I just saw that “Medical” is an another open source electronic medical record (EMR) (term sometimes used interchangeably with EHR, depending on functionality) has just won some kudos over at Sourceforge
Their stated goal:
” Provide an universal Electronic Medical Record (EMR), so doctors and institutions all over the world, independently of their economic status, will benefit from a centralized, high quality, secure and scalable system.
Our goal is to provide a free, universal EMR / HIS, where developing countries can also benefit. ”
Again we see the issue of EHR cost being directly addressed. This was not surprisingly, a factor attributing to the rate of EHR de-installations occurring in Phoenix.
It appears the high initial cost of EHR adoption, coupled with implementation and maintenance costs (those dreaded “hidden costs” of open source adoption) as well as other disruptions to basic organizational work factors, add up to the proverbial straw breaking the camel’s back.
Could it be that the classic open source business model, – i.e. free or low cost for software, with the business being support, customization, etc. – is what is needed to provide a window of opportunity for EHR adoption? An open source EHR also gives physicians the option to “fire” their support contractors who are not responsive to customer needs (also implicated in EHR de-installations). The closed source vendors have been screaming that market competition forces should drive this market. By all means, let them compete.
I think that’s really cool. Would be a potential solution and as you stated the classic open source business model. EMR has to happen. It’s no excuse that I can’t go online and get a history of my last doctors appt, conditions, etc. We can talk about all the hurdles but it needs to happen.