Google Health Unveiled: Open the Flood Gates

After 18 months in development, Google (GOOG) has unveiled its online personal health record [PHR] storage system, Google Health.

Google brings its considerable know how and infrastructure to the space. The successful trial at the Cleveland Clinic validated the secure exchange of patient data between the Clinic and a secure Google profile.

The excitement was palpable. According to C. Martin Harris, the Cleveland Clinic’s chief information officer, the trial, limited to 1,600 patients, was quickly overbooked.

Privacy Concerns Over-Hyped

Google’s approach bypasses the key problem in being able to integrate health data from multiple sources. Current regulations, designed to protect people’s privacy, make sharing medical data difficult. But Google places control in the hands of the user. If the user inputs data and then shares access with to this data with others, privacy issues are largely averted.

Your Google Health profile includes standard PHR data like notices, drug interactions, conditions, medications, allergies, procedures, immunization and test results. Google places your data in the clouds; it’s accessible with the same password you may use for email and other Google services – if this password is compromised your records are at risk.

I spoke with Dr. Leonard Finn this weekend, who reports his existing PHR system is both cumbersome and inefficient. The savings he envisioned when switching over to an electronic health record system were never realized. Currently Finn stores his data on a server in his office, a decision he believes will curtail the risk of privacy violations.

Finn looks forward to learning more about Google Health; if anyone can make data safe it’s Google. A public relations nightmare would ensnare the company if even a modest breach of privacy were to occur.

Robust System Architecture

Google Health offers a number of tools including a ‘health topics’ section which allows users to find information (symptoms, causes, treatment, news, etc.) in a robust library of disease states. This would seem to run on a collision course with WebMD (WBMD). Users can search for physicians in a number of ways.

The secret sauce is the ability to add or import your patient records and prescription data. Google has established data portability relationships with:

• Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center: Patient site connects patients to medical records online.
• Cleveland Clinic MyChart: Online health management tool that gives Cleveland Clinic patients access to their medical records.
• Longs Drug Stores: Import prescription history from Longs.com.
• Walgreens Pharmacy: Import prescription history from Walgreens.com.
• Medco: Online pharmacy management and mail order drugs.
• RxAmerica: Discounts on prescriptions at retail pharmacies and delivery through a mail order prescription program.
• MinuteClinic: Retail-based health care and a subsidiary of CVS (CVS) Caremark; medical care for common illnesses.
• Quest Diagnostics (DGX): Laboratory testing, information, and services; access lab test results online.

Monetization Opportunities Abound

Monetization opportunities abound. While the site remains ad-free, Google is in a unique position to offer the services gratis until it gains significant market share.

Down the road, I believe Google will support the service through advertising. Think GMAIL for medicine – with ads for doctors, pharmacies, drugs, and devices peppered beside your personal health records and delivered using the same contextual advertising Google is known for.

Comments

[atauber]

so is it secure or not? im confused.

[Doug]

WSJ’s Google reporter Jessica Vascellaro sent us a dispatch: “Google’s vice president of search products and user experience Marissa Mayer said the company is very conscious of the sensitivity of the information it is collecting and has taken a range of steps — including beefed up security of the servers where records are stored — to protect it. Consumers must also select which participating medical organizations can read and send updates to their profile and can tailor the permissions for different providers.”

[Health Guy]

No offense but your evalutaion of Google Health shows a lack of expertise in the online health space. And as for their content, its simply licensed from ADAM just like tons of other health websites. The fact is there is no motivation for users to use this service, secure or not, and it will gain zero traction. People have been trying to get users to import their data for years with zero success. And now the WSJ reports that the CBO is saying that any benefit from digital health records is overstated and likely non-existent.

Google should just stick with search. After all, they already eat WebMD's lunch by taking the majority of Pharma ad dollars already.

[TechWatch]

I'll like to meet the first joker who shares all his medical data with Google.

techwatch.reviewk.com/.../

[Doug]

Anonymous Health Guy -

Agreed, Google should “just stick to search” and ignore the billion dollar electronic medical record storage market…

Especially since they’re going to get “zero traction” (a bold statement for a supposed market research firm).

With Google's market penetration in other verticals, and their ability to store all your information (Gmail, Google Docs, Google Reader) I wouldn’t discount them just yet.

Even modest rates of adoption could create what many would consider a home run – were it not for the high standards investors have set. Nothing will compare to search as far as generating revenues is concerned.

And the data may be licensed from ADAM, but Google has the ability to integrate it into their search results. The competitive playing field is hardly level.

[Health Guy]

A) I dont work for a market research firm.

B) Google already has ADAM and every other content provider integrated into their search results.

C) Google already is the leader in the online health ad space.

D) Nothing about Google Health inidicates that they can gain traction with users or make money. Just saying that a market is "a billion dollar industry" doesnt make it so. In fact, I dont know anyone who is making any money in PHR field.

My point here is simple: broad, general statements that have no historical fact or logical assumptions are useless. And how investors usually get burned....

[Doug]

a) Sorry, you work for a digital strategy firm specializing in online health (no market research)

b) integrated, as in prioritized, a la Google Maps in local search: www.google.com/search?...

c) agreed

d) sounds like a pretty broad, general statement.

[Health Guy]

Well, I guess we will agree to disagree. You are impressed by Google Health and I am not. Who knows? Maybe something interesting will evolve-certainly Google knows how to innovate. And its nice that someone is writing about online health. That is rare.

But I dont think Google Health represents any additional value to cause any investor to buy Google stock. And this is a website about investing, right?