Basingstoke and North Hampshire NHS Foundation Trust is rolling out a clinical portal based on IBM’s Websphere platform.
The portal will allow users to view historical patient information, access the trust’s JAC e-prescribing system, place requests for pathology and radiology through its Sunquest ICE system, and create correspondence for GPs.
IBM has been working with the trust on the portal and on getting its systems ready for go-live. This has included upgrading the trust's core network, virtualising its servers in a move from 120 non-IBM to 10 IBM servers, and deploying a wireless network.
Mary Edwards, chief executive of the trust, told E-Health Insider: “Our foundation trust has completed a significant IT investment programme over the past 18 months and established a number of new systems with associated changed work processes."
Sarah Harland, chief information officer, added: “The portal provides essential information required for clinical decision support into one consolidated view. [It also] completes the foundation trust’s delivery of the ‘clinical 5’."
Basingstoke and North Hampshire plans to add more functionality to the portal, including the introduction of business intelligence, enabling wider clinical documentation sharing, and establishing clinical pathway management.
The trust was understood to be one of four (now three) ‘greenfield’ sites in the South of England there were to deploy Cerner Millennium from local service provider BT, as part of its £546m contract to provide Cerner and RiO to sites across the region.
The trust declined to comment whether Cerner is part of its longer term strategy. Such an investment in its infrastructure and the portal would appear to make this unlikely.
However, it may merge with the nearby Winchester and Eastleigh Healthcare NHS Trust, which has been struggling to reach foundation status, ahead of the government's deadline for all trusts to be or be part of foundation trusts by 2013. Winchester is a well-known Cerner Millennium site.
Robert Tickell, IBM's business leader for healthcare and life sciences, told EHI: “It’s fair to say that the national programme has not been a resounding success, so this is a large scale roll out to bring a number of disparate systems together.
“This is a great strategy for those trusts that don’t want to do a rip and replace and don’t have monumental amounts of money to spend. The clinical buy in has been great at the trust and the deployment is on time and on budget.”
© 2010 E-HEALTH-MEDIA LTD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Flexibilty comes with standardsNeelam Dugar 220 weeks ago
Due to DICOM as a globally adopted standard, we can buy CT from Siemens, Ultrasound from Phillips, CR from Fujifilm, Gamma camera from GE & all these images are stored in an Agfa, Sectra, McKesson or another vendors PACS. A PACS vendor cannot say 'we will only integrate with this vendors machine or our machine'. As this is a standard integration cost is small.
Let us use your analogy with IBM Portal( EPR). If it was XDS repository & consumer it would display clinical letters produced in Medisec, lab reports from ISoft, prescription from JAC, Radiology reports from CRIS, Radiology images from McKesson PACS, electronic request from ICE, Cardiology reports in Tomcat, etc---giving you a unified view to the doctor working on coal face a unified view of the patient (or in other words EPR-- created from best of breed departmental systems from multiple vendors). Customers remain in the driving seat being able to choose systems of their choice-- rather than IBM or other EPR vendor dictating. IBM does provide XDS compliance but you need to ask for it.
IT System Out of a box from vendorNeelam Dugar 220 weeks ago
No IT system out of a box straight from the vendor is fit for purpose. We found this with implementing PACS (the most tried & tested Clinical IT solution in the world perhaps). This built the electronic community that we have with over 3000 registered users. There is always one NHS Trust who has thought of something that you havent. Just buying a system is very different to having all you clinical users working on the coal face using & also loving.
Adopting global interoperability standards like XDS will future proof your investment. In 10 years time if you want to move from IBM to Cerner or another vendor who is offering a better deal than IBM, you will be able to do that with ease. Whereas if data is locked in propietary format IBM or any other vendor could charge you huge amounts to get the data out-so you are forced to stay with them.
LSP-CFH PACS has come at a huge cost to NHS. However PACS contracts come to an end in 2013. We know that cost of PACS is much smaller in a competitive market. Because PACS deployments are underpinned by global standards of DICOM, we know we will be able to get Trust data out from 1 vendors PACS system to another PACS supplier who provides us best value with best functionality.
Adopting DICOM standards has been 10 process & has been driven by user community.
My view is know standards & future proof your investment.
Future proofingunknown 220 weeks ago
Neelam - you're quite right on the point that no IT major system out of the box is fit for purpose.
What I in fact meant was to question how robust and flexible a solution is in enabling a trust to adapt it to a changing environment? If IBM or Orion trusts decide that they want to view different data on their portal than that which was originally implemented by the vendor, are they able to do that a) quickly b) without additional services from the vendor?
That, to me, is real future-proofing.
Timescalesunknown 220 weeks ago
When considering at solution like this there are two key things in the current climate that should be critical. How quickly can the vendor implement their solution? If it's greater than 9 months consider how much change will occur and therefore...
How much flexibility does the vendors solution provide "out of the box" on the portal, pref. without having to revert to the vendor for further services work? Avoiding rip and replace is great, but not much better than "rip and renew" every time the next big priority/strategy/target/focus comes around (circa every 6 months).
IBM PortalNeelam Dugar 220 weeks ago
Whether you buy a portal from IBM, Orion, Cerner, or any other vendor for that matter. Ensure that it is compliant as XDS repository & XDS consumer thus adopts global IHE standards of IHE. All major vendors support IHE. However, unless you insist on it as a customer they may not tell you. IBM spoke at our meeting(RCR Imaging Informatics Group) "Next Generation PACS". They have been on the forefront of XDS of IHE. But customers need to ask for it.
Adoption of XDS will future proof your investment towards EPR.
Portal or Cernerjust_instantiate 221 weeks ago
If Winchester is struggling to achieve Foundation status it would appear unlikely to be in a position to impose its solution on Basingstoke. However a portal and an EPR implementation are not necessrily contradictory (I believe other Cerner sites are doing just that). Indeed the Basingstoke portal could be a way to provide a more-or-less unified user-experience across the enlarged trust in a reasonably short timespan. That would allow the consolidation of underlying systems to take place in an orderly fashion.
Great concept - but IBM?Virginian 221 weeks ago
I couldn't agree more with the way forward. Why do we want to waste money replacing systems that are proven with rubbish from the USA? But i do have one question and that is why IBM? Surely this is a company that has no real idea of clinical solutions for health after all they make tin and everything else is just a bought in product. Having just returned from Australia, New Zealand and Singapore looking at solutions, i would strongly advise like minded trusts to look at Orion Health