Good afternoon, everyone. We will get started in just a moment. Alright. Good afternoon, everyone. And thank you all so much for joining us today. We are so excited to have you for our webinar, Measure What Matters, Why Engagement Drives Results in Digital Health. My name is Jenny Sousi. I am a senior product manager here at NCQA. We're so excited to have you join us today. So very quickly, some housekeeping and introductions first. We'll then run through a quick topic and program overview, followed by our panel discussion, and last but certainly not least, some audience q and a. Related to the Q and A, if you would like to ask a question, which we very much encourage you to do throughout the webinar, please submit your questions using the Q and A box at the bottom of the menu bar. You can see that here on the screen. And we will do our best to get to as many questions as possible during the presentation today. And so with that, I am very excited to share and introduce our panelists for today. First off, we have Adrianne Chaufflet, the head of partnerships at Get Set Up, Lashonda Pettieway Brown, practice transformation consult at the South Carolina Office of Rural Health, and Sarah Dallas, AVP of Ambulatory Quality Data and Process Improvement at Endeavor Health. And so before we get too far into things today, I would love to learn a little bit more about who we have joining us in the audience. So you will see a poll pop up on your screen and tell us a little bit more about the organization you represent today. And it looks like you got all of the polling questions at once, so please feel free to just select the first one. Give folks just a few more seconds to respond to the poll. Alright. I think we can go ahead and close the poll. Alright. It is great to see that we've got such a great mix of folks on the phone today. As looking at the results, it looks like about 64% of folks with a health plan, 13% with a health system, 2% employers, 5% digital solution... Other digital solution per purchasers, and then we have other. Alright. So I wanna start by talking about something that I know you all are probably very familiar with, but that is that in The US, we don't feel well. On average, adults in The US report feeling not good more than 10% of the month with slightly more mentally than physically unhealthy days. And we know that seventy six percent of American adults have at least one chronic condition that impacts that well-being. And we know that the experience and severity of a lot of those conditions could be modified through behavior change. And so knowing that, it makes sense that we're seeing these new digitally enabled solutions pop up to support members, patients, clients in managing their well-being and staying healthy or managing their conditions. We're seeing an increase in employers, payers, and health systems leveraging these tools as a way to support those that they serve. But one thing when we started looking at this was trying to understand how do we sort out real impact from noise. And so our team started to try and uncover the answer to this question by having conversations with folks in the industry doing this work. And what we found was that underneath all of that was this underlying lack of trust. When I say purchasers today, I'm referring to health plans, health systems providers, employers. And so these purchasers were seeing this inability to understand, does this really work? What outcomes should I be looking at? What matters? What do you actually mean when you're talking about engagement? And patients, are wondering, does this drive value? Does this actually help improve my care, or is this actually going to make me feel better? And on the flip side of this, we were hearing vendors ask, why can't I have more transparency into the data? Why am I unable to really understand what's happening to this patient long term and other aspects of their care and really understand if what I'm doing is having the desired impact? And when we dug into that lack of trust a little bit deeper, what we started to understand was that it was, in some ways, a lack of quality infrastructure and a lack of common language. And so when we think about those organizations that are on the, quote, unquote, inside the traditional walls of health care, so think your health systems, your health plans, your providers, those folks, have a traditional way of talking about health care quality. They often have VPs whose whole role is to think about the quality of care being provided. When we get outside those traditional walls and we start looking at these vendors and solutions providing that self management, those wearable devices, coaching tools, quality may not mean the same thing to them as it does within these more traditional walls. And so they're left wondering, you know, we have this business model, but what is the quality model? And how do we integrate quality into what we're doing in a consistent way? Because the other big thing we heard is that different purchasers have different requirements. And so as you're pursuing quality, what every person is looking for may be different, and that can make it hard to produce the same results. And so we took all of this, and we brought together a group of organizations through both a working group and a learning collaborative, many of whom are, you know, here today and three of whom are on the call with us as panelists, to start digging into this and to really define for the industry what high quality digitally enabled care looks like in practice. And we, you know, really intentionally wanted to make sure that we did this in partnership with the industry because we wanted to see this change not just for folks we might accredit, but really across the industry broadly. And we also know that there is this broader environment that we were working in already, and we wanted to create alignment where we could run that. And so making sure we were aligned with folks like the Karen code of conduct, the ACLM six pillars, and PHTI's playbooks around value based contracting was really important to us throughout this work. And so after partnering with these organizations and going through multiple rounds of iteration and conversation about what actually matters, we landed on