healthcare professionals

The new MedTech Europe Code of Ethical Business Practice (the “Code”) came in force on the 1 st January 2017 and replaces the Eucomed Code of Ethical Business Practices and the EDMA Code of Ethics. The Code allows for an additional year to phase out direct sponsorship by the entire medtech industry but this may be a good time to take stock of the situation; inquire if there are still grey areas and what are the opportunities going forward, therefore this letter. Over the last 2-3 years we tried through different means, such as the creation of an advisory group; bilateral discussions, panel discussions, etc to ensure that our partners, i.e. Healthcare Professionals (HCPs), Hospitals, Scientific Societies and Professional Congress Organisers (PCOs) are aware of the Code developments, but in order to get everyone on the same page, we thought to provide a short summary of what lies ahead for 2017: -- 1st January 2017 – the Code came into force The Code became binding for MedTech Europe Corporate Members . For Healthcare Organisations (HCOs) and Professional Congress Organisers that means that these companies have started to apply stricter rules when providing Educational Grants. -- Throughout 2017 - Outreach to European HCPs, medical societies and PCOs will continue The double objective of this outreach is for MedTech Europe to clarify any grey areas that you may still have on the new MTE Code and to ensure that going forward, the collaboration between the healthcare community and industry continues to the best interest of the patient. One event, where discussions, formal and informal, within the Healthcare Community will take place is the Global MedTech Compliance Conference (GMTCC) on 3-4 th May in Amsterdam. Please consider this as an official invitation to attend! -- Spring 2017 – Ethical MedTech Website Presently, the...
Shouldn’t we be rewarded for healthy behaviour rather than repeatedly punished for being ‘bad’? Fat tax and sugar tax, duty on cigarettes and vodka – everyone can think of a ‘sin tax’ they pay from time to time. These are the penalties we pay for making unhealthy choices. The idea of sin taxes has been gaining ground in recent years. The success of price rises on cigarettes and alcohol in curbing consumption is leading governments to consider what other disease-causing products could be taxed out of existence . In Europe, Denmark were the early movers: they introduced a tax on fatty foods in 2011. It applied to meat, dairy products, oils and certain other foods which contained more than 2.3% of saturated fat. The tax ‘worked’ in that it raised revenue and cut consumption of fatty foods by 4% . However, the policy didn’t last long. It was scrapped within 18 months because the government said the tax was too difficult and expensive to collect. Japan is taking a different route . Instead of hitting shoppers in the pocket to reduce the size of their gut, authorities impose fines on employers and local governments who fail to keep waistlines in check. Other countries, including the UK and Ireland have targeted sugary drinks by proposing a ‘soda tax’ to nudge consumers into making healthier choices. Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver – a campaigner for healthy eating – hailed the move as a victory for children’s health. He was so happy about the new tax that he did a little dance at the end of a TV interview which was captured by BBC! There’s no doubt that taxes can be used to push people into making ‘better’ choices. But what ever happened to incentives for positive change? GPs in the UK get bonuses...
As ‘thinking season’ kicks off, the focus is on how technology and big data can deliver better value healthcare to more people than ever before. January is a time for reflection, planning and predicting what lies ahead. It’s the season for assessing the mega-trends that will shape our future and working out how we will respond. Perhaps the most prestigious venue for future-gazing is Davos where world leaders from politics and business gather on 17-20 January for the World Economic Forum . Here, global influencers will look at how prevailing economic, social and political forces present challenges and opportunities for all of us. Last year, the key phrase from Davos was the ‘ 4 th Industrial Revolution’ . The WEF set the tone for thousands of conversations on the topic last year, including at the MedTech Forum in Brussels last December. This year – with the convergence of technologies that blur the lines between the physical, digital and biological systems still very much in view – the theme will be Responsive and Responsible Leadership . But what can healthcare leaders expect from 2017? When it comes to healthcare , the WEF frames the conversation with some key demographic statistics: - By 2050, the world’s population will have risen to 9.7 billion - 2 billion people will be over the age of 60 To continue to meet the (growing) demands of healthcare consumers without blowing up healthcare budgets, new ways of delivery services will be required. Smarter, more efficient, technologies and systems will be essential. This brings us to the concept at the heart of many new-year health policy forecasts: value . Value-based healthcare has been something of a buzzword since it was coined by Harvard’s Michael Porter . Most of us have an intuitive sense of value. In healthcare, Porter...
