atively and understand the impact they have.
In this context, the implementation of ICT presents organizational impacts, and faces barriers. By leading to new forms of coordination, ICTs require mediators, bearers of this coordination. It is the role currently assigned to coordinating nurses, and health networks, to ensure the proper use of ICT.
The barriers mentioned in the report show for their part that the implementation of ICT is not an easy process. Their accumulation often leads to observing the paradox of Solow’s productivity: a long return on investment while the theoretical gain in efficiency is easy to determine from the start. Their resolution requires endurance and strength of conviction. Because the question of support for change is central to avoid investing heavily in a tool that would not be used. Operators must be sufficiently convinced of the contribution to overcome the technical problems of interoperability. This point underlines that the implementation of ICT cannot be decreed, but that it must be shared by the actors to ensure the dynamics of the process, and be supported institutionally. It is at this price that the increase in load towards more integrated care offers can be envisaged.
In this movement to integrate supply, the role of the hospital as well as the patient’s home is certainly going to evolve. The following example helps to understand this evolution. NXT health is an American team of people with diverse profiles (ranging from architect to hospital administrator to scientific researcher) having developed a project (partly funded by various industrialists) of the hospital room of the future, called “Patient Room 2020”. This room of the future is designed in a “patient centric” spirit where “technology becomes the connective tissue that supports the continuum of care”. Following this trend, the hospital room of the future could become the room of the patient’s home, full of vital sign detection technology and capable of regulating the individual or issuing alerts. In this way, the patient could stay at home longer and only come to the hospital to obtain expertise on very complex problems, or treatments requiring technical platforms that are difficult to transpose.
In turn, the tendency to hospital-centrism could fade, or at least take another form “The hospital [will] be repositioned: it will be able to radiate through telemedicine, and its physical footprint will be exceeded by its footprint intellectual, which should be valued. ”In this regard, these hospitals of the future could constitute, in addition to sophisticated treatment structures, powerful data centers.
The enhanced expertise of the citizen and the patient
Today, with the developments mentioned, the individual has important health information at their fingertips. It can also actively contribute to its development with the active support of increasingly large social networks. Therefore, the patient now has the keys to participate fully in your therapeutic journey and he has a critical capacity at all stages of his disease (from his diagnosis to his treatment through his drug prescription ). Citizens have the ability to organize their health trajectory, by warning themselves of the risks for it.
Beyond information, the wave of self-quantified / self-management allows the patient to develop a critical reading of his illness, the intuitiveness of the tools (popularization of information, adaptation to the person), their integration in everyday objects (smartphones, tablets, social media), the convergence of data for comparative purposes (PatientLikeMe) and finally, the algorithms which orient its behavior helping it (silent procedures for adapting to data in real time).
This newly acquired theoretical and practical knowledge leads to rebalancing the patient / doctor relationship, in the sense that the patient becomes more enlightened, even expert and autonomous in the management of his health. This need to enter a “patient-centric” dimension in the MIT Technology Review recalling that “the person least used in the healthcare sys