what we've called accreditation in digital health engagement. And so this accreditation is designed for digital tools, solutions, apps that are empowering members to manage their own health and well-being in between provider visits. And we wanted to make sure that there was a way for these solutions to demonstrate consistency, trustworthiness, and that their capabilities were able to support not just meaningful engagement, but measuring meaningful outcomes. And I wanna be clear that this is not meant to be an evaluation of a specific app feature or a technology platform or even an isolated metric, but really focused on understanding if those capabilities are designed for engagement and for measuring outcomes. And the way we've designed this program is focused on making sure that these organizations can meet key capabilities and then specialize either in health assessment assessment or digitally enabled interventions depending on their operational model. And so what does that mean in practice? So what you can see here is the program at a glance. And so like I mentioned, those core standards are something we would expect of any digital solution, transparency with clients, AI governance where appropriate, the ability to exchange and integrate data, measure outcomes, and assess the population that they serve. And then from there, organizations would select either or both health assessment and digitally enabled interventions depending on their service model. And when we think about health assessments, it's really making sure that the organization understands and can gather the information about that population, not just on their physical health needs but also their social needs and really taking that whole person care approach and then being able to measure their patient's ability to engage with that health assessment. And then when we look at the digitally enabled interventions, really understanding the ability to have impact through those self management tools, health coaching, referring for those social needs when they're identified, supporting care team and device integration, and then, again, measuring those intervention outcomes to ensure the best possible outcome. And before I open this up to our panel for discussion, I want to highlight the importance of measurement within this program. As you know, the title of this today is Measuring What Matters. We think it's a really important part of this process, so important that we've taken two different approaches for what a measure looks like within this program. The first is what we call an NCQA defined measure. And so think of this, if you're familiar with NCQA, it's something that you would more traditionally see from us. It's a prespecified measure that an organization reports out to us. And in this case, we've harmonized and created a program defined eligible, active, and engaged population framework to make sure we're all working from the same definitions. And the measure I want to highlight here as being new for this is our member engagement measure set. And this measure is designed to help move us closer to member engagement and measuring that in a more standardized way. Throughout this work, one of the things we heard most commonly was that organizations needed a way to more consistently measure engagement. And so this is our first step towards starting to understand what member engagement can look like consistently when we report it. And the second type of measure is our organization defined measure. And the reason we integrated these was as we talked to organizations, the one thing we heard over and over again was that they needed flexibility because what matters to their members may not matter to somebody else's members. And so creating that flexibility where we've provided a template and we're giving organizations space to tell us their intent, their definition, their numerator, denominator, but letting them tell us what they're measuring and why it matters was very important. And so you can see that when we look at things like clinical outcomes, healthy habits, return on investment, we defer to the organization to tell us what matters most to their population. And so with that, I am very excited to turn this over to our speakers for our panel discussion. And so before we jump into the dialogue, I would love for folks to answer our second polling question. What is the biggest barrier your organization faces when partnering with digital solutions or purchasers? And, again, it looks like we're still getting all of the polling questions if that's something we're able to modify. But if you wanna just focus on question two, that would be great. Alright. And I think we can go ahead and close the poll. Alright. I am seeing an overwhelming amount of responses for data sharing, 79%, followed by agreement on which outcomes to report. And then we're seeing other. If you would like to share in the chat, we would love to hear more about that. And then a few folks acknowledging payment models as the biggest challenge. And so I think that sets us up really well to kick off our panel with Sarah. So, Sarah, I would love to hear from you about some of the barriers your organization experiences in the digital health ecosystem. So EHR interoperability is still, lacking the infrastructure, necessary to really aggregate a patient's clinical data and and really see the full longitudinal care, for a patient. So, for example, wearables, tracking blood pressures, that has always been a challenge in terms of quality measurement, that really helps to support meaningful proactive action. So quality reporting and data completeness, I think, still remains a challenge when we think about integrating and monitoring, those wearables into the EHR. Yeah. Thank you so much, Sarah. I know that that is one of the bigger challenges. And so, Adrianne, I'd like to turn it to you first, followed by Lashonda. Why does, a shared external framework matter for providers in evaluating digital solutions? Yeah. I think what Sarah's describing, that data integration gap is exactly the kind of thing that a framework has to account for. Right? It's not just about whether a vendor claims results. It's whether the infrastructure exists to also verify those results. Right? And so I think what