Category Archives: health

Answering the Cancer Call

It’s nice to see efforts continuing at a healthy pace to help employers and employees deal with one of the scariest threats to corporate 508254750-cancerhealth — the growth of cancer in our aging workforce.

The latest initiative is an impressive one, a program introduced recently by the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York through which it now collaborates with employers to simplify the whole process for their working cancer patients to get the help they need. New as the program is, it already has six employers signed on for this collaboration, including CBS Corp. and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

Through the program, called MSK Direct, each collaborative partnership is customized to the individual employer’s and its employees’ needs. A customized menu might include initial evaluations or second opinions, the options to immediately begin cancer treatment and support services such as counseling.

“Cancer care is extraordinarily difficult to go through, but accessing it in a time of distress shouldn’t be,” says Wendy Perchick, senior vice president of strategy and innovation at MSK. “MSK Direct is a prime example of our commitment to our mission, which includes making all aspects of our experience, care and services more accessible, seamless and beneficial to as many people as possible. In the face of a cancer diagnosis, we want patients, their family members and their employers to feel certain they are in caring and highly capable hands.”

Let’s face it, she and others say: The number of cancer diagnoses among working Americans is only going to climb as baby boomers continue to keep working out of a sense of purpose, but also out of necessity, whatever the cost to health, welfare and sanity may be.

As this story in HRE by Julie Cook Ramirez less than a year ago confirms, the number of people continuing to work with cancer diagnoses is now close to 15 million. And though there are a lot of positives around that for those employees (a sense of purpose, distraction away from their diagnosis, the list goes on), there are many challenges they bring to work as well, including diminished physical capabilities and stamina, and some mental impairments as they undergo chemotherapy.

The story also details things HR professionals can do to make such a devastating time for an employee a little more navigable, such as reworking their schedules, making a special effort to go over all benefits till they’re sure the patient understands and basically just being there to answer all the questions they may have.

As the numbers grow, so grow the costs. This post by me in 2014 put the price tag for employers at about $19,000 annually per 100 employees in lost work time and medical treatments, according to research from the Integrated Benefits Institute. (IBI President Tom Parry confirmed for me that these are still the latest figures.)

Numbers aside, let’s face it, there are a whole lot of us baby boomers in the workplace probably in a good bit of denial about what lies ahead. Many of these boomers’ employers might also be happily sharing in that denial as they continue reaping the benefits of older employees’ work ethics and knowledge.

But let’s also face the inevitability. None of us are getting any younger. And as workers age, health problems at work grow. As one friend, a seemingly ageless practicing family doctor in Seattle who likes to backpack, power walk, participate in medical missions abroad … and who’s just been diagnosed with breast cancer … put it, “No one ever told us boomers that life after 50 becomes a journey of loss — loss of our own health and loss of loved ones to the loss of their health. They should have told us this.” (And she’s a doctor!)

At least some employers are now facing this reality with their unstoppable boomers and helping them through the obstacle course that is cancer, however they want to be helped.

For some tips on how this might be done at your organization, and some immediate steps you can take to increase the value of cancer-care benefits and services you’re providing, consider this report — High Value Cancer Care: Guidance for Employers — that the Northeast Business Group on Health put out just last week. Here’s the news statement as well.

Roughly, as Dr. Jeremy Nobel, executive director of NEBGH’s Solutions Center, lays it out:

“Understanding what high-value services to look for when evaluating sites of care; making sure patients have access and coverage for seeking expert second opinions whether via health-plan-recommended specialists, a Center of Excellence or third-party second-opinion services; and encouraging employees to educate themselves about the benefits of palliative care and to request it early in the treatment process are all important steps employers can take right now.”

I guess I might only add that leaving them in the driver’s seat on directions to go and care to pursue, honoring their journey with the dignity they deserve, is a must.

Better Boss: Trump or Clinton?

