FHIR & Ice

FHIR in New Zealand:Establishing a solid foundation

Dr. David Hay, MBChB , July 2015

Page 2

Today

• Agenda– Why FHIR– Where can we use FHIR in NZ– A FHIR primer– Clinician Tooling (ClinFHIR)– Terminology– Profiling– Where can we use FHIR in NZ– Next steps for New Zealand

• Desired Outcome– You can see where FHIR fits in

New Zealand– You want to learn more

• Seminars• Connectathons

– We think about infrastructure– We plan some pilots

Page 3

• Name: David Hay• Company: Orion Health• Background:

– Ex Clinician– Product Strategist– Involved in FHIR almost from beginning– Co-Chair FHIR Management Group– Chair HL7 New Zealand– Member HISO Committee– Blog: FHIRBlog.com

Who am I?

Why FHIR

Page 5

Drivers

• Interoperability requirements increasing– Increasing collaborative care – need for co-ordination – Changing Payment models– Clinical Care delivery to an aging population– Decision support– Involving the patient – raising the bar

• Need for real time access (API)– Mobile

• Vast increase in the amount, type and source of data– Devices, Mobile– Genomics

• Analytics, population health– Need to collect from many different sources

• Implementer expectations– Expect a modern standardCurrent standards don’t cut it - these led to

FHIR…

Page 6

• HL7 version 2– Great for messaging between

systems– But:

• Old technology• Hard to customize and

extend• HL7 version 3

– Defined common model for interoperability

– But:• Extremely complex to

implement• Limited improvement

over v2

• CDA (version 3)– Very successful – But:

• Documents only• Difficult to communicate

coded data• openEHR

– Excellent for modelling– But:

• Main focus is on internal data modeling rather than exchange

• (so can still participate)

Other Standards

Page 8

Business Case for FHIR

• Predefined Resources & API– Analysis already done, and can be safely extended

• All paradigms, All Architectures, All Clients– Thick client, browser, mobile, devices

• Implementer friendly– Simple to understand and access with examples– Familiar tooling & familiar technologies – XML/JSON, HTTP, SSL, OAuth– Libraries available – HAPI, Furore, reference implementation

• Mobile friendly– Concise, REST API & JSON

• Don’t need to understand HealthCare domain to implement– Developers or Analysts

• Already in use Internationally– 70 Organizations, 20 Countries, all Continents (except Antarctica)– Involvement from Providers, Vendors, Payers, Governments

• Including Orion• Large community for support

Results in faster, cheaper deployments that are more re-usable

Page 9

Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR)

• Focus on Implementers• Target support for common scenarios• Leverage cross-industry web technologies• Support human readability as base level of interoperability• Support multiple paradigms & architectures• Make content freely available• Demonstrate best practice governance

“Latest Interoperability standard from HL7”

Manifesto

Page 10

FHIR Timeline

2012 20162014 2018 2020

FirstDraft

2011 20152013 2017 2019

1st

DSTU~ 2nd

DSTU~ 1st Norm.

~ 2nd Norm. . . .

FreshLook

Page 11

Compared with other hl7 standards?

3 years10 years

1980 20001990 2010 2020

V21987

FreshLook2011

V3 CDA2005

FHIRDSTU2014

Start V31995

Page 13

13

Some possible architectures

FHIR

Broker

v3

v2

PHR

FHIR

App

Interface

DB

FHIR

Page 14

Repository model

Vendor Neutral Repository

FHIR

HIS LIS PACS PMS

RLS

FHIR

FHIR

FHIRFHIR

openEHR

FHIR

Vendor Neutral Repository

Where could we use FHIR in New Zealand?

Page 17

Record Locator Service

• Features– Based on IHE XDS– Registries (indexes) that show where documents are– Consistent document metadata (HISO standard)– Repositories holding data– Consumers accessing it

• But– Complex to implement– Complex to use

Page 18

Patient Portals

• Access to Primary Care/Community data– Vendor agnostic

• Access to Secondary Care Data– Vendor agnostic

• Access to other Portal data – Or the repositories behind them

• Patient access / review of Shared data repositories– Medications, allergies, encounters, documents– Annotate– Who has accessed data

• Patient data entry– Devices– Other observations

Page 19

Primary Care EMR Integration

• Incoming– Access to appointments– Patient Messaging

• Repeat prescriptions• Advice

– Notifications – Documents

• Record Locator Integration

• Outgoing– Access/Maintain shared Repositories – eg medications– Update consultation summaries

• Consistent coding

Page 21

Mobile Devices

• Very common access medium– Huge growth area for medical applications– Clinician and especially Patient

• Needs Real-time API• Structured data

– Not just document display

• Limitations– Bandwidth– Performance– Processor / memory

Page 22

Models on the wire / CDA

• Current Standards– HL7 CDA – HL7 version 2

• Where does FHIR fit in?

