Health 2.0 nor e-health equals Participatory Healthcare


Healthcare is/was a rather one-way traffic. Involvement in treatment decision making of the patient is low (health 1.0). Now we slowly migrate into a phase where more interaction is obvious partially due to sources on the internet, (Health 2.0). Information more often goes back and forth and there is a growing interaction between caregiver and patient. This is due to the role of the Internet but also by the manner in which patients process information to an opinion. 
From this phase will slowly create what I call Participatory Medicine: based on information, interaction and a joint process between caregiver and patient they arrive at an “attack plan” for diagnosis, treatment and care possible. Here comes the role of e-health “around the corner, where efforts by the patient can be addressed. 

If you add to Participatory Medicine the vital role of family and informal caring and also about the opportunities for prevention on this side, I like to talk about Participatory Health Care, which is the “2.0-thing for my. Because the patient has the disease not alone since his environment is part of the process surrounding it. ‘Health’ means here literally “health” as a total approach. What is not there, you do not have treat, it is an attempt to prevent diseases. 

Soon we look back as caregivers to what we’ve built. And we will see in the care process things have changed and improved, sometimes “with velcro”. Maybe then we conclude that have reset the process . How would you design it all over again when you should draft ? If you could start with a white sheet of paper ? We call this process ‘REshape’. Then we would like to talk about Service Design phase (health 3.0), where everything is designed from the perspective of the patient. 

It will start to let care institutions disappear, and care networks in varying composition around and with the patient to occur. In that e-health, or (part of) m-health will play a major role for me is a given. 

With Marco Derksen we made the attached model, which currently receives further elaboration. also the graph below is moulded into health setting as we speak, we’ll keep you posted.



Ladies & Gentlemen, we present our Promovideo of TEDxMaastricht


Our partner FourCorners listened once again in a superb manner to our message of what we would like to achieve with -in this case- TEDxMaastricht. 

We’ve had som experience with them already since they produced our corporate video :



and recently a demo of our digital policlinics:


Thanks guys & dolls !

To be or not to be : E-patient or I-Patient

I see a growing community of people entering the “arena” of the e-patient.

Looking to the e-patients White Paper for me this more and more rises the question when does one names him of herself a e-patient.

For now i am curious to your opinion in this, but i let me give you a hint of my opinion in this matter :

  • An e-patient is a (ex-) patient able to advocate patients rights, needs, experiences and able to advice healthcare institutions in a neutral way on steps to be made in REshaping healthcare, so more an ambassador-role.
  • An i-patient is a patient who uses the internet for information, sharing moods, questions experiences etc.

For now i will let it rest there, lets see if we can get some discussion about this 😉