The U.S. presidential election may not be over yet (unfortunately), but Hillary Clinton has already won. The boss contest, that is: According to a new CareerBuilder survey, 57 percent of workers say they’d prefer to work for the former Secretary of State, while 43 percent say they’d rather work for Donald Trump.

Donald Trump was a tough boss on NBC's "The Apprentice" (photo by Gage Skidmore)
Donald Trump was a tough boss on NBC’s “The Apprentice” (photo by Gage Skidmore)

A gender gap exists here, as it does in the general electorate, with 62 percent of women favoring Clinton. Men were evenly split between Clinton and Trump. Clinton was also the preferred boss for African American (87 percent), Hispanic (79 percent) and Asian (78 percent) professionals.

The survey, which queried 3,133 full-time workers over the age of 18, also finds that manufacturing workers stood out as the only industry preferring Trump as workplace leader, with 55 percent of them favoring him over Clinton. The next closest was transportation workers, who favored working for Clinton by only four points (52 percent to 48 percent). Support for Clinton as boss was strongest from workers in healthcare (63 percent to 37 percent) and financial services (60 percent to 40 percent — somebody better tell Bernie Sanders).

Regardless of whether their campaigns put them in the Oval Office or back in the private sector, Clinton and Trump have already had a major impact on the U.S. workplace. An American Psychological Association survey finds that one in four employees have been negatively affected by conversations about the election with co-workers. Twenty-eight percent of workers younger than 34 said these conversations left them feeling “stressed out.”  Twice as many men as women reported that the political talk was making them upset enough to be less productive. Until this endless political season is over (and will be shortly), it’s probably best to follow a few rules of engagement for political discussions at work.

Beware of the ‘Food Altar’ at Work

ThinkstockPhotos-178634141Anthropologists tell us that sharing food is nearly universal in human society. And that includes the office.

Some workplaces have raised the custom to a high art. Think of Doughnut Day. Strawberries from the garden. Cookies from home. Leftovers from a lunch meeting. M&Ms in a bowl on the boss’s desk.

These rituals humanize the workplace. They break up the monotony of work. And who doesn’t like to eat?

One problem: Much of that food is unhealthy. And the cornucopia can undercut both company wellness programs and individual efforts at healthy eating. What good does it do to put bananas in the vending machines or carrots in your lunch bag when Susie in accounting brings brownies?

One recent study about this problem says there’s a term for that place in every office where food gets piled. They’re called “food altars,” according to four researchers at the University of California Davis.

Published in the June issue of the journal Food, Culture & Society, the study was by Carolyn Thomas, Jennifer Sedell, Charlotte Biltekoff and Sara Schaefer. They studied the eating habits of 25 university office workers to draw some conclusions that could apply to many workplaces.

They found that while health-conscious employees might have elaborate systems to control consumption, their efforts often were “sabotaged by food that simply materialized in the workplace.” Food altars, they wrote, are “responsible for the majority of unplanned and ‘unhealthful’ eating decisions in the workplace.”

The result: “A workplace-sanctioned system of food-choice challenges.”

Anyone who’s worked in an office will recognize the problem. Yet how can we control it? No one wants to be the Grinch who refuses to bring in bagels when it’s their turn. Or to be the boss who issues a memo declaring the office a carrot-cake-free zone.

The study authors don’t propose a solution. But at least they’ve identified a problem and given it a name. The rest, alas, is up to us.

Supporters of E-Cigs Fight Back

There’s some real pushback under way to what I was thinking had become a generally agreed-upon vice worth eradicating from our streets, public arenas and workplaces: e-cigarette vaping.

470456691--vapingMy eyebrows were raised on Friday when I came across this release from the National Center for Public Policy Research announcing an amicus brief that had just been filed by the NCPPR and TechFreedom in support of an earlier challenge to the Food and Drug Administration’s war on vaping.

