Monday, April 27, 2009
Health Information Technology Public Utility Act of 2009
Senator John D. Rockefeller has recently proposed a bill that will support open source health systems focused on public health coordination, especially in rural communities. The passing of this bill could greatly push the open source health systems movement forward. Overall, it is clear that many are beginning to see the value of open source health systems with regards to public health issues. It is clear that small, rural clinics do not have the budget for large EHR proprietary health systems, so open source health systems are the most viable solution to have a nationwide adoption of EHR's a true possibility.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think open source health systems can be very beneficial because if a patient comes into an ER and is unconscious then it would be nice to know the medical history so the patient can get the best treatment.
ReplyDeleteJason,
ReplyDeleteI think you are arguing for EHR's in general. This blog is focused on whether one should adopt an open source vs. a proprietary EHR system. It is clear the need for health IT systems, but the question that still remains is which system do you implement.
I am a novice on the subject so forgive me ... I am just wondering how medical information will be initially entered into an EHR (open source or proprietary)?
ReplyDeleteIf the country makes the switch to an open source EHR system, how will the existing medical information be transfered to this new system?
Hi Grant,
ReplyDeleteThank you for the comment. That is difficult question for many health organizations. They are faced with having to literally manually convert their entire paper record system into an EHR system. The other option is to hire a consulting firm to do this or the provider of the software. For large health providers, this is possible. However, for small health providers, the cost is too much. They are overwhelmed with the thought of having to convert their records, so this is a major issue that still remains to be tackled.
Hi Katie,
ReplyDeleteI think the particular focus on open source and the rural clinics to be an interesting topic. Anything dealing with Healthcare had always seem to be deemed as very expensive in the United States. I apologize in advance for being particularly ignorant, but I imagine that if one argues the need for open source for the EHR system to lower the cost for them, then how are the rural clinics affording the rest of the medical instruments that are so high cost currently? Would it be too bold to suggest that rural healthcare might need to be subsidized by the public either through government subsidies or charity contributions?
If government subsidies already exists for the rural clinics, then the cost of an EHR system would seem to be irrelevant.
Another point... since there are so money to be made in the healthcare system, are there any incentives out there for anyone to actually actively participate in the making of an open source EHR system? (Other than just normal moral guides, of course) I am just thinking about companies like Cerner and GE Healthcare who make significant amount of money from making proprietary EHR systems.
Sorry for the long comment, but these are just thoughts from my mind,and I certainly don't mean to be argumentative. I am geniunely interested in your answers! Thanks!
I think open source health system will really benefit the small, rural clinic since they truly do not have that much budget to implement EHR.
ReplyDeleteJust curious what cons would there be to implementing the open source EHR system? It seems like it could be beneficial from what i have read, but I am not very educated on this topic.
ReplyDeleteI thought i posted a comment but it didnt go through, I was just curious what the cons are to implementing an open source EHR system? From what I read it seems very beneficial, but i am still unfamiliar with this topic.
ReplyDeleteThanks,
Sarah Zurovsky
I can't figure out why my comments are posting, but here is my same comment again... I am just curious of the cons to implementing the open source EHR system? I think it could be very beneficial, but I am unfamiliar with this topic.
ReplyDeleteThanks,
Sarah Zurovsky
Thanks again for the comments.
ReplyDeleteTo address Martin's questions first, small clinics do in fact rely on charity and donations to continue running. Many continue to see their fundamental value in our health care system, so a variety of organizations will do anything to keep them up and running.
You are quite right in highlighting the fact that these clinics would not have the funds to implement an EHR system in general. That is where aid must come into play, either by the government or other organizations. Funding then for an EHR system will have to continue to come from outside sources, so my proposal to adopt an open source EHR system will simply reduce the price tag needed from outside sources.
As for incentives for open source, you are right again that there are hardly incentives to adopt open source. The primary one simply is the cost reduction. However, the more that implement an open source system, the more interoperable and less costly this can be. Plus it will validate its strength as more adopt it.
To address Sarah's comment, there are indeed cons for adopting an open source EHR system. They will be the same as with any open source software. The security of the system always is a question and also the robustness of the system comes into question. Another major concern is the support for the system. Proprietary systems have continued, strong support for their systems. However, open source systems are only as strong as their community.