Overview: In this milestone, you will submit your recommendations for technology for the institution and how it will be implemented. Specifically the following critical elements must be addressed: III. Technology System Recommendations: In this final section of your final project, you will review the provided technology options and make informed recommendations to the organization regarding which technology it should choose. A. Determine the needs of the various roles of the organization in a new technology. B. Recommend a new health information technology system that meets the following criteria. Be sure to justify how your recommendations meet the criteria. The new health technology must: 1. Abide by provided health regulations and laws 2. Align with the needs of all staff members of the previously described organization 3. Ensure the ethical management and use of health information C. Determine how the organization could more effectively invest its financial resources into the recommended technology system. Be sure to justify your response. D. Determine how the organization could monitor the use of the new health information system. Be sure to justify your response. E. Determine how the organization could effectively invest its time into the implementation of the new health information technology system. Be sure to justify your response. Guidelines for Submission: This milestone must be 2–3 pages in length (plus a cover page and references) and must be written in APA format. Use double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. All references cited in APA format.
Featherfall Medical Center has an existing admission discharge transfer (ADT)/master patient index (MPI) system that was developed in-house and implemented over 20 years ago. By now, all of the original programmers have resigned or retired. The system is cumbersome to manage and update to meet the current needs of the center. This has also led to the compliance, ethical, and governance issues previously stated. An RFP was sent out to two vendors: Intel (SOA Expressway for Healthcare) and Alert (Admission Discharge and Transfer [ADT]). Key portions of the RFP have been summarized to
allow for easy comparison.
The responses to the functional requirements have also been provided for review. Demonstrations were conducted at the Center, and both systems looked good. The MPI module is preferred on Intel, and the ADT system is preferred on Alert; however, both systems were received favorably. The committee went to see both systems in operation and liked them both. References were checked on both systems. The references for Alert were glowing. All of them said that the system was good and the people were great to work with because they wanted their new company to succeed and grow. However, given their small size, they might lack the resources of a larger company. The references on Intel were excellent as well. The only negative about Intel was that the company is quite large and was sometimes slow to respond to what the company saw as minor problems. The next release of Alert is due out in 6 months and of Intel is due out in 8 months. The Committee has used the following tables to summarize and compare the information that was gathered and is awaiting your recommendation before final decision is reached. System Comparison Topic Intel (SOA Expressway for Healthcare) Alert (Admission Discharge and Transfer [ADT]) Cost of interface $378,000 $238,000 Cost of software $465,000 $325,000 Cost of hardware $375,000 $400,000 Implementation costs $275,000 $175,000 Other costs $110,000 $120,000 Annual maintenance $75,000 $65,000 Training costs $350,000 $264,000 Number systems in use in hospitals 364 12 Length of time in business 30 years 3 years Stability of company Good Good