Physicists and Engineers Need More Healthcare Professionals in Their Team—PART 2—Solutions to the Skill Gap

 

 

We now know that the Skill Gap in HealthTech exists (refer to PART 1 of this article). The question is where to start addressing this.  As the demand for technologically advanced medical solutions grows, so does the need for professionals who can bridge clinical expertise with technical proficiency. In this article, we bring together instances where the NEXUS between the technical and healthcare professions was established, how cross-disciplinary training and integrated learning are a necessity, and how to build the connection. 

 

The Real Picture of Teams with Engineers and Healthcare Professionals

I recently read an article on JAMIA that discusses informatics in healthcare and biomedicine. Many reputed hospitals across the world use electronic prescribing systems. In this study across three Australian hospitals using CSC MedChart and Cerner Millennium, an Electronic Health Record software 42% of prescribing errors were linked to the technology. Of those, 98% were socio-technological errors caused by poor user interface design, highlighting the human-machine interaction issues.

 

THIS 98% OF SOCIO-TECHNOLOGICAL ERRORS IS OF OUR INTEREST HERE.

 

The socio-technical theory emphasizes the importance of understanding and improving an organization's system, in this case, a hospital or a private practice, by integrating and viewing its social and technical components as interconnected parts of a complex whole. 

 

Thus, here, if you are building a platform tomorrow, like PRACTO tomorrow, that allows booking appointments and online consultations, is a doctors’ directory, and is also a stage for e-prescriptions, FAQs, and clarifying medical doubts, etc. then YOU may have to think beyond what’s obvious.

 

Usually, the scientists and engineers are so consumed by the technicalities of the product that their ‘eureka’ moment overlooks the need to establish the right feedback channels and audits by the end-users—in this case healthcare professionals and their interactions with patients.

 

Now that we have a viewpoint on the pitfalls of inadequately using healthcare perspectives in engineering and technology, let’s switch roles and see what happens when HCPs encounter technical roadblocks.

 

Has anybody heard of Atul Gawande? 

 

He is an MD, MPH, surgeon, writer, and public health researcher who later was appointed by the Joe Biden Administration to lead global health at USAID. I love to read his books… you guys must read “Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End”; it kind of aligns with today’s talk. Well anyway, a New Yorker article by Atul Gawande was titled, ‘Why Doctors Hate Their Computers’. 

 

Here’s why I need to refer to this article:

 

So this guy was then working as a surgeon at Partners HealthCare, Boston. Once the whole surgery department, with doctors ranging from 30 to 70 years old, had undergone a mandatory sixteen-hour computer training course for a new medical software system, Epic, that they were going to use.

 

• This, by the way, is the ideal way to help healthcare professionals, who are commonly known as ’technologically’ handicapped, adopt tech... (laugh)... Workshops and training sessions held by the team involved in product development or implementation really do help. You’d be surprised to know that in this case, Partners HealthCare invested $1.6 billion to adopt this technology across its twelve hospitals and hundreds of clinics. 

 

Anyway, this new software was designed to streamline a variety of processes, including recording medical observations, ordering tests, and sending prescriptions. But what happened next was a different story altogether….

 

Early training sessions highlighted Epic’s confusing interface, which included multiple tabs and fields with overlapping purposes. The shift left doctors spending more time facing screens than interacting with patients.

 

The challenges doctors faced weren't just technical; they were political. 

 

The introduction of Epic involved decisions influenced by various departments, each with conflicting priorities. Design changes that benefited one department and not the other often made tasks more time-consuming for another. This frustrated doctors who were required to fill out extensive and redundant forms, taking precious minutes away from patient interactions.

 

What exactly happened here? 

 

A NEXUS was established for a HealthTech product, I’d say, really late in the ‘product life cycle,’  revealing numerous ‘ISSUES’ the product had in real-world healthcare settings. 

 

🧲Had they run surveys to find what kind of patient-management platforms are needed in urban American hospitals, 

🧲Had they tested their product with a cohort of doctors from the same settings and smartly compiled their feedback, 

🧲The adoption of Epic could have been different. 

Here’s what happens with doctors—the real BTS. 

 

The medical field is complex and multilayered with an adaptive nature.

 

It has too many interconnected and evolving components that are designed to change over time and under different conditions. I mean, we all know how differently your body reacts to some things as compared to hers. 

 

Correct?

 

In contrast, software, while intricate, lacks this adaptability. 

This fundamental mismatch is the core issue for us, the users.

Precisely why the NEXUS is a necessity rather than a protocol. 

 

However, medical, dental, nursing, physiotherapy, or any med school in the healthcare sector is oblivious to the need to orient their students to the mechanism of the DEVICE they are using.

