Why The Digital Technology Gap Threatens Quality Care for Vulnerable Populations In This A.I. Era

By Ryan Dewey Smith, founding executive chairman & CEO, Inperium.

Behavioral health and human-centric services delivery is rapidly shifting to digital-first, A.I.-supported, and algorithmic modeling. Far beyond the realm of business functions like automating appointment reminders or facilitating insurance claim submissions, these technologies now are applied in clinical use to augment care.

A.I. holds promise for early medical intervention through its power to analyze full medical records and identify potential causation for patterns it recognizes, and clinicians in behavioral health services are increasingly utilizing digital therapeutic software to deliver evidence-based interventions to diagnose, treat, or prevent mental and behavioral health disorders.

From using A.I. language interpretation programs for clinicians to speak with diverse language populations or applying voice-to-text to generate timesaving summaries of patient sessions to employing A.I.-enabled wearables, there are numerous applications that hold real promise for better patient outcomes.

Like in every sector, emergent technologies are moving into widespread use at lightning pace, and like all emergent technologies, they are not cheap. A.I.-enabled devices share something with analog mobility and communication or sensory tools:

They are complex, difficult to maintain, and expensive. State-of-the-art technologies, whether used in the clinician’s back office or employed as an enhancement to medical care, follow the familiar pattern of being available only to those who have the financial wherewithal to afford them.

The harsh reality is that a large segment of those seeking professional assistance to manage mental health needs, addiction recovery, or disabilities services would never receive care if it were not for nonprofit providers. Our most vulnerable populations are overwhelmingly served by organizations already operating on razor-thin budgets.

Such providers lack the resources to access new technologies. In rural locations many providers have limited access to reliable broadband, an underlying requirement for implementing digital services. This fundamental digital divide is something they have in common with their impoverished patients, no matter their geographical location.

Yet a bridge across this divide could mean so much. Applications like an eye-tracking speech and visual output device or a smart medication dispenser that can track doses and send reminders are life-changing. We should be excited for the transformative innovations that are being developed, but the current structure threatens to worsen the existing disparity of access to them. Why should those with the greatest needs get left behind?

As the larger culture is carried on a tsunami into the A.I. future, we are reminded that we will require an equally sized tidal wave of education to use it effectively. As expensive as technology can be to purchase or use, that price pales compared to the human capital required to learn to use it well.

Successful adaptation will require an advanced set of critical thinking skills, immersive training in best A.I. practices, and heightened attention on data security measures to protect patient privacy. Not only will there be a learning curve, but there will also be vital data transition required, for in underfunded nonprofits, much of the treasure trove of data is stuck in analog systems (including paper record systems) and digital systems are often either outdated or cannot speak with one another. A.I. is useless with incomplete, inaccurate, or obsolete data.

The need for provider education is only half the equation. Reliance on patient usage of systems requires access to the technology and the know-how to use it. Many populations served lack one or both. Should we make the considerable investment required to realize all the benefits that these technologies can bring to the sector, it won’t have any meaning if we are not successful in providing the education our patients will require.

As with most difficult human problems, education can’t stop at “this is how it works;” it has to be adopted, which means investment in the time required to assist patients in altering their lifestyles.

People naturally fear the presence of “robots” in the parts of their lives that make them most vulnerable. Let’s learn the lessons of the COVID Pandemic, that a lack of human connection creates vast unintended consequences. Humancentric services can lead this transition by maintaining human connection while helping those they serve capture the benefits that nonhuman assets can provide.

Only human professionals can ensure that the most vulnerable among us are not made more vulnerable as we move into a technologically enhanced future.