1. "EMR vendors are being stretched to the limits by requirements to support multiple standards across the country" is this good or bad, why so?
"EMR vendors are being stretched to the limits by requirements to support multiple standards across the country". One of the functions of EMR is to make possible to transfer data into information and to support the knowledge; other indicator of quality is its interoperability (De.ryerson.ca, 2013 CHIT 100), in order to meet these requirements EMR system has to support multiple standards. This is required not only to be able to be used across the facilities and/or networks, but also to make it highly functional and interoperable with EHR. Vendors are required to make EMR system maximum functional to be able to synchronize, analyze, interoperate, provide administration, clinical support, etc. It has to be in compliance with agreed terminology standards Meeting different standards and at the same time maintain the system user friendly, simple for health care providers to use– is a challenge (Thomson, 2013). Of cause EMR can be just simple electronic medical records, only for one office-use, but in today’s reality requirement to the system much higher and its’ analytical ability and interoperability is almost a must. Even though within the one medical office it has to be ‘Loose in the front, tight in the back’ and as minimum be able to ‘understand’ (Healthcareimc.com, 2013) used variation, synonyms of the medical terms and translate them into coded terminology. The systems should be able to generate the standard output, while being open for vide range, diversely formulated input. Ideal solution will be one or, since it is not possible, minimum number of vendors to decrease diversity of the systems, to have limited number of different EMR systems and to make more feasible to standardize indicators across the systems. In addition, use of provincial standards developed by CIHI, Infoway, will make easy vendors’ job and help standardization process. I do think that meeting requirement of supporting multiple standards is good idea; however vendors should try to keep the system as simple as possible to use, to not discourage and raise resistance among health care providers. EMR systems have to meet requirement to support multiple standards across the country in order to be able:
• To understand, translate, code, accumulate, analyze different indicators, both in terms of administrative, statistical and medical use;
• To be used across the medical and diagnostic facilities, all over the province,
• To be adjustable, interoperable and multifunctional.
2. "Reusing standards" the article discusses issues from the author's perspective, what is your opinion in this regards?
In my opinion ‘reusing of standards’ is a good idea. Off cause with about twenty years of history of EMR, this is not a case when everything new is well forgotten old; however the other proverb - why reinvent the wheel is a good fit for it....