Tue 10 Jul 2007
Medtrotter: Matching Web 2.0 and Health tourism
Posted by raphael encaoua under Medical tourism theory, Hospital marketing
The Web 2.0 has been on the back burner for quite a while now. Just quoting the 2.0 stuff is enough to see people advocating a new golden era. However, many econmists and web specialists have identified several hindrances to the web 2.0: the revenue model has not evolved, the bigs only can survive, the information is not homogenous, yet it is a great looking idea. Wikipedia among others is a great example of the potential success of such a trend.
Medtrotter: a new toddler in the Web 2.0 world
Medtrotter decided to be the first entrant in the Web 2.0 for medical tourism. The company has created a portal where people can give their opinion on a given surgeon or a given location. Unfortunately, we can hardly access to any data and it seems that this system is not efficient. In fact, there are little elements that push anyone to fill these questionnaires that however are not long but is still demanding efforts. Nevertheless, there is a genuine community sustaining the system, namely people experiencing medical travel and that are willing to share their experience. Yet, is the simple assesment of a doctor a good tool to pass a judgement on medical tourism. This supposes that the concept itself is accepted, that medical tourism is well understood by everyone and that there is no need to make a clear statement on the side effects of the system (better service, better facilities…). Is grading a doctor better than reading a testimonial where a doctor and an hospital are involved?
I genuinely feel that this concept comes at a too early stage of medical tourism and testimonials are still a better tool than global benchmarking. Even though the idea is relevant, I don’t feel that this is people wan to say and want to read for the time being. Web 2.0 in medical tourism should better be developped for close knitting qualified testimonials…
August 13th, 2007 at 10:33 am
Raphael,
Interesting post. I had an opportunity to listen to the principals of this company speak at the WHTC earlier this year in Cyprus. As a member of the medical community i was intrigued with their plans to reshape our community on the internet. it certainly needs it. You might be interested in this: I sent them my practice info last month. I was told they are in the process of launching the final site and have subsequently taken the existing site down for now. Most people I met in Cyprus registered with them if that is any indication of the level of interest. What are your thoughts?
August 13th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
Honestly, considering my education, I am really a consumer focused people. I don t doubt the need of such a tool I just don t like the criteria that are used.
To me there are many cognitive elements involved in a medical tourism experience:
the +/- bias on a country a priori (namely what is your impression of the country)
the reputation of an hospital, that is never absolute but relative according to te jugement passed by other people
Same goes with the reputation of a doctor (tested by Medtrotter)
the service quality (at least the latter is heavily marketed by medical tourism agencies)
To me, Medtrotter can work only if there is a critical threshold of qualified comments and ranking met, say 15 to 20. Yet, people can doubt the quality of the comments if not geographically diversified and not thorough enough. A comment such as “good practician” is never enough to quell doubts. As you perfectly know it, the medical environmnt whatever you do is stressing, people needs to get some guarantees…
How to guarantee practice: C2B2C or C2C? As phoney as it sounds I feel for the time being that the C2B2C model proposed by medtrotter though promising is still too elaborated to trigger a massive following. Plus their barrier of entry os trim (as I don t feel from my earlier researches they have accumulated a sizable number of referals) But at the end of the day this concept will certainly work. (yet, where is the revenue stream????)