If you already run a sustained nurture programme for key HCPs, this diagnostic may confirm what you know. If follow-up is mainly a rep checking in after training, continue.
The question
A training, then three or four follow-up calls. Would you call that a continuous relationship?
The event runs. The reporting covers how many were invited and how many showed up. It usually stops there. What those HCPs did afterwards, whether they adopted, stayed, or drifted, is rarely tracked.
That is what this tool measures. Split your trained HCPs into two groups, because the two behave completely differently.
so 77% of the room was already yours.
The gap
24 of 36 never became regular users.
They drop between the training and the first case, not after it. That gate is the one to work, and it is rarely a knowledge problem.
13% drifted away this year.
Background movement: relocations, retirements, changing case mix. Nothing here needs a programme, which is worth knowing before you fund one.
The math
The honest limit
There is no honest way to price an HCP's loyalty, so I would not try. Where the journey breaks is measurable, and that is the part worth arguing about when the budget is questioned.
Compliance / operating constraint
Mecomed Conference Vetting System ↗
Support for third-party education is assessed centrally against the Code, and members cannot fund an event that has not been positively assessed. Submissions close 50 days ahead. This is why the planning window is structural rather than a matter of how organised your team is.
Evidence
Learning curve assessment, Annals of Surgery, 2025 ↗
A three-phase model of competency, proficiency and mastery, in which the first phase runs under the supervision of an experienced proctor on selected low-risk cases. That is the phase this module counts, and it is why a first case is a gate rather than a formality.
Where I would start
One training and four follow-ups is not a relationship. It is the same event, repeated. I have come to think of engagement as a whole journey instead, a reason for an HCP to hear from you between the asks.
Some HCPs do forget a step. More often that is not what is holding them. They learned the device in a pristine demo lab with an expert proctor standing over their shoulder.
Then they walk back into their own theatre. The scrub team isn't familiar with the trays yet, the scheduling block is tight, and their rep is texting them every Tuesday asking when to book the case. After a while that starts to feel like sales rather than safety.
So what I would do is take the friction out of their room rather than lean in with more product. That is a different kind of support, and it is rarely what the team assumes.
What I have seen in practice
The adoption-journey framework holds across business models, but the evidence of usage and the length of the journey typically differ. Depending on the model, adoption may be evidenced by case volume, referral patterns, or outcomes data, and the nurture path from training to habitual use may be shorter or longer accordingly.
Every specialty and hospital culture has its own quirks. Sometimes it is an uncooperative theatre manager. Sometimes it is instrument tray logistics. Often it is an HCP who does not want the first one watched by half the department.
That context does not fit into an online form.
If you want to find the why, and build something that holds them from the training to the first case and from the first case to the five hundredth, let's talk.
Let's talk it through shaoniemaitrra@gmail.comYour channel mix sets a ceiling on gross margin. Most teams have never calculated what it is, or how far below it they sit.
Open →Awareness that ends at a view is spend. The version that ends at a patient who presents is demand.
Open →The judgement that took a rep ten years to build has nowhere to accumulate now.
Open →Five questions place your real leverage with a partner who holds your registration.
Open →Each pillar works a little on its own. Interconnected, they show the whole picture. See all six pillars →