Soapbox

David Barrett, Lecturer in Telehealth at the University of Hull takes a hard look at how local trials are often evaluated and looks forward to a time when more rigorous approaches will provide solid evidence for the benefits of telehealth.

Regular readers of TelecareAware cannot fail to notice the frequency with which new evaluations of telehealth services are published. In recent months, we've seen documents from, amongst others, Kent, SE Essex and Argyll & Bute. These evaluations are almost always positive, suggesting that further deployments of technology can supply huge savings for health and social care organisations, whilst proving immensely popular with users, carers and practitioners.

This growing evidence base in favour of telehealth services strengthens the argument that technology can deliver substantial benefits for individuals and organisations. However...

Livia Bellina, Specialist, General Pathology, works for the Italian National Health Service on Lampedusa Island, which lies between Sicily and Tunisia. In this Soapbox she tells how, with colleague Eduardo Missoni, they are making a reality of their vision of spreading an ethical and low cost health technology everywhere.

Ugandan students

In April 2008, working as a pathologist on Lampedusa, I found myself in urgent need of confirming a diagnosis of malaria from a blood sample of an African immigrant.

In the light of a private communication from a reader, I re-read the qualification requirements in the Invitation to Tender (ITT) document (PDF). In the sections relating to Lot 2, Telecare services; Lot 4, Telehealth services; Lot 5, Telecoaching Products and Services and Lot 6, Managed Services, the wording in each of them is essentially the same:

Background

First, a little history of telecare procurement to explain why the UK now has its second 'national framework agreement'.

Jeff Brandt is one of the founders of Communication Software, Inc.   He has extensive experience in mobile telecomm, online banking, and healthcare information technology.  Jeff has a BS in Computer Science from the University of Oklahoma and is currently attending Oregon Health Sciences University’s school of Bio-Medical Informatics. 

When I [Editor Steve] began looking at the role of equity capital in companies, I started out feeling sympathy for company directors, like those of Tunstall, which run businesses saddled with large debts. However, I have learned a few things along the way and my sympathy has evaporated somewhat.

I've also concluded that I understand very little about the magical world of company finance, but I'll do my best to explain how I came to this conclusion after looking through two sets of Tunstall accounts for October 2008-September 2009 which recently become publicly available. [Note for US readers - although Tunstall is privately owned, its accounts are in the public domain.]

The first set of accounts, for Tunstall UK, gives a rosy picture. Profits of £28.7million before tax on turnover of £86.4million. However, Tunstall UK is just one part of the UK-based Tunstall Group, which made the astonishing — to me — loss of £84.1million on a worldwide turnover of £141.7million.

How was this loss achieved? And — this is where my accountancy friends tell me my lack of company finance understanding kicks in — how come a company in this position can still be a going concern? …

Paul Sonnier, founder of the Wireless Health group on LinkedIn and co-chair of the Healthcare Communications SIG at CommNexus San Diego, has thoughts on the new definition of 'value creation'.