Does TforG offer MedTech companies a workable solution for the European markets under pressure?
•
0 gefällt mir•520 views
On May 20th, London was the guest city for TforG’s launch of a series of workshops discussing the difficult market context in Europe and how potential solutions can assist providers to better absorb the changes. The starting point and assumption is that nowadays products or devices do not compete at a single point in the patient treatment, but rather, that they have become part of a process; more specifically, part of a care delivery chain. The workshops tackle issues such as: Optimization of care processes Facilitation of fast tracking Reduction of time to diagnosis Integration of expertise between hospitals and administrations The role and limits of external influences (payers, HTA, guidelines, central purchasing etc.) Anticipation of competing and game-changing technologies TforG invites respected speakers coming from different angles in healthcare: care providers, Central Purchasing Organizations, Health Insurance companies, etc. From its side, TforG presents its Business Intelligence-tool that supports MedTech suppliers in dealing with new challenges and change management: the TforG Care Tracks. Last Tuesday, TforG invited Mr. Mario Varela, Managing Director NHS London Procurement Partnership and Prof Sebastian Brandner, Professor and Chair of Neuropathology. Mr. Varela presented the role and challenges of his organization in the containment of the health care costs in the NHS hospitals. He specifically expanded on sharing and integrating the efforts, expertise and processes between hospitals and purchase organizations in the NHS. The limitations of centralization were also discussed. Professor Brandner presented a project developed by his team using digital pathology and automated diagnostics to reduce the time to diagnosis and time to provide treatment for the patient. Finally, Bart Ongena, VP Business Development at TforG, presented the TforG Care Track, a web based tool, providing the overview of patient pathways, bottlenecks, stakeholders, etc. He presented a number of cases in which the TforG Care Track tool has assisted MedTech companies in applications, such as: design of go-to-market models, reduction of patient access time, positioning of new technologies, profiling of potential partners, etc. The discussions between the participants and the speakers confirmed that the topics addressed are of major importance for the MedTech companies: the impact of reimbursement-rules on product positioning, the role of HTA in the go-to-market strategies, the market disturbance caused by over-centralized purchasing, etc. The next stop on TforG’s European tour will be in Tübingen (Germany) on June 16th. Other workshops are planned in Amsterdam, Geneva, Brussels, Paris and Copenhagen later this year.
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Empfohlen
Empfohlen (20)
Does TforG offer MedTech companies a workable solution for the European markets under pressure?
- 1. Looking for clear insights? we help you understand the MedTech market – globally TforG Roadshow London The Impact of Pressure on HealthCare Expenditure
- 2. 2 - Bart Van den Mooter– CEO TforG Group London Roadshow
- 3. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Who is TforG? Since 1991, the TforG Group provides strategic & decisive Business Intelligence and Decision Support to international business managers. Its unique focus is the medical devices and medical technology. The company operates from offices in Antwerp, Shanghai and Dalian. 3
- 4. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Product Portfolio AD HOC DECISION SUPPORT: • Create sustainable differentiators • Add value • Justify premium offers • Shift handling in mature markets • Growth management in emerging markets • Product Marketing BI PLATFORMS: • Up to date & accurate information • Customizable • Single point of access • World HealthCare Scan • Country Reports • Care Tracks 4
- 5. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Global Reach Healthcare business professionals face global challenges and need global answers. TforG is committed to be on top of trends, opportunities and challenges in mature markets as well as in high growth emerging markets. 5
- 6. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 MedTech markets under pressure Impact of CRISES: o Medical Device markets: decline or zero growth o Capex: replacement rates down & negative growth rates o Reduced customer loyalty invites new “good enough” suppliers in Changes in “MODUS OPERANDI” o Complex reimbursement context, role of payers o Impact of Registration and HTA, changing Regulatory climate o Complex purchasing systems o Products have “Longer time to patient” o Guidelines, Hospital processes and Hospital budgetting rules New “CARE MODELS” o Power play surgeons vs interventional specialists o Tele health, home care 6
