Switching Hospital Systems to Linux

jcatcw writes "Health care software vendor McKesson Provider Technologies is focusing on ways to cut IT costs for customers, including hospitals and medical offices. The cure is moving many of McKesson's medical software applications to Linux, which can then be used on less expensive commodity hardware instead of expensive mainframes. A deal with Red Hat allows McKesson to offer its software in a top-to-bottom package for mission-critical hospital IT systems."

Comments

Re:Lackluster vendor makes incremental, pitiful st

[ColdWetDog]

Well, TFA didn't exactly mention it, but it appears that it's the server apps that get the UNIX -> Linux treatment. I'll bet that the clients remain XP / Exploder 5-6.

Linux at the desk top is so next year.

Re:Lackluster vendor makes incremental, pitiful st

[demonlapin]

AMEN BROTHER! I'm a doctor in a hospital that just deployed an electronic health record system that is slower than the system it replaced - which was slower than the TTY system it replaced - that refuses to search patient names if you can't provide a first initial. I'm an anesthesiologist, so I see people I don't have long relationships with, and remembering someone's first name is just damned hard when you remember their medical conditions better than their name. The one piece of medical software I've seen that is really fantastic - and no, I don't own a piece of the company, I just wish I did - is our radiology system, Stentor iSite (now bought by Phillips, I think). It's very easy to use, yet the advanced user can access all sorts of features that improve the experience.

Re:(laughs so hard milk squirts out his nose)

[Psychotria]

I actually think you're the redhat newbie and not the parent. RedHat in recent (3-4 years?) has been very stable. All the stuff gets seriously stress-tested on Fedora first, so by the time it makes it into a stable RedHat, things are stable--i.e. the packages don't "suck". Additionally, because things are "tested" on Fedora first you get this kind of intrinsic QA for things making it into RedHat stable. Next time you decide to squeeze milk through your sinuses, at least do it for something funnier ;-)

Re:(laughs so hard milk squirts out his nose)

[module0000]

Glad to see someone else saw this glaring piece of obviousness.

Just because a product wasn't plug-and-play in 1997 when you last used it, doesn't mean it still sucks a decade later.

The amount of testing/development that takes place in the fedora community all funnels directly into a more stable and usable product(i.e. RHEL). That subscription to RHN ensures those engineers bust their ass to fix whats wrong and get it delivered to you: it also means that if your the IT staff in said hospitable and something doesn't make 100%, you can call someone who it does make 100% to and get an answer/fix instead of diagnosing it for 45 minutes while a doctor needing to do a simple task breathes down your neck and wastes both their time and yours.

OpenVista

[Wheelie_boy]

Really want to save money? And a whole lot of Tums? Screw McKesson's kludgeware.

OpenVista is the open source version of the VA's VistA program, deployed at over 1500 sites worldwide. You can also grab it for free from http://sourceforge.net/projects/openvista.

Yes, you can get professional training, installation and ongoing support for it:

http://medsphere.org/

Re:OpenVista

[ochampaugh]

Are you actually using VistA in a medical practice? I hear a lot of people recommending VistA as a free software alternative to expensive and often disappointing commercial systems, but not many people use VistA outside the VA. I went to the WorldVistA conference in Pittsburgh in July 2006 to look into using it for our ~30 doctor ophthalmology group, and I was surprised at the small size of the community actually using this creaky old software in a private practice setting. There are a few promising installations, and the core user group is incredibly dedicated and friendly. I met one of the devs from MedSphere at another conference a couple years ago, and they've done some fascinating work trying to make the best of this system and support it. But I think most of the people recommending this system either don't know much about it or want you to buy their VistA related services.

I'm a pretty hardcore advocate of FOSS solutions, and I was excited by the hype around VistA. But after learning about this system in some detail there's no way I could recommend it as a reasonable alternative to the better commercial systems out there despite the savings on software licenses. MUMPS is a platform without much of a future. There are huge gaps in functionality. And the future of VistA outside the VA is far from certain. I'd encourage anyone looking for an EMR/EHR system to educate themselves about VistA a little, but I suspect most of them will reach the same conclusions we did.