Mon 12 Nov 2007
Working hands in hands
Posted by raphael encaoua under medical tourism, Hospital marketing
Recently I received two mails from European Entrepreneurs (one Deutch, one English) that are willing to open a medical tourism agency that were both wildly complaining about the lack of support of Asian Hospitals. What they were pointing out was the fact that hospitals were not willing to invest in their operations while these medical tourism facilitators were “working in the best interest of the hospitals”. To be honest, I find this idea totally exaggerated: a medical tourism agency is always hedging surgeries between a pool of more than 10 hospitals. Given the small volumes yielded, what do these medical tourism agency provide: 30 customers per hospital a year? Seriously, why should an hospital invest in your start up and not in another one with a real value proposition?
Tan Tok Seng to NUH: Let’s work together baby! You take the arms, I take the legs
Yet, even though these claims are too much, there is one point to put forward: hospitals could act as a regulating power for these medical tourism agencies. In fact, the industry is lacking standardization: hospitals are very different from each other and the incoming process always vary from a medical group to another resulting into an incompatibility of medical records system, filing system, reporting system… plus, medical tourism agencies are often individuals that advice people to go to a certain hospital and take a commission for all the ground work. Yet, what about insurances? what about medical records transfer?
The critical investments that hospitals need to do is a common R&D program to ease up international patient management. Let s take Asian Hospitals: they will gain momentum (against Eastern Europe or South America) by creating a common process (as medical tourism operators will find it easier to work with them). Intercompatibility between hospitals is even more important in case of complications: for instance, one friend of mine got a motorbike accident while visiting Singapore last week (… poor guy, his knee is in shambles …).
He was transfered to Alexandra Hospital, a good but not world class hospital in Singapore where a first operation was performed. An Arthroscopy showed that the operation will be more complicated hence he was sent to Singapore’s best orthopedic clinic in Singapore @ Mount Elizabeth Hospital (a Parkway group hospital). These two hospitals are not belonging to the same group of hospital… This resulted in a messy outpatient management (my friend was still considered a patient of Alexandra Hospital two days after leaving) and the need to do again some examinations as Alexandra hospital was unable to provide the records in due time. A complication during an orthopedic surgery can always happen requiring the help of the adequate team of specialists but not necessarily belonging to the same hospital. If Alexandra and Mount Elizabeth had a common system for their international patient, my firend would not have gone through painful drills and tests for a second time in a week.
In an ideal world, hospitals in a specific place would create an association whereby each hospital will hold a speciality for international patients (hospital X for plastic surgery, Hospital Y for spinal cord surgery and hand surgery…) so that hospitals can assemble the best team of specialists in the aera and gain sizable know how while reaching important volumes. Let’s take Singapore: Mount Elizabeth could specialize in orthopedic surgery while Raffles Hospital could specialize in Cardiology, leading to only one interface and common marketing effort to attract international patients. The Singaporian Board of Tourism (STB) is already gearing towards this direction by creating its medical travel departement, yet this is a governement initiative more than an industrial association. The Public System is in fact working under two groups, but these groups are put at odds (competition should create better process) and are diconnected with Private Hospitals.
There are evident issues to this system (revenue sharing model? volume per speciality? profitability per operation?) … Readers what are your thoughts?


November 12th, 2007 at 11:26 pm
Only a fool will believe that a hospital will gladly write a check for a start up unproven operator. As the largest operator in the field we would never even dream of asking a hospital to invest otherwise we would no longer be serving the client — we would have to serve two masters. People think this business of medical tourism is easy, sadly they ruin it for the few legitimate players around like ourselves, MedRetreat, and MTI.
November 12th, 2007 at 11:46 pm
thx rudy for your message! Planet hospital in fact is doing a tremendeous work without the financial support of any hospital. But Rudy don t you agree with the point that hospital can help in terms of process if they work on a common international patient program. Such an evolution will not kill your barriers to entry but simplify your patient management.
November 14th, 2007 at 2:31 am
Perhaps we at America’s Medical Solutions Pvt. Ltd. don’t understand the problem of commonality because we only deal with Indian hospitals. We have none of the problems mentioned in the above article moving from one hospital to another, and English is always the medium when ever it happens. We’ve also never had a patient having to move to another hospital because of any kinds of complications or lack of expertise. We’ve only ever had one complication which just happened to be a gastric by-pass but it was very skilfully handled by the surgeon and his team before it became a problem. Further, all our patients re internationals.
DLW
www.AmericasMedicalSolutions.com
November 14th, 2007 at 2:52 am
Dear Don, I m very happy to hear that your organisation did not experience any major mishpas. Yet, the goal of this article was to look on the side of what hospitals can do to gain competitive advantages.
To give further information to our readers could you explain us more about your operations?
November 14th, 2007 at 3:41 am
The commonalty in the processes for dealing with medical tourists at the various hospitals and typically a commonality in the protocols followed in the domain will be a boon to the patients. The organizations being formed in the domain could be the drivers for the common processes. At e-medsol we have created an end to end process driven software service called Virtual Medical Tourism Ecosystem for the medical tourism industry which tries to provide interconnected solutions for the different players form the hospital side, insurance companies and medical travel companies from the demand side and the destination management. It is also aimed at bringing singularity into the processes. The system also helps in medical history transfer between hospitals. We believe this could be a start to flattening the health care domain. The flattening will happen only with a commonality in processes.
www.emedsol.biz
November 14th, 2007 at 4:16 am
What you arfe doing is extremly interesting. Could you please send more info about your company on my private mailbox: raphael@vivadoc.com? I m really willing to talk about it on my blog. Congrats
November 18th, 2007 at 9:01 am
Dear Raphael, I need to take issue with my old buddy Rudy being so loose with the truth and his disparaging remark that there are “few legitimate players around like ourselves” and all the rest of us “ruin it” for those few.
