Chrissy Farr: Underserved areas of healthcare

Andrew: Chrissy, I follow you on Twitter, and I appreciate your threads about the underserved areas of consumer healthcare, from your perspective as a new mother. Is there a particular area that feels the most underserved?

Chrissy: Definitely. I talk about the experience of being a new mother and the maternal health and pediatric areas because those areas are underserved across contexts, whether it be commercial or Medicaid populations.

It's not right that you see women dying in childbirth in the US. We shouldn’t have the worst maternal mortality rates amongst all OECD countries, but we do.

I was quite shocked with my experience here, particularly in that I didn't have a single interaction with the medical system until six weeks after giving birth. That timeframe is when you see most complications happen, once you're sent home.

So, it’s things like that. We can't figure out a reimbursement for having an OB-GYN, midwife or a nurse go to the patient’s home to check in with them. In the UK, that's something the health system pays for, but we don't have that in the States. It’s just one way in which we continue to let women down.

Andrew: Wow. Now that you've mentioned it, you’ve got me wondering why that isn’t a normal part of our healthcare system. Speaking of underserved areas, you've talked about our struggle to meet the mental health crisis head on as a society. But we’ve also seen a lot of investment and work being done here. What are some gains you've noticed in mental health awareness and treatment? And where do you still see an opportunity for improvement?

Chrissy: There’s so much to be done in mental health. Much of the funding has gone into anxiety and depression that are considered low acuity, yet we see severe mental illness being ignored time and time again. Think about how many companies you can name in the space of generalized anxiety. Then compare that to companies focused on eating disorders, PTSD, schizophrenia, or OCD. It's less than two or three in each of these categories, versus dozens.

We can’t throw our hands up and say that acute conditions aren’t our problem. Companies like Equip and others have shown that we can treat this population with virtual tools, at least some portion of the time.

There's also a huge provider shortage in mental health. There are companies aiming to give people their first opportunity to access affordable, convenient mental healthcare. But you also have to look at quality control and measures of compliance. Doing both is really hard.

Andrew: As a VC, what role do you think that investors have in finding that balance?

Chrissy: We need to question whether the incentives are pushing founders in the right direction. You may have founders that start from a well-meaning place, thinking they’re expanding access to care. But with tons of money coming in, and a board that wants growth, things can get tricky.

We need to be sensitive and thoughtful when we look to invest in the space. We absolutely should invest, but we've got to have an eye on making sure patients are safe, that outcomes are good, that we’re seeing them in person when we need to. It's still very much a work in progress.

Andrew: Yeah. I couldn't agree with you more. I think many companies start with the best intentions, yet the pressure for growth is real. When we have people's health on the line, we need to align the incentives with what’s best for the patient.

***

Before becoming a venture capitalist, Chrissy was a health-tech reporter and on-air contributor for CNBC, FastCompany and Reuters News. She continues to wear her editorial hat via her “Second Opinion,” e-newsletter, a bi-monthly deep dive into the latest health-tech news and trends.

***