<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for The HealthITBlog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thehealthitblog.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thehealthitblog.com</link>
	<description>Healthcare Informatics and Technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:57:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The little company that can DELLiver by EMR</title>
		<link>http://thehealthitblog.com/2010/06/03/the-little-company-that-can-delliver/#comment-209</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[EMR]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:57:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thehealthitblog.com/?p=569#comment-209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi, professionalism &quot;counts&quot;, DELL has its own place as a professional IT company. Any organization getting attached with DELL is definitely in win-win position.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, professionalism &#8220;counts&#8221;, DELL has its own place as a professional IT company. Any organization getting attached with DELL is definitely in win-win position.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Comparison of Microsoft and Google PHRs by Olympia</title>
		<link>http://thehealthitblog.com/2010/03/15/comparison-of-microsoft-and-google-phrs/#comment-194</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Olympia]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Feb 2011 04:37:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thehealthitblog.com/?p=541#comment-194</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[P.S. any update on the EPIC public PHR called Lucy?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>P.S. any update on the EPIC public PHR called Lucy?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Comparison of Microsoft and Google PHRs by olympia</title>
		<link>http://thehealthitblog.com/2010/03/15/comparison-of-microsoft-and-google-phrs/#comment-193</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[olympia]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Feb 2011 04:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thehealthitblog.com/?p=541#comment-193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[nice comparison of the PHRs.  It will come in handy for classes in health informatics.  I am in a class now and one of the assignments is to compare personal health record solutions using an inventory matrix. PHRs are so different even trying to select the features to compare is almost impossible.  The next difficulty is trying to get the information to compare. You did a good job.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>nice comparison of the PHRs.  It will come in handy for classes in health informatics.  I am in a class now and one of the assignments is to compare personal health record solutions using an inventory matrix. PHRs are so different even trying to select the features to compare is almost impossible.  The next difficulty is trying to get the information to compare. You did a good job.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Back in the saddle, galloping to secure electronic health data. by David</title>
		<link>http://thehealthitblog.com/2010/05/25/back-in-the-saddle-galloping-to-secure-electronic-health-data/#comment-173</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 14:56:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thehealthitblog.com/?p=561#comment-173</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I definitely agree that security of data is an issue, especially with client-server and web-based software. This chart explains the difference between client-server, web based and internet based technology pretty well:  http://www.nuesoft.com/pdf/technology-evolution-factsheet.pdf]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I definitely agree that security of data is an issue, especially with client-server and web-based software. This chart explains the difference between client-server, web based and internet based technology pretty well:  <a href="http://www.nuesoft.com/pdf/technology-evolution-factsheet.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.nuesoft.com/pdf/technology-evolution-factsheet.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8216;Meaningful use&#8217; toward HIEs &#8211; questions for Dr David Blumenthal by vswamy</title>
		<link>http://thehealthitblog.com/2009/10/01/meaningful-use-toward-hies-questions-for-dr-david-blumenthal/#comment-172</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[vswamy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 23:52:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gershater.wordpress.com/?p=311#comment-172</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Jonathan, 

I pretty much seem to agree with your view point on the issue of using the right word. But apart from that I also wanted to add a few things to his advices on meaningful use and the HITECT act. 

I feel today medical practitioners are looking to avail of this federal incentive by trying to comply with the definition of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.waitingroomsolutions.com/wrs/meaningful-use-EHR-meaningful-use-definition-EHR-Matrix-Regulations&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;meaningful use&lt;/a&gt; but at the same time EHR providers are looking at their own set of profits.
This misunderstanding is mostly I believe as a result of wrong interpretation of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.waitingroomsolutions.com/wrs/certification-criteria-electronic-health-records-ARRA-Certification-Requirements-Health-Record-Certification&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;federal guidelines.&lt;/a&gt;.  The EHR providers need to look at these guidelines from the prospective of the practitioners who deal with different specialties.
Each &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.waitingroomsolutions.com/wrs/specialty-main.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;specialty EHR&lt;/a&gt; has its own set of challenges or requirements which I believe is overlooked by in most EHR vendors in a effort to merely follows federal guidelines. This is resulting in low usability to the practitioners, thus less ROI, finally redundancy of the EHR solution in place.
I think ROI is very important factor that should be duly considered when look achieve a &#039;meaning use&#039; out of a EHR solution. Though one may get vendors providing &#039;meaning use&#039; at a lower cost, their ROI / savings through the use of their EHR might be pretty low when compared to costlier initial investment. Found a pretty useful ROI tool that is pretty customizable and easy to use. It also accounts for the different specialty EHR&#039;s too.

