Why should remote treatments be delayed in the age of smartphones?

The Ministry of Health and Welfare announced Tuesday that it would seek to revise medical law calling for the implementation of remote medical services from 2015 that would allow patients to receive medical treatment via information technology (IT) devices from the comfort of their homes. Despite heated debates over remote treatments, little progress had been made due to occupational self-interest in the medical community. The latest announcement would unlatch the closed door albeit to a limited extent. Banning remote medical services is an outdated regulation in the medical services industry, together with the restrictions on for-profit hospitals. However, lifting the regulations is expected to sail through a rough sea due to resistance from the medical services industry.

Most advanced countries broadly allow remote medical treatments. The United States has been implementing the services since it enacted a relevant federal law in 1997. Since the same year, Japan has allowed remote treatments of repeat patients with chronic diseases and people living in remote areas and electronic billing of medical expenses. It is a shame on Korea that has not been able to introduce the system despite its world-class level of IT and ability to use information.

Remote treatments are a typical product of creative economy in that they combine IT and services. There is no reason to postpone any further the introduction of remote treatments, considering the global trends and increased benefits for medical consumers. These days, medical doctors make diagnoses just by looking at charts without having to look at patients. This indicates that the conditions for remote treatments have matured. Allowing physicians to issue prescriptions to diabetic patients who sent their blood sugar levels via smartphones is possible any time, considering Koreans` high level of abilities to use IT devices.

The health ministry has decided to introduce remote treatments to local clinics first in order to prevent neighborhood clinics from being losing out in competition and remove medical blind spots. This is introduced for patients with such chronic diseases as high blood pressures, diabetes and mental diseases or the elderly, the disabled and those living in remote areas to receive remote treatments from local clinics. Although the new system can potentially provide new opportunities for neighborhood clinics, depending on how they respond to the new challenge, the Korean Medical Association`s unconditional opposition could be seen as a move to protect the interest of doctors. The government should overcome a certain level of resistance in order to provide medical services based on new technologies for medical consumers.

Still, the medical community`s concerns have their own share of grounds. It is very likely that remote medical services will send much more patients rushing to large hospitals, which are allowed to perform remote treatments for surgery patients. More than half of rural villages do not even have obstetricians and gynecologists who would help deliver newborns. If neighborhood clinics collapse, the impact would affect not only the doctors but also patients who cannot get right treatments at the right time. Such issues should be addressed during the process of the implementation of remote treatments.