we see these days is a noisy market problem. Right? Providers are evaluating dozens of point solutions, each publishing individual metrics, and then, of course, defining, you know, that engagement term via their own case studies. And so at this point, there's no common denominator, which then a provider comparing multitude of different vendors is really comparing three different measurement philosophies and not three specific outcomes, which is why, ultimately, a shared framework matters. And so at this point, without that shared standard, the burden is on the provider's team to examine each vendor's claim from beginning to end and usually without the bandwidth to allocate those resources too. And so the framework does that due diligence once, right, and externally. That way, the busy providers, you know, they're not reinventing and vetting each vendor from beginning to end each time. And so I do think it closes that blind spot. Right? A vendor can show strong enrollment and activation while also, you know, serving the members, you know, and... Or may or may not be serving the members who need the program the most. Right? There are those sensitive demographics that might not show up within enrollment and activation as well. And so the framework also forces a question beyond, did people actually sign up? And and or, also, did it reach who it claims to reach? And did it move the outcome, which ultimately is the end game. Right? And so for digital health organizations such as GetSetUp, you know, a shared framework protects our credibility also, which is wildly important when pinning vendors up against other vendors. And so it's not just, you know, providers taking our word for something that works, but actually makes the partnership start from a stronger place of trust, which ultimately is the the strong foundation that we need. So Thank you, Adrian. No. Shonda, anything you wanna add? They both hit on some real key points, especially when it comes down to, rural providers. They are just looking for something that's going to help their actual patients. But sometimes, a lot of rural providers don't have access to that compliance officer or a dedicated person to look at the technology and see if it could benefit the practice. So having that framework just gives them that solution. They know the information's gonna be secure, easy to use, and also capable for their patients to also maneuver through it as well. Overall, they just want that meaningful results, but they also want to make sure it's inclusive to those rural practices and their special characteristics within their local areas. So frameworks really matters for them because they don't have the resources that a lot of the large health system and health plans have to make that choice. Sometimes the choice is typically not being seen or the solution's not being seen until they actually select the actual, program and put it in place, and then that's when all the barriers are actually coming into place, which hinders that patient outcome. Yeah. Thank you so much. I think that's such an important piece of this, making sure that we're managing resources responsibly and how a framework can really be a tool to help make sure that the right type of care is getting to the right people at the right time. So thank you all for your thoughts on that. I will say another thing that I I mentioned earlier and that we heard quite a bit about was the importance of strong partnerships and that emphasis on trust. Again, that just continually came up through our conversations. And so before we go into our next set of questions, I'd love to take a moment and hear from the audience about your experience building those successful partnerships and what your experience has been to date. So the poll's gonna pop back up, and so this time, it's gonna be question three. And so we really would love to understand what your experience has been building trust in partnerships. Is that something that has been easy and that feels true, or has it been challenging? Alright. I think we can go ahead and close the poll. Alright. So in asking the question about how true it feels that building these partnerships from a place of trust has been challenging, about 26% of folks said that felt very true. The overwhelming percent, 59%, said that felt true, and only about 15% said it felt untrue or very untrue. So it sounds like a lot of the folks listening in have faced a lot of the barriers that we spend a lot of time talking about within our working group. And so, Adrianne, I'd love to start with you and ask a little bit about your perspective as a digital health organization and what it is that makes a partnership with a plan or provider genuinely work. Yeah. I appreciate everyone's candor too because I think the barrier truly does exist. And I think a few things in a partnership have to be true from day one, right, with a big emphasis on collaboration and level setting on expectations. And so really defining what engagement is and what success looks like together, right, before you launch anything. And I think that's kind of setting the right foundation. Right? It's not just enrollment or not downloading an app, but agreeing on what a good outcome looks like for a specific population, right, prior to the program starting. What we see sometimes is that disagreement will show up month three or four when there's disappointment in numbers or outcomes when previously they weren't aligned upon. Right? And I think the biggest one for us is also the digital literacy assumption. Right? Most partnerships quietly assume that every member can connect digitally. And what we're seeing more and more is that that assumption is usually wrong, and that gap is significantly bigger than most people realize going into it. And so designing the partnership and the program, you know, the conversation shouldn't be what's our engagement campaign. More or less, it should be who needs help opening the front door. Because if we skip that step first, then building a program and partnership for the entirety of a population that doesn't really exist. Right? Because now we're separating those that can engage from those who have those barriers to even get started. And so designing that program and partnership for the whole