Specifically, the initial challenge that got a major boost on Friday was filed by Nicopure Labs, a manufacturer of e-cigarette liquid, against the FDA’s Deeming Rule, which was finalized in May. That rule would force e-cigarette manufacturers to undergo an expensive and time-consuming premarket tobacco-application process unless their products were on the market prior to the predicate date of Feb. 15, 2007. As the NCPPR release puts it:

“The high cost of the application process means most e-cig businesses will be forced to shut down, eliminating choices of dramatically safer alternatives to combustible cigarettes, which will leave smokers with fewer options to compete against the most harmful form of nicotine consumption, [again,] combustible tobacco.”

It also states that:

“The FDA’s Deeming Rule fails to consider the scientific evidence readily available to the agency regarding the safety and the public health benefits of e-cigarettes.”

Is it just me or is this the first time you’ve read anything about the “public health benefits of e-cigarettes”?

I love how this guy, Tom Remington, on his blog post, compares  choosing between e-cigs and tobacco to choosing between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Mind you, I’m not 100-percent sure what position he’s taking here (something tells me he’s anti e-cigs … and don’t ask me to even hazard a guess as to who he plans to vote for), but his quote is pretty fun:

“Having a discussion about whether or not e-cigarettes are more healthy than real tobacco-product cigarettes is akin to deciding which crook, Hillary or Donald, should get your vote. Would you rather die from e-cigarettes or from tobacco? Would you rather get screwed and further forced into slavery by Hillary or Donald?”

For a much more complete and sobering look at why clamping down on the e-cigarette business isn’t necessarily a good thing for health but IS a big victory for Big Tobacco, read this opinion piece on the Washington Post site by Jonathan Adler. Here’s just one compelling thought to come away with, as Adler writes it:

“With the new FDA rule, Big Tobacco is getting just what it wanted. … [A]s a consequence of the FDA rule, the e-cig market will shrink, and Big Tobacco will be in a better position to dominate what’s left. A vibrant competitive market will be replaced with a cartel, much like the one we see in the cigarette market.”

So what does all this have to do with HR? Probably not as much as other topics we’ve raised here, but I do know many of you are grappling with your smoking policies, and many of you have opted to lump vaping in with the rest of your organization’s prohibited activities.

I guess this might just give you something more to think about as you go about drafting or enforcing such a policy … like who’s hands you might be playing into(?) Or where the real truth lies(?) If, indeed, these things are so much healthier than cigarettes, for all concerned, and can help move the quitting process along, are you sure you want to deny your employees any and all access(?)

Maybe just put all this in your pipe and smoke it(?) (Sorry.)

Wait … Work Is Good for Your Health?

A compre200400993-001hensive survey of American workers this week offered some predictable findings about health and employment. But there are some happy surprises as well.

Perhaps most interesting was a finding that 28 percent of workers said their job was good for their overall health. That’s considerably more than the 16 percent who said it was bad.  (The rest, a slight majority, said their job had no effect on their overall health.)

Why the upbeat view? Researchers didn’t ask, and declined to share any thoughts about what respondents meant. But we can find some clues on our own by looking at this poll and other research. And those clues offer some encouragement for HR professionals.

How does your job affect your _____?
Good impact Bad impact No impact
Overall health 28% 16% 54%
Eating habits 15% 28% 56%
Stress level 16% 43% 39%
Sleeping habits 17% 27% 55%
Weight 19% 22% 57%
Social life 27% 17% 56%
Family life 32% 17% 50%
Source: Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

Make no mistake, there are plenty of concerns raised by this survey, which was performed by the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in conjunction with National Public Radio and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Researchers polled 1,601 working Americans across a range of ages, ethnicities, income levels and industries. The margin of error for the full sample was 2.9 percent at the 95 percent confidence level.

NPR stories about the survey this week have highlighted how workers with disabilities often struggle at work, how lack of sick leave can drive some families into financial crisis and why so many employees go to work while sick.

Among other troubling — if unsurprising — findings was that 43 percent of respondents said work added stress to their lives. A news release from the university quoted poll director Robert J. Blendon concluding that “The takeaway here is that job number one for U.S. employers is to reduce stress in the workplace.”

