Oct 14, 2013 11:18 am | By: John
I’ve long had an interest in the topic of when hospitals chose to buy their EHR software versus build their EHR software. In fact, we’ve written multiple times on the subject including Anne Zieger’s piece on “Some Hospitals Still Choosing To Build Own EMR“.
With this as background, I was really intrigued by Dr. Edmund Billings’ blog post looking at how open source EHR is the best of both buy and build worlds. Here’s a good section of his article which frames the debate:
In a Buy vs. Build decision, the key drivers are control and cost. Do you have control over your system at a cost you can afford? The decision calculus then shifts to ownership on two levels: First, can we have true ownership of our solution and make it work ourselves? Second, is the total cost of ownership economically sustainable?
Dr. Billings then goes on to make the case that open source EHR is the best of both worlds. He compares the open source EHR vista to Linux and Red Hat to Medsphere. It’s a pretty app comparison of what Medsphere is trying to do. Dr. Billings does point out that an enterprise EHR is not an operating system (like RedHat/Linux). Although, I find that ironic since I’ve written before about how I think that the EHR is the operating system of healthcare.
One major difference between Linux and VistA is how they’re implemented. Linux could be implemented by an organization on just a server or two while still running all the old servers on something else. Then, over time they could add in more Linux servers. This isn’t the case with VistA. Everyone wants an Enterprise EHR to be implemented across the entire system. I don’t see someone implementing VistA in one department and then growing from there. Maybe we should do it this way, but that’s not what I see happening in the market. They buy an EHR system they can use across their whole organization.
This difference aside, open source does provide an interesting balance between the buy vs build mentality. I wonder why hospital organizations have chosen other EHR vendors over the open source EHR alternatives.