Is open source the key to successful national e-health?
- 12 November, 2009 13:23
- Comments 4
The Federal Government and healthcare industry bodies should abandon proprietary software and embrace open source software if Australia is to have a successful national e-health platform, argues e-health academic, Professor Jon Patrick.
Professor Patrick, who heads up the health information technology research laboratory at the University of Sydney, said the existing proprietary software used in the health industry lacked the flexibility and cost-effectiveness to meet the demands of emergency department clinical situations.
“One of the problems we are seeing is that [health] authorities get locked into contracts and software which they can’t change when their needs change, yet the health sector is highly dynamic,” Professor Patrick said.
“If we try and define information systems needs in some static way, we are absolutely destined to produce systems that are not effective in the ongoing nature of their work. Unless your information system can change very quickly, it will fall from use and will contribute to lack of productivity.”
Patrick said that current proprietary systems either intrinsically lacked the sorts of functionality required by the health industry or required users to pay large sums of money to add functionality.
“Medical staff will keep inventing new things they want to do and new ways of doing things, so you need software which is agile and the way it performs and behaves can be changed,” he said. “You will only get that with a very agile software development methodology and, at the moment, the most agile we have is open source.”
Another important consideration is the ability for the healthcare sector to avoid vendor lock-in and be able to have the freedom of choice over who and how its software is serviced.
“Only open source allows you to have the free market operation of the service side of software production,” he said. “In an open source environment, having software changed is exactly the need which is served the best.”
Patrick argues control and oversight is an issue that pertains more to proprietary software rather than one that potentially prohibits the uptake of open source software in the healthcare sector.
“At the moment hospitals have no control over their software - they get what’s installed. So the control situation would improve in that they would have control over what is installed and what they can achieve,” he said. “Oversight is always a software issue for organisations but it [depends on] the types of policies and practices in place. Open source is agnostic about those sorts of things and has the flexibility to provide a wider range of choices about what you want and who makes those changes. That’s a good thing if we believe in a competitive society.”
Patrick criticised the New South Wales Government’s rollout of its $80 million FirstNet Emergency Department program, saying the influx of US-developed software in emergency departments is costly and hinders the capacity for hospitals to achieve greater productivity.
“Australian software engineers are amongst the best in the world," he said. "We should be using that talent and building an Australian medical software industry."
Professor Patrick's comments come on the back of recommendations for an e-health policy from the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission (NHHRC).
The report recommends that by 2012 the Federal Government must ensure that the national e-health policy framework incorporates open technical standards which provide for interoperability, compliance, confidentiality and security.
- Bookmark this page
- Share this article
- Got more on this story? Email Computerworld
- Follow Computerworld on twitter
-
BTJunkie voluntarily closes file-sharing website
-
More Australians switch on IPTV: Study
-
Microsoft at a loss over Event Viewer scam
-
Battery fires, rootkits and Sony's brand
-
Mobile device management: Apple's extra little tricky requirement
-
MYOB Software for Dummies 6E Australian Edition
-
Excel 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies
-
Microsoft Office
-
Windows 7 for Dummies®
-
Office 2007 for Dummies
-
Computers for Seniors for Dummies, 2nd Edition
-
Office 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies
-
Teach Yourself Visually Windows 7
-
Windows 7 for Dummies® Dvd+book Bundle












Comments
kiran
I work for area health service. Almost all software related to Patients Information Systems are proprietary ones. Those developed in-house are being slowly replaced by expensive proprietary software.
There are number of ways to move forward with Open source software for health care.
Mike
Open Source is a business model, not a panacea to fix any poorly thought out system. The main problem with ehealth is not the software model, but the thinking that patient records belong to the doctor, or hospital or insurer or government. They don't, they belong to the patient. Until this fundamental question is addressed, all ehelath initiatives will fail
Anonymous
Open standards and interoperability is what is important. Writing software for eHealth is hard, very hard. The programmers need to earn a decent wage. Neither Open Source nor hospitals can pay much. It is only be leveraging costs across multiple projects and sites that a company can afford to write the software. Make sure your data is not locked in. Then it shouldn't matter what software you use.
Ognian Pishev
I am curious to see a list of successful open source projects and implementations in e-health. It will be a very short one:
1. VISTA (not really our kind of open source) and ?
Post new comment