The Leading Business Education Network for Doctors, Financial Advisors and Health Industry Consultants

On Configurations and Varieties

[By Brent Metfessel MD MIS]

Hospitals can use a variety of configurations for HIS implementation depending on business needs and budgetary constraints.

Staffing needed for these systems can range from a few full-time equivalents (FTEs) per 100 beds for very basic off-site processing systems to 15 or more FTEs per 100 beds for sophisticated systems that attempt to combine several architectures into one system (e.g., combination of client-server systems with mainframe processing). Resource use and customizability tend to vary in tandem; the greater the flexibility of the system to meet unique user needs, the greater the cost outlay for capital and/or additional FTEs.

***

Relationship of Resource Use and Customizability Based on System Architecture Selected

***

The Possibilities

The basic system architecture possibilities are as follows:

Off-site (remote) processing: In this case the hospital contracts with a vendor external to the hospital. The hospital sends data over to the vendor site where the actual processing takes place. When processing is complete, the vendor sends the data back to the hospital, usually in electronic form.

Turnkey systems: A vendor provides the hospital with systems that are “pre-packaged” so that hospital-based system development is minimal. Limited customization of the system is possible using systems analysts or programmers.

Mainframe systems: Most applicable to large hospitals, this configuration is highly centralized. A large and powerful computer performs basically all the information processing for the institution and connects to multiple terminals that communicate with the mainframe to display the information at the user sites. Hospital IT departments usually use in-house programmers to modify the core operating systems or applications programs such as billing and scheduling programs.

Client-server systems: In this configuration one or more “repository” computers exist, known as “servers,” that store large amounts of data and perform limited processing. Communicating with the server(s) are client workstations that perform much of the data processing and often have graphical user interfaces (GUIs) for ease of use. Both customizability and resource use is high, depending on the desired sophistication.

Many clinical information systems that process data directly related to patient care use this configuration.  For instance, the Veterans Health Administration, which has implemented what is likely the largest integrated healthcare information system in the United States, uses client-server architecture.  Known as the Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture (VistA), this system provides technology infrastructure to about 1,300 care facilities, including hospitals and medical centers, outpatient facilities, and long-term care centers.  VistA utilizes a client-server architecture that links together workstations and personal computers using software that is accessed via a graphical user interface.

Overall, for hospitals that have the financial and manpower resources for a significant investment in IT, client-server architectures are the fastest-growing and typically the most preferred of the system architectures, due in large part to their local adaptability and flexibility to meet changing hospital and medical center needs.

Broad Categories

The above architectures are broad categories.  Modifications and combinations of the above also exist, such as the use of client-server technology with mainframe systems and the addition of wireless technology, smart phones, laptop PCs and tablets,  and various personal digital assistants (PDAs) to supplement the core computing functionality.

In considering the optimal architecture for a hospital, management needs to take into account factors such as size of the institution, desired sophistication of the application, IT budget, and anticipated level of user community involvement.

Assessment

Another important aspect of HIS is the need for integration.  Often, different hospital departments have their own stand-alone systems — such as a Laboratory Information System (LIS) and pharmacy systems — that do not communicate with each other.  Duplicate data may be kept in separate systems, creating additional work to enter the data multiple times.

In an integrated system, each departmental system communicates with the other systems through either a centralized or decentralized. A computerized physician order entry (CPOE) system, for example, would be much less effective if it did not communicate electronically with the pharmacy system that would process the medication orders.

Channel Surfing the ME-P

Have you visited our other topic channels? Established to facilitate idea exchange and link our community together, the value of these topics is dependent upon your input. Please take a minute to visit. And, to prevent that annoying spam, we ask that you register. It is fast, free and secure.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

• PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
• HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
• CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
• ADVISORS: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org
• FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
• INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors
• Dictionary of Health Economics and Finance
• Dictionary of Health Information Technology and Security
• Dictionary of Health Insurance and Managed Care

NOTES: Resource use refers to the need for FTEs and hospital capital expenditure. Customizability refers to the ability for users to alter the system structure or function to meet the unique needs of the institution.

Filed under: iMBA, Inc., Information Technology | Tagged: graphical user interfaces, GUI, health information technolgy, HIT, hospital information systems, Mainframe systems, Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture, VistA | 4 Comments »