This is an interesting article that in the long run focuses on interoperability for Personal Health Records. When you compare side by side, there are pros and cons for both Google Health and Microsoft HealthVault. Who knows some day the 2 might even talk to each other as well, which may not be that far fetched when you stop and think about how browsers work, in other words how Google works in the Internet Explorer, etc., so it’s something that could come to pass someday.
There’s also a recommendation for both to look at for suggestions as to what could be added for ease of use and what the consumers had to offer with advice from a company called UserCentric. One thing that was nice though is that UserCentric actually sat down and had people work with the PHRs, unlike so many of the posts on the internet today where we read opinions and what selected leadership folks in different areas believe, but find out they themselves have never opened a PHR account nor used one, so hats off for their comparison and taking the time to actually use and evaluate the PHRs.
The one item I found somewhat not addressed though is the integration both have with vendors, in other words the focus on the analysis was on entering data manually, when the big advantage of both PHRs is to integrate and get away from the manual entering of data, which is what we all want, credible data to share. Having the information populated for you is the big key to the entire matter. I would much rather have the drug stores where I get my prescriptions filled do the work with a couple clicks rather than to sit down and try to remember everything off the top of my head, or hook up my glucose machine via usb and have it all done automatically, no manual typing on a keyboard.
Working with Open Health Tools as mentioned below too is not a bad idea either, as we need the PHRs to work with EHRS as well, so getting back to the integration process, the records in the EHR from your doctor can populate your PHR too. We’re getting there, we have medications, medical devices and more already working with PHRs, so in time it will come full circle, as mentioned, it’s in the code, smart programmers can do a lot when they get their hands on the “code”. Some hospitals are already set up to work with the PHRs as well. BD
A PHR has to do many different things for many people. It must be able to take in data cleanly and seamlessly, sometimes automatically. That requires interfaces with hospital records, and with a host of consumer devices. It may also require taking input from alternative therapists, like chiropractors.
So I think it’s vital that the code be accessible by all the many stakeholders in this process, and that compatibility be assured. There is a long road ahead. The company which can manage this process best is going to win the market.
In this effort both Microsoft and Google have real assets to offer. So here’s my final idea. The first of these to get their code, and their ecosystem, integrated with Open Health Tools is going to have a big advantage in this space.
» PHRs are operating systems | ZDNet Healthcare | ZDNet.com
Related Reading:
0 comments :
Post a Comment