But what might workers be thinking when they say their job is good for their health?

One obvious point is that having a job means having an income and (often) having insurance. That’s definitely good for your health. But I wonder if many respondents were really thinking at that level of abstraction.

There’s also research suggesting that, in fact, work is good for your health. One frequently-cited research overview conducted in the United Kingdom concluded that meaningful, safe work generally offers physical and mental-health benefits. Being active and having a purpose is good for us.

But were many respondents thinking about arcane findings in the field of occupational health?

Perhaps a more plausible explanation is in the new poll itself — findings that suggest wellness programs really matter. More than half of respondents said their company had a formal wellness program.

Even more significant: Of those workers, a whopping 45 percent said that program was “very important” to their health. Nearly as many said it was “somewhat important.”

Wellness programs don’t offer any clues about some other surprising findings in this poll, alas. Respondents also apparently think work is good for their social life and (even more mysteriously) their family life. Let’s hope researchers some day will drill deeper to find out what’s really going on here.

A Wake-Up Call for the Sleep Deprived

Several familiar themes emerged at Virgin Pulses’ 2016 Thrive Summit in Boston this week, including some we heard at HRE’s Health & Benefits Leadership Conference earlier this spring.

Arianna Huffington’s humorous and engaging keynote Tuesday afternoon on the topic of sleep deprivation was one that personally resonated with me. Maybe it had something do with the fact I was still struggling with jet lag, having just returned from a trip from Japan the weekend before?

Of course, you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to grasp the detrimental impact sleep deprivation can have on effectiveness and productivity. Studies have repeatedly shown the huge toll it can take on businesses, including one titled “Insomnia and the Performance of U.S. Workers: Results from the American Insomnia Survey” that put lost workplace productivity at around 11 days per employee—or the equivalent of $2,280 per employee. If you’re a business leader, figures like these, you would think, could lead to a few sleepless nights of your own.

Huffington, founder, president and editor-in-chief of the Huffington Post Media Group, touched on the problem of sleep deprivation in Thrive: The Third Metric to Redefining Success and Creating a Life of Well-Being, Wisdom, and Wonder. Most likely in the hopes of drawing more attention to this ever-important issue, she also came out with a new book last month dedicated to the subject titled The Sleep Revolution: Transforming Your Life, One Night at a Time. (As an attendee at the Thrive Summit, I received a complimentary copy, which I’m looking forward to giving a more thorough read.)

In her Thrive Summit talk, Huffington shared her own personal awakening, which involved pushing herself so hard nine years earlier that she collapsed and, in the process, broke her cheekbone. She noted that “you’re not successful when you find yourself in a pool of blood.”

After a series of doctor visits and testing, she said it was determined the cause of the fall wasn’t a brain tumor or heart condition, but was due to her not getting enough sleep.

“Sleep deprivation is the new smoking,” she said.

Despite noting that her talk would be apolitical, Huffington, a political commentary who regularly takes aim at the Republican Party, couldn’t refrain from taking a jab at the Republican Party’s “presumptive” nominee, who has, on occasion, boasted about the limited sleep he needs to get. That candidate, she said, seems to display all of the symptoms of a person who is sleep deprived: mood swings, bad judgement, etc.

Huffington said the science shows that people need seven to nine hours of sleep, not the three, four or five many are settling on—and employers and HR leaders need to do more to enable that to happen.

For starters, she said, business leaders need to end the practice of praising and rewarding those who never disconnect from their jobs. “When you congratulate people who work 24/7, it’s like congratulating them for coming to work drunk,” she said.

Huffington specifically praised the efforts of business leaders such as Amazon’s CEO and Founder Jeff Bezos and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, who have been ahead of the curve in talking about the value of getting eight hours of sleep a night. Other so-called “sleep evangelists” mentioned in The Sleep Revolution include Campbell Soup CEO Denise Morrison and Google Chairman Eric Schmidt.

