IncludeHealth, Inc., a Columbus, Ohio-based provider of musculoskeletal technology solutions, has secured $11 million in a recent financing round.
IncludeHealth Closes $11M Financing Round
1 min read Premium comments
Secondary
The funding was led by CincyTech, a public-private seed-stage investor based in Cincinnati, Ohio. Tamarind Hill, an early-stage venture capital firm based in Dublin, Ohio, and other investors also participated. The other investors include a mix of institutions, venture funds, and individuals.
OTW spoke with IncludeHealth CEO and Founder Ryan Eder about the funding and how the funds will be used. Eder told OTW, “Funds will be utilized to grow the team, support customer expansion, and continue innovating through MSK-OS.”
OTW also spoke with Eder about the company’s goals for the remainder of the year. Eder said, “We are looking to expand our footprint across multiple MSK providers to become the prominent solution to unlock hybrid MSK care at scale.”
MSK-OS™ is IncludeHealth’s musculoskeletal operating system. MSK-OS was created to deliver hybrid musculoskeletal care. IncludeHealth partners with musculoskeletal care providers so they can offer, according to the company, “hybrid services to their patients under Remote Therapeutic Monitoring and Value-Based Care.”
The MSK-OS platform utilizes computer vision to deliver “personalized, measured care” through the patient’s personal devices. This can be done without the need for special sensors or other hardware. According to the company, “With a simple link, the platform provides an interactive experience for patients to complete their at-home care while collecting objective adherence and performance data to help manage their conditions and improve outcomes.”
In the press release, Eder said, “IncludeHealth’s MSK-OS platform is at the forefront of hybrid musculoskeletal care, and we are thrilled to have the support of our investors as we continue to innovate and grow with our customers.”
Eder continued, “Our platform is built to make musculoskeletal care more accessible and efficient for patients and healthcare providers.”
React:
Discussion
This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?
Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.
We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.
Join the conversation
Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.