Each replay uses a recreated ChatGPT interface so the placement can be read in its original conversational context. It is not a live or embedded chat.

1. ObservedJul 17, 2026Conversation1 turnsPlacementAfter turn 01 turns · After turn 0Replay chat
   Observed conversationJul 17, 2026 · interface recreation

   ChatGPTArchived view

   Healthcare sustainability initiatives. Where can tech meaningfully reduce carbon footprint and costs simultaneously?

   Healthcare is responsible for an estimated 4–5% of global greenhouse gas emissions, with major contributors including pharmaceuticals, medical devices, buildings, transportation, and supply chains. Technology can reduce both emissions and costs when it targets operational inefficiencies rather than simply digitizing existing processes.

   The strongest opportunities are:

   Area	Carbon impact	Cost impact	Technology examples
   Energy management	High	High	AI HVAC optimization, smart building controls
   Supply chain	High	High	Predictive inventory, RFID, digital twins
   Virtual care	Medium–High	High	Telehealth, remote monitoring
   Operating rooms	High	Medium	Instrument tracking, waste analytics
   Imaging & diagnostics	Medium	Medium	AI workflow optimization, cloud archiving
   Pharmaceuticals	High	Medium	Demand forecasting, cold-chain monitoring
   Clinical documentation	Low	Medium	Ambient AI, automation
   Fleet & logistics	Medium	Medium	Route optimization, EV fleet software

   1. Smart hospital energy management (highest ROI)

   Hospitals operate continuously and are among the most energy-intensive commercial buildings.

   Technology can:

   • Optimize HVAC in real time using occupancy sensors
   • Predict equipment failures before they waste energy
   • Coordinate operating room ventilation schedules
   • Automatically dim lighting and reduce unused loads

   Typical outcomes include:

   • 10–30% lower building energy consumption
   • Lower maintenance costs
   • Longer equipment life

   Examples:

   • AI building management systems
   • IoT sensor networks
   • Digital twins of facilities

   ---

   2. Supply chain optimization

   Healthcare often over-orders to avoid shortages.

   Consequences:

   • Expired medications
   • Unused surgical supplies
   • Emergency shipments
   • Excess warehouse inventory

   Technology helps by:

   • Predicting demand
   • Tracking inventory with RFID
   • Sharing stock across hospital systems
   • Identifying products with higher lifecycle emissions

   Benefits:

   • Less waste
   • Fewer overnight deliveries
   • Lower purchasing costs
   • Reduced landfill disposal

   ---

   3. Virtual care and remote monitoring

   Many outpatient visits do not require physical presence.

   Technology:

   • Telemedicine
   • Remote patient monitoring
   • Home diagnostic devices
   • AI triage

   Carbon reductions come from:

   • Less patient travel
   • Less staff commuting
   • Lower facility utilization

   Cost reductions:

   • Reduced no-show rates
   • Lower infrastructure costs
   • Earlier intervention preventing admissions

   This is especially impactful for chronic disease management.

   ---

   4. Operating room sustainability

   Operating rooms can account for a disproportionately large share of a hospital's waste and energy use.

   Technology opportunities:

   • Instrument tracking
   • Sterilization optimization
   • AI case scheduling
   • Waste analytics
   • Inventory prediction

   Benefits:

   • Fewer opened-but-unused supplies
   • Less reprocessing
   • Reduced regulated medical waste
   • Lower purchasing costs

   ---

   5. Imaging optimization

   Medical imaging consumes significant electricity and often leads to repeat scans.

   Technology can:

   • Reduce repeat imaging through AI quality assurance
   • Optimize scanner scheduling
   • Move archives to energy-efficient cloud infrastructure
   • Compress image storage intelligently

   Savings:

   • Less scanner idle time
   • Lower storage costs
   • Reduced electricity usage

   ---

   6. Pharmaceutical and vaccine logistics

   Cold-chain management is energy intensive.

   Technology includes:

   • IoT temperature sensors
   • Predictive maintenance for refrigeration
   • AI demand forecasting
   • Route optimization

   Benefits:

   • Fewer spoiled medications
   • Reduced emergency shipping
   • Lower refrigeration energy use

   ---

   7. Clinical workflow automation

   Administrative work itself has a relatively small carbon footprint, but inefficient workflows indirectly increase resource use.

   Technology:

   • Ambient AI documentation
   • Automated coding
   • Electronic prior authorization
   • Intelligent scheduling

   Primary benefit:

   • Reduced labor costs
   • Improved clinician productivity
   • Fewer unnecessary repeat appointments

   Carbon savings are modest but accumulate through fewer redundant visits and better resource utilization.

   ---

   8. Transportation and logistics

   Healthcare systems operate extensive transportation networks.

   Technology:

   • Route optimization
   • Dynamic scheduling
   • Fleet telematics
   • Delivery consolidation

   Benefits:

   • Lower fuel consumption
   • Reduced maintenance
   • Faster deliveries

   ---

   AI-enabled predictive maintenance

   Hospitals own thousands of high-value assets:

   • MRI scanners
   • CT scanners
   • HVAC systems
   • Sterilizers
   • Laboratory analyzers

   Predictive maintenance:

   • Reduces downtime
   • Extends equipment lifespan
   • Prevents energy inefficiencies
   • Avoids premature replacement

   This is a strong example of sustainability aligning with financial performance.

   ---

   Carbon-aware procurement

   A large share of healthcare emissions comes from purchased goods rather than direct operations.

