My personal belief is that there aren't huge medtech companies because the people founding medtech companies don't know the market - they are coming at it from the perspective of being in tech, or being successful in other arenas, think something is going to be a great idea, and then the wheels fall off because they misread the actual market for their product (ie it doesn't exist, their product isn't useful) or the product they built is fit for purpose but not fit for function.
To cite an example from the article, I can think of almost no reason why it would be a net improvement to the world if people were able to have their own personal breast ultrasound machine to monitor breast health.
Of course I have significant biases that influence me here, being both a doctor and having a tech startup, I think I'm solving problems no-one else can.
One group I think are going to do outstandingly well is Shift Labs. Great idea, and if they have solved the problem with their iv monitors properly then there should be excellent take up
The notion that only people who are currently in the medtech industry are capable of founding successful companies is simply not true. That’s not to say it’s not challenging, but as the Biodesign program emphasizes, innovation in medtech comes from thinking outside the box. By observing the problems in healthcare system as an outsider, even if you are a doctor, there is an opportunity to realize solutions that can have a drastically positive impact while considering the market, regulatory and reimbursement. Unfortunately our current healthcare systems is extremely costly and inefficient in delivering quality care. As you mentioned, there are biases towards status quo that makes it hard for many inside the system to imagine things being done differently.
You mentioned that “I can think of almost no reason why it would be a net improvement to the world if people were able to have their own personal breast ultrasound machine to monitor breast health.” In a world where 1 in 8 women will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in their lifetime, making low-cost breast cancer screening accessible to every woman regardless of their age, insurance coverage, access to healthcare, etc will be a great net improvement. There is published literature that demonstrates that by adding ultrasound screening, the number of breast cancer detected is doubled, and furthermore the number of cancer detected at an early stage is increased 3 fold. Not only this early detection results in saving lives, but it also results in significant savings for the healthcare system.
I applaud YC's efforts in giving an opportunity to medtech companies to think bigger, move faster and I am confident there will be even greater medtech companies coming out of YC every batch to move medtech industry in the right direction.
'Unfortunately our current healthcare systems is extremely costly and inefficient in delivering quality care. '
- speak for the US. The rest of the world doesn't do too bad a job.
The problem with ultrasounds is that it is not the sort of device that can simply be given to someone and used. Both the operation of the device and the interpretation of the image are highly technical skills, with high false positive rates.
I maintain that making ultrasounds portable enough to be used be all would only further drive healthcare costs up, as frivolous expenditure on a gimmick is wont to do. Pretty much the same as much of the 'wearables' market.
I don't disagree that other people can have insight into the problems the health sector faces, and towards innovating within, but maintain that most tech driven solutions (ie electronic medical records) are fucking atrocious, because they have been designed by technical people who don't understand. The workflows. Unfortunately these systems are now entrenched, and cost a huge amount of end user time (a 2011 Deloitte study on the introduction of FirstNet into Australian emergency departments determined that introduction of the system lead to a 20% decline in productivity. It was implemented anyway, with the hopes that there would be synergies gained over time. No follow up study has been performed however the overwhelming consensus from the frontline troops is that when we loose network access, an event which occurs around 6 times annually for periods of up to 8 hours, productivity and workflow improve substantially)
Good point, teams need exposure to hospitals, hospices, or rehabilitation centers in order to better understand addressable needs. The market is even less clear for patients who have treatable or terminal illnesses but still have the option to live independently of a care-taking facility. I have met many patients at hospitals who would love to be home with family or in their own space, but can't due to illness. This a large market with the opportunity to increase the quality of life for many people. A great place to start for medtech companies.
I personally witnessed this through my sibling who was diagnosed with brain cancer. It eye opening to see how little innovation is pushed directly consumers. The current U.S. system needs all care to be overseen by the insurance companies. Thus, directly impacting the innovation in market. I am seriously considering shifting roles or exploring opportunities in medtech or biotech. I need to help in any capacity possible.
To cite an example from the article, I can think of almost no reason why it would be a net improvement to the world if people were able to have their own personal breast ultrasound machine to monitor breast health.
Of course I have significant biases that influence me here, being both a doctor and having a tech startup, I think I'm solving problems no-one else can.
One group I think are going to do outstandingly well is Shift Labs. Great idea, and if they have solved the problem with their iv monitors properly then there should be excellent take up