According to this article Medsphere Corp. is raising $15 million in venture capital: ‘In a regulatory filing this week, Carlsbad, CA-based Medsphere Systems says it has raised about $1.9 million of a $15 million secondary venture round. Medsphere CEO Michael Doyle told me recently that existing investors have committed $6 million for the round so far. Since it was founded in 2002, Medsphere has raised $50 million from investors that include Azure Capital Partners, Epic Ventures, and Thomas Weisel Partners. The company is commercializing an open source software version of VistA, the electronic health record system developed for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.’
Full announcement here: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Nationally Recognized Psychiatric Hospital Selects Medsphere’s Open Source Electronic Health Record to Transform Clinical Care
Silver Hill Hospital Chooses OpenVista to Improve Efficiency and Patient Care
CARLSBAD, California – April 29, 2009 – Medsphere Systems Corporation, the leading provider of open source healthcare IT solutions, today announced a five-year contract with Connecticut’s Silver Hill Hospital for implementation, training and support of the company’s OpenVista electronic health record (EHR) solution.
On October 22, government and private industry experts will debate the issues and opportunities presented by collaborative software development models at the Government Open Source Conference (GOSCON) Portland, Oregon. The distinguished panelists have direct experience with successful public/private consortiums based on the open source software model in which developers as well as business and technical users collaborate to create new applications while sharing both the costs and the benefits.
In another smart move by the “new medsphere”, medsphere.org has been retooled as a community forge. They are in soft-launch now, and will make a formal announcement soon. The new site is far more community-friendly than the old one. Its a critical part of the Medsphere strategy to get the VistA community to migrate from Hardhats (and the FOIA VistA/WorldVistA that is typically discussed there) to medsphere.org and (which centers on OpenVistA). Recent licensing changes, as well as this newly improved site are smart moves to that end. The new site is already filling with good content, including a comparison between FOIA CPRS and Medsphere CIS.
ALISO VIEJO, CA––May 21, 2008––Medsphere Systems Corporation, the leading provider of Open Source healthcare IT solutions, today announced the Open Source release of OpenVista Clinical Information System (CIS) version 1.0 Beta and OpenVista Server version 1.5.86. Available for immediate download at www.medsphere.org, these applications compose Medsphere’s Open Source electronic health record (EHR) system. OpenVista CIS provides a multi-platform (Linux and Windows), user-friendly and intuitive client interface through which clinicians can enter and view patient information. OpenVista Server is a commercialized version of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs VistA solution, developed over the course of more than 20 years and instrumental in a well-documented organizational turnaround at the agency.
Medsphere, an open-source VistA vendor and their customers, gave a talk on their system and their strategy at HIMSS yesterday.
Relative to the number of vendors present at HIMSS, very few held a session at the “University” section of the tradeshow. Medsphere did and highlighted several of their key successes. Overall, I was impressed. Read on after the gap for my review of the session.
Medsphere started the talk with CEO Mike Doyle discussing the product and the strategy. Sadly, I missed most of this; who knew that the exhibit hall takes 20 minutes to cross…
Apparently, Joel West has just heard about the Medsphere vs. Shreeve settlement. He is apparently no longer dreading a subpoena. (I was actually looking forward to it myself…) He is notably critical of the VC firms involved. From the article: …Even if the lawsuit is over, IMHO this sordid mess leaves the VCs with a permanent black mark. From 2002-2006, they invested $12 million in a company whose strategy was always to release open source, and then they wholeheartedly backed the decision both to fire the officers who released open source and to sue them. Were the investors (Azure Capital, Thomas Weisel, Wasatch) incompetent in not knowing what an “open source company” meant? Did they panic when deployments ran behind schedule? Were they duplicitous? All of the above?