Web Development

General discussion


HL7, is it practical?

By craiglinq ·
It's good to hear about the advances mentioned. For someone who has some knowledge of medicine and information. My review of the HL7 website continues to be underwhelming for what would seem to be such simple tasks.

I'm just referring to the format of the medical record like: registration, admitting, initial visits... This can easily be accomplished between a nurse, a doctor or two, some ancillary services people, a medical records librarian and a good programmer. Most of the element involved in the chart already exist preprinted sheets of paper (forms) with little spaces(fields) to enter the appropriate the appropriate information. All that has to be done is to formalize the names and a few validation characteristics and standard definitions such as whether the temperature is going to be presented in C or F. There will always be disagreements based on fixed preferences support usually non nonsensical abstractions. Soap, mini-soap, XML or a whole raft of other formats would serve the purpose.

It appears that the effort toward interoperability is being complicating and adding steps to provide openings for conversion programs which are entirely undesirable for design, efficiency and cost.

Visit the HL7 shop and see if you can figure out what they're talking about with excessively priced specifications. There are some issues that as yet they are supposed to approach but haven't that would be simple and very helpful, like finding medically oriented codes that are operable, extensible and public domain.

CPT codes are copyrighted by the AMA and there are probably three or four more codes that may require royalties. Once committed to these it will be much more difficult to change.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

I might try to answer if I knew what you're talking about - nt

by Deadly Ernest In reply to HL7, is it practical?
Collapse -

It's simple with three people

by Dr Dij In reply to HL7, is it practical?

a pt, a dr, a nurse

but the dr has to send out to bill this stuff
so needs consistent I/F.

this is required to be electronic now. small Drs have billing svcs to put in computer.

addl are need to interchange with other hospitals for referrals, and pt moves or in other state or foreign country temporarily.

then the other parts of the record include radiology, pharmacology, equipment provided to pt, nursing or therapeutic care provided, home health care (no dr present, maybe no nurse), etc.

so the field of med is much vaster and complicated than you make it out to be. no dr practice with 1 dr is going to hire a pgmr. they will buy software or an ASP service online.

there's considerations of privacy and encryption, hipaa, permanent storage of med record in some cases including radiation exposures, etc.

so this is really well beyond one pgmer in your cursory evaluation. this is why there are so many software companies and often very large ones like epic, etc.

certainly there might be a place for small scale effort by independents tweaking via add on modules or report writing, or interfacing various software components.

and large efforts are even more complicated. despite seeming simple, the british system had a consulting abortion of effort relating to new software rollout, this by one of the major sw consulting firms.

and strange as it sounds, drs don't always want to computerize. the dr I interned at threw out a $25k package and was just using it to schedule appts. they kept paper charts, used biling service. they still did some things like ordering drugs or supplies via internet via vendor's websites.

the hospital I just finished up at was a bit better. they used touchscreen for patient data entry by nurse aids but much of the nurse and dr info about pt was on paper.

Related Discussions

Related Forums