Comments on: News 7/26/07

By: B2B-John

B2B-John — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:13:47 +0000

mia hottie – My comments were meant to simply enlighten others as to why Google may have put together the type of advisory panel they did. It’s not that I necessarily agree with their choices, but I do understand them and if I were in their shoes, probably would not have done much differently.

Really see this advisory panel as structured to push policy and open doors and not about what their future service will offer. For that, agree, they will need other constituencies such as med librarians and RNs among others to assist with that effort.

By: Art_Vandelay

Art_Vandelay — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:22:19 +0000

RonA – check the scoreboard – Misys Lab is doing well in KLAS ratings. It still works well, performs well on mid-range hardware, has a plethora of interfaces, and is far from the bottom of the pile. It doesn’t run with a windows client and relational database but those that do usually don’t perform for larger organizations. IMHO, the Lab business for hospitals and their immediate ambulatory clients will continue to consolidate -> so the small environments referenced in KLAS ratings will continue to decrease or be outsourced.

By: mia hottie

mia hottie — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:13:29 +0000

Agree that Google seems to be looking for talking heads but one might assume they also want input on their solution, not just the concept, nor are they just promoting PHRs as a good concept. Thus engaging one less talking head and one more thinking head with some practical experience might have been wise.

Even if Google were just interested in promoting PHRs as “good citizens” then might want practical sound advice from largest business group and IT users in all settings – RNs have earned at least one seat at the table and many are as or more articulate than the named committee members. If nothing else someone needs to keep the egos and talking head smoke blowers honest and on track.

The medical librarian comment leads me to believe you don’t know what nurses do or how they play a role in IT or healthcare – or think they have anyting to offer even at the talking head level.

By: B2B-John

B2B-John — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:40:39 +0000

Re Google Advisory Council
Based on the composition of the advisory council it looks like Google is seeking influence to move policy and ultimately drive the PHR push that they have been expounding upon. For that, they do not need nurses nor medical librarians, they need talking heads that are well-known in the industry.

But the $64,000 question is: “If they build it, will they come?” and I’ve yet to see any clear indications that PHR, which is so in vogue right now has any legs. Heck, just look at the still abysmal rate of EMR adoption, without the digital records, what will a consumer have in their PHR, an exercise log book? I just don’t see consumers entering in the data themselves. It must be automated and aggregated and for that to occur there are a whole slew of things that will have to happen first in this industry.

By: PezMan

PezMan — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:32:30 +0000

RE: Anne Arundel – The CIO is an old VP at Cerner over consulting. Reference the link below for factual back-up.

http://www.aahs.org/news/bios.php

As for replacing Meditech…was this recently installed Meditech? If so, then that is a pretty dumb move to do as they never had any ROI yet. Replacing Meditech with Cerner itself…we need more reasons as to why they want to do that…beyond the CIO connections.