There are a number of steps people can take to get “rekindle our romance with sleep,” Huffington said. She specifically emphasized the value of creating a ritual before going to bed. For her, that ritual includes disconnecting from all electronic devices roughly 30 minutes ahead of time and taking a hot bath in Epsom salts.

Whether it’s 30 minutes or something less, she said, “we need to wind down and put the day behind us.”

Of course, for those of us who aren’t getting enough sleep, changing our behavior is often easier said than done. So it probably wasn’t a coincidence that the program kicked off the following morning with a workshop titled “Behavior Change is a Skill,” conducted by BJ Fogg, director of the Persuasive Tech Lab at Stanford University.

The premise of his workshop was that people can learn to change their behaviors—that people can acquire skills for changing just as they can learn how to play a musical instrument or swim.

Or, I suppose for that matter, learn how to get a better night’s sleep.

Opioids Continue to Be a Workplace Scourge

158362155We’ve all heard a lot during this presidential election season about the heroin epidemic that has seemingly left no corner of the United States untouched. Experts say an important factor that led to today’s skyrocketing rates of addiction has been the widespread abuse of opioid prescriptions for painkillers, including those prescribed by doctors for employees covered by workers comp claims. A new report from Castlight Health reveals that this prescription abuse continues today, accounting for a significant chunk of healthcare spending.

Castlight’s report, The Opioid Crisis in America’s Workforce, finds that nearly one third (32 percent) of opioid prescriptions subsidized by U.S. employers are being abused by a small number of employees — just 4.5 percent of the population, accounting for 40 percent of opioid prescription spending. Baby boomers are four times as likely to abuse opioids as millennials, the report finds, and workers with a mental health diagnosis are three times more likely to abuse opioids as those without.

The report is based on aggregated reporting from medical and pharmacy-based claims, including de-identified and anonymous health-data reporting covering nearly 1 million Americans who use Castlight’s health-benefits platform. The report defines “opioid abuse” as receiving more than a cumulative 90-day supply of opioids and receiving an opioid prescription from four or more providers over the five-year period between 2011 and 2015.

In addition to the cost (opioid abusers typically cost employers twice as much as non-abusers in medical expenses annually), opioid abuse lowers productivity and potentially puts other employees at risk, says Kristin Torres Mowat, Castlight’s senior vice president of health plan and strategic data operations. Opioid prescription abuse results in more than 16,000 deaths in the United States each year, the report notes.

The report finds that patients living in low-income areas are twice as likely as patients living in high-income areas to abuse prescription painkillers. The South is home to a significant chunk of opioid abusers, with 22 of the top 25 U.S. cities for opioid abuse located in Southern states.

What Winning at Wellness Looks Like

Curious to see what makes for a top-notch wellness program?

I’ll assume you said yes, which means you might want to take a peek at the new U.S. Chamber of Commerce Winning with Wellness report.

Released earlier this month, the new publication is designed to “demystify” health promotion initiatives, looking at some of the “fundamentals of workplace wellness programs,” including evidence-based critical components such as developing a plan and applying behavior change methodologies, for example.

The report also lays out “10 Essential Steps in Designing a Workplace Wellness Program,” urging employers to “rely on evidence-based best practice strategies and tailor interventions to their populations” when plotting out wellness initiatives.

To begin planning, for instance, the report suggests that employers assess the organization’s readiness to adopt a workplace wellness strategy, asking “crucial questions” such as: Are there business plans in place that support or impede behavior change? Is there a history of workplace wellness programs? If so, what are some lessons learned? Can the organization specify how health changes can improve the work environment?

In addition, the report cites case studies demonstrating “employee satisfaction and social or financial ROI” from wellness programs at companies such as PepsiCo Inc. and Johnson & Johnson.

An evaluation of PepsiCo’s Healthy Living wellness program, for example, studied the initiative over the course of seven years in an effort to determine the cost impact of its lifestyle and disease management programs.