Just because he got an early start and is a whiz at attracting investors and manipulating traditional media (well, except for the New Zealand “60-Minutes” program about him) doesn’t make him “legitimate” nor does it mean all other service providers are “ruining” anything — except Rudy’s ability to charge lots of high fees and survive despite a very, very low rate of customer satisfaction.
And who said that Rudy’s biz is the “largest operator in the field” — besides Rudy? Because I know one Bangkok-based medical tourism agency (not us) that sends patients to only ONE hospital (not Bumrungrad) and they are quietly making much more money (six-figure US dollars/month) than Rudy.
And his holier-than-thou comment about “masters” was really hypocritical since his investors are his only true “master” — well, except for his other “master” the hospitals. Raphael, you were mistaken to say he is “without the financial support of any hospital” because they pay Rudy many, many times more than his customers pay him in fees. His customers are very low on his totem pole of multiple “masters”.
Regarding other issues mentioned in this thread: Good Thai hospitals already regulate their agents through highly detailed contract agreements that set many conditions.
And like the experience of “DLW” in India, patients of international hospitals in Bangkok have no difficulty getting their records and taking them in hand to any other hospital anywhere in the world. What happened to your friend in Singapore sounds quite strange.
Thai hospitals are extremely competitive businesses and Thai doctors are extremely competitive businessmen, both locally and internationally as well as down to the level of medical specialties. In addition, Thais are very independent in nature. For those reasons, I don’t think they are ever going to cooperate on a grand communal information management system, neither nationally or regionally, in the hope it’ll give them some type of competitive advantage.
The strongest competitive advantage will go to those Thai hospitals which have published prices, no hidden costs, competitive pricing, and comprehensive information about their treatments, procedures, doctors, success rates & rates of complications as well as promptly responding to inquiries. Of course that’s in addition to the highly qualified doctors and medical professionals, beautiful facilities, friendly staff and the latest medical equipment they already have. The Thai hospital that is doing many of these things is BOOMING.
And may I point out that Cleveland Clinic and Mayo Clinic have expanded and diversified their offerings rather than becoming ultra-specialized as you proposed. I suspect the bright people there have determined that diversification is the best road to profitability for them. However, on the other hand, the “BOOMING” Thai hospital I mentioned is highly specialized exactly like you proposed. So hospitals taking opposite approaches are both doing very well.
November 18th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
Hi Richard! Thx for this long comment and giving your opinion about Planet Hospital and other actors. I feel some sarcasm in your “bright people @ Mayo Clinic”. What is the difference between the Mayo Clinic and a bunch of international hospitals in South East Asia: marketing to international patients their operations. Cleveland Clinic and Fortis group (India) have not the same business model nor the same overheads nor the same cost structure. It is like comparing a McDonald in Chicago with a Pratha franchised restaurant in India: both are doing F&B and have the same problem (quick table turnaround, streamlining operatons in the cuisine to shorten response time…) but they diverge in terms of waiter management and cost, cost structure (marginal profit per pratha). So I TOTALLY DISAGREE with your counter exemple.
I would be very happy to contact you directly as I m travelling often around the region for other business purposes: hgere is my personal contact raphael.encaoua@gmail.com
December 6th, 2007 at 4:37 am
Hi Raphael,
You bring up a number of interesting points in your post.
Firstly, the interoperability between hospitals you talk about can only happen once there is some sort of common electronic medical record system. Medical tourism as a whole is held back by the lack of such a system. Right now we at RevaHealth.com work primarily with international dental clinics, and the advent of the digital panoramic x-ray has been a major advance in this area. It means that patients can email their full mouth x-ray to any number of clinics for opinions or quotes.
Secondly, I don’t have exact figures for patients shopping for price versus patients shopping for speciality, but it is clear that the market right now is driven more by price sensitivity. This won’t always be the case though.
People are naturally afraid of what they don’t know, and not that many people as a percentage of the general population have engaged in medical tourism yet. As this number grows, medical tourism will seem less strange to people. Price sensitivity is driving people to overcome their worries right now, but as medical tourism becomes more widespread, and information becomes more widely available, a new wave of patients will start “shopping” for the leading specialist in a given field.
This is where the hospitals, clinics, doctors, and dentists have to engage with medical tourism facilitators. They need to start focusing not only on advertising “Save 70%…” but also on actively advertising their success/failure rates for their chosen procedures.
Finally, when it comes to hospitals specializing or not, it seems to me that the common consensus is that being a centre of excellence in a small number of treatments is the best practice for the best results for the patient. As pointed out above in one of the previous comments, this might not be the best business practice for a hospital though, which might explain the reluctance of some to go down this route.
This exact debate is being had here in Ireland at the moment, with the public seemingly opposed to specialization because it means that they might have to travel an extra hour or two to get to the specialist hospital. I can understand the problem for local patients that require regular outpatient treatment, but in the field of medical tourism, where treatment generally isn’t ongoing and the distances travelled are far greater, in the long run I can see the most successful hospitals and clinics being the ones that have the best success rates in a particular field rather than the ones that offer all procedures at the lowest cost.
Best regards,
Philip Boyle
RevaHealth.com
December 31st, 2007 at 7:02 pm
I would like to represent medical tourism in Costa Rica pease contact me at tha mail.
Paula