[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Sun, 2010-04-18 at 09:53 +0100, Simon Waters wrote: > Henry Bremridge wrote: > > Saw the following this morning > > > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7598520/Controversial-medical-records-database-suspended.html > > Simon said > it. Probably summary care records have reached that point, where aside > from the merits of how we got here it may well be cheaper to work with > what we have, than scrap it and build "cheaper" systems to replace it. > I don't think so. Writing code to allow a generic network facing interface to receive questions from an authorised other node on the network and pass them to a system-specific layer which turned those questions into actions on the general practice* database is a simple scalable task which has been done for many systems - indeed the stuff I'm using now has a Windows frame around a terminal emulator that pretends to the database system that it is a Wyse green screen terminal. Writing a registry is not hard, particualrly since the EC ran the PICNIC project at the turn of the century and produce an Open Source central register. Los ALamos did the same around then, and produce another FLOSS register that is said to scale better - the PICNIC one was "regional healthcare software" which would handle Scotland, or Wales, or the South West but was not really scoped for the UK. Not in one go, at least. We have the example of the Internet before us, we know how these large tasks should be attempted. The SCR is not a tool I expect to find useful even when it works, and I do not think we have the capacity to make its administration honest. -- A * hospitals don't have this stuff. We do. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html