A Primer in FHIR

Page 26

2 aspects to FHIR

• Content– Resources (the model)– Informed by much past work inside & outside of HL7

• HL7: version 2, version 3 (RIM), CDA• Other SDO: openEHR, CIMI, ISO 13606• Others: IHE, DICOM

– Profiling & the 80%

• Exchange protocols - Paradigms– API– Other paradigms

• Message, Document

Page 27

Content: Resources

• “Resources” are:– The exchange models

• Small logically discrete units of exchange• Defined behaviour and meaning• Known identity / location• Smallest unit of transaction “of interest” to healthcare – and that

can be exchanged.– HL7 V2: Sort of like Segments– Hl7 V3: Sort of like CMETs

• Can be represented in XML or JSON• Can be individual or in bundles

– Eg query results, messages, documents

Page 28

Resources

Page 29

Resource Anatomy

Page 30

Resource description

Page 31

Datatypes

Page 32

Polymorphic Properties

• Where a property can have different datatypes• Can use a profile to restrict to specific type

– To come!

Page 33

The DSTU-2 Candidate Spec

33hl7.org/fhir/2015May

Page 34

References between resources

A web of resources that can tell any story

Page 35

Clinical Scenario

• First consultation– Complaining of pain in the r) ear for 3 days with an

elevated temperature. On examination, temperature 38.5 degrees and an inflamed r) ear drum with no perforation. Diagnosis Otitis Media, and prescribed Amoxil 250mg TDS for 5 days

• Follow up consultation– 5 days later returned with an itchy skin rash. No

breathing difficulties. On examination, urticarial rash on both arms. No evidence meningitis. Diagnosis of penicillin allergy. Antibiotics changes to erythromycin and advised not to take penicillin in the future.

Condition

Observation

Med

Allergy

Encounter

5 year old boyPatient

Page 36

Looking at the relationships

Page 37

Visualizing FHIR

• clinFHIR– Educational tool

• For non-techies (especially clinicians & BA)• Beta software!

– Resource Builder• View Resources• Create Condition

Page 38

Paradigms of Interoperability

REST

DocumentsMessages

Services(Operations)

Page 39

FHIR Message

39

Bundle

Resource 1

Resource 2

MessageHeader

• Similar to v2 and v3 messaging• Collection of resources bound

together• Root is a “MessageHeader”

resource• Just like MSH segment

• Allows request/response behavior with bundles for both request and response

• Event-driven– E.g. Send lab order, get back result

• Can use HTTP• Can be asynchronous

Page 40

FHIR Document

40

• Similar to CDA• Also a collection of

resources as a Bundle• Root is a “Composition”

resource• Just like CDA header

• Explicit references• Can be signed,

authenticated, etc.

Bundle

Resource 1

Resource 2

Composition

Page 41

API – REST & Services

• Real-time interaction– Application to Application

• Eg within enterprise systems– Person to Application

• Eg Mobile access to data

• Increasingly common (ubiquitous?) outside of healthcare– Twitter, Facebook, SalesForce

• Simple REST calls (CRUD)• More complex Operations (RPC)• One of the ‘selling points’ for FHIR

Page 42

FHIR RESTful Interactions

• Instance– Read GET [base]/Patient/100– Vread GET [base]/Patient/100/{vid}– Update PUT [base]/Patient/100– Delete DELETE [base]/Patient/100– History GET [base]/Patient/100/_history

• Type– Create POST [base]/Patient– Search GET [base]/Patient?name=eve– History GET [base]/Patient/_history– Validate POST [base]/Patient/100/_validate/{id}

• System– Conformance GET [base]/metadata– Transaction POST bundle to root– History GET [base]/_history– Search GET [base]/Patient?name=eve

Page 43

FHIR Operations

• When more complex server logic required than simple CRUD– Midway between REST & SOAP

• Some defined in spec. e.g.:– Get all data for a patient– Expand/filter terminology