- 7. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Creating Value for the hospital 1. Integration of primary – secondary – tertiary Care 2. Multi Disciplinary DMU’s 3. Economic value vs Clinical performance 4. Care Delivery Chain 7
- 8. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Creating Value for the hospital Care Delivery Chain: The usage of your product is more than a single moment in the medical treatment. It’s part of a process. 8
- 9. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 TforG Care Tracks: The tool to create value for the hospital. Position your product in the care delivery chain to understand: o choices made before and after, o alternative solutions, o bottlenecks in the process Use this information to support the hospital & create Value o Identify in which part of the chain value can be created o Shorten the time to diagnosis / treatment. o Accelerate the access to the patient, o Create new benefits for the hospitals & staff o Implement cost effective solutions / care tracks 9
- 10. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Programme 10.00 : Bart van den Mooter: CEO TforG Group Welcome and introductions. 10.10 : Mario Varela: Managing Director NHS London Procurement Partnership Financial challenges for the NHS & strategies to counteract 10.40 : Sebastian Brandner – Professor and Chair of Neuropathology (UCL) Turnaround times for molecular pathology tests 11.10: Bart Ongena: VP business development at TforG TforG Care Tracks: Benefits & Cases 11.40: Networking lunch 10
- 11. 11 - Mario Varela – Managing Director NHS London Procurement Partnership
- 12. NHS London Procurement Partnership Mario Varela BA,MCIPS,MCIPD,MBA Managing Director TforG event: 20th May 2015
- 13. NHS London Procurement Partnership: • A collaborative procurement organisation funded and governed by our NHS members • Established April 2006: Permanent organisation since 2011 • Hosted by Guys and St Thomas • Professional, operational and process efficiencies to procurement and supply chain services
- 14. NHS London Procurement Partnership: • Focus on NHS expenditure categories: • Agency and Temporary Staffing • Estates, Facilities and Professional Services • Medical, Surgical and Supply Chain • Medicines Optimisation and Pharmacy Procurement • Technology We now have £7-8bn of spend data, and influence £3bn of that
- 15. NHS London Procurement Partnership: • Savings and improvements for the NHS through procurement collaboration, supporting our members to deliver better patient care: £ 110m £ 755m 2014-15: Total 2006-15:
- 17. Five Year Forward View and efficiency • NHS’ long run performance on efficiency has been 0.8% annually • This has risen to 1.5-2% in recent years (largely due to pay restraints), but the NHS needs to repeatedly achieve 2% net savings for the rest of the decade, perhaps rising to 3% by the end of the period if action is taken on prevention, new care models, sustained social care services and wider system improvements. • This is a daunting task for NHS providers and one that requires forensic analysis of costs and a coordinated programme of action to support them
- 19. • We know that the English health system represents better value for taxpayers than any other health system in the world….. • ……and we are sure we have hospitals that are up with the best in the world in terms of operational efficiency…… • …..but we suspect our hospitals are not necessarily good at everything, leading to inconsistency, and the average across the system is lower than it should be…… • …..in fact we already know there are inexplicable differences in efficiencies across providers….. • …..so we need a process for identifying and addressing these performance differences to help providers deliver the 2-3% required by 5YFV Proposition
- 20. 1. We need a set of metrics that allow providers to compare themselves with their peers, and help them identify opportunities for performance improvement 2. We need a process that supports providers on this journey, and helps them deliver and sustain these opportunities 3. We need to develop and deliver support mechanisms, be they local, regional or national, to help providers improve their performance 4. We need to embed the approach so that providers are able to regularly monitor their efficiency improvement, month-on-month, year-on-year How can providers be helped?
