Why healthcare may not embrace the iPad

by Satish Misra

The excitement and hype surrounding the announcement of Apple’s iPad have subsided for the time being, perhaps just a lull prior to the actual release in a few months. It’s expected that the iPad could make significant contributions to healthcare, such as potentially replacing the physician’s clipboard or medical textbooks.

However, we did disagree at times on the extent to which the iPad could penetrate the healthcare market, for a variety of reasons. The folks over at Software Advice decided to try to get a feel for what the community at large was thinking through an interesting survey they performed. And for Apple, the results of this survey aren’t encouraging – if you believe the results.

Having spent nearly four years learning how to read medical literature, I decided to try to get a better sense of just how valid these results are especially considering the seemingly conflicting results of the Epocrates survey. Chris Thorman, who authored the article on the survey, was kind enough to correspond with me on details of the survey methodology. Here’s a look at the results and our take on what they really mean.

According to the Software Advice survey, the medical community wants a tablet, with a third of respondents saying that they are likely to purchase a tablet. For over half of respondents, the primary factor that would guide their purchasing decision would be ease of use, with a fifth identifying software as their guiding factor. Why do they want it? Over 75% of respondents identified diagnostics management (ordering/tracking tests), medical reference, clinical decision support, prescribing, imaging, and notes as tasks they would like to perform on their tablet. As you read this, an obvious question arises – these are all things the iPad could probably do well, so where does the survey go wrong for the iPad?

The survey also explores the must-have features for a tablet, with over 50% identifying Wi-Fi, durability, lightweight, availability of medical software, and fingerprint access as essential features. Fewer respondents also identified dictation capabilities, RFID reader, camera, and barcode scanning as must-have features. While the iPad clearly does fares well with regards to some of these criteria (weight, Wi-Fi, usability), it lacks most of these identified must-have features. And these are certainly features that many, including us at iMedicalApps, have discussed as notable deficits when it comes to the iPad in healthcare.

However, with any study or survey, the results are only as good as the methodology. Chris Thorman kindly shared with us the methodology for this survey which involved an online survey which was publicized through online media including blogs, LinkedIn, and other online platforms. The demographics indicate that out of a total of approximately 175 respondents, about half function in clinical roles (physician, nurse, student) and a little less than half function in management roles (IT, admin staff).

I think knowing this is useful for a few reasons. First, if the respondents were all identified via online media, then this is almost certainly a tech-savvy group. So while that may inflate the “plan to purchase tablet” numbers a bit, it also suggests that this group is sufficiently knowledgeable to give feedback on what a tablet could be used for and needs to be successful. Second, it would be interesting to break out the responses of clinical and non-clinical healthcare staff – I could certainly imagine their responses being very different. Lastly, its important to note that a study of less than 200 people is certainly not sufficiently powered to accurately predict the sentiments of the healthcare industry as a whole.

Then there’s the Epocrates survey. Their survey of 350 clinicians suggested that 20% plan to buy an iPad within one year of release, with nearly 40% expressing interest but awaiting more information. So if clinicians are so excited, what’s the deal with the disconnect with the responses in the Software Advice survey. Well, Mr. Thorman suggests an explanation – clinicians are also electronics consumers, and electronics consumers are excited. So just because the regular consumer side of these folks are interested, the clinician side may not be. I’m waiting on more information from the folks at Epocrates on the methodology of their survey, and will update you all if any enlightening information comes forward.

All of that being said, these surveys are valuable because, whatever we predict, adoption or rejection of the iPad in healthcare is ultimately a decision that will be made collectively by hundreds of thousands of providers. So in reality, we’ll just have to wait and see what happens.

Satish Misra is a senior editor of iMedicalApps.com.

Submit a guest post and be heard.

email

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

  • http://www.hieconnect.net Jeff Brandt

    Tablets have been around for an long time and have not been received well by the provider community. Even the slates have had less than stellar reviews and following.

    On of the man problems is that the systems that they are connected to have not been designed for the tablet format, others are that the pad/slate add more complexity not less. This may change with the rise of interest level.

    It is my opinion that the iPad will not be the answer for clinical use for many reasons but the iPad II or one of the other 20+ pads that are coming may. Many times it is a disadvantage to be first. I may be wrong, when the 4th mkt Cap company in the US advertises like Apple does anything is possible. McDonald sell 3B burgers a day and it not because they are good.

    Jeff Brandt
    http://www.hieconnect.com

  • http://drgrumpyinthehouse.blogspot.com/ Dr. Grumpy

    I’m an Apple fan, but have no use for the iPad in my everyday practice, and have no interest in getting one. to use my self-designed chart system, I need to have it be able to run mac OS, wiht work processing, printing letters, and the ability to search my medical database. It would also have to be able to do medical software voice dictation software. My current iMac desktop can do all of this, but so far the the iPad looks more like a glorified iPod Touch to me than a real computer.

  • http://www.drrjv.com Bob Varipapa

    I beg to differ about the negative opinions on KevinMD about the iPad (all expressed before even seeing one).

    Having gotten an iPad over the weekend, I find it to be a wonderful device. Instantaneous on and off, high resolution screen and very fast OS.

    Our hospital portal system (McKesson) works great with the iPad (over hospital WiFi) and I can see carrying it around on rounds rather than searching for one of the clunky hospital workstations.

    There is already a Citrix client for Windows people and a zillion programs available.

    So contrary to the Pundits on KevinMD, I predict the iPad to be a big winner in medicine.