As the Chamber report notes, the study revealed that Pepsi saw an average reduction of $30 in healthcare costs per member per month, after seven years of continuous participation in either the lifestyle or disease management program.

A 2011 evaluation of Johnson & Johnson, meanwhile, compared a matched cohort sample of its 31,823 employees to similar organizations with a comparable number of employees. According to the U.S. Chamber, the findings demonstrated that, from the years 2002 to 2008, “Johnson & Johnson experienced a 3.7 percent lower average annual growth in medical costs compared to the comparison group,” and J & J wellness programs produced an ROI of $3.92 for every dollar spent.

Finally, the Chamber points to a 2013 RAND Inc. report that determined “there is solid evidence to be optimistic” that healthier employee behavior will correlate directly to lower healthcare costs. More than 60 percent of respondents in that survey indicated that workplace wellness programs reduced their organizations’ healthcare costs, while also reporting an overall decrease in healthcare service utilization, which, in turn, reduced the healthcare cost burden.

While pointing out that each of these studies had limitations, “the majority show that well-designed wellness programs lead to an ROI ranging from $1.50 [for each dollar spent] to more than $3 invested over a timeframe of two to nine years,” the report notes.

Cost savings aside, the report’s authors tout the non-financial advantages of developing a winning wellness program.

“Even if one assumes for the sake of argument that any limitation of each particular study leads to an ROI of less than $1.50 to $3,” they write, “there are other benefits to these programs, such as increased job performance, overall well-being, and happy and thriving employees who contribute to business and community success.”

Using Data to Drive Health Outcomes

Given the hour (8 a.m.) and the setting (the Aria Resort & Casino in Las Vegas), Ronald Leopold, M.D., wasn’t so sure that the time was ideal this morning for a talk centered on getting the most out of employee-healthcare data.

Nevertheless, Leopold—the national practice leader of health outcomes at Willis Towers Watson—soldiered on in the opening session of Human Resource Executive’s Health and Benefits Leadership Conference’s second day, delivering a lively presentation that focused on harnessing healthcare-claims data to better control coverage costs.

In “Doing the Math: Data-Driven Health Outcome Strategies for Employers,” Leopold first asked attendees to rate, by a show of hands, their comfort with data analytics on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the lowest and 5 the highest.

While a scattering of audience members indicated the highest level of comfort with data analytics, and a few ranked themselves as “4s,” the clear majority considered themselves to be “3”s—“not bad, but leaving some room to improve,” noted Leopold.

His goal at that moment, he said, was to help attendees better understand available data “to make the best [benefits] decisions on behalf of their employees.”

In 2016, “we are poised for a new era,” said Leopold, “where we see healthcare costs starting to trend slightly upward.”

For employers, being ready for this uptick entails making efforts to lower employee health risks—implementing effective wellness programs and making plan-design changes that encourage employees to become more responsible for their healthcare, for example—and, in turn, lower healthcare costs.

Leopold urged attendees to “demand the story” beyond typical metrics such as average employee hospital stays and number of employees with a given disease or condition, for instance.

This type of descriptive data “doesn’t always give us a lot,” said Leopold.

“Go deeper, and get diagnostic data to find out why” these numbers are what they are, “and do predictive analysis as well.

“Look at data and use algorithms—which you in HR may not have, but carriers will have, and some consultants will have, and data aggregators will have—to determine [your population’s] health risks,” he continued.

“This,” said Leopold, “is practicing predictive analytics. Then we can see what’s likely to happen in the future … and we’ll get better results.”

 

Back to the Future for Healthcare

Value-based care. ACOs. Narrow networks. Consumerism. These were just a few of topics explored in depth at last week’s National Business Group on Health’s Business Health Agenda 2016 conference at the J.W. Marriott in Washington. But if there was a single thread running through these sessions and many others during the two-and-a-half-day event, it was the increasingly important role technology is playing these days as a disrupting force.

