« Who Owns EHR Data? What constitutes proper data stewardship? | Main | Need for Greater Emphasis In EHRs on Accessibility of Medical Directives »


Chris Brancato

Interoperability is so amorphic a term that most people on the Hill will just not get what that means and how the meaning is often manipulated. It's akin to saying you're HIPAA compliant, whatever that means. Makes for good marketing though.

Epic, and every other vendor on the planet, is selling nothing but this: "Health IT would be interoperable if you all just did it our way".

Those of us who've trudged through implementations know that just ain't so even if you use the exact same product.

What we really mean to say is that the content is predictable. I, as a clinican, can reasonably predict that of you send me what we call a patient summary record, I'll know what to expect it would contain with little or no variation.

Take the multiple and almost infinate iterations of the document we call discharge summary. When I receive one from a hopsital and another one from a different hospital, one would reasonable expect that they would contain the same pheynotypes of data and data elements. And you'd be 100% incorrect, Batman!

The heart of interoperabilty is standardized content and definition. Moving the data is in its essence pretty darn easy. Knowing what I'm going to get when I need it is something totally different.

The rest of the arguments about interoperability as simply spurious noise.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Corporate Underwriters



Search Lab Soft News

  • Google


Subscribe to Lab Soft News (Email and RSS Feeds)

Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz

May 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 12/2005