Authors: this article was written by Hans Martens, Martha Emneus , Anders Green and Camilla Sortso . This is the first blog of the series presenting the economic value of being in good health and the broader consideration of cost of disease. Europe’s health systems are struggling to maintain sustainability. One of the major challenges is the exponential increase in the prevalence of chronic diseases and the number of patients in advanced and costly disease stages. A challenge, which is predicted to only increase in the years to come. Chronic diseases make high demands on health systems for continuous, quality care. For patients, chronic diseases are associated with shorter lifetime, reduced quality of life and economic as well as socio-economic burdens on the patients, their caregivers - formal or informal. For society, the burden is excess healthcare, pharmaceuticals, nursing, reduced labour market participation and ability to be socially and economically active and premature mortality. Altogether these costs underpin the major challenge of chronic diseases for our societies – not least in Europe where health is a collective rather than an individualised responsibility. This challenge must be dealt with by the health systems and perhaps by reconsidering where investments should be made in the future as with many of the chronical diseases onset and progression can be prevented if diagnosed early and precisely and if the process is well managed. Among chronic diseases, diabetes mellitus is one of the most burdensome with app. 371 million people diagnosed globally and evidence of rapidly increasing prevalence. In a recent study from Denmark it was estimated that costs of diabetes amounted to 14,349 Euro per person year. Of these, health care costs accounted 17% and pharmaceuticals 4%, while for example loss of productivity amounted to 42%. And this is not the whole story, because...
Never before has there been a more compelling time and a more urgent need to disrupt and transform the way we delivery healthcare to the people of our planet. I am the son of a wonderfully devoted Australian country GP who later became the country surgeon in the Hunter Valley in New South Wales. A father of 8, Dad was seemingly forever on-call and, with the exception of his faithful stethoscope, his scary scalpel and his trusty truck, he had absolutely zero technological assistance. No pager, no mobile phones, no EHR, no teleradiology. He was a truly old school practitioner and a mighty man, dedicated to his calling and adored by his patients. As a young lad, accompanying Dad in his old truck on long journeys late at night on those windy roads between each of the country hospitals (trying so hard to stay awake and keep my promise to Mum to make sure Dad did not fall asleep at the wheel), I knew there had to be a better, faster, safer, more effective and more efficient way of delivering healthcare. When my time came, and I followed proudly in Dad's brave footprints, I quietly committed to change the way the traditional hospital based and doctor dependent healthcare service was delivered. I got my chance years later when I set about exploring the possibility of building a simple tele-radiology system over the old 3K copper telephone system to link small isolated communities distributed over an enormous geographical area. This was not an idea borne without experience, as I had found myself performing obstetric ultrasound scans from the back of a truck in remote parts of Western Australia, in oppressive heat, shortly after completing my degree and qualifying as a radiologist. Working with pregnant mums to be in an aboriginal community,...
For the first time in history, a major industrial change is taking place in parallel with a global push towards a shared vision of the future. The 4th industrial revolution can be harnessed to address global development goals How can Europe make the most of the technology changes that are afoot? I would share some of the views of Professor Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum: these are, potentially, the best and worst of times. We have lots of technology but we are not having the conversations with the public about how innovations might affect our lives. There is not enough attention to the potential risks nor to the many positives that technologies can bring. Past industrial revolutions spurred growth but had environmental and other downsides. How can this revolution be better managed? One of the reasons we are lucky to be embarking on this work now is that we know what we want the 4 th industrial revolution to be for . Last year, 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were agreed. The SDGs ask every country in the world to play their part to reduce poverty, protect the planet and ensure prosperity for all. This is an unprecedented global consensus for what we want our future to look like. The first thing to do when someone says they have a new industrial or technological revolution for you is to ask them to explain how it will help the SDGs. Does this require a new way for countries and companies to think about their own priorities? Yes, responsible research is a requirement now and we’re seeing it from top companies like Dow, which has mapped their innovative activities against the SDGs. Not everyone is at the same level but growing numbers of corporate actors are producing very clear maps...