   Technology platforms can:

   • Measure supplier emissions
   • Compare lifecycle footprints
   • Model reusable versus disposable products
   • Optimize purchasing decisions

   This enables procurement teams to balance cost, clinical requirements, and environmental impact.

   ---

   Where AI has the greatest leverage

   AI is most valuable where it improves operational decisions:

   • Forecasting patient demand
   • Staffing optimization
   • Inventory management
   • Predictive maintenance
   • Building energy control
   • Operating room scheduling
   • Clinical decision support that reduces unnecessary testing

   These applications reduce waste while maintaining or improving quality of care.

   Areas where sustainability and cost savings align best

   Some initiatives consistently deliver both environmental and financial benefits:

   1. Smart building energy management (lower utility bills and emissions)
   2. Inventory optimization (less expired stock and fewer purchases)
   3. Telehealth for appropriate use cases (less travel and lower facility costs)
   4. Operating room waste reduction (lower supply and disposal costs)
   5. Predictive maintenance (longer asset life and reduced energy waste)
   6. Logistics optimization (lower fuel use and transportation expenses)

   The common pattern is that the biggest wins come from reducing wasted energy, materials, and unnecessary activity. These improvements often lower operating costs while also reducing emissions, making them easier to justify than sustainability projects that require trade-offs between environmental and financial goals.

   

   Becker's HealthcareAd

   Top Health Execs Convene HereJoin 2,500+ executives shaping health IT, digital health and RCM.
2. ObservedJul 17, 2026Conversation1 turnsPlacementAfter turn 01 turns · After turn 0Replay chat
   Observed conversationJul 17, 2026 · interface recreation

   ChatGPTArchived view

   Health system platform strategy. Build comprehensive platforms or best-of-breed with strong integration layer?

   For most health systems today, the decision is no longer "platform or best-of-breed." The leading strategy is increasingly platform-first with selective best-of-breed extensions connected through a strong integration and interoperability layer.

   The right answer depends on the organization's size, digital maturity, and strategic priorities.

   Strategy	Advantages	Disadvantages	Best fit
   Comprehensive platform	Simplified operations, unified data model, lower integration complexity, consistent UX, easier governance	Vendor lock-in, slower innovation, weaker functionality in some domains	Smaller systems, organizations prioritizing standardization
   Best-of-breed	Best functionality in each clinical or operational area, faster innovation, greater flexibility	High integration costs, fragmented workflows, duplicate data, governance complexity	Large academic systems, organizations with strong IT capabilities
   Platform + integration layer (hybrid)	Core consistency with targeted innovation, lower long-term risk, easier vendor replacement	Requires mature architecture and interoperability governance	Most regional and national health systems

   Why the industry is moving toward hybrid

   Health systems have learned that neither extreme consistently delivers.

   A single enterprise platform often struggles to keep pace with innovation in areas like:

   • AI-enabled clinical decision support
   • Digital front door and patient engagement
   • Remote patient monitoring
   • Specialty workflows
   • Revenue cycle optimization
   • Precision medicine
   • Workforce management

   Conversely, organizations that accumulated dozens or hundreds of point solutions now face:

   • Clinician burnout from multiple interfaces
   • Integration maintenance costs
   • Inconsistent patient identity
   • Data quality challenges
   • Difficult AI deployment due to fragmented data

   A modern platform strategy

   Many CIOs are organizing technology into four layers:

   1. Enterprise core

   • EHR
   • ERP
   • Identity and access management
   • Revenue cycle
   • Enterprise imaging
   • Master patient index

   These become systems of record.

   2. Integration and interoperability layer This becomes a strategic capability rather than just middleware.

   Key capabilities include:

   • API management
   • Event-driven architecture
   • HL7/FHIR interoperability
   • Enterprise service bus or integration platform
   • Identity resolution
   • Consent management
   • Terminology services
   • Workflow orchestration

   This layer allows applications to connect without tight coupling.

   3. Shared enterprise services Examples include:

   • Enterprise data platform
   • Analytics
   • AI services
   • Document management
   • Notification services
   • Clinical terminology
   • Search
   • Security
   • Audit logging

   These services avoid duplication across applications.

   4. Best-of-breed applications Used where they create meaningful differentiation, such as:

   • Oncology
   • Cardiology
   • Behavioral health
   • Virtual care
   • Patient engagement
   • Ambient documentation
   • Clinical AI
   • Population health
   • Care management

   Decision framework

   Consider each application across four dimensions:

   Question	Platform preferred	Best-of-breed preferred
   Is it a commodity capability?	✓
   Is deep clinical differentiation important?		✓
   Does it require extensive workflow integration?	✓
   Is the market innovating rapidly?		✓
   Is replacing it expensive?	✓
   Does it create competitive advantage?		✓

   Critical success factors

   A hybrid strategy succeeds when organizations invest in:

   • Enterprise architecture governance
   • API-first standards
   • FHIR and event-driven integration
   • Cloud-native integration platforms
   • Canonical data models where appropriate
   • Strong vendor management
   • Data governance
   • Product management rather than project management

   Without these disciplines, hybrid environments can become difficult to maintain.

   Emerging trend: Platform ecosystems

   The newest evolution is from monolithic platforms to platform ecosystems. Rather than building every capability, core vendors expose APIs and marketplaces, allowing health systems to add specialized applications while preserving a consistent user experience and shared data foundation. This approach aims to combine the stability of a core platform with the flexibility to adopt innovative solutions more quickly.

