Wearable HealthTech spend to hit $60bn by 2023
Written by Peter Walker
Wearables, including health trackers and remote patient monitoring devices, are set to become ‘must haves’ in delivering healthcare, with $20 billion forecast to be spent annually on these devices by 2023.
This is according to market analysis by Juniper Research, which also suggested that connected hearing aids made available via healthcare providers - as well as directly to customers at varying price models - will mean this sector generates revenues of over $40 billion by 2022.
The research found that adoption of healthcare wearables will be driven by improvements in remote patient monitoring technology, in addition to increased adoption by medical institutions. Juniper forecasted that five million individuals will be remotely monitored by healthcare providers by 2023.
The advanced ability of artificial intelligence-enabled software analytics to proactively identify individuals at risk of their condition worsening will witness increased confidence among medical practitioners and regulators with regard to sensor accuracy, the report stated.
As wearables become part of patients’ treatment plans, tech manufacturers will seek to adjust their business models and generate revenues from devices being monitored, for example, selling data produced by the devices to insurance providers. Juniper forecasted that service revenues of this nature will reach $855 million by 2023.
However, data privacy and consent will continue to be a significant barrier. Improving healthcare systems, such as using AI-enabled software analytics, is contingent on patient data being anonymised. Some insurance providers are changing the dynamics, with policies that state that in order to be covered, they require a data feed from the policyholder’s device.
Research author Michael Larner said it is vital that patients are made aware of how their personal data will be used.
“If not, making wearables a ‘must have’ to provide personalised care or receive medical insurance risks a backlash from patients and heightened regulatory scrutiny; stalling the effectiveness of remote monitoring.”