In late May, Chilmark Research published a comprehensive report on the PHR market, iPHR Report Analysis & Trends of Internet-based Personal Health Records Market. This was, and remains, the most comprehensive report on the PHR market since the recent entrance of the massive consumer-focused vendors, Google and Microsoft.
This 100+ page report provides a detailed look at the PHR market today (focus is on Internet-based solutions, thus the term iPHR), including current and future trends, the impact of the major platform plays of Dossia, Google Health and Microsoft’s HealthVault and deep profiles on 20 iPHR vendors. This report is of high value to any entity that seeks to gain a thorough understanding of the market, leading players and their capabilities.
Today, Chilmark Research is releasing, for free download, the Executive Summary of the report. This 20 page summary will provide the reader with an excellent overview (though certainly not as comprehensive as the full report) of PHR market trends. You can pick-up your copy at our store.
There are only a couple of catches:
1) If you use any information contained in the report in future slides, presentations, internal reports we ask that you please cite the source. Actually, this is a good idea as it adds validity to what you may be trying to convey.
2) We’d love to get your feedback on the report’s contents, particularly what you would like to see in the report when we update it the next time around. Your input is crucial to our research and will assist us in insuring that the next report is even better, more comprehensive and informative. Send your comments to: info@chilmarkresearch dot com
That’s it. Pick-up the report and hope you enjoy the read.
Nice report. Unfortunately you seem to have fallen into the same trap as most other prognosticators in this area. PHRs are at low single-digit acceptance rates among consumers according to all reputable surveys and these numbers haven’t moved appreciably in two years. Contrary to popular opinion, this isn’t mostly about privacy. The far more complex problems relate to the health literacy skills of the average consumer (low), the lack of connectivity among the populations for whom this technology would really be of benefit (chronic disease sufferers–especially those aged 65+), and the fact that at this point the technology doesn’t deliver much benefit to the consumer for all the work that’s required. The only successful PHR model to date is a shared view of an EHR (as practiced by folks like Geisinger and Kaiser). That should be telling us something. PHRs will be mainstream only when there’s something useful to put into them–and that’s not claims data. In other words, get EHRs deployed and the PHR problem solves itself. Until then, this whole area looks to me like a very small niche market.
Thanks Kim for your comments.
A couple of points of clarification. First, if you have read my posts here on the site, as well as the full report, you will see that I am cautiously bullish (yes, an oxymoron) on the potential for PHRs. I do believe that there are some very fundamental changes now taking place in healthcare sector (care fragmentation, plan redesign, larger co-pays, information access, etc.) that are creating a more vibrant market for PHRs, but the extent to which that market grows will still be contingent on a number of factors primary among them: EMR adoption, data liquidity (auto-populate PHRs), better PHR tools (value to end user) & consumer engagement.
Based on your comments, we agree on most of those points.
Where we differ is in your belief that only a tethered PHR (tethered to an EMR ala what Kaiser has done with MyChart) will succeed.
First, Kaiser is unique in that they are a fully capitated, vertically integrated provider/payer. Therefore, if a member has a care team for say a chronic disease, everyone is on-board. This is rare in the US with most chronic care consumers having a care team that is spread out, not necessarily in the same IDN, thus little sharing of records among themselves to facilitate care – that is left to the consumer to coordinate. In this scenario, a tethered PHR is of only modest value.
Second, there are PHRs now being sponsored by employers. This week, Wal-Mart announced that it will be offering employees a PHR (WebMD) that relies on the Dossia platform for data aggregation. Granted, only claims data today, but even claims data provides some utility to the consumer.
One of the early pioneering employers to offer their employees a PHR is the high-tech company, EMC. They were an early adopter and have worked hard to build out the PHR to serve its employees. Spoke to the lead person at EMC about 2 weeks ago and she stated that they now have 50% adoption (that is higher than Kaiser and on par with Group Health). Very impressive. Like most employer-sponsored PHRs, EMC’s relies heavily on claims data. With such high adoption, obviously there is perceived value in a claims-based PHR. But be assured, the EMC PHR has a lot more features than just viewing one’s EOBs!
Yes, the PHR market remains a niche market but from what I have seen in the rest of the healthcare sector, all HIT is one niche market or another.