   Recommendation

   For a large integrated delivery network or academic medical center, the most resilient strategy is:

   • Standardize on a small number of enterprise platforms for core systems of record.
   • Invest heavily in a modern interoperability and data platform that supports APIs, events, and standardized data exchange.
   • Adopt best-of-breed solutions selectively where they provide measurable clinical, operational, or patient experience advantages.
   • Apply architectural governance so every new application integrates through shared services rather than point-to-point interfaces.

   This balances operational simplicity with the flexibility to adopt new technologies, particularly AI and digital health capabilities, without being constrained by a single vendor's roadmap.

   

   Becker's HealthcareAd

   Top Health Execs Convene HereJoin 2,500+ executives shaping health IT, digital health and RCM.
3. ObservedJul 17, 2026Conversation1 turnsPlacementAfter turn 01 turns · After turn 0Replay chat
   Observed conversationJul 17, 2026 · interface recreation

   ChatGPTArchived view

   Evaluating DTx opportunities. Reimbursement pathways, evidence requirements, and go-to-market strategies in the current environment?

   The digital therapeutics (DTx) market has matured from "Can we get FDA clearance?" to "Can we get paid?" Today, commercial success depends much more on reimbursement strategy, clinical evidence, and workflow integration than on the software itself.

   Here's how I would evaluate opportunities in the current (2026) environment.

   Area	Current reality	Implication
   Regulatory	FDA pathways are increasingly understood	Necessary but no longer sufficient
   Reimbursement	Still fragmented in the U.S.	Biggest commercial bottleneck
   Evidence	Payers expect clinical + economic outcomes	RCT alone rarely enough
   Buyers	Providers and payers more selective	Clear ROI required
   Investment	Capital favors focused indications	Broad wellness plays struggle

   1. Reimbursement pathways

   There is no single dominant reimbursement pathway in the U.S., which makes GTM strategy highly indication-dependent.

   A. Prescription DTx (FDA-cleared)

   Typical options include:

   • Commercial payer contracts
   • Employer-sponsored benefits
   • Integrated delivery networks
   • Medicaid pilots
   • Emerging Medicare pathways (limited)

   The biggest development has been CMS recognizing reimbursement for certain digital mental health treatment devices through new payment mechanisms beginning in 2025, although coverage remains narrow rather than universal.

   B. Provider-billed services

   Many successful companies generate revenue through:

   • Remote Therapeutic Monitoring (RTM)
   • Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM)
   • Chronic Care Management
   • Behavioral health integration
   • Care coordination

   Rather than selling "software," they support reimbursable clinical services.

   C. Risk/value-based contracts

   Increasingly attractive because DTx naturally generate outcome data.

   Examples:

   • PMPM payments
   • Shared savings
   • Episode-of-care models
   • Reduced utilization guarantees

   These models align well with accountable care organizations and self-insured employers.

   ---

   2. Evidence expectations

   Evidence requirements have become substantially higher.

   Minimum bar

   • Prospective clinical study
   • Safety
   • Usability
   • Engagement
   • Meaningful clinical endpoint

   Competitive bar

   Increasingly includes:

   • Randomized controlled trial(s)
   • Real-world evidence
   • Longitudinal adherence
   • Health economics
   • Budget impact modeling

   Payers now ask:

   Does this reduce costs enough to justify reimbursement?

   rather than

   Does it improve symptoms?

   ---

   3. Health economic evidence

   This is often what separates winners from technically good products.

   Strong dossiers include:

   • Reduced hospitalizations
   • Lower ED utilization
   • Medication optimization
   • Fewer specialist visits
   • Increased guideline adherence
   • Productivity improvements
   • Reduced absenteeism

   The health economic model should be indication-specific.

   For example:

   Diabetes:

   • HbA1c improvement
   • fewer complications
   • fewer admissions

   Insomnia:

   • reduced medication use
   • fewer accidents
   • improved productivity

   Behavioral health:

   • fewer crises
   • lower hospitalization
   • improved retention

   ---

   4. Best commercial indications today

   The strongest reimbursement environments generally exist where:

   • disease burden is high
   • costs are measurable
   • outcomes occur within 6–18 months
   • providers already bill related services

   Examples include:

   Strong

   • Diabetes
   • Hypertension
   • Heart failure
   • COPD
   • Mental health
   • Substance use disorder
   • Musculoskeletal rehabilitation

   Moderate

   • ADHD
   • Migraine
   • Sleep
   • Women's health

   More difficult

   • General wellness
   • Prevention-only products
   • Lifestyle coaching without clinical endpoints

   ---

   5. Go-to-market strategies

   The most successful companies today rarely rely on a single channel.

   Provider-first

   Sell to:

   • health systems
   • specialty clinics
   • physician groups

   Advantages:

   • clinical credibility
   • reimbursement infrastructure
   • easier workflow integration

   Challenge:

   • slow enterprise sales

   ---

   Payer-first

   Direct contracting with insurers.

   Requires:

   • strong HEOR
   • actuarial evidence
   • utilization reduction

   Works best when the disease drives substantial costs.

   ---

   Employer-first

   Still viable for:

   • mental health
   • MSK
   • diabetes
   • obesity
   • women's health

   Employers care about:

   • absenteeism
   • productivity
   • disability claims
   • pharmacy spend

   Sales cycles are generally shorter than with national health plans.

