Difference between revisions of "CHC Corner"
From VistApedia
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
center. We hope to participate in an open development process that tailors | center. We hope to participate in an open development process that tailors | ||
VistA to community health centers' special needs. | VistA to community health centers' special needs. | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''From: Hardhats Listserve:''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Here are some recurrent questions us nontechies have about VistA: | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''1) Is Mumps a serious limitation to complete EHR functionality, code maintainence, HL7, or PMS interfacing?''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | There are several major commercial EHRs that use MUMPS. In fact, | ||
+ | the language was developed expressly FOR the health care | ||
+ | environment. There are far more limitations (and serious ones at | ||
+ | that) in most other languages and especially strict SQL | ||
+ | |||
+ | Absolutely not. I will go one step further than Cameron. | ||
+ | I have heard that M is the #1 language used for EHR's. | ||
+ | Epicare, which just contracted for EHR for Kaiser, is based | ||
+ | on M, for example. | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''2) What is the fundamental difference between a relational database and a hierarchical database and how does that effect the end-user? (Should we even care? If so why?)''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | While MUMPS has been characterized as "hierarchical", the | ||
+ | DBMS that VistA uses, VA FileMan, provides what is more accurately | ||
+ | characterized as a polymorphic view of the database. One can | ||
+ | readily use relational projections (indeed there are commercial | ||
+ | add-ons that give a strict SQL view of the database). The more | ||
+ | advantageous view through VA FileMan is more like an object view | ||
+ | of the data with abstract data types being highly specialized for | ||
+ | optimal use and performance. End users usually need not care | ||
+ | (except that performance of VA FileMan is demonstrably superior | ||
+ | (there are published reports) to SQL on the same hardware and | ||
+ | configuration.) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Another difference is the way the data is stored. M data is stored | ||
+ | in b-trees, as compared to flat tables (I believe). This leads to | ||
+ | faster data acess, and less CPU power needed. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Also, the database in M is called by some a "sparce array." This | ||
+ | means that there are no "blank spaces" left for data to be later | ||
+ | filled into. So with M, if there is no data present, then no space | ||
+ | is wasted. I find this to lead to many many fields being defined | ||
+ | for a given file. With a traditional database, having all these | ||
+ | fields with empty/wasted space, would lead to huge database files. | ||
+ | But with M, one can can store years of patient information on a | ||
+ | relatively small disk. | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''3) How hard is it for non-Mumps IT personnel to learn Mumps/VistA and are there enough experienced VistA programmers (or former VistA programmers) to consult or be hired to non-VA projects?''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Learning MUMPS is as simple as learning BASIC. Learning about all | ||
+ | the utilities and capabilities of the common services in VistA is | ||
+ | a years long process. And learning the functionality and setup | ||
+ | for the clinical and administrative functions in VistA would | ||
+ | probably take several life-times. Are there enough experienced | ||
+ | programmers and application consultants? So far I believe you'll | ||
+ | currently pay more for a Java programmer. | ||
+ | |||
+ | I am a physician and have taught myself M. It is a very simple | ||
+ | language. I consider it to be a scripting language. But it gets | ||
+ | the job done, and has run hospitals safely for decades. | ||
+ | |||
+ | There are many people on the list that would like work as | ||
+ | programmers, so I don't think there will be any limitation there. | ||
+ | And when CMS releases VistAOffice, there should be even more | ||
+ | interest and consultants available. | ||
+ | ''' | ||
+ | 4) What other concerns should we have regarding adopting VistA?''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Expect a long learning curve. Get help. | ||
+ | |||
+ | I think a factor here is how much you want to put into the system. | ||
+ | It is not turn key at this point, although there are installers | ||
+ | who can do the work for you. It is not going to have all the | ||
+ | bells and whistles that commercial EMR's want you to pay for. | ||
+ | It is not currently integrated with a billing system or a system | ||
+ | for appointments. |
Revision as of 21:08, 19 September 2005
From: "Matthew King" <mking@clinicaadelante.com> The Community Health Centers in AZ are forming the Arizona Integrated Network (AIN) to formally integrate information technology services, financial management, and clinical initiatives. We are have included VistA Office in our EHR evaluation.
From: "John Leo Zimmer" <jlzimmer@cbchc.com> The Council Bluffs Community Health Center is assembling the hardware and software to implement VistA Office or FOIA VistA in this one small center. We hope to participate in an open development process that tailors VistA to community health centers' special needs.
From: Hardhats Listserve:
Here are some recurrent questions us nontechies have about VistA:
1) Is Mumps a serious limitation to complete EHR functionality, code maintainence, HL7, or PMS interfacing?
There are several major commercial EHRs that use MUMPS. In fact, the language was developed expressly FOR the health care environment. There are far more limitations (and serious ones at that) in most other languages and especially strict SQL
Absolutely not. I will go one step further than Cameron. I have heard that M is the #1 language used for EHR's. Epicare, which just contracted for EHR for Kaiser, is based on M, for example.
2) What is the fundamental difference between a relational database and a hierarchical database and how does that effect the end-user? (Should we even care? If so why?)
While MUMPS has been characterized as "hierarchical", the DBMS that VistA uses, VA FileMan, provides what is more accurately characterized as a polymorphic view of the database. One can readily use relational projections (indeed there are commercial add-ons that give a strict SQL view of the database). The more advantageous view through VA FileMan is more like an object view of the data with abstract data types being highly specialized for optimal use and performance. End users usually need not care (except that performance of VA FileMan is demonstrably superior (there are published reports) to SQL on the same hardware and configuration.)
Another difference is the way the data is stored. M data is stored in b-trees, as compared to flat tables (I believe). This leads to faster data acess, and less CPU power needed.
Also, the database in M is called by some a "sparce array." This means that there are no "blank spaces" left for data to be later filled into. So with M, if there is no data present, then no space is wasted. I find this to lead to many many fields being defined for a given file. With a traditional database, having all these fields with empty/wasted space, would lead to huge database files. But with M, one can can store years of patient information on a relatively small disk.
3) How hard is it for non-Mumps IT personnel to learn Mumps/VistA and are there enough experienced VistA programmers (or former VistA programmers) to consult or be hired to non-VA projects?
Learning MUMPS is as simple as learning BASIC. Learning about all the utilities and capabilities of the common services in VistA is a years long process. And learning the functionality and setup for the clinical and administrative functions in VistA would probably take several life-times. Are there enough experienced programmers and application consultants? So far I believe you'll currently pay more for a Java programmer.
I am a physician and have taught myself M. It is a very simple language. I consider it to be a scripting language. But it gets the job done, and has run hospitals safely for decades.
There are many people on the list that would like work as programmers, so I don't think there will be any limitation there. And when CMS releases VistAOffice, there should be even more interest and consultants available.
4) What other concerns should we have regarding adopting VistA?
Expect a long learning curve. Get help.
I think a factor here is how much you want to put into the system. It is not turn key at this point, although there are installers who can do the work for you. It is not going to have all the bells and whistles that commercial EMR's want you to pay for. It is not currently integrated with a billing system or a system for appointments.