- 21. • Health systems all over the world, be they ‘for profit’ or ‘not for profit’, have adopted a common set of metrics to monitor and improve the performance of their individual hospitals • Hospitals in the US have been operating such metrics (Adjusted Admissions) for nearly 50 years • There is clear evidence that by adopting such an approach hospital efficiency improves significantly – but we don’t have such a metric in the NHS • By examining methodologies around the world, we have now developed a metric for NHS providers, and with the enthusiastic support of 22 diverse providers, we are confident this metric can support our vision to make NHS providers the most efficient in the world by 2020 Metrics and vision
- 22. Identifying the opportunity – 6 areas of spend NHS Providers Prescribing costs Pharmaceuticals services DH & ALBs Commissioning non-NHS bodies GPs Training (doctors) Dental £72bn £3bn £5bn £8bn £2bn £9bn £13bn £8bn DH overall budget £120bn Source NHS Accounts 2013-14 £45.35bn £3.80bn £0.65bn £5.08bn £0.99bn £4.79bn £3.69bn £7.22bn NHS Providers £72bn Staff Costs Clinical goods & services Purchase of Healthcare from non NHS bodies Financing Costs Clinical Negligence Costs Common goods & services Property Inventories Consumed £45bn Pay £22bn Non-pay £5bn Financing costs Unless we address workforce and pharmacy costs, all other savings pale in to insignificance All doctors Qualified nursing, midwifery & health visitors Qualified scientific, therapeutic & technical Qualified ambulance staff Support to Clinical staff NHS infrastructure (central functions / management) £9.9bn £13.1bn £6.9bn £7.4bn £0.8bn £6n Pay £45bn Influenceable Non-Pay £18bn And we need more granular data to forensically examine cost differences Pharmacy Everyday consumables Medical technologies Common Goods & Services Estates £6bn £2bn £3bn £4bn £3bn Split between pharma, everyday consumables and medtech is best guess as £7.2bn is accounted for by ‘inventories consumed’ 2 1 3 4 5 6 6
- 23. • Developing and applying the Adjusted Admission metric to accounts data allows us to see variation between trusts • But we then need to forensically examine of every area of operating expenditure, so we need granular detail • To demonstrate how this can be done we have assembled a team of subject matter experts and are working with a cohort of 22 trusts to better understand variances and opportunities in 5 areas: • Workforce • Pharmacy • Procurement (everyday consumables, medtech, and common goods/services) • Estates • Pathology and Radiology • We will have gathered and analysed detailed data by the end of March 2015 Process
- 24. Process continued Feb 15 Mar 15 Apr 15 May 15 Jun 15 Jul 15 Aug 15 Sep 15 Oct 15 Nov 15 Dec 15 Jan 16 Feb 16 Mar 16 Apr 16 Develop and validate a set of efficiency metrics for NHS Providers Develop and issue a ‘template’ for selected providers to complete to show how each provider has budgeted for 15-16 (32 providers) Roll out metrics and new ‘efficiency performance support system’ for all NHS Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Gather level 4 and 5 data from 22 cohort for: • Workforce • Pharma • Estates • Procurement • Clinical SR settlement Learning workshops with 32 providers to help them revisit their plans Gather level 4 and 5 data from 10 further trusts 32 trusts to share revised budget plans with programme Establish size of opportunity Analysis to inform 2016-17 tariff Agree individual trust efficiency plans for all providers Compile an assessment of where each provider can make savings and issue to 32 trusts • 3 stage process • Phase 1 is to develop and apply the metrics to 32 trusts • Phase 2 is to forensically examine costs in the 22 and help them with their budget planning for 2015-16. This will also help us understand the ‘size of the prize’ for all NHS efficiency • Phase 3 is to both roll out the approach to all NHS trusts and deliver support solutions at local, regional and national level to help trusts improve their efficiency performance
- 25. Gathering line level detail……. Workforce Pharmacy Medtech/Clinical Everyday supplies Common Goods/Services Estates Procurement:DatadrawnfromAP/POsystemsforperiod?? • Data drawn from trust systems for every ward for Feb 2015 • Looking at doctors and other areas such as pathology • Led by Lyn McIntyre • Data drawn from pharmacy systems • Focusing on pharmacy optimisation, usage and procurement • Led by Ann Jacklin and Keith Ridge • Global best practice • Development of ‘core list’ • NHS Supply Chain (procurement & logistics) • Compliance processes and systems • Led by Andy Jones and FOM team • Looking at clinical practice and supporting supply chains • Building on ‘Getting it right first time’ • Looking at 10 clinical specialties • Engaging clinicians in the management of device costs • Changing the relationship with the medtech industry • Led by Prof Tim Briggs, Rob Hurd and Andy Brown • Global best practice • Solving the ‘non-stock’ conundrum in trusts • CCS • Led by Anthony Doyle 13,9 7,8 7,8 8,9 15,2 13,7 Investment Capacity Space Productivity Resource Productivity -Estates & Facilities Running Costs Efficiency Environmental Performance !Estates Compliance, Safety & Risk • Data drawn from ERIC • Led by David Harrison Pathology/Radiology services • Led by Phil Hudson
- 26. Core List