   ---

   Pharma partnerships

   Increasingly attractive.

   Models include:

   • companion therapeutics
   • adherence support
   • digital biomarkers
   • patient engagement
   • combination therapy

   Many pharmaceutical companies now view DTx as a lifecycle management and outcomes-improvement tool rather than a standalone product.

   ---

   6. What investors and buyers now prioritize

   Compared with five years ago, diligence has shifted.

   Earlier focus:

   • FDA clearance
   • app engagement
   • downloads

   Current focus:

   • reimbursement pathway
   • provider adoption
   • utilization
   • gross margins
   • persistence
   • economic outcomes
   • scalability

   Questions you'll often hear include:

   • Who actually pays?
   • Who writes the prescription?
   • Who bills?
   • Who renews?
   • What is the sales cycle?
   • What is the cost per activated patient?

   ---

   7. Major risks

   Common commercialization challenges include:

   • Low sustained engagement
   • Complex provider workflows
   • Limited payer coverage
   • Weak health economic evidence
   • High customer acquisition costs
   • Long enterprise sales cycles
   • Difficulty integrating into EHRs

   ---

   8. International opportunities

   Outside the U.S., reimbursement is often more structured.

   Examples include:

   • Germany's DiGA framework, which offers a fast-track route to statutory reimbursement after demonstrating positive healthcare effects.
   • The U.K., where adoption is typically mediated through regional procurement and evaluation processes rather than a national DTx reimbursement benefit.
   • France and several Nordic countries are expanding digital health reimbursement through pilots and condition-specific programs.

   ---

   Strategic framework for evaluating DTx opportunities

   When assessing a DTx company or product, I would score it across five dimensions:

   1. Clinical value: Is there robust evidence of meaningful patient benefit?
   2. Economic value: Can the product demonstrate measurable reductions in healthcare costs or improved productivity?
   3. Reimbursement fit: Is there a realistic, existing pathway to payment, or will one need to be created?
   4. Workflow integration: Does the solution fit naturally into clinician workflows and electronic health record systems?
   5. Commercial scalability: Can the company efficiently acquire customers and expand beyond early pilot programs?

   The current environment favors DTx companies that address high-cost chronic conditions, integrate into existing care delivery and reimbursement models, and generate compelling real-world and economic evidence—not simply those with novel software or regulatory clearance. Recent policy discussions, including proposed federal legislation to establish a dedicated Medicare benefit for prescription DTx, reflect ongoing momentum but do not yet eliminate the need for indication-specific commercialization strategies.

   

   Becker's HealthcareAd

   Top Health Execs Convene HereJoin 2,500+ executives shaping health IT, digital health and RCM.
4. ObservedJul 17, 2026Conversation1 turnsPlacementAfter turn 01 turns · After turn 0Replay chat
   Observed conversationJul 17, 2026 · interface recreation

   ChatGPTArchived view

   Health tech M&A landscape. What types of acquisitions are creating real value versus just adding complexity right now?

   The current health tech M&A environment is much more disciplined than it was in 2020–2021. Buyers are generally looking for acquisitions that solve a specific strategic problem—improving clinical workflows, reducing administrative costs, or strengthening data capabilities—rather than simply expanding into adjacent markets.

   The acquisitions creating the most value tend to share a few characteristics.

   Acquisition type	Why it's creating value	Main risks
   AI embedded into existing workflows	Improves productivity for clinicians or administrative staff without requiring behavior change	AI hype exceeding measurable ROI
   Revenue cycle & administrative automation	Direct, measurable cost savings and faster reimbursement	Integration with legacy systems
   Healthcare data & interoperability	Makes existing products more valuable by connecting fragmented data	Regulatory and data governance challenges
   Specialty clinical software	Deep solutions for high-value specialties (oncology, cardiology, behavioral health, etc.)	Limited expansion beyond niche markets
   Home care & remote monitoring platforms	Supports value-based care and aging populations	Reimbursement uncertainty
   Cybersecurity & compliance	Increasingly essential due to rising healthcare cyberattacks	Difficult to differentiate vendors

   Where buyers are finding real value

   1. AI that augments existing software—not standalone AI

   The strongest deals involve AI capabilities that can be embedded into established healthcare platforms. Examples include:

   • Clinical documentation automation
   • Medical coding assistance
   • Prior authorization automation
   • Patient communication
   • Clinical decision support

   The value comes less from the AI model itself than from:

   • existing customer relationships
   • proprietary healthcare datasets
   • integration with clinical workflows
   • regulatory expertise

   A large EHR vendor acquiring an AI documentation company often creates more value than the AI startup remaining independent because distribution and workflow integration are already in place.

   ---

   2. Revenue cycle management (RCM)

   Healthcare providers continue to face staffing shortages and financial pressure.

   Acquisitions that automate:

   • coding
   • claims processing
   • denials management
   • eligibility verification
   • payment collection

   often have clear ROI because customers can directly measure:

   • lower labor costs
   • faster reimbursement
   • higher collection rates

   These economics are easier to justify than many purely consumer-focused digital health offerings.

   ---

   3. Data infrastructure

   Healthcare remains highly fragmented.

   Platforms that unify:

   • EHR data
   • imaging
   • claims
   • pharmacy
   • lab
   • wearable/device data

   become more valuable as they connect larger ecosystems.

   This is especially attractive because healthcare AI depends on clean, interoperable data.

   ---

   4. Vertical clinical software

   General-purpose platforms have become harder to differentiate.

