Middleware_comparison_chart_Feb_2007 - Survey editors:...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Survey editors: Raymond D. Aller, MD, and Hal Weiner 2 0 / CAP T O D A Y February 2007 CMYK Page 2 0 Tabulation does not represent an endorsement by the College of American Pathologists. Middleware systems Part 1 of 7 See related article, page 16 Name of system First ever middleware installation/Most recent installation Last update of middleware system No. of contracts for sites operating middleware U.S. contracts/Foreign contracts No. of sites operating middleware Percentage of business that is middleware Staff to develop/install and support/other* in entire company Staff to develop/install and support/other* in middleware division Hardware platforms Proprietary hardware required Smallest hardware platform system can run on Largest hardware platform in use Software platforms Fault-tolerant solutions/Hardware must be purchased from company Databases used Storage capacity of standard configuration of hardware System can interface with instruments from any manufacturer Data supported from microbiology instruments Data supported from molecular instruments Data supported from genomics instruments No. of instruments one middleware device can support Configuration of middleware device Protocol middleware supports to interface to instruments Low-level transport that system supports to interface to instruments LIS interfaces for receiving orders LIS interfaces for sending results No. of diff. host system connections operational at once on one middleware unit Protocols system supports to interface to other systems Human languages middleware supports Multiple languages can be used at same time on one system System supports local date and time formats No. of users that can access system at once No. of user security levels system supports Users can write all rules for system System supports simple rules/System supports compound rules Programming or script language required to write rules Full and persistent audit trail of rules/System supports rules testing QC data used as part of auto-verification or rules process Results that are entered manually processed by rules System supports event notification System user notified of rules-based events/Notification methods Automation routes determined by user-defined rules System supports test-based load balancing across instruments Events that lead to automation routes being dynamically updated Audit trail of the route a sample has taken Laboratory automation system interfaces System interfaces with noninstrument automation devices Back-end specimen storage and retrieval tracking System supports management of inst. & automation device maintenance records System provides alerts when instrument needs maintenance System provides LIS downtime functions/System allows for manual order entry System generates downtime specimen ID/Algorithm user definable Orders entered in middleware manually are sent back to LIS automatically System supports data collection or data mining Quality control module System interfaces to third-party QC packages...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 02/23/2011 for the course HTEC 50 taught by Professor Hassel,patricia during the Spring '11 term at DeAnza College.

Page1 / 7

Middleware_comparison_chart_Feb_2007 - Survey editors:...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online