• Can define custom services– Still using FHIR resources– Resources to define / inputs

Page 44

API Examples

• REST & Operations• How an app can access a FHIR server• Against Grahames server (one of public test servers)

– Simple CRUD– Operation ($everything)

Page 45

FHIRRepository

Regardless of paradigm, the content is the same

Lab System

FHIR Message FHIR

Document

NationalExchangeREST

The same resources

Terminology

Page 47

Terminology

a discipline that systematically studies the “labeling or designating of concepts” particular to one or more subject

fields or domains of human activity

Wikipedia

Page 48

FHIR Resource Datatypes

• Resource element datatypes of different ‘categories’– References to other resources– Non-coded data – Coded data

• Coded data– Code– Coding– CodeableConcept– (Quantity)

Page 49

Examples

• Code: "status" : "confirmed"• Coding: {

"system": "http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/rxnorm", "code": "C3214954", "display": "cashew nut allergenic extract Injectable"}

• CodeableConcept: { "coding": [{ "system": "http://snomed.info/sct", "code": "39579001", "display": "Anaphylactic reaction“ }], "text" : "Anaphylaxis"}

Page 50

Terminology Sub-system

• SNOMED CT / LOINC / RxNORM• HGVS, ICPC, MIMS + 100s more• ICD-X+• ANZSCO, METEOR• A drug formulary• A config table in an application • A list of enums in a java class• Australian state codes

Code System:Defines a set of concepts

with a coherent meaning

CodeDisplay

Definition

Page 51


Value Set:A selection of a set of codes for

use in a particular context



CodeDisplay

Definition

Selects

Page 52




CodeDisplay

Definition

Element Definition: Type and Value set reference



Selects Binds

Page 53




CodeDisplay

Definition

Element Definition: Type and Value set reference



Selects Binds

Element: code/

Coding/CodeableConcept

Refers to

Conforms

Page 54

NamingSystem resource

• A coded element needs to indicate the terminology– How to know which ‘system’

value to use?• Some standard ones defined

in the spec– SNOMED, LOINC etc.

• Other datatypes need the same– Identifier

• Can define own ones– Using NamingSystem resource– uniqueId is key

{ "resourceType": "NamingSystem", "id": "nznhi", "meta": { "versionId": "2", "lastUpdated": "2015-07-21T19:58:39Z" }, "text": { "status": "generated", "div": "<div xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml\">New Zealand NHI</div>" }, "type": "identifier", "name": "NZ NHI", "date": "2014-12-13", "status": "active", "description": "The New Zealand NHI system", "uniqueId": [ { "type": "uri", "value": "http://hl7.org.nz/ns/nhi" } ], "contact": [ { "telecom": [ { "system": "email", "value": "[email protected]" } ] } ]}

Page 55

Binding Strength

• How closely the options in the value set should be followed• Values

– Required (must come from set)– Extensible (may use alternate if have to)– Preferred (don’t have to, but should)– Example (set isn’t specified)

• Can use extension to vary– (Make stronger not weaker)

Page 56

ValueSet resource

• Defines list of possible values for a particular context• Can reference external Terminology/s

– Or define own sets

• Why?– A common valueSet improves recording consistency – Improves user experience (pick lists)

• Examples in New Zealand– ED diagnoses (derived from SNOMED)– NZ POCS (Pathology Observation Code Set) (derived from LOINC)– List of NZ Iwi (defined in ValueSet)

Page 57

ValueSet for condition.code

{ "resourceType": "ValueSet", "id": "valueset-condition-code", "meta": { "versionId": "1", "lastUpdated": "2015-05-08T16:18:23Z", }, "text": { "status": "generated", "div": ”Condition.code sample ValueSet" },"url": "http://hl7.org/fhir/vs/condition-code", "version": "0.5.0", "name": "Condition/Problem/Diagnosis Codes", "publisher": "FHIR Project team", "contact": [ { "telecom": [ { "system": "url", "value": "http://hl7.org/fhir" } ] } ],

"description": "Example value set for Condition/Problem/Diagnosis codes", "copyright": "This value set includes content from SNOMED CT, which is copyright © 2002+ International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation (IHTSDO), and distributed by agreement between IHTSDO and HL7. Implementer use of SNOMED CT is not covered by this agreement", "status": "draft", "experimental": true, "compose": { "include": [ { "system": "http://snomed.info/sct", "filter": [ { "property": "concept",