 

I mean, next time you visit your dentist and he scans your teeth, casually ask them the optical theory behind intra-oral scanners or the AI software he is using… I mean no harm…And also don’t do it unless you want to change dentist…(laughs)... the idea here, is to underscore the fact that healthcare students barely have exposure to real-time “engineering’ settings that will give them a ‘real feel’ of ‘what’s going on inside that Device. 

Tips and Tricks to Bridge the Skill Gap and Support Collaborative Teams In HealthTech

 

Having said this, how can we, at this juncture, suggest bringing about a similar NEXUS between the engineering and medical lingo?

 

In the engineering landscape, for students in India: 

 

Understanding the Clinical Problem Space is the starting point: 

The real-world clinical challenges and patient care needs through interdisciplinary workshops, joint problem-solving sessions, or short-term observerships in hospitals.

 

Emphasis on Usability and Human-Centric Design: 

The end goal is ‘HealthTech,’ correct? 

 

So ideating, designing, or manufacturing must include ease of use, a friendly interface, privacy of patient info, and comfort in routine use. Feedback on prototypes can help designs be intuitive and clinically useful, avoiding the common pitfalls of technically sophisticated but impractical solutions.

 

Participation in Health Hackathons and Joint Projects: 

Engineering students should collaborate with medical students in hackathons, project clubs, or innovation cells focused on healthcare. Such initiatives not only foster teamwork but also help both groups understand each other's constraints and strengths, resulting in more well-rounded solutions.

 

As Medical Students who already feel they have an endless syllabus:

 

Basic Technical Literacy: 

Medical students should be encouraged; in fact, their syllabus must include foundational knowledge in technology, including digital health, data analysis, and programming. 

Short courses, boot camps, or electives on health and bioengineering can help.

 

Survey Participation: 

Surveys and feedback loops created during the ideation and design phases of device development can be extended to medical students—who I believe are the next generation of healthcare professionals, most likely to adopt tech. It effectively translates the clinical needs, addresses a genuine medical need, and ensures patient safety.

 

Create and Present Use Cases: 

Programs that encourage medical students to share detailed use-case scenarios, clinical workflows, and potential applications of the device with their engineering friends to outline real-life contexts, patient interaction, and the desired outcomes.

 

Cross-Disciplinary Actions:

How’s the idea of Interdisciplinary Research labs? Initiatives to set up dedicated interdisciplinary research labs that encourage medical and engineering students, those interested in the ‘tech’ sector, like I was as a student, to work together on health tech projects under faculty supervision. Such a lab can serve as an incubator for innovative solutions. This can offer Joint Certifications focused on bioengineering, digital health, or healthcare informatics. 

 

The way forward is NOT EASY, but PRAGMATICALLY achievable. 

Programs such as these are already underway.

 

Success Stories 

In 2022, a collaboration between the University of Miami, medical and engineering students produced Smart Scan, an AI-based tool for the early detection of pulmonary embolisms (PEs), a life-threatening condition, from X-rays or CT scans, winning Best Biomedical Engineering Project at the College of Engineering Design Expo, showcasing successful interdisciplinary teamwork and innovation in healthcare.

 

In 2016, the DuBois Campus of Penn State University conducted a collaborative project between engineering and Occupational Therapy Assistant students to design assistive devices for the elderly or disabled. The project enhanced teamwork, cross-disciplinary understanding, and respect for diverse professional perspectives, leading to continued interprofessional collaborations and improved learning outcomes.

To my knowledge, India already has online platforms that offer networking events and mentorship programs for healthcare students to interact with industry professionals, tech personnel, healthcare practitioners, and entrepreneurs to build a collaborative culture.

 

Whether it was the year 1958, when cardiac surgeon Ake Senning and an engineer, Rune Elmqvist, collaborated to develop the first implantable pacemaker in Sweden, or the year 2018 when a Totonto-based cardiologist, Dr. Brian Courtney, conceptualized and patented a 3D intravascular blood vessel imaging system to enhance safety and efficiency in heart surgeries—the NEXUS of medicine and engineering has already hit the road running. 

 

Key Takeaway

Building the two-way street for doctors and engineers demands concerted efforts from educational institutions, healthcare providers, and the tech industry. When doctors and engineers combine their strengths, they can design and implement solutions that revolutionize healthcare, improve patient outcomes, and adapt to the rapidly evolving landscape of medical technology. 

 

Anastomos, India’s first healthcare providers’ network, offers 10 services designed for the healthcare industry—graduates, postgraduates, practitioners, researchers, entrepreneurs, management, and veterans, ensuring the offerings are diverse. Whether it's mentoring, applying for courses, hiring and recruitment, side hustles, or healthcare marketing, every step is adapted to the dynamism of the industry.