   Instead, buyers are interested in software deeply tailored for specialties like:

   • oncology
   • radiology
   • cardiology
   • fertility
   • behavioral health
   • post-acute care

   These businesses often enjoy:

   • strong customer retention
   • specialized workflows
   • pricing power
   • lower competitive pressure

   ---

   Where acquisitions are adding complexity

   Several types of deals have struggled to deliver expected value.

   Platform roll-ups without integration

   Simply acquiring multiple healthcare software vendors doesn't necessarily create a unified platform.

   Common issues include:

   • multiple databases
   • inconsistent user interfaces
   • duplicate engineering teams
   • overlapping products
   • conflicting sales organizations

   Without meaningful product integration, customers often experience increased complexity rather than improved functionality.

   ---

   Buying users instead of capabilities

   During the digital health boom, many acquisitions focused on:

   • member growth
   • app downloads
   • virtual care utilization

   Today, buyers are placing greater emphasis on sustainable economics:

   • customer retention
   • recurring revenue
   • profitability
   • workflow integration

   ---

   Overlapping point solutions

   Many health systems already manage dozens or even hundreds of specialized applications.

   Acquiring another standalone tool can increase:

   • IT burden
   • security risk
   • clinician fatigue
   • integration costs

   This is why buyers increasingly favor platforms that consolidate functions rather than add another isolated application.

   ---

   What strategic buyers are prioritizing

   Health tech acquirers are generally evaluating targets across several dimensions:

   • Workflow fit: Does the product integrate naturally into how clinicians or administrative teams already work?
   • Recurring revenue: Subscription or transaction-based revenue tends to be more attractive than one-time implementation fees.
   • Data advantage: Proprietary, high-quality healthcare data can strengthen both current products and future AI capabilities.
   • Regulatory readiness: Established compliance with healthcare regulations can reduce execution risk.
   • Cross-sell potential: Existing customer relationships that enable broader product adoption often increase acquisition value.

   Outlook

   Over the next few years, the most successful health tech acquisitions are likely to be those that strengthen an existing platform rather than expand into unrelated areas. Buyers are increasingly focused on acquiring capabilities that improve productivity, automate administrative work, and make better use of healthcare data, especially where AI can deliver measurable operational or clinical benefits.

   In contrast, acquisitions that simply add another standalone product, duplicate existing functionality, or create a more fragmented technology stack are less likely to generate lasting value unless accompanied by a clear integration strategy and a compelling economic rationale.

   

   Becker's HealthcareAd

   Top Health Execs Convene HereJoin 2,500+ executives shaping health IT, digital health and RCM.
5. ObservedJul 17, 2026Conversation1 turnsPlacementAfter turn 01 turns · After turn 0Replay chat
   Observed conversationJul 17, 2026 · interface recreation

   ChatGPTArchived view

   Epic and Cerner still dominate but there's growing interest in composable EHR architectures. Is this a real trend or hype? How should a health system evaluate their options?

   Yes—it's a real trend, but it's also surrounded by hype.

   The short version is that most large health systems are not replacing Epic or Cerner/Oracle Health with fully composable EHRs. Instead, they're increasingly adopting composable architectures around their core EHR to gain flexibility without giving up the stability and workflow integration of a mature platform.

   Here's how I'd think about it.

   Why composable architectures are gaining traction

   Traditional EHRs evolved as integrated suites. That delivered important advantages:

   • One patient record
   • Unified clinical workflows
   • Single security model
   • Mature billing and regulatory support
   • Large implementation ecosystem

   The downside is slower innovation. Health systems often wait years for new functionality or have to accept vendor priorities.

   Composable architecture tries to separate the platform from the applications.

   Instead of asking:

   "Can Epic do this?"

   organizations ask:

   "Can we plug in the best application for this capability?"

   Examples include:

   • AI clinical documentation
   • Digital front door applications
   • Patient engagement
   • Specialty workflow apps
   • Remote monitoring
   • Clinical decision support
   • Care management
   • Revenue cycle optimization

   Rather than replacing the EHR, these applications communicate through APIs, interoperability standards, and event streams.

   ---

   What's enabling this shift?

   Several industry changes have made this more practical than it was a decade ago.

   FHIR APIs

   FHIR dramatically lowered the barrier for exchanging clinical data compared with older HL7 interfaces.

   SMART on FHIR

   Applications can increasingly launch directly inside clinician workflows.

   Cloud-native software

   Vendors can update continuously rather than waiting for major EHR upgrade cycles.

   AI

   Generative AI vendors rarely want to build complete EHRs—they want access to clinical context while providing specialized capabilities.

   ---

   Where the hype begins

   Some presentations imply that hospitals will assemble their own "best-of-breed" EHR from dozens of microservices.

   In reality, that remains difficult.

   Healthcare is unusually complex because clinical systems must support:

   • medication ordering
   • documentation
   • scheduling
   • billing
   • regulatory reporting
   • quality measures
   • patient safety
   • audit trails
   • downtime procedures

   Those functions are tightly coupled.

   Every additional application creates:

   • governance challenges
   • security reviews
   • identity management
   • integration maintenance
   • vendor management
   • testing burden

   The result is that complexity moves—it doesn't disappear.

