On Thursday 15 February 2007 08:12, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > On Wednesday 14 February 2007 23:41, john hilton wrote: > > How would you like a surgerywhere in each GP's office the doctor uses his > > fave EHR frontend prog, from a shared db? > > That's what I was thinking of when Horst made his suggestion. I'd love it. > I would never be blamed because of my choice of program (although I haven't > had any for more than a year)
One of the things I've learnt from trying to write an EHR is that the GUI and the backend are inevitably wedded fairly closely in term of behaviour. You can move things around, change fonts, colour etc. very easily, but to implement a particular workflow on the GUI, you need a matching database structure. This is also why a 'common set of fields' to make EHR data portable is very hard, unless you make it very simple, and then the imported data won't be as 'rich' as the EHRs own data. For example, you won't be able to do automatic repeats scripts from the old data, as it's just a free string "Amoxil 500mg tabs" which the new EHR can't make sense of. You can read it though, so it's still useful. This is not absolute, I think it is possible to have the two interfaces demonstrated by Richard and Horst talk to the same backend, (and an MD-style one as 'lowest comon denominator') however it would need very careful thought, and there would be limits, certain areas were all the clients would have the same or similar behaviour. Ian _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