population that we're serving from the beginning, you know, allows to acknowledge the digital gap, build on whether this is a nondigital human assisted pathway in the original plan compared to a digital pathway for engagement, and then not need to backpedal as enrollment numbers are coming in. Right? And so that also shows up in that two way data flow. And I know that that was a big barrier for a lot of folks that, you know, filled out the poll earlier, but the idea to share those outcomes becomes wildly important to take a look at the whole picture of success in a partnership. Right? It's not just receiving engagement reports, but also, you know, what does a program look like? What does personal outreach look like? And then identify who needs what to be successful. And so the last piece I'd say to that, in addition to the data, is just the opportunity to calibrate. Right? So the opportunity to pivot, take a look at data, have that collaboration ongoing to be able to say, you know, the first several months are gonna be a learning period. That's not the end of the story. Right? And programs that get squashed right away or doubted at month two, it's probably just a need for data adjust... You know, adjustment based off of the data information, right, or an opportunity to pivot and, you know, not just a a redesign or, you know, an an abort to the mission. So I'd probably say all of that really provides the foundation for that successful partnership. Adrian, thank you so much. There was a lot of great information in that response. And, Lashonda and Sarah, I wanna turn it over to you guys and ask on the flip side, on the provider side, what is the single most important thing that partners can do to build trust early in those relationships? So for the provider side, especially in rural, when I came on to do this ten years ago, just walking into a practice, I knew right offhand I was not gonna have the trust that I needed. So I had to actually build upon that. So it's almost like bilateral. So it's also trust, but also communication and also having those shared expectations on what's gonna happen and communication along the way. So for rural providers, it's not just that one single thing, but also what are you promising me? Is it gonna actually show up? Is it there? And if it's not, then are you gonna communicate that to me early on? So it's all about communication and also having that shared goal. For a lot of our providers, that's in rural, because they're so close knit and you have a lot of providers and patients and staff that actually live and work in the area. So they wanna make sure that you know who their patients are. They wanna make sure you know what they do and how successful they are. So having that information also just helps grow that partnership and also grows the trust, almost like in real life. Right? I'm not just gonna trust you just because you say you could do this, this, and this. I need to see it. So it's the same thing when it comes to rural health care providers. That makes a lot of sense. Sarah, anything you'd add? Absolutely. So I think Adrianne touched on it earlier, which is really what does success look like? Success needs to be spelled out and agreed upon with all parties involved and and ultimately the the patient. Right? And so cocreation and alignment of shared goals and objectives is is really critical for a partnership. And, you know, I would say try and embed it in your statement of work, before you start, implementation so that it is laid out and memorialized. And there really needs to be a direct workflow alignment that is truly customized to that organization, so that, you know, partners, whether they be a plan, a provider, or a vendor, understand what solutions work for that organization and for their unique patient population. Thank you. Yeah. And so I think what we're hearing overall is really that importance of making sure that there are those shared expectations and that we're taking the time to actually build those relationships and build that trust. I think you made such a great point that it's it's just like anything else in life. If we don't take the time and lay a good foundation, you know, you can't be surprised when that mistrust pops up or when there are bumps along the way. So I I really appreciate that parallel that you offered. And so before we move into our last big theme for the... Today, which is measurement, I want to ask the audience one more time to participate in a poll and talk to us a little bit about the measures that your organization currently captures and assesses for your digital health programs. And so this will be the fourth question in that poll set. So if you all wanna take a moment and complete that. I've also seen a few questions roll into the q and a, but we would love to have a few more come in. So please also use this as a moment to ask those questions that you wanna hear the panel respond to. And, again, for anyone who might be selecting other, please put more in the chat. We would love to learn from you as well about what you're collecting. Alright. I think we can go ahead and close the poll. Alright. So in response to the question, what types of measures does your organization currently capture to assess its digital health programs, Technical engagement measures, so think... Things like clicks, open emails, is about 44%. Sustained engagement, use of the program or app was, again, at about 44%. Clinical outcomes, very excited to see that up at 87%. Member experience, 73%, and return on investment, 27. Also very happy to see that nobody clicked none of the above or other, which means that we did a great job of capturing everything under the sun. So thank you all for that information. Through our work, though, we did hear pretty often that the most frequent or most important metric, for folks to report was enrollment and activation, rather than those clinical outcomes or those further down the road, metrics. Sarah, I'd love to start with you. From your perspective as a purchaser, why are those metrics no longer enough? Absolutely. So Endeavor Health, which is the organization I I come from, we started our digital health journey several years ago and very much, anchored off of enrollment and activation outcomes. And, really, as