There are stated concerns that open source software does not come with the necessary support and security like proprietary offerings have. However, check out Medsphere. They operate off of an open source software model but provide the necessary support to install the software and security for protection of data in the system. Their system, OpenVista, is modular and is a pay-as-you-go concept. It is not necessary for a health provider to adopt an entire system package, but rather the health provider can choose what it is they want to implement and pay when they implement it.
Medsphere follows along the lines of many open source software providers in that they cannot offer everything they do for free. The software is open source, so it's free. However, by adding on their services, Medsphere does in fact charge for their services (similar to RedHat with Linux). The question then is how much does it cost to implement the open source with its services in comparison to the proprietary systems? From Medsphere's site along with open source providers in general, the consensus appears to be that there is a significant cost savings in comparison to the proprietary system offerings. Is that true? If so, can these savings be quantified and compared for health care providers to truly understand the financial differences?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment