3 ms·
When I looked at HL7 a few years back, it was standardized on in the most technical sense and was basically a big bag of hurt. Epic made a big chunk of their mo
by epmatsw 10y ago
When I looked at HL7 a few years back, it was standardized on in the most technical sense and was basically a big bag of hurt. Epic made a big chunk of their money just charging people to build interfaces over various PACS (and other) systems. Has that changed recently?
- aabajian 10y agoYes and no. I spoke with an Epic engineer recently and he confirmed that Epic is still a front-end to HL7 databases. With that said, many PACS are adopting the WADO standard (https://www.research.ibm.com/haifa/projects/software/wado/ https://www.research.ibm.com/haifa/projects/software/wado/), which provides a REST interface to radiology images. It makes it a lot easier to retrieve images for analysis, albeit you'd still have to implement DICOM/HL7 if you want to make a usable product.
- kayman 10y agoHL7 has matured even more now. The linear evolution from HL7 v2 to HL7 v3 did not win the day. Most are now moving to https://www.hl7.org/fhir/ https://www.hl7.org/fhir/ Main issue is with HL7 is not technical. From a business point of view, the incentive to cooperate with other systems via HL7 means another reason for a department to adopt a system other than yours.
- sufyanadam 10y agoRuby makes working with things like HL7 super easy. Check out the super extensible HL7 ruby parser I wrote here: https://github.com/sufyanadam/simple_hl7_parser https://github.com/sufyanadam/simple_hl7_parser. It currently focuses on parsing ORU messages but can be easily extended to support any HL7 segment. Feel free to submit a PR :)