YouTube Message

[mbpark]

Flint,

I suppose you are mentioning GE?

I work in Healthcare IT too, however, Google actually, at least on the surface, has the integration between their browser and their applications because the browser is used, in part, to sell Google Apps and their other applications that rely heavily on JavaScript. It would not be good for them to "sell" a browser that doesn't work with their own apps.

At least GE will do the integration for you, and will gladly charge you a lot of money for it. Consumers are much more picky than hospitals .

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by mbpark

Consumers are much more picky than hospitals .

Ain't that the damm truth.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by mbpark

Flint,

I suppose you are mentioning GE?

What? :::nervous chuckle::: Of course, I would never disparage the meatball :::looks over my shoulder:::

Originally Posted by mbpark

At least GE will do the integration for you, and will gladly charge you a lot of money for it.

Don't be ridiculous, my dear man! The DICOM and HL7 "standards" are here to make integration worries a thing of the past!

[mbpark]

Flint,

We have our systems integrated. It cost us nearly 7 figures and a custom e*Gate implementation maintained by 2 full-time staff, plus additional professional services work from GE, but we did it.

I spent yesterday hearing about "McKesson's implementation of the 835". There's a reason why SeeBeyond/Sun/Oracle gets a lot of money from us every year, and it's because every vendor implements standards their own way, and we have staff that does nothing but maintain the message translations.

Don't even start me on HL7 XML .

Originally Posted by Flint

What? :::nervous chuckle::: Of course, I would never disparage the meatball :::looks over my shoulder:::
Don't be ridiculous, my dear man! The DICOM and HL7 "standards" are here to make integration worries a thing of the past!

[Flint]

Originally Posted by mbpark

Flint,

I suppose you are mentioning GE?

May I ask you a question about your GE implementation?
I'm reluctant to mention this on the Aunt Minnie PACS board, for fear of sparking yet another GE-bashing thread.

Have you ever rebuilt your Centricity workstations yourself, i.e. declined to use GE's workstation image? And, if so, have you been able to navigate through the kludge that is GE Centricity and make them actually work? Also, when not using GE's image, does GE support treat you as if you are on your own (as I suspect they might)?

Thanks,
--Flint

[mbpark]

Flint,

Not only have we done it, we use it on Citrix XenApp.

GE supports us, even on our own images.

We run our own images for Centricity, a customized Centricity Web (we SSL-enabled it and turned off integrated authentication so our docs can use it without having to log into the PCs under a Windows session), our own images for GE Viewpoint, and Intel NIC cards in our forthcoming Imagecast RIS servers (we told GE that we wanted Intel cards because Broadcom cards have way too many issues, and they agreed after we gave them the HP ticket # I opened up).

The only thing we don't customize are our GE Imagecast PACS servers and our hardware configs for them. Everything we do is by the book with GE on those, down to the switches.

Considering I had GE engineers on the phone debugging issues with Viewpoint on our image and our workstations (Dell Optiplex 760) with our team, I think that the same courtesy extends to Centricity. I got approval to SSL-enable Centricity Web from them.

I think they're a great company when they send out the good engineers, like every other vendor.

At this point, if GE reads this post, they know EXACTLY who I am .