That's a big part of any integration effort, but only one piece of the
puzzle. Projects I haver worked on have generally begun with
identifying use cases and reviewing data models. I wouldn't get too
caught up in issues of topology ("hub and spoke") just yet. But a
unified data model may not be what you need, either. Ultimately, you
will need a set of interfaces, which cannot be properly defined without
knowing the data models on either side, but in general, the coupling
between the systems should be as loose as feasible, emphasizing
separation of concerns and functional issues.--- TyrusMaynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Fred, > > Isn't it best to concentrate on defining what is common in data > dictionaries, > to which all developers can map data in and out? > > I think that practitioners and patients are less interested in hub > and spoke > models than are the business managers of institutions. Sometimes a > choice of > software at a hub (such as hospital) causes some institutions and > practices out > there on the so called spokes to believe there is advantage in > running the same > software as the hub institution (this shouldn't be the case). > That said,a Vista with proper configuration dialogs should be > able to run > on the spokes in addition to the hub (where the massive VA model also > has to be > substantially configured or modified at a hospital hub, as Medsphere > is doing). > > As has been discussed elsewhere, there is a mandate to map data to > enable a > running Vista to cooperate with Free B application for billing. > When such mapping is also made available for widely accepted > standards of > EMR data, it will not only allow patients to move more easily between > providers > and sites (with different software) .... it will allow IT persons to > support > their providers in moving (their data) to whatever software they > choose. > Of course migrating a whole practice should not be an everyday > whim, but it > should not be a fearful process either, and perhaps the day will come > when even > a test drive of a new software could truly run substantial parts of > accumulated > data, rather than tiny dummy data sets (just a dream). > > So I don't see any value in declaring what software should operate > on spoke > as opposed to hub. Software which maintains large portions of data > mapped to a > common standard will enable the portability of a patient record, > but also, > "portability of users" should be a benefit that is not unintended. > Then the > users will decide what to use. > > I havn't been able to find Nancy Anthracite's earlier posts on the > initiative > of the Personal Health Record (is this the correct wording?), but it > seems that > such data mapping intitiatives are a start for collaboration between > differing > open-source projects. It certainly is a place for a software to > show its tools > for moving data in and out. > > RustyMaynard > > Fred Trotter wrote: > > This seems like a good point to discuss the possiblity of a joint > > ClearHealth-VistA interaction. > > > > The advantages of ClearHealth in this situation are as follows. > > > > 1. Already deployed and tested in a clinical environment > > 2. Based on more popular technology, a web consultant could handle > the > > technology with some help from a medical IT person. > > 3. ClearHealth is on the road to being VistA compatible/component. > > > > As I hope everyone can see, by my more and more pestering emails, I > > really want to see a long term partnership between VistA and > > ClearHealth. (perhaps something like the quasi-collaborative > > relationship between Linux and Free/OpenBSD communities) > > > > The most obvious example of such a system would be a VistA and > > ClearHealth hub and spoke system. I envision this as VistA running > the > > more complex Hospital infrastructure, with satellite clinics > running > > ClearHealth with a gateway into the VistA EHR system. As a result > > ClearHealth would become the clinic window into VistA. Of course I > will > > refrain from making the VistA and Clear to Window pun, but it is > > tempting :) > > > > This situation might be a good opportunity to test this model. > > ClearHealth is easy to install, I can get it running from source on > a > > fresh server in about five minutes, and if I knew all of the > information > > about a practice I could have a skeleton system up in an about an > hour > > after that (of course knowing the information about a practice > could > > take a day to acquire) > > > > What do you think of this Hub and spoke model? generally and in > this > > situation. > > > > Again I want to be clear that we have not yet decided exactly what > do > > about this, so do not view this as a statement of our intention, I > am > > just tossing around ideas? > > > > Anyone? > > > > Regards, > > Fred Trotter > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO > > September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle > Practices > > Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * > Testing & QA > > Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * > http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf > > _______________________________________________ > > Hardhats-members mailing list > > Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO > September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle > Practices > Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing > & QA > Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * > http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf > _______________________________________________ > Hardhats-members mailing list > Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members > === Gregory Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Without the requirement of mathematical aesthetics a great many discoveries would not have been made." -- Albert Einstein ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
