Medical Circle Weekly No.10: Three 'False Propositions' in Healthcare and Digital Health

Topic: Is the Integration of the Internet and Hospitals a "Pseudo-Proposition"?

Location: Dayi Cloud Valley, Health Management Group—Ciming & VCBeat

Participants: Liao Xinbo, Liang Liangliang, Bai Shengxi, Lin Feng

“Internet Plus” integrates online and offline channels, specifically by acquiring patients through online sales and directing them to offline facilities for medical consultations and treatment. While this model is viable in price-driven consumer markets, it is utterly unrealistic in the specialized healthcare sector, where trust, rather than simple price competition, is paramount. In short, a physician’s medical expertise should not be treated as a consumer commodity.

The “+Internet” model is B2C, that is, from the supply side to the customer side. By leveraging the Internet, hospitals can enhance patient experience, provide greater convenience, and maintain customer loyalty. Therefore, it is highly advisable for hospitals to vigorously develop Internet-based services.

“Internet + Big Data” (including resident health records, outpatient visit records, surgical records, and rehabilitation records) is provided to hospitals free of charge. The advantages are evident: hospitals can improve efficiency without having to invest in their own informatization infrastructure.

“Internet + Hospital” is a pseudo-concept. Under the current system, public hospitals will not participate, while private hospitals are flocking to it, with the prerequisite being the utilization of physicians from public hospitals. The goal? To make money!

Hospital + Internet ≈ A flat, interconnected integration of hospital informatization on the internet, which helps hospitals break down information barriers and enables the government to strengthen the management and allocation of healthcare service resources (scientific governance). However, for individual hospitals, standalone internet transformation has limited impact, as they can already generate substantial profits without it.

Unless the patient volume significantly decreases in the future (hypothetically), hospitals can leverage big data to attract patients through digital transformation. This approach relies on internet technologies, including big data analytics, and requires hospitals to adopt a platform-based model that allows open participation by medical practitioners. For instance, physician groups could perform surgeries at various platform-enabled hospitals ("flying knife" procedures) while managing patient care pathways through data systems. As long as the medical and nursing teams adhere to Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), this model would be viable. At this stage, the distinction between "Internet + Hospitals" and "Hospitals + Internet" becomes irrelevant; the core determinant is which model enhances revenue generation efficiency more effectively. The former primarily benefits capital seeking to penetrate the healthcare system via internet technologies, while the latter represents the existing healthcare service delivery framework.

With the advent of internet-based transformation, scientific management has become significantly more accessible. Over time, this will culminate in a final outcome where the financial operations of all hospitals are fully transparent and traceable, ushering in an era where health administration is grounded in scientific evidence and data-driven rigor.

“Online” and “offline” are both pseudo-concepts. The so-called “internetization” touted at this stage is nothing more than a pursuit of convenience. Convenience for what? To put it bluntly, it’s about making money. The current healthcare ecosystem encourages everyone to take medications and seek medical care, to the point that the national health insurance fund is trembling with fear—its vulnerabilities are on the verge of being exposed. If prevention continues to be neglected, the consequences will be nothing short of absurd.

Topic: Is Health Management a “Pseudo-Concept”?

Location: Health Management Group—Ciming & VCBeat

Participants: Bai Shengxi, Yang Hongxi

Health management was once considered a pseudo-concept, but it will certainly not remain so in the future. Viewing the present through a developmental lens, we are moving in the right direction. With the integration of healthcare and the internet, along with technological applications such as big data, wearable devices, and precision medicine, many business models are already advancing through trial and error. We believe that health management will become widely prevalent in the future!

Certainly, there are some prerequisites. For instance, big data cannot resolve issues related to industry standards, while wearable devices fail to address concerns regarding comfort, battery life, access to legitimate professional guidance, and risks of accidents. Under such circumstances, current health management practices are merely a form of self-indulgent entertainment.

Take the simplest example: some physicians prefer to use “hypertension” for diagnosis, while others favor “elevated blood pressure.” There are also terms such as “high-normal blood pressure” and “borderline high blood pressure.” Each approach has its rationale, underscoring the critical importance of standardization. An analysis of commercially available medical software and health examination database systems reveals even more absurd inconsistencies.

Topic: Is the Development of Physician Groups a “False Proposition”?

Location: Dayi Cloud Valley

Participants: Liang Liangliang, Lin Feng

It is true that doctors are highly sought-after, but this applies only to those who have achieved fame and established their reputations. They are by no means the central focus of the future; rather, the healthcare system should take center stage. Individual doctors can save only a limited number of patients, whereas public health measures can prevent large populations from falling ill.

Physician groups are still far from emerging in large numbers, with a mass exodus of doctors from the public system creating a competitive landscape. At this stage, the focus should be on strengthening individual practices and fostering mutual exchange to establish industry standards; otherwise, encounters with unreasonable parties could lead to outcomes similar to the current “Beisan” incident. Physician groups should also operate within a structured system rather than in isolation, thereby truly optimizing resource allocation and expanding supply.

The future is fraught with too much uncertainty. In my view, it is enough to practice medicine with dignity and earn the hard-earned income you deserve; there will always be people who continue to support you. As for platformization, its prerequisite is the complete transformation of public hospitals. This transformation will not occur because of an administrative order or because hospital directors are collectively “brainwashed” into taking initiative. Rather, it will happen when patient volumes drop significantly (due to effective prevention at the primary care level), causing panic and financial strain, forcing the issue: “Fine, let’s change!” Shedding the burden of established personnel quotas, physicians will swiftly form independent medical groups. With pristine hospital facilities ready, and quality control, infection control, and management SOPs firmly in place, a loud announcement will declare: “The physician group has arrived!” Patients will see the advertisements and come.

Want to join the Medical Community WeChat Group Alliance?

Want to continue discussing specific issues?

Want to subscribe to “MedCircle Weekly” long-term?

Please add Zhan Shi on WeChat.