Exporting patient files, with the patients details (name, DOB, sex,
Medicare number, etc.) from HCN's software is possible as they can be
exported from the program as a delimited text file (patients.out), but
the patient's billing history, etc. cannot be imported into another
medical practice suite and the database isn't accessible without HCN's
access (logged in with a valid logon).
to me it sounds like what is needed is to transform the exported file into
an XML schema which, if done in a meaningful way, could be fairly
easily transformed into any desired format - that is, there's probably only
a certain amount of different information types to worry about, and each
type could be captured with appropriate markup and class definitions.. then
it could be imported and/or exported into any db schema with
a standardised parser
Now, this type of software is the perfect candidate to be on an open
platform (which some medical practices use Linux to store a flat-file
database on), and with simple google seaches I've found some
open-source Medical Billing/Appointment book practice management
suites, but they were all on 0.x releases and unsuitable for the
Australian medical billing system, with no mention to Medicare. Has
anyone found anything for Australia; I'd be interested in following
the development for a Linux/multiplatform open-source practice
management suite suited to Australia's medical/Medicare standards.
I completely agree, and would even go further to day that it is exactly this
kind of information that needs to be freed.. but in terms of the software
itself, I imagine that this sector is in a particularly lucrative market
place. What I mean to say is that given the international climate around
medical data (well, ok, the USA's medical system), the goodness and badness
of software can really be established in how usable it is for professionals
who are anything but IT focused, and in fact are more properly focused on
the job at hand - namely, curing illness. If the information is published in
open formats, the software itself can compete in each of the localised
markets, given the particular laws that are applicable in different
countries and different states that may effect various aspects of the
system, and there's nothing wrong with that, but what is important, and I
mean *really* is important (and I definitely feel in this circumstance more
than others), is that transportability of the information itself. An open
source product can compete in the market as with any other vendor, and I
think many here would advocate such a solution, but really I think it's an
open data format that should be higher on the list of priorities for medical
information.. this would, needless to say, provide possibilities of exchange
between different hospitals and GP practices that can be vendor neutral, and
can evaluate the effectiveness of software on it's functional merits rather
than the ability of a licensing model to lock in an entire industry to a
single solution with extortionate fees.
An open source model for the software may benefit from this environment with
a properly thought out, probably OO design, but software companies with more
focused resources may or may not be able to be more effective in that space,
but when it comes to the medical industry's priorities, a focus on patient
care, I think, far outways whether some software is GPL'ed or not, as long
as the data is available and useable for all those that need to, whether
they can afford a particular vendor's fees or not.
Pushing such a thing wouldn't be easy, but I think it would be an effort
that ultimately would be more fruitful than the advocacy of a particular
open source solution in favour of another propriety solution that has the
commercial an support resources available to appeal to an industry that
would see IT as support and not as core to the business.
This doesn't really help you, but I think this sort of information is a
prime example of where freedom is very, very important
