First it offers two reasons why the Virtual Desktop solution is a good option:
The first benefit of security is a good once since as long as your virtual desktop and access to your virtual desktop are secured, then you don’t have to worry about healthcare related data on the iPad. The second benefit is mostly a benefit to the EMR software vendor. Sure, they could make the argument that the price to develop a native iPad app is passed on to the end user. However, most doctors won’t feel that cost. In most cases it just means that other features on the EMR development roadmap will just get pushed back. Although, even this can be a bad strategy if your developers are good at developing EMR software on your current platform, but aren’t familiar with developing a native iPad app. Then, it’s worth spending some money on an iOS developer who knows which features of the iPad they can really leverage.
Now on to the reasons the article suggests that you develop a native iPad app and not just do the virtual desktop solution:
-Doesn’t Make Use of Native iPad Functionality
-Requires Constant Connectivity
-Virtualized Apps are Not Optimized for the iPad
The first and third in the list are very much related and are the biggest reasons why a native iPad EMR app makes so much sense if you’re going to do something on the iPad. The second item actually doesn’t apply very well to an iPad EMR app which even when created as a native app will likely need to have internet connectivity to have any value. An EMR iPad app could be made that didn’t need connectivity, but I have yet to see one that’s done that.