Also the introduction of REC’s through the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.waitingroomsolutions.com/wrs/regional-extension-centers-arra-rec&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;HITECH act.&lt;/a&gt; is a great way to avail of quality EHR solutions at competitive prices. The stiff competition among not only these REC’s but also among EHR vendors ( to become a preferred vendor of a given REC) will result in lot of positives to medical practioners.
Looking the funding provided to the REC’s, the staggered grant allocation system also promises to be an unbiased way of allocating funds. It will also help in the concept of REC’s helping out each with their own unique business models. It can be one of the possible answers to the &#039;safe EHR vendor&#039; challenge as discussed by many critics.

Sorry to have diverted a bit from the topic but I feel this HITECT act and the REC&#039;s are going to play an important role, as discussed above in the successful EHR implementation in the medical practices in our country. 

As far as implementation challenges goes, the federal guidelines for certification and usability are pretty much clear. Useful improvisation on these lines can make ones EHR&#039;s friendly to most practices of varying specialties.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jonathan, </p>
<p>I pretty much seem to agree with your view point on the issue of using the right word. But apart from that I also wanted to add a few things to his advices on meaningful use and the HITECT act. </p>
<p>I feel today medical practitioners are looking to avail of this federal incentive by trying to comply with the definition of <a href="http://www.waitingroomsolutions.com/wrs/meaningful-use-EHR-meaningful-use-definition-EHR-Matrix-Regulations" rel="nofollow">meaningful use</a> but at the same time EHR providers are looking at their own set of profits.<br />
This misunderstanding is mostly I believe as a result of wrong interpretation of the <a href="http://www.waitingroomsolutions.com/wrs/certification-criteria-electronic-health-records-ARRA-Certification-Requirements-Health-Record-Certification" rel="nofollow">federal guidelines.</a>.  The EHR providers need to look at these guidelines from the prospective of the practitioners who deal with different specialties.<br />
Each <a href="http://www.waitingroomsolutions.com/wrs/specialty-main.html" rel="nofollow">specialty EHR</a> has its own set of challenges or requirements which I believe is overlooked by in most EHR vendors in a effort to merely follows federal guidelines. This is resulting in low usability to the practitioners, thus less ROI, finally redundancy of the EHR solution in place.<br />
I think ROI is very important factor that should be duly considered when look achieve a &#8216;meaning use&#8217; out of a EHR solution. Though one may get vendors providing &#8216;meaning use&#8217; at a lower cost, their ROI / savings through the use of their EHR might be pretty low when compared to costlier initial investment. Found a pretty useful ROI tool that is pretty customizable and easy to use. It also accounts for the different specialty EHR&#8217;s too.</p>
<p>Also the introduction of REC’s through the <a href="http://www.waitingroomsolutions.com/wrs/regional-extension-centers-arra-rec" rel="nofollow">HITECH act.</a> is a great way to avail of quality EHR solutions at competitive prices. The stiff competition among not only these REC’s but also among EHR vendors ( to become a preferred vendor of a given REC) will result in lot of positives to medical practioners.<br />
Looking the funding provided to the REC’s, the staggered grant allocation system also promises to be an unbiased way of allocating funds. It will also help in the concept of REC’s helping out each with their own unique business models. It can be one of the possible answers to the &#8216;safe EHR vendor&#8217; challenge as discussed by many critics.</p>
<p>Sorry to have diverted a bit from the topic but I feel this HITECT act and the REC&#8217;s are going to play an important role, as discussed above in the successful EHR implementation in the medical practices in our country. </p>
<p>As far as implementation challenges goes, the federal guidelines for certification and usability are pretty much clear. Useful improvisation on these lines can make ones EHR&#8217;s friendly to most practices of varying specialties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Back in the saddle, galloping to secure electronic health data. by Mister Reiner</title>
		<link>http://thehealthitblog.com/2010/05/25/back-in-the-saddle-galloping-to-secure-electronic-health-data/#comment-156</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mister Reiner]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 15:41:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thehealthitblog.com/?p=561#comment-156</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Removing the individual choice of where to store patient data is an excellent idea. The medical industry needs to start regulating software, especially now that more and more single practitioners are using EMR. In my opinion, single practitioner office environments need to be certified as well, as the security in these environments ranges from non-existent to very poor. The medical industry has a long way to go before patient health care records are truly secure.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Removing the individual choice of where to store patient data is an excellent idea. The medical industry needs to start regulating software, especially now that more and more single practitioners are using EMR. In my opinion, single practitioner office environments need to be certified as well, as the security in these environments ranges from non-existent to very poor. The medical industry has a long way to go before patient health care records are truly secure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Comparison of Microsoft and Google PHRs by Back in the saddle, galloping to secure electronic health data. &#171; The HealthITBlog</title>
		<link>http://thehealthitblog.com/2010/03/15/comparison-of-microsoft-and-google-phrs/#comment-154</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Back in the saddle, galloping to secure electronic health data. &#171; The HealthITBlog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 14:03:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thehealthitblog.com/?p=541#comment-154</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] With my new focus on security for cloud, virtualization and general data center, I bring a new perspective and focus on healthcare IT &#8211; that is security of patient data. Ever so important if patient records are going to go electronic, especially if stored in the cloud. Aside from my new paid position, I have also had the privilege of volunteering under the stewardship of Arien, as the leader of the Security and Trust Workgroup of NHIN-Direct. I also have the privilege of working with the likes of Sean Nolan, who wrote a terrific compliment on my comparison of a Google and Microsoft PHRs. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] With my new focus on security for cloud, virtualization and general data center, I bring a new perspective and focus on healthcare IT &#8211; that is security of patient data. Ever so important if patient records are going to go electronic, especially if stored in the cloud. Aside from my new paid position, I have also had the privilege of volunteering under the stewardship of Arien, as the leader of the Security and Trust Workgroup of NHIN-Direct. I also have the privilege of working with the likes of Sean Nolan, who wrote a terrific compliment on my comparison of a Google and Microsoft PHRs. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Comparison of Microsoft and Google PHRs by jgershater</title>
		<link>http://thehealthitblog.com/2010/03/15/comparison-of-microsoft-and-google-phrs/#comment-153</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jgershater]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 May 2010 04:45:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thehealthitblog.com/?p=541#comment-153</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sean
Thanks for taking the time to read this, and for connecting in the blogosphere as well as our joint efforts in NHIN-Direct.
I will update the post to reflect the other API alternatives
Jonathan]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sean<br />
Thanks for taking the time to read this, and for connecting in the blogosphere as well as our joint efforts in NHIN-Direct.<br />
I will update the post to reflect the other API alternatives<br />
Jonathan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Comparison of Microsoft and Google PHRs by Sean Nolan</title>
		<link>http://thehealthitblog.com/2010/03/15/comparison-of-microsoft-and-google-phrs/#comment-152</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sean Nolan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 May 2010 07:45:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thehealthitblog.com/?p=541#comment-152</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jonathan, great post! I did want to make one clarification about HealthVault. Our .NET SDK is one option we make available, but we&#039;ve worked hard to make sure that developers on any platform can build apps for HealthVault. The whole API is available as an XML-over-HTTP interface (documented at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/healthvault/cc297280.aspx), and there are open source libraries available for Java, PHP, Python, Ruby and others. In fact, almost half of the apps built for HV today are not running on the Windows platform!

