The chief executive of HeliosX talks about the future of care that sits between general practice and hospital intervention.
Stuart Peak is the chief executive of digital health platform HeliosX, a digital bridge between users and prescription treatments, which cuts out the traditional hurdles of in-person appointments and pharmacy lines. With more than three million customers a year and providing treatments for more than 30 chronic health conditions via a network of 500 UK-equivalent licensed doctors and pharmacists, he talks to Healthcare Today about how his technology is making healthcare more accessible to all.
HeliosX describes itself as a “disruptor”. Which parts of healthcare are you most intent on disrupting – pricing, access, pharmacy, care pathways?
We often debate internally what we mean when we talk about “healthcare”, because it is such a broad term. Fundamentally, we focus on modernising healthcare and making it easier for people to manage chronic conditions from home. We are not dealing with high-acuity conditions; instead, we are looking at the growing area where healthcare is becoming more consumer-led. The pressures on the NHS mean people are actively seeking convenient ways to supplement their care or access different pathways, and that creates a real opportunity.
Many long-term or lifestyle-related issues sit at that intersection of consumer health and clinical need – such as weight management, skincare, sexual health and a wide range of common pharmacy-treatable conditions. Technology allows us not only to improve accessibility, but also to make care more affordable.
Crucially, technology also helps to improve consistency and quality. By taking consultant-led models and combining them with digital tools, a consultant can safely support many more patients than would ever be possible in a purely traditional setting.
Does telemedicine shift patient behaviour? Does better access drive earlier intervention?
People want access to trusted, high-quality clinical care in a way that fits with their lives – and they want support when they need it. What they do not want is constant reminders or pressure to track every metric or follow rigid instructions every day.
However, when something is wrong – if they have questions, side effects or feel they are not seeing the results they hoped for – they expect near-instant access to assistance and a real conversation with a clinician. That expectation has shaped how we have developed our model: we focus closely on customer behaviour and treat our services as consumer products, then build the appropriate healthcare wrap around them.
“I’m not convinced that hyper-personalised pathways will resonate with consumers.”
Will telemedicine lead to more personalised health journeys – or could algorithmic standardisation make care feel more generic?
I often talk about care being personal, rather than personalised. If you want the most personalised experience, go to the NHS. It may be inconvenient and difficult to scale, but it remains a very personal service. You see a GP who knows your history and who has a proper conversation with you – notwithstanding the current pressures on access.
Where companies like ours can make a real difference is by engaging people on a personal level, but in ways that better suit their lives. We can offer more time, more convenience and more relevant touchpoints. And because we collect numerous data points along the way, we can surface support exactly when it is likely to matter most.
I’m not convinced that hyper-personalised pathways will resonate with consumers. What we can do is provide care that feels human and personal, delivered through more modern channels that reflect how people live today.
You’ve spoken about the “1.5 care zone” – care that sits between general practice and hospital intervention. How big is that unmet need in the UK?
If you can accurately predict the size of this market with a precise number, you’re already ahead of everyone else. What I can say with confidence is that the opportunity is enormous. It’s no surprise that within the NHS, the shift towards digital health is only becoming more urgent and more visible.
Focusing solely on whether care takes place in hospitals or community settings slightly misses the point. The real question is how care can be delivered in personal settings – enabled by digital tools and technology – because that is what best fits the way people live now.
Whether someone is treated in a hospital or a pharmacy makes relatively little difference to the individual. What matters is being able to access help in the right moment and in the right way. The real challenge lies in all those interactions that fall in between – the day-to-day management of health that doesn’t fit neatly into traditional models.
This is where digital platforms powered by AI can provide a new and valuable layer of infrastructure. They can generate insights, support early intervention and ultimately reduce pressure across the system.
What does success look like for the “1.5 care zone”? Fewer GP visits? Reduced hospital activity? Better personal health literacy?
I’d say the answer is probably all of the above, in different ways. From our perspective, the core impact we’re aiming for is improved access for patients with conditions typically managed in primary care, rather than in hospital. If people get care earlier and don’t have to wait to see their GP, then you start to see the knock-on benefits further along the pathway – fewer outpatient referrals, and ultimately, less demand on secondary care.
At a macro level, that comes back to patients receiving the right care at the right time. If you achieve that, you should see better outcomes and, in theory, greater financial sustainability.
“AI should never replace clinical judgement. Our clinicians understand that accountability remains with them, not with an algorithm.”
I am curious about accountability. If an AI-driven assessment leads to a patient being mis-triaged, who is accountable: the provider, the developer or the clinician?
We’ve spent a lot of time developing the right internal governance around AI – ensuring we’re very clear about which decisions are being made and where accountability sits. Everything operates within a robust audit framework, with ongoing measurement of accuracy and internal testing to continually validate performance.
For us, AI should never replace clinical judgement. Our clinicians understand that accountability remains with them, not with an algorithm. The technology is not making medical decisions – it is supporting efficiency, summarising information and helping clinicians scale their work safely.
We also ensure clinicians can always access the full details behind any AI-generated insight so they can interrogate it as needed. I think we’ve achieved the right balance: improving efficiency and capacity at a time when the system is under real pressure, while keeping clear checks and safeguards so the clinician remains firmly in control – they’re making the decision, not just ticking a box.
The future that HeliosX envisions relies heavily on personal data. How do you convince patients to trust you with sensitive health information beyond the transaction?
For us, earning trust isn’t only about the quality of care we provide – it’s also about how we handle data. We are very clear with customers about what data we collect and why. Where possible, they can opt out, though there are situations where we do need certain information to deliver safe and effective care, such as accessing NHS records to ensure prescribing is appropriate and joined up.
We also work hard to explain the value of data in improving their personal health journey, what the value exchange looks like. If someone is happy for us to use their information, we can support them in more proactive and personalised ways. If not, we will always offer alternatives, but there may be limitations on the level of support we can provide.
Ultimately, our responsibility is to be transparent, give people meaningful choices, and ensure they know their rights when it comes to their own data.
The UK market is crowded and margins are tight; where does the growth come from?
In the UK, people have largely used private digital health solutions for specific issues, where the NHS doesn’t fully meet their needs, they want something more convenient, or they’re falling through the gaps. Historically, individuals have come to us to solve a single problem.
What we’re now seeing is a shift: patients are starting to use us alongside – not instead of – their GP, across multiple needs. That opens up an opportunity for us to deepen our role in supporting people with more aspects of their care, particularly chronic conditions that can be managed safely and effectively from home.
To be clear, we’re not looking to move into highly acute or complex interventions. But we do see real value in bringing together various lower-acuity services under one provider, easing pressure on the system while offering patients a more seamless experience.
As that expands, we expect to grow in two directions: continuing our private self-pay offering, and – increasingly – partnering with the NHS as it looks to digital solutions to deliver care in the community.
International expansion is another exciting avenue. The UK is now a relatively mature digital health market. There’s a huge opportunity to take lessons learned here and help build stronger, more scalable systems from the start, rather than retrofitting later.
This isn’t about rushing into 50 countries for the sake of it. It’s about choosing markets where our model can genuinely improve outcomes for patients and deliver real value for health systems, and then proving we can make that work.
