3 ms·

> Norway has recently changed our health software to Epic Why? I'm assuming corruption and lobbying by Epic.

kakoni 3y ago
There were huge epic deployments in Denmark and Finland before this. And Oracle/Cerner going on in Sweden. All of these entities had working EHR systems.
- flangola7 3y ago
  So why change?
  - marvin 3y ago
    There’s one major feature request that triggered the change: being able to see patient journal notes made by other branches of the public health service.
Phaedor 3y ago
Norway has a "tender" system (not sure if that is the right word) where the public entity create a list of requirements and firms bid on getting the contract. Doing some research it seems that there were few bidders and in the end only Epic: https://www.dagensmedisin.no/helse-midt-norge-rhf-helseokonomi-ikt/it-selskap-trakk-seg-fra-milliardanbud-i-helse-midt-i-siste-liten-kun-en-leverandor-igjen/272282 https://www.dagensmedisin.no/helse-midt-norge-rhf-helseokono... To me this system just seems destined to fail because there is no chance the public entity is able to write comprehensive requirements. Creating the bid is also a huge undertaking, and large suppliers and consulting companies will have a large edge by having experience with creating such systems and with creating bids, so they usually win. I dont know how to solve this though.
- pbhjpbhj 3y ago
  How about if public software had an atomic structure, and required open source, with copyright owned by the public entity? Having smaller suppliers make changes to one area would then be possible, there would be a little less lock-in, perhaps?
- moron4hire 3y ago
  This is exactly how government consulting in the US works, often with a US gov employee writing the requirements with a specific vendor in mind. Oh, that's illegal as hell, but how else does Deloitte stay in business?
marvin 3y ago
Mandated to choose them due to cargo cult process. They were the only vendor capable of submitting the «objective» tender that is madated by law, and the decisionmakers are too stupid and chickenshit to consider that this process is in itself guaranteed to produce a worse outcome than alternative approaches.

There were huge epic deployments in Denmark and Finland before this. And Oracle/Cerner going on in Sweden. All of these entities had working EHR systems.

flangola7 3y ago
So why change?
- marvin 3y ago
  There’s one major feature request that triggered the change: being able to see patient journal notes made by other branches of the public health service.

Phaedor 3y ago

Norway has a "tender" system (not sure if that is the right word) where the public entity create a list of requirements and firms bid on getting the contract. Doing some research it seems that there were few bidders and in the end only Epic: https://www.dagensmedisin.no/helse-midt-norge-rhf-helseokonomi-ikt/it-selskap-trakk-seg-fra-milliardanbud-i-helse-midt-i-siste-liten-kun-en-leverandor-igjen/272282 https://www.dagensmedisin.no/helse-midt-norge-rhf-helseokono... To me this system just seems destined to fail because there is no chance the public entity is able to write comprehensive requirements. Creating the bid is also a huge undertaking, and large suppliers and consulting companies will have a large edge by having experience with creating such systems and with creating bids, so they usually win. I dont know how to solve this though.

pbhjpbhj 3y ago
How about if public software had an atomic structure, and required open source, with copyright owned by the public entity? Having smaller suppliers make changes to one area would then be possible, there would be a little less lock-in, perhaps?
moron4hire 3y ago
This is exactly how government consulting in the US works, often with a US gov employee writing the requirements with a specific vendor in mind. Oh, that's illegal as hell, but how else does Deloitte stay in business?

marvin 3y ago

Mandated to choose them due to cargo cult process. They were the only vendor capable of submitting the «objective» tender that is madated by law, and the decisionmakers are too stupid and chickenshit to consider that this process is in itself guaranteed to produce a worse outcome than alternative approaches.