Last week we reported on an interview that health blogger Amy Tenderich carried out with Google Health's Missy Krasner. Amy has followed up with an interview with Keith Toussaint, Senior Program Manager with Microsoft HealthVault.
As we shall see, the two tech rivals - Google and Microsoft - have much in common when it comes to their online health apps.
Microsoft HealthVault was launched in October '07. Based on Microsoft's existing health search engine, the service aimed to become a central repository for people to store and selectively share their health information and records - including patient records, test results, and prescription info.
As with Google Health, Microsoft is essentially building a platform for other, smaller services to tap into. Neither bigco wants to get involved in the tricky world of health records compliance and prescription. Both are encouraging more specialized health-focused services to do that legwork - and Google and Microsoft will provide the tech infrastructure and focus on ordinary users.
Like Google, Microsoft is emphasizing that it's still early stages in this market. Said Keith Toussaint:
"We knew going in that introducing a new type of consumer health solution is a long-term endeavor; we have to be in this for the long haul. Health is, as you know, a HUGE ecosystem -- trillions of dollars, hundreds of millions of consumers/patients, hundreds of thousands of physicians, thousands of hospitals, hundreds of insurance plans and so on. We also knew the greatest value of HealthVault to consumers will come when we can offer connectivity throughout the health ecosystem and give people the ability to use their personal health information in a wide range of health and wellness applications and share it with the providers and plans of their choice. We're still in the early phases of developing the HealthVault ecosystem but we're making great progress."
Toussaint admitted they are essentially competing with Google "to find the best developers" for their HealthVault platform, but that "we're not in some kind of hot market share battle now because it's so early."
Indeed Toussaint used the comparison of Coke and Pepsi to illustrate their nascent competition with Google:
"Leading hospitals like Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center are actually integrating their systems with both us and Google -- because some people like one or the other. It's a Coke or Pepsi thing. And why not program with both? It's fine as far as we're concerned; this whole space is still so small, and has such huge potential, that we can both grow huge and succeed without bumping heads. Later on, head-to-head competition will probably be more important."
So it seems that it's difficult to 'taste the difference' between HealthVault and Google Health. They are both platforms, neither tries to be a healthcare provider or conduit between healthcare professionals and patients, and both have search as their business model. There are differences in the two services when you drill down, but at a high level they're very similar.
Let us know if you've used either system and if so what your experience has been.
Image credit: Senor Adventure
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
So does Microsoft think they're Coke and Google is Pepsi? Coke is a really aggressive negotiator and I think Pepsi is always the one trying to capture new ground, pump out innovative beverages that don't succeed, and have cool younger image.
Posted by: JP
|
October 15, 2008 4:52 AM
its good projected. its pepsi cangorulation
Posted by: konteyner | October 15, 2008 6:19 AM
I think they can both do a great job at this, but right now is when it should be easiest to spot the difference -- "both have search as their business model" and MS still doesn't do search well. I'm actually pulling for them that they will, but I've been waiting an awfully long time now.
Posted by: Google Tutor | October 15, 2008 6:44 AM
Google and Microsoft are the only companies mentioned, mainly because of their name recognition. Of note, neither company's e-health efforts are wanting to enter into the physican-centered EMR space, and instead want to remain aggregators from disparate data sources. On-line, hosted and free EMRs like Practice Fusion (free EMR), are focused on revolutionizing the in-office physican EMR world -- as this offering expands in its scope, then perhaps working with either Google or MS (or both) to link with fragmented data sources (such as hospitals) might be worth exploring. However, coming from the physician-EMR center, sharing clinical information among physicians and developing a patient portal for Personal Health Records might even make the efforts of both Google and Microsoft seem incomplete. The technology in e-health is evolving quickly... let's see how it develops.
Posted by: Robert Rowley MD (Chief Medical Officer, Practice Fusion Inc) | October 15, 2008 12:10 PM
You know, both Coke and Pepsi are bad for your teeth. Going along with your analogy - I'm curious who Snapple will be. What's "made from the best stuff on earth" and will provide an alternative to the big "beverages"? Will the increased use of online health records mean that alternative health sites (like Revolution Health, RightHealth.com, OrganizedWisdom) will get killed because Google and Microsoft will combine search with the records?
It's an interesting area in development, with lots of concerns.
Posted by: Forget the carbonated beverages | October 15, 2008 12:33 PM
As a prior PHR product manager at Medicalogic/Medscape, and current one at MedHelp.org I think it's important to ask why anyone would come back to these and use them on an ongoing basis. MSFT HealthVault's integration with devices such as Polar pulse monitors eases the data entry, but satisfies only those active exercisers. Google Health's import of EpiCare physician authored EMR data only helps those with physicians using that EMR.
I think what's lacking is a focus on the needs of users. They're not asking for a PHR on an ongoing basis. That's not to say that it's not good for them to have one, since with episodic illness it's very helpful. The question is how to engage them and continue to use the PHR between these episoses.
At Medhelp.org, we've just launched PHRs that has data fed to it by trackers and widgets -- focused applications just satisfying one specific condition or vital sign, such as our iGoogle widget for weight. I expect that as tools to feed PHRs are widgetized to places where people are already -- you'll find much more use of them.
Enoch Choi, MD
MedHelp.org
Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Partner
Posted by: Enoch Choi, MD | October 15, 2008 1:44 PM
it's great news to find out that Microsoft who actually use the same bulk as health. Thanks to Google.com Microsoft is actually building a better network should remind to help the industry both of these emphasizing its early stage and marketing.
because consumer health solutions are growing and economics inclusion. It seems that health and wellness has become a barrier between Google search and MSN.
Health products like healthy coffee of Oprah Winfrey Acai Berry - mangosteen Barry - Goji Berries - and some of the top anti-accident known super fruits in the world have been advertising their business campaigns on Yahoo and MSN some of the biggest search engines to date.
the health and wellness industry surrounded by an array of super fruit products.
But the agency needs more of as a home-based business opportunity might choose from how broadcasted by a well-known doctor Dr Freideman. this doctor focuses on his anti-accident rich super fruit vitamins called chew-4-health.
Posted by: kauai massage | October 20, 2008 5:14 PM
great blog post about Google Yahoo and MSN acres great credibility to the search engines and people trying to market a brand name their affiliate multilevel marketing products such as super fruit antioxidants and tons of other interesting health products such as ability mangosteen.
chew-4-health
Posted by: kauai massage | October 20, 2008 5:18 PM
Regarding the comments about search being at the core of both HealthVault and Google Health given MS's recent acquisition of FAST enterprise search platform and MedStory (http://www.medstory.com/).
Evidently part of the longer-term strategy as it will be 2010 before FAST is fully integrated into the MS platform/suite.
With search, evidently, a serious part of the consideration - I would agree with Robert Rowley's comments above about Google and MS's approaches being incomplete without adequate integration and development of user-centric services (assuming I've understood Robert correctly).
Posted by: Mark Buchner - Conscia Enterprise Systems Ltd | November 3, 2008 12:26 PM