Thanks again for taking the time to put together a comprehensive assessment ... it is early days for these platforms and it&#039;s great for people to be able to get a sense of what&#039;s &quot;under the covers&quot;.

Take care ...
---S]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonathan, great post! I did want to make one clarification about HealthVault. Our .NET SDK is one option we make available, but we&#8217;ve worked hard to make sure that developers on any platform can build apps for HealthVault. The whole API is available as an XML-over-HTTP interface (documented at <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/healthvault/cc297280.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/healthvault/cc297280.aspx</a>), and there are open source libraries available for Java, PHP, Python, Ruby and others. In fact, almost half of the apps built for HV today are not running on the Windows platform!</p>
<p>Thanks again for taking the time to put together a comprehensive assessment &#8230; it is early days for these platforms and it&#8217;s great for people to be able to get a sense of what&#8217;s &#8220;under the covers&#8221;.</p>
<p>Take care &#8230;<br />
&#8212;S</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Transferring 30 printed pages of medical records to my doctor by protogere</title>
		<link>http://thehealthitblog.com/2010/01/05/transferring-30-printed-pages-of-medical-records-to-my-doctor/#comment-151</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[protogere]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 15:52:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gershater.wordpress.com/?p=426#comment-151</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It is so surprising to me that in this day of computer technology, when I can manage my bank activities from my phone or computer; when I can pay bills and handle legal issues from the computer; that the only thing I can&#039;t do is easily communicate with my family&#039;s doctor over the computer!  I run into the same issues when I have had to get files from one doctor to another and then to a specialist for my children&#039;s files - I have copies but my option is to hand deliver (which being that I live about 20 miles from town this is not the best option) or fax (I don&#039;t have a fax).  I cannot scan them to PDF or images because they don&#039;t accept electronic files from patients.  The doctors and specialist are within walking distance of each other, in fact two share the same building, but for some reason it&#039;s quicker for me to drive into town to give them records.
Crazy!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is so surprising to me that in this day of computer technology, when I can manage my bank activities from my phone or computer; when I can pay bills and handle legal issues from the computer; that the only thing I can&#8217;t do is easily communicate with my family&#8217;s doctor over the computer!  I run into the same issues when I have had to get files from one doctor to another and then to a specialist for my children&#8217;s files &#8211; I have copies but my option is to hand deliver (which being that I live about 20 miles from town this is not the best option) or fax (I don&#8217;t have a fax).  I cannot scan them to PDF or images because they don&#8217;t accept electronic files from patients.  The doctors and specialist are within walking distance of each other, in fact two share the same building, but for some reason it&#8217;s quicker for me to drive into town to give them records.<br />
Crazy!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

