On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Wayne Wilson wrote:
...
>I can't say too many times how important workflow is, technology often
>disrupts workflow or perhaps better phrased, re-organizes workflow.
Wayne,
I agree completely. All EMR systems impose a specific workflow. Their
ability to support/facilitate modification of their embedded workflow/data
model is typically limited.
ABSOLUTELY DISAGREE. THIS IS A SERIOUS MISCONCEPTION and SOMETHING ONE SHOULD LOOK AT WHEN THEY EVALUATE AN EMR FOR THEIR PRACTICE!
>All too often, technologists don't understand what they have wrought and
>spend a lot of time 'dismayed' at the poor uptake of our wonderful new
>technologies.
I think some are beginning to understand and even trying to take a
different approach. :-) For example:
We have been doing an OIO-based EMR implementation for a network of
clinics since Jan 2004. I think it should be classified as a semi-custom
application since it contains custom workflows/reports + standard OIO
forms. It looks and feels like a fully-custom application built-to-fit the
specific needs of a specific care-delivery operation. However,
implementation time/labor/risks have been much lower due to use of OIO
components (compared to using other tools/frameworks or modifying existing
EMR).
To give some background, this is a replacement system for their in-house
developed Coldfusion and Microsoft SQL Server/Access system that became
too expensive to maintain. They were able to use OIO to model aspects of
their existing workflow/data model that they wish to keep. The bonus is
that they can further modify their data model (=OIO forms) and workflows
as their needs change in the future at very low cost (time +
labor-skill-level + risk).
Best regards,
Andrew
