@article {1226, title = {Comparison of Open-Source Electronic Health Record Systems Based on Functional and User Performance Criteria.}, journal = {Healthc Inform Res}, volume = {25}, year = {2019}, month = {2019 Apr}, pages = {89-98}, abstract = {

Objectives: Open-source Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems have gained importance. The main aim of our research is to guide organizational choice by comparing the features, functionality, and user-facing system performance of the five most popular open-source EHR systems.

Methods: We performed qualitative content analysis with a directed approach on recently published literature (2012-2017) to develop an integrated set of criteria to compare the EHR systems. The functional criteria are an integration of the literature, meaningful use criteria, and the Institute of Medicine{\textquoteright}s functional requirements of EHR, whereas the user-facing system performance is based on the time required to perform basic tasks within the EHR system.

Results: Based on the Alexa web ranking and Google Trends, the five most popular EHR systems at the time of our study were OSHERA VistA, GNU Health, the Open Medical Record System (OpenMRS), Open Electronic Medical Record (OpenEMR), and OpenEHR. We also found the trends in popularity of the EHR systems and the locations where they were more popular than others. OpenEMR met all the 32 functional criteria, OSHERA VistA met 28, OpenMRS met 12 fully and 11 partially, OpenEHR-based EHR met 10 fully and 3 partially, and GNU Health met the least with only 10 criteria fully and 2 partially.

Conclusions: Based on our functional criteria, OpenEMR is the most promising EHR system, closely followed by VistA. With regards to user-facing system performance, OpenMRS has superior performance in comparison to OpenEMR.

}, issn = {2093-3681}, doi = {10.4258/hir.2019.25.2.89}, author = {Purkayastha, Saptarshi and Allam, Roshini and Maity, Pallavi and Gichoya, Judy W} } @article {1235, title = {A Platform for Innovation and Standards Evaluation: a Case Study from the OpenMRS Open-Source Radiology Information System.}, journal = {J Digit Imaging}, volume = {31}, year = {2018}, month = {2018 06}, pages = {361-370}, abstract = {

Open-source development can provide a platform for innovation by seeking feedback from community members as well as providing tools and infrastructure to test new standards. Vendors of proprietary systems may delay adoption of new standards until there are sufficient incentives such as legal mandates or financial incentives to encourage/mandate adoption. Moreover, open-source systems in healthcare have been widely adopted in low- and middle-income countries and can be used to bridge gaps that exist in global health radiology. Since 2011, the authors, along with a community of open-source contributors, have worked on developing an open-source radiology information system (RIS) across two communities-OpenMRS and LibreHealth. The main purpose of the RIS is to implement core radiology workflows, on which others can build and test new radiology standards. This work has resulted in three major releases of the system, with current architectural changes driven by changing technology, development of new standards in health and imaging informatics, and changing user needs. At their core, both these communities are focused on building general-purpose EHR systems, but based on user contributions from the fringes, we have been able to create an innovative system that has been used by hospitals and clinics in four different countries. We provide an overview of the history of the LibreHealth RIS, the architecture of the system, overview of standards integration, describe challenges of developing an open-source product, and future directions. Our goal is to attract more participation and involvement to further develop the LibreHealth RIS into an Enterprise Imaging System that can be used in other clinical imaging including pathology and dermatology.

}, keywords = {Diagnostic Imaging, Humans, Radiology Information Systems, Software, Systems Integration, Workflow}, issn = {1618-727X}, doi = {10.1007/s10278-018-0088-5}, author = {Gichoya, Judy W and Kohli, Marc and Ivange, Larry and Schmidt, Teri S and Purkayastha, Saptarshi} }