I’ve been reading quite a few articles on the topic of Open Source EHR software in the US market. The market perception amongst the Open Source community appears to be one of a bias against Open Source software qualifying for CCHIT certification. This post sums up the argument fairly well
In a post about the meeting, Trotter laid out some of the chief concerns open source has with the current standards set-up:
- HIMSS’ Electronic Health Records group does not allow open source members.
- HIMSS has lobbied against open source in the past, including the VistA software used by the VA.
- CCHIT, which certifies EHR standards, has long had a bias against open source and has close ties to HIMSS.
Trotter’s biggest concern is language in the Obama Stimulus that only covers “certified” systems, with penalties coming in later for those whose systems are not certified.
Since CCHIT is the organization that presently certifies solutions, and it locks out open source, Trotter fears open source is being locked out of the health care market.
An interesting argument. As you know Mike, I am not against Open Source software, I use all kinds of it on a daily basis. The issue to me is there an unfair bias against Open Source in the CCHIT certification process?
If so how would you propose to level the playing field? Or is this issue in the eye of the beholder? Keep in mind that I am not advocating for proprietary vendors to be disadvantaged either. Let the players compete on their strengths in the open market and those with the best strategies and products will win. If this means one model wins over the other then so be it.