[GPCG_TALK] Re: [HL7Info] David Guest comment on webservices - issues for theworkshop on March 28th.

[David Guest]

Russell McDonell wrote: snip - mail versus webservice authentication stuff Which doesn’t really matter, because both sides are picking on the worst attributes of each other’s solution – email can be use badly and Web Services can’t be used at all. Email can be used badly, by people who don’t encrypt stuff. And people who think that just because they sent it, the receiver got it. Like paper. Web Services can’t be used at all if you don’t have the interfaces. You can offer me the best Web Service in the world, but without the appropriate interface I can’t make use of it.  So why not argue the best point of each other’s solution and try and raise you solution to that level. For instance, you can implement email as a closed loop solution; that is with an acknowledgment coming back that the message has been received. But the round trip time of that acknowledgement can be several days. With Web Services is it virtually “instantaneous”, because it’s more of a “point to point” solution, rather than email’s “store and forward”. So let’s build an Australia wide health broadband network that cuts out the middleman. That way, email can be delivered directly from server to server and the round trip time would drop to almost zero. but the delay in round trip time is not due to the servers, it's due to the recipient not reading the mail. You can argue that with webservices you can dump the data straight in the EHR but in Australian general practice that can still mean that somebody with a potassium of 8.2 on Friday night will be dead by Monday morning. The only solution to this is to have service level agreements that recipients will check data with certain frequency or at least have another linked mechanism that is more reliable like an SMS gateway as has been suggested elsewhere. And email also has a standard protocol for sending acknowledgements that the message has been opened (if not read). I don’t believe that this is a standard feature of Web Services. So Web Services users only have “non-repudiation” that my system go it, not that it ever made it to my desktop. If my understanding of Web Services is right, then perhaps this is something that the Web Services people could work on improving. My understanding of webservices is even more rudimentary but some applications such as Argus can determine when a message has been "consumed" by the EHR. This still doesn't mean that it's been appropriately medically processed but the sender's obligations must stop at some point beyond their control. Otherwise you finish up like the docs responsible for a patient's actions when he does not turn up for the specialist appointment. And email interfaces are almost universally available and enhancements like encryption can be done very cheaply. So lets find a way of making Web Services interfaces universally available, perhaps by getting them “bundled in” with something that everyone in health purchases. Um – may be not so easy. But, HIC PKI keys could come bundled with Web Services interface modules for all the most common medical practice, patient administration, client administration, patient billing, pathology, radiology and clinical viewing software. That’s actually quite a small list. You could count them on the fingers and toes of the members of federal cabinet. Webservices does not seem that daunting a technology. My concern is about standardising the minimum datasets and calls that they will provide. Communication between disparate applications is much easier with RPC/SOAP but you still don't want to write (n-1)! interfaces. David Russell McDonell, Technology Manager, HumeNET Ltd Phone +61 (3) 57613702 On NET 13702 (free) Mobile +61 (4) 38392099     This communication is intended only to be read or used by the addressee. The information contained in this communication may be confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, distribution, disclosure or copying of this material is unauthorised and prohibited. The confidentiality attached to this communication is not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery to you. If you have received this communication in error, please destroy it and notify Goulburn Valley Health - by phoning (03) 5832 2322. This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and cleared by MailMarshal - For more information please visit www.marshalsoftware.com -- SIP [EMAIL PROTECTED] NodePhone +61 7 31290168 Jabber [EMAIL PROTECTED]

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
Gpcg_talk@ozdocit.org
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk