Are Diagnostics Harder or Easier to Gain Provider and Payer Adoption?

Short answer: Harder.

But why?

The answer lies in objective decision making versus subjective decision making with the provider audience.

Fundamentally, new therapy adoption focuses on objective factors. Sure, some subjectivity creeps in but it disproportionately an objective sell.

But diagnostic adoption has a foundation in objective decisions but adds in a number of subjective factors that also need to be considered.

So what are the important customer factors when driving adoption of a therapeutic?

• What is the indication?
• How do I treat this condition now?
• What is the data?
• What are the risks?
• How do I dose…or…how do I deliver therapy?
• What is the cost?

But for diagnostic products there are some more subjective factors that also come into play too:

• How did I learn to diagnose / how was I trained?
• How confident am I that the training I received is still best in class?
• How much accuracy of the diagnosis dependent on my experience and expertise?
• Will I be viewed as less of an expert by patients or colleagues if AI / App / Technology diagnose for me?
• Will it impact my support staff?
• How will it change my office workflow?
• Does using an app / tech change my reimbursement and therefore my income?
• Do I want to learn something new or commit to training?

This isn’t an exhaustive list for either grouping…but it’s a good start.

Objective points are logic based, but alternatively, subjective criteria deal with the provider’s emotions, which makes it trickier!

I’m not suggesting just because it’s harder you shouldn’t do it. The economic value or savings a diagnostic can provide may far exceed a therapeutic. That makes it worthwhile to pursue. But you have to ask the right questions.

Trouble sorting through the best way to drive adoption?

Email me and let’s chat!