In particular, senior level Systems Engineers or Software Architects are in demand, if they have a strong understanding of the demands associated within this environment, along with an HL-7 background.

There are several openings in the Florida area that our company has been filling. hwoo@charterglobal.com.

Ultimately the market for HL7 “people” is, IMO, very strong. What they do is unique and requires a strong mix of skills — project management, programming/development, people skills, troubleshooting/debugging, etc.

Thus, in general, healthcare integration (and the need for HL7-aware people) is growing strongly.

On a personal note, NeoTool is hiring HL7 people. Please check out our Dallas-based openings: http://www.neotool.com/about/careers

To be successful in this position the person needs to be very strong technically (MCSE Certification preferred). Since the end user is typically a hospital, we have found that PACS Administrators or other hospital IT professionals that are looking to work independently and in a variety of environments are very successful. HL7 experience preferred.

We are currently looking for Specialists in Northern CA and New England.

Please fee free to forward this information on to anyone that would like to learn more about this opportunity. I do value your time and your expertise – networking is KEY to finding quality candidates. Keep in mind that we compensate for referrals that lead to placements.

Joy

Regards,

Joy Shanklin

Shanklin & Associates

Tele: 440-519-0441

Email: jobs@techjobsearch.com

Web: http://www.techjobsearch.com

Join my Linked In network at http://www.linkedin.com/in/shanklin

Member of NPA, The Worldwide Recruiting Network, your connection to premier independent recruiting firms on 6 continents.

Interestingly enough there is no HL7/BizTalk involved in the implementation of HealthVault. There is a very interesting data model though. There are many ways that HealthVault can accept data from many sources and BizTalk could be one of those aspects (though it is not at present the case). I have not as yet investigated that aspect of it myself - but plan to interview the development team at HIMSS in Orlando this year and publish the result on my blog (sorry about the gratuitous personal plug).

HealthVault is what you could call a ‘platform’ for partner development, storage and management of Health Record content. It can absorb content from various sources and extrapolate raw content into graphs and sequences that a DSS may be able to use. Loosely speaking, the design behind HealthVault follows on from Microsoft’s vision for healthcare – which we call ‘Knowledge Driven Health’ (KDH). Implementations of Knowledge Driven Health take the architectural form of the Connected Health Framework (CHF). The CHF takes its physical form in the implementation of solutions via the Connected Health Platform (CHP). HealthVault is built on a cross section of products that constitute part of the Connected Health Platform. (I thought I would play acronym bingo for a while…sorry)

While I do not claim to be an expert in HealthVault – I do have an avid (some would say rabid) interest in it as a specific measure of where the commoditisation of HIT is heading.

For more accurate information I should point you to the blog of a colleague of mine – Roberto Ruggeri - http://blogs.msdn.com/rruggeri/archive/2007/11/04/designing-healthvault-s-data-model.aspx
Regards,
Van
PS: Cool blog – I am using you and others to drive themes in mine.

The NHS, just like the Dutch national infrastructure, started
development in 2003. In 2003 probably none of the existing standards that were a candidate for the English infrastructure (e.g. SNOMED, HL7v3, 13606, IHE XDS) were suitable as-is for the type of complex inter-organizational architecture envisioned, nor were they finalized, nor were there tools to support implementation. If anybody thought one could use off the shelf standards and tools to implement such an architecture in 2003 they probably should have known better. Even today such a project would be (and is) daunting.

In 2003 HL7 v3 hadn’t even been officially released yet - the initial normative release of HL7 v3 was published late 2005. The NHS knowingly chose to implement a beta-version of the standard.

All standards require versioning, new insights have to be added and flaws have to be fixed. It therefore is a sign of maturity that multiple versions exist - because implementations are a driving force for enhancements and fixes. Whether programming language (e.g. C, Java) or industry standards (e.g. WDSL, SOAP, HTML) versioning is the best way to deal with new requirements.

Standards that don’t require updates or fixes probably are like ancient greek: nice from an academic standpoint, but dead as a doornail. Why do some of the issues with HL7 v3 surface right now? Two answers: a) HL7 v3 is a relatively new standard - being published initially in 2005, and b) governments of multiple countries now implement and rely on HL7v3. Implementation leads to the discovery of issues.

Implementation will have to show what combination of standards works best for the type of governmental projects as described by the initial post. Given that there are no equivalent alternatives any governmental project will surely study HL7v3 to see were it would be of benefit within their national healthcare infrastructure projects.

-René