   ---

   A practical architecture many health systems are adopting

   Increasingly, organizations look something like this:

                     AI applications
   
   Digital front door
   
   Remote monitoring
   
   Specialty workflow apps
   
   Clinical decision support
   
   Analytics platform
   
   -------------------------------
   
    Integration / API layer
   
    Event streaming
   
    Identity
   
    FHIR
   
   -------------------------------
   
    Epic / Oracle Health
    (system of record)
   

   The EHR remains the source of truth while innovation happens above it.

   This is arguably a more realistic version of composability.

   ---

   How should a health system evaluate its options?

   Rather than asking "Should we go composable?", ask a series of architectural questions.

   Question	Traditional suite	Composable approach
   Clinical stability	Excellent	Depends on governance
   Innovation speed	Moderate	High
   Vendor dependence	High	Lower
   Integration effort	Lower	Higher
   Operational complexity	Lower	Higher
   Ability to adopt AI	Improving	Often stronger
   Long-term flexibility	Moderate	High

   ---

   A useful decision framework

   Evaluate each capability separately.

   Keep in the core EHR when:

   • patient safety is paramount
   • workflow integration is essential
   • regulations are extensive
   • functionality is mature

   Examples:

   • CPOE
   • medication administration
   • core documentation
   • billing
   • results review

   Consider composable solutions when:

   • innovation is rapid
   • AI provides meaningful differentiation
   • clinicians want specialized workflows
   • vendors innovate faster than the EHR

   Examples:

   • ambient documentation
   • patient messaging
   • care navigation
   • remote monitoring
   • scheduling optimization
   • specialty clinical pathways

   ---

   Questions to ask every vendor

   A health system evaluating a composable component should ask:

   • Can it operate independently of one EHR vendor?
   • Does it support open APIs and FHIR?
   • How much data replication is required?
   • Who owns workflow orchestration?
   • What happens if the application fails?
   • Can clinicians continue working?
   • How difficult is it to replace this vendor later?
   • How will upgrades be coordinated?
   • Does it introduce another patient identity or security boundary?

   These questions often matter more than feature comparisons.

   The strategic perspective

   For most large integrated delivery networks over the next 5–10 years, the likely destination is not a fully composable EHR assembled from interchangeable parts. It's a hybrid architecture:

   • A mature enterprise EHR (Epic or Oracle Health) remains the transactional system of record.
   • An interoperability and integration layer provides APIs, identity, and eventing.
   • Best-of-breed applications deliver differentiated capabilities—especially AI, patient engagement, analytics, and specialty workflows.
   • Governance focuses on preventing integration sprawl while enabling faster innovation.

   In that sense, composable architecture is less about replacing incumbent EHRs and more about changing where innovation happens. The core EHR continues to handle safety-critical transactions, while the surrounding ecosystem becomes increasingly modular. That shift is already underway at many health systems, even if the vision of a completely interchangeable "plug-and-play" EHR remains farther off.

   

   Becker's HealthcareAd

   Top Health Execs Convene HereJoin 2,500+ executives shaping health IT, digital health and RCM.
6. ObservedJul 17, 2026Conversation1 turnsPlacementAfter turn 01 turns · After turn 0Replay chat
   Observed conversationJul 17, 2026 · interface recreation

   ChatGPTArchived view

   Post-pandemic virtual care utilization has stabilized but margins are thin. How should health systems evolve their virtual strategy — hybrid models, asynchronous care, or something else?

   The short answer is that most health systems should stop thinking of "virtual care" as a separate service line and instead treat it as one capability within an integrated care delivery model. The question is less "How many video visits should we do?" and more "Which interactions should happen synchronously, asynchronously, virtually, or in person to maximize outcomes, patient experience, clinician productivity, and financial sustainability?"

   Here's how many health systems are evolving their strategies.

   1. Hybrid care becomes the default, not virtual-first

   The pandemic demonstrated that many encounters can occur remotely, but it also exposed the limitations of making video visits the centerpiece.

   Instead, leading organizations increasingly design longitudinal care journeys that combine:

   • In-person visits when physical examination or procedures are needed
   • Video for complex conversations and follow-up
   • Phone when clinically appropriate
   • Secure messaging for low-complexity issues
   • Remote monitoring for chronic disease
   • Digital education and self-management tools

   Patients experience this as one continuous care pathway rather than switching between separate "virtual" and "physical" systems.

   2. Asynchronous care is likely underutilized

   Many organizations still rely heavily on scheduled video appointments, even when they are unnecessary.

   High-value asynchronous workflows include:

   • Medication adjustments
   • Lab review
   • Blood pressure management
   • Diabetes titration
   • Dermatology image review
   • Behavioral health check-ins
   • Post-operative recovery monitoring
   • Prescription renewals
   • Preventive care reminders

   Benefits include:

   • Higher clinician productivity
   • Greater patient convenience
   • Reduced scheduling bottlenecks
   • Lower delivery costs
   • Faster response times

   The challenge is reimbursement. Fee-for-service payment often rewards synchronous encounters, while value-based contracts better support asynchronous care.

   3. Remote patient monitoring should become targeted

   Early enthusiasm led some systems to deploy remote monitoring broadly, but many programs struggled financially.

   Successful programs tend to focus on patients with:

   • Heart failure
   • Hypertension
   • Diabetes
   • COPD
   • High-risk pregnancy
   • Post-discharge transitions

   These populations have enough clinical risk and utilization to justify the investment in monitoring infrastructure.

   4. AI can reduce clinician workload more than replace visits

   The biggest near-term opportunity may not be replacing clinicians but reducing administrative burden.