"op": "is-a", "value": "404684003" } ] } ] }}

Page 58

Valueset for NZ Iwi{ "resourceType": "ValueSet", "id": "nziwi", "meta": { "versionId": "4", "lastUpdated": "2015-07-18T19:29:40Z" }, "text": { "status": "generated", "div": "<div xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml\">
<p>Valueset for Iwi</p>
</div>" }, "url": "http://fhir-dev.healthintersections.com.au/open/ValueSet/nziwi", "version": "1", "name": "New Zealand Iwi", "publisher": "HL7 New Zealand", "contact": [ { "telecom": [ { "system": "email", "value": "[email protected]" } ] } ], "description": "The list of possible Iwi (tribes) for New Zealand", "requirements": "Needed for an extension on Patient", "status": "draft", "experimental": true, "date": "2015-06-13",

"define": { "system": "fhir.hl7.org.nz/valueset/nziwi", "concept": [ { "code": "kt", "display": "Kai Tahu" }, { "code": "np", "display": "Ngāti Porou" }, { "code": "nt", "display": "Ngāi Tahu" }, { "code": "np1", "display": "Ngā Puhi" }, { "code": "nk", "display": "Ngāti Kahungunu" }, { "code": "th", "display": "Tūhoe" } ] }}

Page 59

Terminology Server

• Provides ‘services’ for consumers to access terminology– Hide the complex stuff from a consumer

• Uses Operations framework– Get definition for a concept– Find a concept

• Within a ValueSet

http://hl7.org/fhir/2015May/terminology-service.html

• Find Terms• Get Term

Definition

Page 60

Exercise: Using a Terminology Server

• clinFHIR– Resource builder (Condition)– Condition.code

• Explore data set– Direct REST query from filter

Profiling

Page 62

Profiling

• The basic resources are not enough– Many different contexts in healthcare

• Specific implementations need to: – Specify resources used– Extend resources– Constrain resources– Specify code sets / terminologies

• Multiple supporting artifacts in FHIR• FHIR is a platform specification

– Profiles adapt it to specific purposes

• Discoverability• Profiling increasingly important

– Allows clinicians to express reqirements– Tooling supports Clinicians and Analysts involvement

• Whole spec build on profiling infrastructure

Page 63

Claiming conformance

• Profiles are like a template– Servers indicate what profiles they support– Clients can interrogate servers

• Resource instances ‘claim conformance’ to 1 or more profiles– Libraries developed to test this– Can be conformant without claiming

• Cannot set defaults– Can state what a value should be

Page 64

Extensions

• Only most common elements in base resource– Keeps the resources small– (Adding everything was the problem with version 3)

• Extensions allow other elements to be defined– Same capabilities as core elements

• Including resource references and terminology bindings

• Extensions are normal– Expect all real implementations to use extensions

• ‘normal’ and modifierExtensions– Normal extensions can be ignored by a recipient– Unknown modifierExtensions cannot be ignored

Page 65

Profiling a resource

Specify that the identifier uses the NHI – and is required

Limit names to just 1 (instead of 0..*)

Limit maritalStatus to different set of codes (ValueSet)

Multiple Birth indicator only boolean

Indicate photo not supported

Add an extension to support “Ethnicity”

Note: hardly any mandatory elements in the core spec!

Page 66

Published Profiles & Artifacts (Registry)

http://registry.fhir.orgFind & maintain

Retrieve & use

Page 67

openEHR & FHIR

• FHIR defines interoperability model & transport– Internal EHR formats don’t matter as long as they can map– openEHR strong in data modelling

• Archetypes & Profiles are where mapping occurs– Some differences:

• Archetypes are ‘maximal’, Profiles are context specific

• NZ Team working on this– World leading– Contact Koray Atalag to participate

Exercise

Page 69

Exercise: Creating a profile

• Profile on Patient – make the New Zealand Patient– Add an extension for iwi– Remove Photo (& some others)– Make identifier single only, required and fixed to the NHI

• Then, create a resource based on that profile• Will need:

– A ValueSet for Iwi codes• (to hold the list of values)

– An Extension Definition (StructureDefinition) for iwi in Patient• To define what it is

– A profile (StructureDefinition) for NZ Patient

Page 70

Artifacts

Page 71

Process

1.Build/Find registry resources1. Show the ValueSet in XML editor (Oxygen)2. PUT it to the registry using POSTMan3. Create and save NamingSystem for NHI

