Disruptive innovation in rural American healthcare: the physician assistant practice

Abstract

Purpose This article proposes a new disruptive innovation in healthcare through the development of a physician assistant business model, which can be most readily applied in vulnerable rural health care settings. Design/methodology/approach This study reviews the current state of the health care system in terms of physician assistant utilization and primary care shortages in rural communities. The study proposes that the physician assistant-owned and -operated primary care business represents a disruptive innovation, via the application of the five principles of Clayton Christensen’s (1997) thesis on disruptive innovation. Findings Considering the current state of the health care industry, the study logically defends the proposed model as a disruptive innovation in that it: focuses on an underserved market, has lower costs, has few competitors, offers high quality and provides a sustainable competitive advantage. Practical implications The physician assistant business model is a viable solution for providing primary care for rural communities with educational, financial, transportation and other resource limitations. Originality/value This is a unique application of the theory of disruptive innovation, which illustrates how a new business model can solve a chronic shortage in primary care, especially in underserved populations.

Genetic services diffusion in the precision medicine ecosystem

“…Diverse actors interact in varied and unpredictable ways in specific contexts, and the result of these interactions impacts how innovation spreads in the health-care system. Coordination among key actors is crucial for an innovation to be adopted and disseminated within the health system (Plsek, 2003;Greenhalgh et al, 2004;Cresswell and Sheikh, 2013;Rigter et al, 2014;Fiedler, 2015;Kushins et al, 2017). The effort of multiple stakeholders will impact the PM development (Aronson and Rehm, 2015;Jameson and Longo, 2015).…”

“…"Particularly when innovations were perceived to be radical, proactive engagement with various stakeholders was common" (Barnett et al, 2011). Innovation diffusion needs to fit stakeholder's particularities (Kushins et al, 2017) GS requires physicians dealing with uncertain issues, probabilities and health-decision counseling. When the changes that genetics impose in the health-care arena involve political risks or run against the dominant political forces, the diffusion faces resistance from important actors and regulation tends to preserve the status quo (Weitz, 1981;Barnett et al, 2011;Rigter et al, 2014) understand human society.…”

Clarifying the disruptive innovation puzzle: a critical review

“…More importantly, DI has been used outside the context of its specific definition has been widely misunderstood and its basic tenets frequently misapplied (Christensen et al, 2015;Steenhuis and Pretorius, 2017). This concern is shared by other researchers who claim that the definition of DI is routinely misused or improperly broadly applied in research (Danneels, 2004;Kushins et al, 2017;Markides, 2006;Tellis, 2006;Yu and Hang, 2010). The term disruptive is often misunderstood and can be so easily misconstrued, and despite the ubiquity of the term, managers often have a hard time identifying a DI (Schmidt and Druehl, 2008).…”

Perceptions of Ontario chiropractors on business education in chiropractic schools

“…Accordingly, the exploration of different business models, focusing on diverse patient populations and lowering costs with improved quality of care, may lower overhead costs and costs to patients. 25 Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptions that practicing chiropractors have regarding the business education they received during their education at chiropractic schools.…”