time has gone on and and space has evolved, we've really... We've realized that they provide superficial engagement numbers. So, ultimately, we want to tie those digital health engagements to clinical outcomes that we're seeking to improve. So what's important for our organization, both at the micro level, so by patient, but also at the macro level, population health. And so longitudinal engagement really requires driving sustained behavior change over time. And then that in turn will increase retention and loyalty, and ultimately keep patients in active control of their health. Amazing. Thank you for that. And so, Lashonda and Adrian, from your perspectives, what engagement measures actually signal that the program is working? And then how do you connect those two outcomes? So this is when the rubber meets the road, right, for rural providers. This is where they are looking at the apps or the downloadables or the equipment and saying, can this help my patients and how? So typically for rural providers, because it's such limited time and limited staff, they're going straight to outcomes. They want to know if the patient's losing weight improved blood pressure, diabetes is under control. Are they coming more for preventive appointments? Are they staying out of the ER in the hospital? So this is where, for rural providers, this is where it all happens. There has to be outcomes. It has to be realistic for them. It also has to make sure it's specific for those rural patients that may have things around digital literacy or limited broadband. So this is where for rural providers, where it all comes down to them making that decision on if they want to implement this program at... Within the actual practice. Thank you. Adrian, do you wanna respond as well? I do. I'm sitting... I'm shaking my head, Lashonda, to everything you're saying. Because building on that connection between engagement and the clinical results, there's all the operationalizing in between. Right? And so enrollment and activation are the starting gun and where to start, but not necessarily that finish line. And so someone showing up once tells you the front door works. Right? People are able to get there, but it doesn't tell you whether the program changed anything for them. Right? And so what actually signals something real is gonna be that repeat sustained use over time. And that one's easy to overlook. And this one is easy to overlook. Right? The self reported confidence or reduced anxiety navigating the care, or that's the one that matters, especially, you know, for get set up for older adults or first time digital users. Right? And so a drop in confusion in itself is a meaningful outcome. Right? An increasing confidence becomes something that changes whether someone does come back to utilize that digital engagement tool. Right? Not just a soft metric in between. And so when we talk about that... Those outcomes, the depth beats breadth at that point because a smaller group of members who are consistently and meaningfully engaged predicts better downstream outcomes than so many people who logged in one time and then disappeared. Right? And so reporting reach, although important, you know, we're optimizing for the wrong thing at that point when we're leaning into these outcomes and what members are actually seeing as far as, you know, what's helping them. And so the mechanism for connecting engagement to outcomes. So when you're thinking about, you know, mapping to outcomes, whether it be annual wellness visits or claims delays or medication adherence, it really is tracking both at the same time, right, rather than two different dashboards. It's not is someone completing their annual wellness visit, and did someone utilize our activation tool. Right? So for example, you know, we were so lucky to be a part of this learning collaborative, and we've been backing into a lot of our partnerships and looking at what the members' activity looks like. So, an example would be 24% of members in a specific partnership took both a meditation class from Get Set Up and a caregiver class. And what we were seeing is the overlap in that signal was not just one class alone, but it prompted us to take a look at caregiver burnout and the need within our population and that partnership to reshape the program specifically for those outcomes. So it's just a good story and a good example to show that the engagement data revealing a need that we didn't know to look for prior to taking a look at those consumption habits and what members were coming for. So, you know, just cons... Confirming what was assumed, especially when you're taking a look at the entire journey of a member and engagement. Yeah. And, Adrianne, I think you, touched on something really important, and that is I mentioned early on in the presentation about the importance of creating more standardization in some places when we're thinking about measuring outcomes and engagement, but also offering that flexibility. And you mentioned this idea of measuring a decrease in confusion about given thing that needs to be done. And when I think about unique measures, like, that is right at the top of the list of things I would personally never think to measure. But, you know, if we didn't offer that flexibility, you wouldn't be able to capture that. And for your population, that is such a a critical metric of success that, you know, I think it's a a great example of making sure that we're giving that flexibility so that folks can tell us what matters most to their populations. So thank you for that. Thank you for that example, and thank you all. It's been a great conversation so far, and I'm really excited now to open this up to the audience. Like I said, we've got a few q and a's in the hopper. So I am going to transition us over to that now and start taking these questions. Please continue to add in your questions as we go. We'll try and get to as many as we can. And so we have one question here that asks, what has been the greatest barrier your organization has experienced? And I will put a little bit of a a finer point on that and say maybe what is the greatest barrier your organization has experienced with implementing these digital solutions? Or, Adrian, in your experience coming in to a new