DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY IN HEALTHCARE
yet only a few have truly harnessed their potential, and are able to report a tangible positive impact on patient outcomes. This is perhaps not a failure of the technology or those who use it, but rather a failure to measure change or monitor the potential side-effects brought about when introducing a new approach. The emphasis, therefore, should not just be on adoption, but rather on the thoughtful, targeted application of these digital innovations. There is an imperative for organisations to quantify
their specific challenges and draw a direct line to an STR meant to address them. This fundamental step of quantifying the ‘before’ and anticipating the ‘after’ is not something digital strategies are designed for, and is often overlooked during technology implementations, which tend to prioritise meeting project milestones and rapid rollout to demonstrate ‘progress’. Without this baseline, how can institutions measure
‘Smart’ patient rooms integrate digital displays and environmental controls into the care space, ‘enhancing communication, comfort, and experience’.
considering both singular and blended technology deployments. It weighs up risk vs reward, and considers other factors such as physical space reconfigurations and the underpinning digital infrastructure as core requirements and enablers of success. The STR is a blueprint that acknowledges the need for a
paradigm shift, placing people – healthcare professionals and patients – at the epicentre of change, but also recognising the tangible, logistical aspects that underpin successful technology integration.
A well-integrated clinical digital hub supports efficient observation, communication, and data access, across multiple patient areas. Arcadis said: “By bringing together smart infrastructure, ergonomic design, and clinical visibility, this set-up enhances responsiveness and control.”
From concept to reality: a holistic paradigm The value of the existing digital strategy cannot be understated. These strategies reflect genuine aspirations, and provide a visionary glimpse into the potential of technology-integrated healthcare. Their importance as indicators of intent and directionality should not be diminished. Rather than replacing or dismissing the digital strategy, the STR complements it, augments it, and provides the granular detail, actionable steps, and iterative approaches required to navigate the complexities of implementation. It asks the pivotal question: how can technology serve as a catalyst for meaningful change while aligning with the original vision described in the digital strategy? Consider, for example, the ambitious NHS ‘digital-first’ approach. While 95% of general practices offer online appointments, less than 35% of patients are using these services.1
This
gap underscores the importance of understanding patient behaviours, needs, and trust factors. Consider the broader healthcare sector, where numerous institutions have implemented digital tools,
progress or the success of their digital strategy? Rooting the transformation process in quantifiable evidence not only illuminates the path forward, but also ensures a tangible, measurable return on investment. By committing to a before-and-after analysis rooted in hard data, healthcare organisations can both track their progress, and truly reap the rewards of their digital journey.
Bespoke solutions for targeted transformation Building on the data-driven insights, the crafting of bespoke solutions becomes the next step to transform the umbrella goals of the digital strategy into actionable, effective innovations. Consider a large healthcare institution aiming to refine the dynamics of its Outpatients’ Department. The broad, and rather nebulous goal, as defined in its digital strategy, is to ‘support the development of seamless digital pathways’. In seeking solutions, the institution considers a one-size-
fits-all hospital management system. This software provides a suite of features: a digital calendar for scheduling, automated reminders for patients, and basic monitoring of patient flow. On paper, it seems to address the primary requirements. The administrative staff can digitalise their appointment systems, while patients receive timely reminders to reduce no-shows. However, the intricacies of the institution’s challenges
aren’t fully explored or understood. While the system might be able to manage the typical day-to-day patient flow, it doesn’t consider the unique patient demographics of the community, or fluctuations caused by factors such as seasonality. There is no provision for a dynamic patient interaction system, which can adapt to real-time challenges and offer flexible scheduling options. By solely focusing on a generic system, the institution misses the depth of problem-solving required to truly optimise its outpatient services. What is needed is not just a digital tool, but a comprehensive solution that is sensitive to the real-world complexities of the department. A more robust solution could involve digitally optimising patient flow. By using real-time analytics to forecast daily patient volumes, appointment slots can be dynamically adjusted to optimise utilisation. Deployed in tandem with an AI-backed adaptive scheduling interface, patients can choose, reschedule, or cancel, their appointments, with real-time feedback about availability and wait times. This progression from vision to execution underlines
the transformative potential of a plan that roots itself in detailed understanding and targeted solutions to challenges, aligning the intricacies of technology with the genuine needs of patient care. The same principle applies across a range of use cases, particularly where automation and emerging technologies intersect with the
50 Health Estate Journal May 2025
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84