- 30. Understanding the LPP collaborative /1: • LPP represents, and is governed by, its NHS members: • Steering Board • Executive Management Board • Category Boards • Acute and Mental Health stakeholder meetings Workplanning and relevant priorities are agreed in consultation with members at every stage
- 31. Understanding the LPP collaborative /2: • A collaborative member-led approach to work planning, with decisions made according to members needs • LPP is funded by its NHS members, and must demonstrate savings and added value for each member’s investment in the service we provide
- 32. Understanding the LPP collaborative /3: For 2013-16, this translates into: • Targeting £3bn of London’s £6bn influenceable spend through a core set of category priorities • Achieving a minimum saving of £300m/5 per cent • Providing transparent, trackable and easily identifiable savings
- 33. Understanding the LPP collaborative /4: For 2013-16, this translates into: • Providing professional procurement expertise and added value services such as benchmarking and analytics, and e-sourcing tools • Working more closely than ever with other NHS procurement hubs
- 34. Collaborating across the NHS: the NHS Collaborative Procurement Partnership • NHS London Procurement Partnership • North of England Commercial Procurement Collaborative • East of England Commercial Procurement Hub • NHS Commercial Solutions • Opening up frameworks • Reducing duplication • Creating new national opportunities: • National Collaborative Framework for the supply of Nursing and Nursing related staff • Total Orthopaedic Solutions • Total Cardiology Solutions
- 35. Thank You Any questions? Mario Varela Managing Director, NHS London Procurement Partnership mario.varela@lpp.nhs.uk
- 36. 36 - Sebastian Brandner – Professor and Chair of Neuropathology UCL
- 37. UCL DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHYUCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Using digital pathology to improve workflow and cut turnaround times: A feasibility study Sebastian Brandner, UCL Institute of Neurology, and The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery Queen Square, London
- 38. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Integration of molecular diagnostic into the histopathology workflow using digital pathology • Molecular diagnostics in the context of the cancer pathway. • Diagnostic Neuropathology: From morphological to integrated molecular diagnostics. • Apply lean principles to molecular diagnostic workflow. • Establishing a rapid throughput image analysis pathway for tissue-based molecular diagnostics.
- 39. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY A&E Tertiary 2WW A&E Royal London Newham Whipps Cross Homerton NHNN Referral (with CT and MRI) SMDT to discuss treatment options Local clinic to discuss treatment options Diagnosis giving Surgical Treatment Recurrence UCLH Mount Vernon BH Tertiary / GP RL Southend Basildon Harlow Chelmsford Newham Whipps Cross Homerton Moorfields BH* NHNN NHNN Ward attended NHNN Inpatient at NHNN Clinic appt at BH Clinic at NHNN (low grade) Surgical follow NHNN BH* Oncology 0-14 Max 28 days Pathology The NE London Cancer Pathway for malignant brain tumours 1-3d 8-15 d Histology Mol Path
- 41. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Neuropathology turnaround times at NHNN 0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 20 30 60 90 Cumulativefraction TAT (Days) Mol Path 2014 (675) Mol Path 2015 (208) GBM Histology (108) All Surgical Pathology (751)
- 42. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Turnaround time and clinical oncology information • Histological diagnosis of common brain tumours: 90% in 3 days – Patients can be referred back to local hospital – Treatment plan can be devised in most cases • Complete molecular integrated diagnosis: 90% in 15 days – Delay in allocation to clinical trials possible – Delay in final decision making re treatment plan
- 43. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Workflow difference between DNA based and tissue based assays • Specimen frequency 1-3/day – Nucleic acid based: 4-8 per week, batch of tests – Tissue based: daily test, along with IHC, on machine Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM DNA based: batching Sample Test Sample TAT 1-5 days +WE Sample Test Sample Test Sample Test Sample Test Sample Test Sample Test Reports Tissue based: queue Sample Test Sample Test Sample Test Sample Test Sample TAT 1 day + WE Sample Test Sample Test Sample Test Test Reports Reports Reports Reports Reports
- 44. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Process A Process B Process C Batch and queue processing 10 min 10 min 10 min 30 minutes total order 21 minutes first product Continuous flow processing Process A Process B Process C 12 minutes total order 3 minutes first product
- 45. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Detection and quantification of chromosomal losses in SISH slides • Aim: to develop a fast-track image analysis to detect SISH signals on FFPE tissue • Procedure: – Use established (HER2) control slides from ROCHE – Setting up image analysis algorithm in Definiens Tissue Studio and Developer – Validating image analysis algorithm
- 46. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Specimen preparation and staining Preparation of histological slides Diagnostic decision making Choice of test QC: Visual inspection of slide 12-24 h Surgical removal of tissue 4 h Automated IHC, CISH or SISH 8h 10 min Tissue processing in PathLab Experimental tissues
