Which DHBs are now using Badgernet (MCIS)? And how is it going?
I am aware that Badgernet was previously fraught with problems including those relating to intraoperability and integration, and that this led to both slow uptake and even some DHBs backing out implementations. As a consequence we put this work on the backburner in Wellington, and reduced its priority compared to other major projects.
There has been renewed focus on this area lately, and it has been said that the newer versions of Badgernet have fixed the previous problems. Is this the case? Who is now using the system, to what extent, and how successful has it been?
They are using it extensively in the UK, and there are still plenty of intra-operability complaints.
I’m not sure how they’ve done with wrapping it in FHIR APIs though - that could potentially make a massive difference.
There was a recent thread on the DHN about this, albeit focussed on Badgernet Neonates and Cerner Maternity, but the principles are likely to be the same:
Hi Steve, you’re in touch with Teresa Omundsen? From what I’ve heard moving to the newer Badgernet single platform has been really well received, several DHBs moved onto the new platform and others planned.
The initial NZ localised implementation was not so well received. I’ll email you Teresa’s details.
regards,
David
Sarah Tout, clinical director of women’s health at CM Health would be another good person to speak to about this if you want @searnshaw I can pass on her email?