Posts by Sir Crispalot 17 publicly visible posts • joined 3 Dec 2010
I have to disagree with your general sentiment - I actually think ITK is a good thing, and they've got it largely right. Yes it's very complex, but it needs to be to support the endless healthcare scenarios you and I deal with on a daily basis.
They have made some mistakes, and the web transport specification (including the WS-* standards you mention) is somewhat bonkers. However in my experience the team behind it have been fairly responsive, and were willing to make changes to the specification to accommodate reasonable suggestions we put forward.
I dread to think how much money CfH could have invested in ITK had they not based it on an existing standard.
I agree, it's all about interoperability.
Another huge omission from this article is the Interoperability Toolkit (ITK) which is largely an NHS interpretation of HL7v3. It's complex, but worth investing in as many of our suppliers are starting to support it, particularly for correspondence (e.g. letters, discharge summaries, etc.)
As an unfortunate resident (NOT native) of the aforementioned city, I wouldn't recommend anyone use the facilities at the Mountbatten Centre regardless of whether they meet the requirements.
The staff there are largely useless dullards. How they can double-book a squash court with their new all-singing, all-dancing computer booking system is beyond me. Maybe the council designed that too ...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
