate to a high tech world!
That's why they pay me the big bucks (yeah, right!) to come up with products, services, concepts that are esoteric but could generate major effects ("impacts" if you're not grammatical!) in the years to come.
Medical monitoring via cellular is rather esoteric. Most people have no idea that research in this field is occurring. But as a wireless data consultant, it's my job -- and my pleasure, actually -- to uncover what's occurring in stealth and semi-stealth mode.
There are some monitoring devices for vehicles, such as gadgets that measure your breath and refuse to start the engine if your alchohol level is too high! But this is just the highest tip of the iceberg. Keep an eye out for cellular medical monitoring during the next several years, especially when Qualcomm launches its LifeComm MVNO.
I must start saying that I hadn't heard anything about this before, but it seems very interesting. Incredible how new technologies, human needs and innovation can lead to wonderful things.
Those ideas can very well be implemented not only in cell phones, but maybe cars, trucks, etc. Having sensors there that can detect alcohol level, blood pressure, even how tired is the driver. And then those signals can be transmitted over the cellular network to a central where some actions can be taken in case something is wrong.
There are hundreds of useful applications, but as you mention there is a thin boundary in the privacy of the users.
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
It is difficult to underestimate the value of wireless data in Haiti in aiding relief workers and residents in wake of the 7.0 magnitude earthquake that hit the country on January 12. Quite literally, wireless data has been a life-saving technology.
I'm cautiously optimistic that Apple's iPad will be successful because it's Apple-like and non-Apple-like. Those characteristics have major advantages and disadvantages that affect the value of the iPad. UPDATED 12:25 PM
May the gods be praised! Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) has finally unveiled what appears to be its online file storage capability -- a so-called Google Drive or GDrive -- for consumers and businesses.
Hysteria has reached fever pitch as techies around the world can hardly contain themselves until January 27, when Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL) is rumored to be announcing its new tablet computer. Also, during the past several months, interesting tablets and concepts for tablets have been unveiled by other manufacturers. The New York Times has called 2010 "The Year of the Tablet."
In Charles Dickens's classic story A Christmas Carol, Ebenezer Scrooge asks the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come about scenes he will be shown from his future: "Are these the shadows of the things that will be, or are they shadows of things that may be, only?"
Smarter Collaboration: How to Thrive in a Challenging Business Environment Market conditions are changing faster than ever, and organizations need to improve their agility and adaptability in order to provide better service and improve processes. The ability to work with customers, business partners, and employees as effectively as possible - while at the same time holding down costs - is a key to success. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
Techies are going crazy over the possibility that Google might design and sell its own Android phone. Some writers say it's a very big deal. Reiter questions whether it will happen and, if it does, whether it even matters.
Ever since the iPhone debuted, cellular manufacturers are rushing to incorporate touch screens into their phones. Alas, cellphone touch screens have significant problems that can actually harm business productivity. And doing business isn’t about getting the high score on Super Monkey Ball!
Companies used to be confident they'd know exactly what a cellular OS would look like out of the box. Today, that confidence should be fading. Reiter discusses how a cellphone OS's looks could be deceiving, and why businesses need to understand it.
Cellular operators, netbook manufacturers, and, of course, techies, have been eagerly awaiting a hands-on experience with Nokia's new netbook, the Booklet 3G. Reiter's got his hands on one, and tells you whether it's worth the wait.
In the final episode of this series about the death of Internet anonymity, Saunders describes how the Internet of the future will start to attain a level of intelligence that requires no human intervention. Scary.
What can users today do to protect their online privacy? The simplest and most obvious option is to not use the Internet – at all. However, once all digital information is consolidated over the Internet, trying to protect digital identity by simply unplugging from the Internet becomes impossible – a fact that has manifest implications for civil liberties, Saunders says.
By 2011 the number of Internet-connected sensors will exceed 1 trillion, making your chances of doing anything or going anywhere unnoticed pretty much zero. Saunders talks about how the 'sensortization' of the Internet is eliminating the traditional divide between online and offline populations.
The 20th Century Internet was characterized by the ability to interact with other people and information on the Internet largely without anyone knowing who you were. The Internet of this century, conversely, will be defined by identity. Saunders explains how Internet users are unwittingly contributing to the demise of the anonymous Internet.
Steve Saunders talks about the risks inherent in uncontrolled, widespread profiling of Internet users, and how one day this practice could form the basis of a new industry, the Outernet, which in economic terms will have outgrown the commercial value of the Internet itself.
Search companies and social networks are collecting incredibly detailed information about their users, says Steve Saunders, who predicts that these 'profiles' could one day become commodities to be bought and sold by companies on 'profile markets' or 'identity exchanges’ – the digital DNA equivalents of the financial and commodities exchanges on which stocks, oil, and gold are traded.
Research shows that the youth of today like Facebook – but not blogging or Twitter. Does that mean Facebook has won, or just that it's not yet out of favor? Will all the services we see today fade into Ovaltine-or-Wheaties status in just a few years?
What kinds of companies are doing the most innovation in the data center? Turns out it's midtier enterprises that are taking the "Just Right" approach.
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Email This
TWEET THIS