- 47. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Digitising and automated image analysis Slide scanning File archiving Web based slide management Submission for image analysisSlides Image analysis Data output to user 1h 20min 1h
- 48. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Definiens Developer and Tissue Studio Identification of region of interest (Ventana control slide; HER2) Regions of interest in detail
- 49. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY High magnification of signal within ROI
- 50. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Definiens Developer and Tissue Studio First nuclear identification
- 51. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Nuclear segmentation
- 52. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY • Result: all nuclei are identified and segmented within the ROI
- 53. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Spot identification (ISH signal) Red= red signal, blue= silver signal
- 54. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Representation of ISH signal on sectioned nuclei Section 2.5-4μm Nucleus ~10μm
- 55. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Validation step: identification and visualisation of red and silver spots code Red Silver 2 0 2 1 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 1 2 2 1 1 0 0
- 56. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Result: Segmentation and spot quantification
- 57. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Data output: counts of red and silver spots in test slide Feature Value Red Silver No Spots 3270 0 0 Red 1 Silver 1 504 504 504 Red 1 Silver 2 237 237 474 Red 2 Silver 1 213 426 213 Red 2 Silver 2 126 252 252 1419 1443 Red spots (total) 4713 Silver spots (total) 5667
- 58. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Conclusion: image analysis of ISH signal • Accurate determination of ISH spot count in tissue sections • 1000’s of nuclei counted in minutes (5000 in our ROI) • Superior to manual counting of FISH nuclei (usually 100)
- 59. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Conclusions • Proof of principle to use tissue based molecular diagnostics can be used • Further evaluation includes – Cost effectiveness (probes) – Accuracy on routine diagnostic material – User interface to select region of interest – Actual turnaround
- 60. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY 0,00 0,10 0,20 0,30 0,40 0,50 0,60 0,70 0,80 0,90 1,00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 20 30 60 90 Turnaround Histology and Molecular Pathology with Future Aims GBM Histology (108) All Surgical Pathology (751) Mol Path 2014 (675) MolPAth 2015 (208) Digital Pathology: aim
- 61. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY What would be the impact on patient care and patient pathway: • Oncologists know the result when discharging patient (4-8 d) • No additional visit to specialist hospital needed to discuss diagnoses • Treatment plan can be devised during hospital stay and is ready when patient discharged for adjuvant therapy at local hospital
- 62. UCL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY Thanks to…. Division of Neuropathology UCL-IoN Matthew Ellis: Implementation of all tissue analysis algorithms and implementation of digital imaging workflow. Complete analysis of muscle, nerve and tumours UCL IQPath team Angela Richard Loendt (lead) with Tamsin Wilkins, Francesca Launchbury and Jessica Broni Preparation of histological slides, slides scanning and data management Definiens, Munich Tamara Haeberlin; Bjorn Reiss, Jan Schoblocher Roche diagnostics (HER slides) Alex McDonald
- 63. 63 - Bart Ongena – VP Business Development TforG TforG CareTracks
- 64. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 TforG Care Tracks 1. Introduction 2. Applications & Cases: o Facilitate Fast Tracking o Solutions to improve Patient Throughput o Optimize Potential for new Products/Technologies o Anticipate impact of Competition & new technologies 3. The TforG Care Tracks 64
- 65. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Creating Value for the hospital Care Delivery Chain: The usage of your product is more than a single moment in the medical treatment. It’s part of a process. 65
- 66. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 TforG Care Tracks: The tool to create value for the hospital. Position your product in the care delivery chain to understand: o choices made before and after, o alternative solutions, o bottlenecks in the process Use this information to support the hospital & create Value o Identify in which part of the chain value can be created o Shorten the time to diagnosis / treatment. o Accelerate the access to the patient, o Create new benefits for the hospitals & staff o Implement cost effective solutions / care tracks 66
- 67. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Demo 67
- 68. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Applications: Facilitate Fast Tracking Support the hospital to reduce the ‘Time-to-Diagnose’ or ‘Time-to-Therapy’ Diagnosis & Referral Support o Re-engineer the pre-hospital diagnosis. o Obtain faster detections and more accurate referrals o Reduce hospital workload & resources.