   Examples include:

   • AI-assisted documentation
   • Inbox triage
   • Patient message drafting
   • Care gap identification
   • Automated follow-up
   • Clinical decision support
   • Routing patients to the appropriate level of care

   This can help address one of virtual care's biggest hidden costs: clinician time spent managing digital communication.

   5. Digital front doors should support navigation, not just access

   Many health systems invested heavily in online scheduling and video platforms.

   The next evolution is intelligent navigation that helps patients determine:

   • Whether they need care
   • What type of care is appropriate
   • How urgently they should be seen
   • Which clinician or service best fits their needs

   Reducing unnecessary emergency department visits or specialty referrals can improve both patient experience and resource utilization.

   6. Payment model matters

   Strategy depends heavily on reimbursement.

   • Fee-for-service: Video visits often substitute for office visits, making reimbursement parity important.
   • Shared savings/value-based care: Reducing avoidable utilization, improving chronic disease management, and increasing patient engagement become stronger priorities.
   • Capitated models: Health systems have greater flexibility to use asynchronous messaging, remote monitoring, and team-based care because revenue is less tied to individual encounters.

   Organizations with a larger share of value-based contracts often have stronger incentives to redesign care around efficiency and outcomes rather than visit volume.

   7. Measure success beyond visit counts

   A mature virtual strategy emphasizes operational and clinical outcomes rather than the number of telehealth visits.

   Useful metrics include:

   Domain	Example measures
   Access	Time to appointment, same-day access
   Quality	Disease control, readmissions, adherence
   Patient experience	Satisfaction, digital engagement, retention
   Financial	Cost per episode, contribution margin, avoided utilization
   Workforce	Clinician panel size, burnout, inbox burden
   Equity	Utilization across age, race, language, rurality, broadband access

   A practical operating model

   A sustainable approach often looks like this:

   Interaction	Best modality
   New complex diagnosis	In-person or video
   Routine follow-up	Video or asynchronous
   Medication refill	Asynchronous
   Chronic disease management	Hybrid + remote monitoring
   Behavioral health	Mostly virtual with periodic in-person care
   Post-discharge follow-up	Virtual plus remote monitoring when indicated
   Preventive outreach	Automated digital engagement and messaging
   Acute minor illness	On-demand virtual triage with escalation as needed

   Strategic direction

   Over the next five years, competitive advantage is likely to come less from offering telehealth itself—which has become a standard capability—and more from orchestrating care across modalities. Health systems that integrate asynchronous communication, targeted remote monitoring, AI-supported workflows, and team-based care into a seamless hybrid model are better positioned to improve access and patient experience while controlling costs. Success will depend on aligning these capabilities with payment models, clinical workflows, and measurable outcomes rather than maximizing virtual visit volume alone.

   

   Becker's HealthcareAd

   Top Health Execs Convene HereJoin 2,500+ executives shaping health IT, digital health and RCM.
7. ObservedJul 17, 2026Conversation1 turnsPlacementAfter turn 01 turns · After turn 0Replay chat
   Observed conversationJul 17, 2026 · interface recreation

   ChatGPTArchived view

   We're advising a health system on their digital transformation roadmap. With value-based care accelerating and AI diagnostics maturing, how should they prioritize investments between telehealth, remote monitoring, and AI-powered clinical decision support? What are the key ROI considerations and competitive risks?

   The three investments are complementary rather than mutually exclusive, but if the objective is to maximize enterprise value over the next 3-5 years under value-based care, I would generally prioritize them differently than many health systems did during the pandemic.

   Investment	Strategic priority	Typical ROI horizon	Primary value driver
   AI-powered clinical decision support (CDS)	Highest	1-3 years	Provider productivity, quality, consistency, margin
   Remote patient monitoring (RPM)	High (targeted)	2-4 years	Reduced admissions, chronic disease management, value-based contracts
   Telehealth	Moderate (optimize vs. expand)	1-2 years	Access, convenience, retention, network growth

   A useful decision framework

   Rather than asking "Which technology?", ask:

   Which investment most improves clinical outcomes while reducing cost per episode across our highest-risk patient populations?

   Under fee-for-service, virtual visits generated billable encounters.

   Under value-based care, the objective shifts toward:

   • preventing avoidable utilization
   • improving quality measures
   • managing longitudinal populations
   • enabling clinicians to manage larger patient panels
   • reducing administrative burden

   That changes the investment priorities.

   ---

   1. AI-powered clinical decision support: highest strategic leverage

   This is becoming a foundational capability rather than a niche technology.

   Examples include:

   • early sepsis detection
   • radiology prioritization
   • documentation support
   • medication optimization
   • care gap identification
   • discharge planning
   • risk prediction
   • prior authorization support

   Why ROI is attractive

   Unlike many digital tools, CDS affects almost every patient encounter.

   Benefits include:

   Operational

   • higher physician productivity
   • reduced documentation time
   • lower burnout
   • faster throughput
   • fewer unnecessary tests

   Clinical

   • improved guideline adherence
   • earlier intervention
   • fewer adverse events
   • reduced variation

   Financial

   • higher quality scores
   • lower readmissions
   • improved coding accuracy
   • better value-based performance

   One important point:

   The biggest ROI often comes from augmenting clinicians—not replacing them.

   For example:

   • AI drafts documentation
   • clinician edits
   • encounter closes immediately

   Saving 5-10 minutes per visit across thousands of visits is financially meaningful.

