I find it interesting that the blogosphere continues to discuss the “false dichotomy” of our “Health 2.0 Meets Information Therapy (Ix)” Conference. On The Health Business Blog, Michael Segal, MD, PhD, blogged yesterday on this topic, concluding that, “the most useful resources come from getting physicians and patients to work together closely to come up with the insights and resources that are most useful,” which “also illustrates how the ‘tension’ between Health 2.0 and Ix falls away in practice.”

I agree (and the conference confirmed) that far more synergies than tensions exist between the two movements. I also am aware of many Health 2.0 approaches being integrated into Ix applications, and Ix offers a vehicle for integrating Health 2.0 tools into the care delivery system.

However, the core of the Health 2.0 movement — primarily spearheaded by entrepreneurs — remains mostly distinct from the heart of the Ix movement. For example, there is only one overlapping member organization (Enhanced Medical Decisions) between the 45 members of the IxAction Alliance and the 20 members of Health 2.0 Accelerator.

While we share a common objective of advancing patient-centered health information technology, there remains little commonality in the organizations driving each movement. What drives that difference? And what needs to happen to change it?

This entry was posted on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009 at 8:39 am and is filed under Health 2.0 Space. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.