- 69. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Applications: Facilitate Fast Tracking CASE: Time to Therapy Supplier: Pump therapy for severe spasticity Objective: o Support hospitals in reduction of ‘Time to Pump Therapy’ o Through better understanding of: • Care Track of spasticity patients • Eligible patients • how to increase ‘Time to baclofen pump Therapy’
- 70. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Support the hospital identify • Bottlenecks in the patient flow • Optimal / most cost effective patient flow Trends: o Open vs. Minimal invasive treatment o In-patient vs. Out-patient treatment o Increasing impact of external influences: • DRG based finance systems • Clinical guidelines Applications: Solutions to improve Patient Throughput
- 71. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Applications: Solutions to improve Patient Throughput CASE: DRG impact on strategy Supplier: innovative, minimally invasive treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis EU market Objective: o Acquire acceptance of an alternative intervention within hospital o Identify a more cost effective patient flow
- 72. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Care Track Analysis: identified most favorable patient flow Overnight stay more favorable DRG vs. Outpatient solution apply for new reimbursement Outcomes: Introduction of alternative interventions: o Require in-depth knowledge of DRG effects & strategy o Need to overcome ‘resistance’ from medical professionals o Requires shift to other medical professional (e.g. from spinal surgeon to interventional radiologist) Applications: Solutions to improve Patient Throughput
- 73. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Applications: Optimize potential for new technologies Reduce the number of patients leaving the track early Through identification of: o Best partners for your activities o Impact of Evidence Based Medicine: - NICE (UK): Dominant influence on application / introduction of new therapies, treatments & technologies. - EU: similar institutes, increasing influence by HTA-agencies 73
- 74. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 CASE: Channel selection Supplier: Interventional Pain Management: new DNS technology Objective: o Identify best Channel / Partners: Compatible companies active in Pain Management o Identify relevant target group Methodology: - Care Track Analysis - Interviews with the target group (interventional pain managers, anesthesiologists, orthopaedic and neurosurgeons, physical therapy physicians) Applications: Optimize potential for new technologies
- 75. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Applications: Anticipate the impact of competition & new technologies Increase your Market Share potential Determine go-to-market strategy by Supporting hospitals to: • Identify most cost effective patient flow • Understand impact of innovative solutions & new technologies • Implement Change management • Become reference centers • Attract more patients 75
- 76. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Applications: Anticipate the impact of competition & new technologies CASE: Optimize data-exchange in Digital Pathology Objective: o Introduce of this new technology o Understanding the current workflow o Identify budget & benefit owners o Understand how to convince hospitals with a cost-benefit analysis
- 77. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 Follow patients with a specific disease, on their path through the Health Care system. – Layer 1: Care track & statistics • From symptom to follow-up • Description of each treatment and diagnosis step • Incidence & prevalence • Population – Layer 2: Locator • Department • Care provider • Equipment/devices – Layer 3: Decision points • Drivers • Decision Making Unit • Consequences & outcomes TforG Care Tracks The tool to create value for the hospital
- 78. © 2015 TforG | www.tforg.com | +32 3 201 64 00 TforG Care Tracks The tool to create value for the hospital DIFFERENTIATING VIEW ON THE CARE DELIVERY PROCESS o Customized to your Product / Technology in any specific country o provide (visual) overview of the patient flow o identify strategic elements (drivers & decision making units) o And give you the necessary tools to create value for the hospital & support
- 79. TforG Tel: +32 3 201 64 00 Address: Ankerrui 8-10, 2000 Antwerp Website: www.tforg.com CEO: Bart Van den Mooter Tel: +32 3 201 64 01 Email: b.vandenmooter@tforg.com VP Business Development: Bart Ongena Tel: +32 3 201 64 02 Email: b.ongena@tforg.com