Adi Smith wrote: > Tim Churches wrote: > >> I'll happily bet that within 2 years Google will unilaterally come up >> with a Web-based EHR >> They'll fund all this out of their own deep pockets. > > Why build when they can acquire? They already have a working > relationship with one vendor and a rich history of growth by > acquisition: > > http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/story.cms?id=6223 > > I suspect Google is just biding their time to see if the adsense > supported EMRs business model yields a profit.
I doubt that Google is interested in providing EHR/EMR systems targeted at doctors. Google is interested in consumers, the 1.1 billion people worldwide (a sixth of the world's population, and rising) with Internet connections. They'll provide an API so that physician-oriented information systems can exchange data with Google Health, but their aim won't be to replace clinical information systems - such systems are far too specialised and niche and Google isn't interested in specialised niches, I think. On a related subject, Google recently released, as open-source, a first version of their "Google Gears" framework, which makes it easier to develop Web-based applications which work online *and* offline, quite transparently. The applications don't have to use any Google infrastructure, though - they have just provided a software toolkit for application construction. Not hard to imagine a Web-based consumer-oriented EHR which stores copies of a user's data locally for use offline, and which automatically synchronises in both directions when back online. All running from an encrypted USB memory stick costing perhaps $50. Such an application is just waiting to be built. The primary data store is online, on a Web-connected server. If a GP or lab needs to update the EHR, those updates are done via the Web to the online version. If the consumer wants to view or update their records, they can do so online or offline, with both the online and offline copies of their data automatically updated. If they lose their memory stick, just get another one and resynchronise with the primary online data store. No need for expensive specialised smart cards, no need for smart card readers, no need for the consumer to plug their memory stick into their health providers' computers in order for them to be updated. So how about CARDIAB data managed online and offline via a Google Gears application? Anyone interested in applying for a collaborative ARC grant to undertake such a project should contact me to discuss. Tim C _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