   ---

   2. Remote patient monitoring: strong ROI when targeted

   RPM is most valuable when focused on patients with predictable high utilization.

   Examples:

   • CHF
   • COPD
   • diabetes
   • hypertension
   • post-surgical recovery
   • oncology symptom monitoring

   Avoid deploying RPM broadly across low-risk populations.

   Strong value drivers

   Reduced:

   • ED visits
   • admissions
   • readmissions
   • disease progression

   Improved:

   • medication adherence
   • patient engagement
   • quality metrics

   The economics improve dramatically under downside-risk contracts.

   Example:

   Preventing one CHF admission often offsets monitoring costs for many patients.

   ---

   3. Telehealth: optimize rather than aggressively expand

   Telehealth is now expected rather than differentiating.

   Patients increasingly view virtual care as table stakes.

   Investment should focus on:

   • integrated scheduling
   • digital front door
   • asynchronous care
   • virtual triage
   • behavioral health
   • specialty follow-up
   • post-discharge care

   Avoid treating telehealth simply as video visits.

   The competitive advantage is seamless hybrid care.

   ---

   ROI considerations

   Direct financial ROI

   Consider:

   Revenue

   • improved patient retention
   • new market reach
   • higher capacity
   • reimbursement

   Cost savings

   • reduced admissions
   • reduced LOS
   • lower staffing costs
   • lower documentation burden
   • reduced duplicate testing

   Quality incentives

   • shared savings
   • bonus payments
   • reduced penalties

   ---

   Indirect ROI

   Often larger than direct savings.

   Examples:

   Physician retention

   Burnout is expensive.

   Reducing administrative work can reduce turnover and recruiting costs.

   ---

   Capacity expansion

   If physicians see:

   • 5% more patients

   or

   manage:

   • 20% larger panels

   capacity improves without proportional hiring.

   ---

   Consumer loyalty

   Patients increasingly compare healthcare to digital consumer experiences.

   Convenient digital experiences improve:

   • retention
   • referrals
   • satisfaction

   ---

   Data assets

   AI improves as organizations build:

   • standardized data
   • interoperable workflows
   • governance
   • longitudinal patient records

   These become strategic assets.

   ---

   Competitive risks

   Risk 1: Digital-first entrants

   Retail clinics and virtual-first providers increasingly compete on convenience.

   Health systems that lack integrated digital experiences risk losing lower-acuity patients.

   ---

   Risk 2: AI-enabled competitors

   Organizations adopting AI earlier may achieve:

   • lower operating costs
   • faster access
   • shorter wait times
   • better clinician productivity

   These advantages compound over time.

   ---

   Risk 3: Workforce competition

   Clinicians increasingly prefer organizations with:

   • ambient documentation
   • AI assistance
   • reduced inbox burden
   • streamlined workflows

   Digital maturity becomes a recruiting advantage.

   ---

   Risk 4: Data fragmentation

   Implementing disconnected telehealth, RPM, and AI solutions creates:

   • duplicated workflows
   • clinician frustration
   • poor interoperability
   • weak analytics

   A unified platform strategy is preferable.

   ---

   Investment sequencing

   A practical roadmap might look like this:

   Phase 1 (0-12 months)

   Focus on foundational capabilities:

   • enterprise data platform
   • interoperability
   • governance
   • cybersecurity
   • AI governance
   • ambient documentation
   • workflow automation
   • clinician-facing AI

   Expected outcome:

   • productivity gains
   • clinician adoption
   • stronger data foundation

   ---

   Phase 2 (12-24 months)

   Scale targeted virtual care:

   • chronic disease RPM
   • hospital-at-home capabilities where appropriate
   • digital care management
   • predictive outreach
   • virtual specialty clinics

   Expected outcome:

   • lower utilization
   • improved quality measures
   • stronger value-based performance

   ---

   Phase 3 (24-36 months)

   Expand advanced AI:

   • predictive operations
   • precision care pathways
   • imaging AI
   • personalized patient engagement
   • enterprise-wide care orchestration

   Expected outcome:

   • differentiated patient experience
   • sustainable cost advantage
   • improved population health outcomes

   ---

   Key success factors

   Technology alone rarely determines success. The strongest returns typically come from aligning technology with operational redesign. That includes:

   • Integrating AI into clinician workflows rather than adding separate applications.
   • Prioritizing high-risk patient cohorts for RPM, where reductions in avoidable utilization are most likely.
   • Embedding telehealth into longitudinal care pathways instead of treating it as a standalone service.
   • Establishing robust governance for AI validation, safety monitoring, privacy, and regulatory compliance.
   • Measuring outcomes with a balanced scorecard that includes financial metrics (cost per episode, shared savings, ROI), operational metrics (provider productivity, access, length of stay), clinical metrics (readmissions, guideline adherence, quality scores), and experience metrics (patient satisfaction and clinician burnout).

   For most integrated delivery networks, the highest-value portfolio is not a single large bet. It is a sequence of investments in which AI-powered clinical decision support improves the productivity and quality of every encounter, targeted remote monitoring reduces avoidable utilization in high-risk populations, and telehealth serves as the digital access layer connecting patients to longitudinal, coordinated care. That sequencing aligns well with the incentives of value-based care while building capabilities that are difficult for competitors to replicate quickly.

   

   Becker's HealthcareAd

   Top Health Execs Convene HereJoin 2,500+ executives shaping health IT, digital health and RCM.