Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




Electronic Medical Records

My company is evaluating 3 different electronic medical record systems.  We're looking at Qualifacts, Creative Socio-Medics, & UNI/CARE.  Has anyone used any of these products?  Can you provide any info from the user's perspective?

Qualifacts is ASP.NET, with BizTalk as the routing engine.  It's pricey but polished.

Creative is a Java app, using Cache DB (Post-relational...) as its data store. 

I don't know anything about UNI/CARE.

Thanks!

nathan
Monday, June 28, 2004

Sorry, we're on Allscripts here.

Steve Barbour
Monday, June 28, 2004

"Qualifacts is ASP.NET, with BizTalk as the routing engine"

Not mature.

Spid
Monday, June 28, 2004

"Creative is a Java app, using Cache DB (Post-relational...) as its data store. "

PITA


Monday, June 28, 2004

"Not mature."

Neither is the electronic medical record field, when you throw HIPAA and HL7 CDA into the mix.

In fact, given those two facts of life, any solution older than five years means it's a patch on a legacy platform.

So it sounds like it's a draw on "young=bad" and we can get back to evaluating platforms on their individual merits.

[grin]
Philo

Philo
Monday, June 28, 2004

Well, my experience with EMR has led me to pay a lot more attention to the vendor themselves as opposed to the application.

Yes, the EMR is a big monetary investment, but after you use it for several years you're going to be pretty much locked in (not completely, but close enough).  Then the big issue becomes how responsive the vendor is to make changes and to fix things.  No matter which EMR you use, if you actually use it, there will come a time when the darn thing just doesn't work the way that makes since to your medical people.  Also, you need to make sure that the company is going to be around ten years from now when you have a serious glitch.  Finally, look at their process.  Are they going to still be able to support you five years from now?  Even though you have a custom version?  Even though you refused to upgrade to the latest version because it broke some functionality your users consider to be crucial?

Take your time.  Any decent vendor will take you to some existing sites and let you see their EMR in action and let you bang away on it for a while.  At the very least they should let you connect to their site remotely and test the thing out.

Steve Barbour
Tuesday, June 29, 2004

Philo:

I have to disagree with your assessment.  Those two standards do not imply a rewrite of all existing systems.  Any properly designed system from 5 years ago should be relatively easy to use in a HIPAA compliant manner.

As for CDA, before that ever becomes useful, companies will need to create front ends that allows for the easy creation of data oriented notes.  That doesn't seem to exist quite yet so I wouldn't give the advantage to new systems just yet.

That said, the EMR field is still, by and large, crap.  It is a bit astonishing given that it has been around since at least the late 1970s.  One of the problems is that it is very difficult to create a system that will work off the rack for a variety of facilities.  A large amount of custom work needs to be done and today that tends to mean millions of dollars to consultants just to get it up and running to the point that doctors can begin complaining about it.

name withheld out of cowardice
Tuesday, June 29, 2004

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home