Comments on: Cerner Disses Google Health. Surprised?

By: The MINGE

The MINGE — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:39:44 +0000

First off, Google should be proud that Cerner was too dumb to look into this offer further. Every employee hates this place and Cerner just had more massive layoffs.

Look no further than this website. The results are shocking.

http://www.jobvent.com/companyBrowse.php?CompanyID=1174

By: medical answering services

medical answering services — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 23:34:21 +0000

google wants to put ‘information in the hands of patients to enable informed buying decisions’. Sounds viable to me. There will always be dissenters. users will have privacy concerns regarding Google obtaining access to medical records but I think this will not last and it will take hold in the long run. Google will provide secure storage and transfer for medical records moving beyond a paper trail and making things more accessible and uniform.

By: Catherine mcnair

Catherine mcnair — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:37:08 +0000

What does anyone think or no of Cerner’s Healthe Iniative aimed at self-insured employers?

By: Melinda Huffman

Melinda Huffman — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:48:46 +0000

As healthcare consultants who see all types of different software systems in place nationwide,I would only say that many, many providers are still novices when it comes to knowing what they should expect interoperative ability to do for them….especially in the area of aligning 3 key compoments: health outcomes quality data, patient/consumer information, and financials.
Our experience has been that many poviders don’t demand anything different from what they have already invested in their software, because they’re not sure what to demand…nor if it’s feasible in the first place…
AND additional huge expense generally prohibits a request/demand for change; plus most software companies require a certain number of similar requests from customers to warrant a change in their software capability… so many times (but not every time of course)the providers keep what they have and continue on their same path as best they possibly can..

By: William Halverson

William Halverson — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 06:06:24 +0000

You say: “Customers (hospitals) have high needs for installation support and customization. Customization for individual customers further challenges opportunities for creating interfaces and achieving interoperability.”

My experience is _hospitals_ want _no_ customization. It’s their physicians who want the customizations.

Separating ‘work flow’ issues (legitimate) from ‘layout’ issues (silly), some customization makes sense. But that really has no bearing at all on interoperability, which is based on how data elements are specified. That is a function of the HL7 3.x use cases the application try to fulfill.

And there is no relationship between interoperability and customized user screens. I’m spending months customizing open source standards based software for an issue tracking system.

So as SOA and mash-ups chew their way through the 2.0 business web, legacy HIT systems will look very cumbersome. HIT should enable flexible business models; right now they are the gating factor in how fast healthcare business deals can produce value.

But for the rest: spot on. None of the proprietary HIT vendors want inter-operability. But then again, neither do their customers … they still believe in incremental change.

When 50% of CABG and 80% of cancer treatment is done on an outpatient basis, HIT will be outsourced to Google/MS mash-up based HIT ASPs.

By: Rick

Rick — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 14:31:11 +0000

Stand by, Cerner. You are about to get disintermediated.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 12:42:36 +0000

It would make sense for Cerner to partner with both Google and Microsoft, because it is in the best interest of the patient. People are wanting and needing more control over their health records, and this would be one more way for them to get control. It would behoove hospitals to ask for this service, because it would be one more service they could offer to their patients. The product could be white labeled through Cerner. It is a win-win, Cerner just needs to realize it is not 1999, and that people will get their electronic health information either way. They might as well make it easier for themselves and for the patient.

By: Cerner Disses Google Health. Surprised? | MedTouch - More Starbucks, less Star Wars. Healthcare e-marketing advice beyond geekiness

Thu, 05 Jun 2008 12:36:25 +0000

[...] If you’re new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed. We also have another blog you may be interested in reading. If you have decided that you like us and want to talk more, contact our sales team. They would love to talk. Thanks for visiting!Cerner Disses Google Health. Surprised? [...]

By: Vince Kuraitis

Vince Kuraitis — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 18:19:58 +0000

Linh, you are correct that Google COULD get into the EHR/EMR business. That could happen tomorrow or 5 years from now. It could happen through an acquisition or a decision to build such capabilities.

For now, I don’t see that it is Google’s interests to do so:

* Very specialized expertise required
* Not clear that providing EHR/EMR directly is necessary to support Google’s broader platform development strategy, see, e.g., The Elements of Platform Leadership, MIT Sloan Management Review, Spring 2002 http://www.scribd.com/doc/505385/The-Elements-of-Platform-Leadership. An EHR/EMR is only one of hundreds of potential complements that Google would like to see connected to their platform.
* Risk of alienation/channel conflict. Google would have a harder time getting data from other EHR/EMR vendors if they were in this business themselves.
* Not a particularly attractive new business — entrenched competitors, slow uptake of ambulatory EMRs, lack of open standards adoption conflicts with platform strategy, etc.

By: Linh Nguyen, MD, MS, MMM

Linh Nguyen, MD, MS, MMM — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 17:57:18 +0000

Vince, why not providing both EMR/EHR directly? Cerner disses them. I can imagine the same result from other EHR’s, unless pushed by the hospitals (clients). Please help us read your incredible mind.

LCN

By: Vince Kuraitis

Vince Kuraitis — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:45:58 +0000

My read is that Google will want access to data coming out of EHRs and going in to EHRs; thus, they need to interface with EHRs, not necessarily provide them directly.

By: Linh Nguyen, MD, MS, MMM

Linh Nguyen, MD, MS, MMM — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 09:13:13 +0000

Hello Vince,

“Expect competition from open-source software vendors.” I absolutely agree with you. You also have not mentioned one more important factor, if not most important one, Global Force. “The World is Flat” will be applicable in the healthcare sector as well. Imagine what doctors can do with an open source EMR? OK, hope I did not open a cane of worm here. Good luck with Cerner in the future. I am sure they will eventually have to change and to adapt their model.

In You-Tube video of Mr. Schmitz, Google’s CEO, he stated that Google is not looking at the EMR sector because it is not their specialty, but rather for hospital and physicians. I knew right away that he was not telling the truth. Similar to Microsoft, Google will step into EMR market.

LCN

By: Jeroen de Miranda

Jeroen de Miranda — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 20:40:57 +0000

interesting: ‘Cerner Disses Google Health. Surprised? ‘ – http://is.gd/p6X