See http://www.ehiprimarycare.com/comment_and_analysis/index.cfm?ID=197

Interesting snippets:

a) "The demo included the first public sight of tools for improved
clinical note taking, that include automatic prompting to allow notes to
be coded with appropriate SNOMED CT codes at the point of capture. A
vital step in the development of electronic patient records, and
providing clinical knowledge support at the point of care. The aim
explained Andrew Kirby, Microsoft's head of the CUI programme is to
ensure consistent note taking with meta tags included."

b) "In addition an NHS Abbreviations Manager has been created that will
automatically ask the user covered by an abbreviation that they type and
ask them to code it appropriately. Microsoft is also looking to see
whether adding and NHS spellchecker is also possible."

c) "The project includes two main strands, a Design Guide which
describes how things should be done and the NHS Software Development Kit
that provides the components for ISVs to easily turn the Guide into
software.

Kirby said that clinical ISVs can now freely take components from the
NHS Software Development Kit and incorporate them into their software.
'This builds on the Microsoft approach of common controls, basic
building blocks that allow you to do things very rapidly.'"

a) and b) are clearly cognate with what Jon Patrick has been working on
with respect to SNOMED CT and other encoding and tagging of clinical
free text. If Jon's unit were funded to produce a fully-developed open
source implementation of this, then Australia could reap many, many
benefits.

<cynicism>Or we could just wait and buy the technology from Microsoft
(part of the UK NHS/Microsoft collaboration is that Microsoft is
encouraged to flog the technologies elsewhere, with some royalties
flowing back to the NHS coffers).  After all, we're only good at growing
stuff and digging stuff up in this country. And brewing beer, sort
of.</cynicism>

c) is interesting because it is an example of a very large govt agency
saying "We need to give the local software industry both direction and
assistance, so we'll fund freely available (at least freely available
within the context of the UK health system) reference implementations
and re-usable components to give them a leg-up and to herd them in a
common direction, while still allowing innovation and entrepreneurship."

Very smart indeed. What isn't so smart is their choice of Microsoft as
the partner in this, and the complete lock-in to the Microsoft software
universe that results, nor the restriction of the availability of the
technologies and components to NHS approved ISPs. Needless to say, open
sourced reference implementations and re-usable components would have
been a much better idea in the long term. But the general idea of
funding development of software components is a good one, rather than
just spewing forth 500 page standards documents in the sublime hope that
the local health software industry will implement them. NEHTA, please
take note!

Tim C
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

Reply via email to