partnership, what's been the greatest barrier? And I'll open that up to the panelists. Yeah. I I I wasn't sure if you wanted me to start. Go for it. I I think every partnership looks and feels very different. And so I know we talked about those important pieces of getting started with a new partnership. And I think as long as we're level setting, you know, Get Set Up has been around for six years now. And so over that time, we've created new versions of ourselves based off of a lot of the feedback and a lot of the outcomes and a lot of the need that has evolved over the last six years. And, ultimately, it is staying flexible to be able to accomplish those needs as a partner being able to align with the needs of each individual organization and knowing what we need to do on our end to accomplish what the end game would be, as we think about those collaborated and, you know, the the outcomes that we're looking to accomplish together. Awesome. Thank you. Sarah, Lashonda, anything you all wanna add? Yeah. I think for for a health system such as ours, I definitely think that the barriers have been navigating all of the the up and coming digital health tools. There are so many in our industry now, and so it's understanding what is gonna work for your organization, for your patients, and prioritizing. Right? You know, with shrinking margins, there's only so many digital health tools we can adopt. And so, really, that's been the the greatest barrier is understanding what is going to be, the most successful, for our patient population. I like both answers Adrian and Sarah gave. But in the rural health space, the biggest barrier they have faced with implementing, digital health tools is education for their patient population. For some rural areas, you have patients who are 65 and older. Just really depends on the location. And so they... Adaptability to wanna use these digital tools, You know? Have they provided good education in reference to implementation to the actual patient population and also their staff as well too? Are the staff educated enough to be able to give the patient what they need to be successful with the program? So I'll say education. That's a that's a really great point, Lashonda. And I know that's something we heard a lot about too was this discrepancy between when a health plan is the one implementing a digital solution versus what knowledge the provider has about that solution and how can we help bridge that disconnect to really make sure that that is not the point of failure and so that everybody has as much information as possible about all these different tools. Because, you know, when you have 50 different tools, it it can be really hard to kind of manage those and understand the ins and outs in each and every one, especially in populations where they may need that additional support and understanding how to how to leverage it. Really great question. Alright. I am gonna keep running down this list. I'm gonna see how many we can get through in the next twelve or so minutes. Next question is where do you see... Where do you most often see the gap between what gets measured and what actually matters to members? We can start. I think oftentimes, you know, our traditional quality measures are, set sort of the check the box compliance and really lean into the clinical outcomes and the pathology for the patient. Ultimately, a patient wants to... We wanna understand... And a patient wants to understand how is this going to help me in my daily life. So it's whole body comes, mind, body, and spirit, right, not just what we view as, you know, health care providers at... As a successful, you know, quality measure. And so I think you've gotta build around that a little bit more rather than sort of these transactional care gaps and visits and things like that. Yeah. I'll double click on that one because, Sarah, I think the gap does show up exactly in what's easy to measure versus what's meaningful to measure because clicks and logins and app opens are easy to show up on a dashboard. But whether someone feels less less anxious or whether managing a diagnosis becomes a little bit easier with some of these tools, it takes a little bit more work. It's harder to instrument. Right? And because it's harder, sometimes it gets deprioritized. And I think there's a big gap there because those are the things that matter to members. And so it kinda ties back also to what Lashonda said about even the literacy point. Right? Educating those members on how to and those that are struggling to navigate. You know, sometimes that doesn't generate any engagement signal at all. And so we're measuring things in not the entirety of the population, right, just in a subset. And so I I think that that gap shows up more and more in maybe what's a little bit easier to report out versus what takes takes a little bit more on the back end? I think for rural providers and a lot of other providers as well, in between that gap falls the patient, the experience that the patient may have endured with those digital tools and then also providers. So capturing, the actual measurement and then what happens in the middle and then the patient, I also think there's that time where you have to look at those social determinants of health. So can that be the gap that's happening, in between what you want to see and what's actually going on with patients? So most often, it's that social determinants of health that we don't quite understand that patients may not be willing to, elaborate on initially, but just getting their experience. How can we capture that experience so we can get what we need to fill that gap? Yeah. Thank you. Thank you all so much. I think that question, you know, really helps us think about... And, Lashonda, as you just brought up, that importantness of capturing those social determinants of health. And, Sarah, you mentioned it too is, you know, when we think about measuring what matters, it's not just can we meet our quality metrics? Can we, you know, hit those marks? But are we actually having the impact, and do we have the data we need to have that desired impact? And I think that's, you know, one of those tensions that we have to continue to work through in this space. Alright. I think we've got time for one or two more