2. Start clinFHIR3. Select Patient as base4. Create new Extension

1. Generally search first2. Set to ValueSet

5. Show preview6. Save7. Create resource in Resource Builder

Page 72

Exercise: Create a Profile

• Then use it to create a resource…

Page 73

Conformance resource

• Indicate Server capability– Also a desired solution or software capabilities

• API Details– REST Interfaces

• Supported Resources– Query Parameters

– Operations

• Messaging / Document Capability• Supported Profiles

Page 74

Implementation Guide

• Pull together all the artifacts for an implementation– Eg New Zealand Patient

• Computable and directly renderable• These include (eg from our exercise):

– Resources• ValueSet• StructureDefinition• Conformance• NamingSystem

– Documentation / other• example resources• pages• Images

• Under active development

Page 75

A Digital Ecosystem supported by FHIR

• Many independent systems• Common understanding of things, and ways to share them• FHIR is the way of organizing and sharing

A digital ecosystem is a distributed, adaptive, open socio-technical system with properties of self-

organisation, scalability and sustainability inspired from natural ecosystems.

Wikipedia

Page 76

Establishing the ecosystem

Terminology

Security

Identity Repository

FHIR API and Resources

Registry

Page 77

SMART: An ecosystem example

Included in project Argonaut

Page 78

FHIR supporting the Ecosystem

• A common way to represent data– Building blocks (resources)– Rules for connecting them (references)

• Defines ways to move data around– API (Simple & Complex)– Messages– Documents

• Links to supporting infrastructure– Terminology– Identity– Security

• A large supporting community

Page 79

Tooling

• Demo Servers– Open Source

• Libraries– Client & Server– Java, c#, python

• Reference Implementations• clinFHIR

Page 80

The community

• Heaps of open source software– Clients and servers

• Specification feedback welcomed– Including update requests – tracker.

• Training events– On-line webinars (eg FHIR academy)– Connectathons – at WGMs and elsewhere – eg Aus– ?demand in New Zealand

• Support channels– Skype– Stack Overflow– Blogs– Email / List servers

Where can we use FHIR: Revisited

Page 82

Record Locator Service

Can also use messaging

Page 83

Patient Portals

• Access to Primary Care/Community data– Vendor agnostic (RESTful interfaces)

• Access to Secondary Care Data– Vendor agnostic (RESTful interfaces)

• Access to other Portal data – Or the repositories behind them (RESTful interfaces)

• Patient access / review of Shared data repositories– Medications, allergies, encounters, documents (Resources)– Annotate (Observation)– Who has accessed data (AuditEvent)

• Patient data entry (Observations to Shared repository)– Devices– Other observations

Page 84

EMR Integration

• Incoming– Access to appointments (Appointment, Schedule, Slot,Operation)– Patient Messaging

• Repeat prescriptions (Order, MedicationPrescription)• Advice (Questionnaire)

– Shared Repositories (General REST - GET)– Notifications (Subscription)– Documents

• Document (DocumentReference, Binary)

• Outgoing– Update repositories (General POST/PUT)

• Consistent coding (ValueSets)

Page 85

Mobile Devices

• Very common access medium• Real-time (REST/AJAX interaction, server side Operations for more

complex)

• Structured Data (Resources)• Limitations

– Bandwidth (only include needed elements. Compress well.)– Performance – Processor / memory (apps focussed on specific functionality)

Page 87

Convert v2-> FHIR Message

Or just extract individual resources…

Page 88

Shred v2 message

Page 89

Convert CDA -> FHIR Document

Or just extract individual resources

Wrapping up

Page 91

Where next in New Zealand

• Interoperability Reference Architecture update• Think about Governance (Implementer support)

– Extensions, StructureDefinition, ImplementationGuide, ValueSets, NamingSystem

– How best to structure with a community focus?

• Infrastructure– Identity, Security, Terminology

• Funding• Pilots

– What’s a good one to start• ?Terminology Service• ?Record Locator

Page 92

Success Markers

• I’ve stirred your interest in FHIR– Review the spec on the web– Consider FHIR in your own projects

• FHIR features prominently in the Interoperability Architecture refresh

• We have demand for more training or connectathons• We have real pilots• The MOH starts to think about FHIR in key interfaces

– NHI, NPI

• We consider a FHIR based national terminology service• We start to think about the other ecosystem services