Consider this: It wasn’t a huge surprise to see the NBGH and Xerox Human Resource Services (the former Buck Consultants) unveil the findings of a study titled Emerging Technology to Promote Employee Wellbeing, one of three research projects released at the event.

Looking at four key areas—gamification, mobile technologies, wearable sensors and social media—the study of 213 employers found significant growth in all four areas, with mobile, not surprisingly, leading the way. When the survey was last conducted three years ago, just 16 percent of employers were using mobile apps to engage employees. In this latest study, that number jumped to 50 percent.

The study also revealed that wearable technologies climbed from 16 percent to 34 percent over the three-year period.

Social networking, meanwhile, grew by 50 percent. “People are increasingly relying on others to get their information,” said Scott Marcotte, client technology leader for Xerox HR Services.

Also, as might be expected, mobile topped the list of future senior-leader priorities, with 50 percent of the respondents citing it as a prime focal point over the next year. Many also predicted that texting will be an increasingly important part of their strategy going forward.

As for barriers to adoption, the respondents cited competing business priorities, the lack of buy-in and support from senior management, the lack of a guaranteed return-on-investment (and ways to measure technology’s impact), and confidentiality and privacy as significant hurdles.

“Technology is also enabling employers to more successfully reach family members,” Marcotte pointed out. He noted that more and more of the companies he’s been working with are “creating hyper-personalized experiences for the spouse,” distinct of the employee.

Of course, you would think the Internet and mobile technology would represent today’s best ways to get educational resources into the home and involve the family, right? But at a session titled Leveraging Technology to Reach the Home, several speakers suggested the next frontier might actually be the television. (Though one conference session on narrow networks featured Back to the Future in its title, I couldn’t help but wonder if that phrase might have been better suited for this one.)

In an effort being led by Kaiser Permanente and Comcast, just out of beta, employees at a handful of employers (Comcast, IBM and Lowe’s Cos.) are beginning to deliver information directly into the home through TV apps.

“People are consuming video on their phones and other devices, but the fact is that many are still watching a lot of TV,” said Chris Stenzel, vice president of business development and innovation at Kaiser Permanente.

Participating with Stenzel on the panel were Marc Siry, vice president of strategic development at Comcast Corp.; Lydia Boyd Campbell, director of global integrated health services at IBM Americas; and Bob Ihrie, senior vice president of compensation and benefits at Lowe’s Cos. (Ihre, by the way, will be participating at two sessions at HRE’s Health & Benefits Leadership Conference later this month.)

All the panelists believe TV has the potential to make healthcare engaging and interesting for the entire family.

Maternity was selected as a pilot for the program because it represents a significant percentage of claims and is a time when families are really engaged in the health system. Videos are delivered to the employees’ TVs based on the stage of the pregnancy—so employees and their spouses/partners are delivered content that’s meaningful to them at that moment. The system knows what to deliver based on the due date, which is the only personal information that needs to be offered up to provide the just-in-time information. (Netflix-like binge watching, however, is still an option for those who prefer that approach.)

Television, of course, isn’t the only legacy device that’s attempting a comeback in the world of healthcare. Let’s not forget the 500-year-old watch, which many are predicting, thanks primarily to the Apple Watch, will someday be a major force in wearables.

That promise isn’t lost on vendors such The Vitality Group, which used the conference as a platform for officially announcing a program that enables “Active Rewards” members to fully fund their Apple Watches by meeting monthly targets over a 24-month period. (The founder and CEO of Vitality Group’s parent company, Discovery Group, Adrian Gore, also delivered the opening-keynote address at the NBGH event.)

Alan Pollard, CEO of The Vitality Group, told me the results of the program in South Africa have been “phenomenal,” with the early data revealing that Vitality members using Apple Watches are more physically active than those using any other fitness devices.

In the United States, early adopters of the new Vital program include Amgen, Lockton and DaVita HealthCare Partners. (The program is also available to consumers through Vitality’s arrangement with John Hancock.)