questions. Alright. So the next one I'm seeing is what is the biggest misconception about digital health engagement? Lashonda, do you wanna start on this one? Oh, yes. I relate this so much to real life as we often see in some of our communities. We... You have a Burger King, a McDonald's, Biscuitville, a Arby's. And it always goes to show just because you bill it does not mean your actual patient population wants it. So I think the misconception about it is that if you bill it, they'll come. If you provide the services, they'll they'll be there. They'll use it, and that's not necessarily true. So you really have to understand what is your patient population and what do you really want out of it for the patient. Because in the bottom line, it's actually the patient that is going to benefit and also the provider benefit as well, but most likely the patient. So you really have to think about if I build this, am I going to uncover other barriers that may be in place because I have not got that patient experience and understand what my patient population is? And so it comes down to, you know, they'll they'll use it if we have it. Not necessarily true. So you really have to think about what your patient population and what that looks like. I'll just chime in, Lashonda. We say that all the time. Right? If they build it, they will not come. And one of the biggest misconceptions we see is that low engagement equals low interest, and that's not necessarily the case either. Right? So that literacy or access gap perhaps is not necessarily a motivation gap. Right? So it's one of those where knowing your population and understanding who we're serving, becomes increasingly important. You know? For example, there was a recent study, CVS Health Survey, did research on Medicare eligible adults, finding more than seven in ten Medicare members report confusion or uncertainty navigating health information online. However, eighty 6% of that same group said they were willing to use those digital health tools. Right? And so the gap between those two numbers really hones in on that point of access and literacy that people want. You know, members want to be good consumers and good users sometimes, or they want access to the education or the resources. They just might not be equipped yet. Right? And so I think that that's one piece to, you know, a big, also expensive misconception around digital health engagement. Right? Because nondigital members become your most expensive members too. And so thinking that those nondigital members are the shrinking edge case, it's actually the opposite. Right? Because it's more proactive point to land on where they're they're usually harder to serve because they rely on phone outreach, paper mailing, staff time. Right? And so the opportunity to turn into and look at digital health engagement as a chance to really start, you know, two steps in front. Right? Helping, educate, opening that front door, leaning into access, and then unlocking everything that, you know, all those tools and everything else is really the launching pad from there. I... I'll I'll just add really quickly. I think one of the biggest misconceptions is is taking volume over quality connections. More outreach, more touch points doesn't automatically equal better outcomes as we all have discussed. We have to understand what types of engagement really resonate with different populations, different generations, so we can leverage organizational resources effectively under really tight operating margins. And that is something that I think in the health care industry, we need to lean into more of and what we can learn from in other industries that have done, done this, you know, with... Such as retail, the service industry, etcetera. Amazing. Thank you all so, so much. Alright. So we have time for one more audience question, and then we're gonna transition into our closing question. So the last question we'll touch on today, and I think this is a a good question to end on because we've been dancing around this in some ways. And so I'll be curious to hear all of your thoughts on this. But in your experience, what separates a digital health program that truly engages people from one that just gets them signed up? What is that what is that difference? That's a, you know, a program that really seeks to understand the patients and the communities that it serves. And I think we, again, have to get out of our traditional box of looking at our quality measures and outcomes and understanding, from the patient perspective what is truly engaging to them, but also looking at it, Lashonda touched on this earlier, what are the socio... Social drivers of health and the socioeconomics of of that region or that patient population, and how does that impact, you know, their ability to engage with digital health? I think it... You know, we need to use those insights to drive that activation. And I think, as mentioned earlier, different populations, different generations, it resonates differently with with them. And so using beta testing to understand where we need to pivot for for certain populations and actively pursuing patient or member feedback to drive that testing. Thank you, Sarah. Adrianne, anything you wanna add? I was just gonna quickly add to that. The programs that are just signing people up are still treating members as a funnel stage. Right? So the ones in the programs that are actually engaging are starting to treat members as a source of information. They're telling us what they need and what they want, and so every interaction tells us what we need to build next, right, as a solution, as as a vendor. And so there becomes an opportunity for us to differentiate ourselves, right, to hone in on the engagement piece and to be better for providers by, you know, building the the next thing to serve what you need to serve your members. So Amazing. Thank you. Lashonda, I'll give you the final word on this question if you wanna add anything. Yes. I'll add this. Digital tools, platforms, apps, all vary across generations. I always talk about generations, and you really have to look at your patient population, where that generation falls. However, people always are evolving. And so when you create something that is necessary for them to use and also creates a benefit for them, this is where I think it comes from having a actual tool that they just sign up for and then a tool that's actually utilized. So getting that full patient, whole person experience on what they need and want to improve their care. So having that patient involved is going to make the big difference when it comes to what that practice can use and what's going to be helpful. Amazing. Thank you all. And I think one of the big takeaways that I have from today is the importance of looking at the whole person and engaging the whole person across all of your responses, and and we're not gonna have time to get it in... Get into it today. Otherwise, I I would ask you more questions about this. But the nonmedical social needs that folks often need support with in addition to their health or maintaining their well-being and just the the critical role and opportunity these apps have to play in that space and what you all hinted at today of the need to address those as well as the whole person, I think, is so important as we we think about the future of health and how we can support folks across that care continuum. And so with that in mind, I'm gonna ask our final question for today for all to respond to. How do you see expectations around digital health quality evolving over the next three to five years? Adrian, do you... Oh, or Sarah, do you wanna kick us off? I... I'm happy to. So I I think we can expect the bar to move from did people enroll to did this reach and work for the population that it claims to serve. Right? So the the shift in framework, you know, and it... It's a it's a good place for us to kind of think through what those outcomes look like. Right? And I think we can expect literacy and access to move from, you know, a small piece to a required part of reporting, especially as we heard from Lashonda talk about, you know, the the the demographic that she's serving and the rural population. And it's not just an equity add on. It's a core measurement question. Right? Because you can't credibly claim population level impact if we're excluding certain populations. Right? And especially, you know, it gets set up. We serve older adults, 55. And so, you know, you're focusing on some of these populations that are are sometimes, you know, looked over. And, the other piece we didn't really get to talk about too much, but, safe, secure AI use and supporting the wider range of members who need to navigate that environment. Right? I think it'll become increasingly important in helping to overcome frauds and scams and, you know, helping these demographics be able to navigate that world. I think we're gonna see that change maybe even faster than the next three to five years. But then, finally, the ever evolving accountability. I think there's... The shared standard, like, DHE accreditation is just a preview of some of the mandatory reporting that is probably headed our way, especially as more and more tools are out there and market confusion continues to be a thing. But that external verification will likely stop being a differentiator and maybe be expectation to be able to work together and collaborate. So, anyway, some initial thoughts. I think I'm just piggybacking off of what Adrian has said. I think we're we're witnessing an evolution in how digital health quality will be. In the early stages of digital health, we really focused on adoption and access. And and over the next few years, probably into the next decade or so, with so many tools and vendors coming onto the market, really, we... They need to differentiate themselves. And so the way that we're... They're gonna need to do that is, you know, moving away from just looking at adoption and access and and truly how does this support patients in their care. And so, again, really shifting from those superficial type outcomes to driving results and outcomes across populations. And so that quality paradigm is really going to rapidly mature over the next couple years, I believe. And, Lashonda, we'll give you the final word. I have always been, kinda on the cutting edge of this digital evolving matrix. And I love it because with the value based purchasing growing very rapidly, I think there's gonna be high demand around those digital tools that patients can use to improve their care. Also similar to telehealth when we were in COVID, it was a big push for that. And patients had the actual change, right, to make sure it was acceptable. They didn't... They want to go into the practice even though COVID was still, high, and people were dying from COVID, but they still wanted to go to get care. But the push for telehealth also made them involved as well. So I think with digital tools, it'll also make them evolve. You have all those social apps where a lot of the aging population are using them now. I have aunts and uncles who are 70 and 80 that are on Facebook. And I'm like, what are you doing there? And they're like, okay. I wanna see what's going on as well. So I think it's gonna be that growth of, okay. People are using these digital apps. What is my quality gonna look like? How can I use this information to make sure I'm also getting the patient outcomes I deserve? And also using it as a choice as well. So you have telehealth. You have inpatient. You have voice appointments that you can use. You can also use this digital plat, platform or app or tool to improve care. So it's an option. And I think it's gonna grow, and I think it's gonna be prosperous. And I love it. I love to see it happening. Amazing. I... We are just about at 02:00, 01:59. So I want to just thank you all so much for your candor today. It was a great conversation, and thank you to all of our audience members for joining us for this fantastic conversation. If you wanna learn more about the digital health engagement accreditation that we've been referencing today, the link is on the screen for you. And, also, if you wanna continue having conversations like this, we encourage you to join us this year at our Health Innovation Summit. It's gonna happen from the fourth to the seventh in Atlanta, Georgia. We would love to see you there. And, just one more thank you to all of our panelists today for a great conversation. I hope you all have a great rest of your day.