I saw a recent discussion over on linked in about PHR usage earlier today. Yesterday I saw an article about physicians complaining about being data entry clerks.
Have you looked at what most PHR provide for patients today? I'm no more a data entry clerk than my physician. Yet, that is what most PHR's reduce me to. I cannot wait for the day when I can download my data into the Application of MY choice, to do with it as I see fit.
I appreciate organizations that give me access in an App of their choice that has some useful features, but I don't want them to be choosing what apps I use.
Keith
Showing posts with label PHR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PHR. Show all posts
Friday, October 5, 2012
HL7 Offers Free Ambassador Webinar on the EHR and PHR System Functional Models on October 12, 2012
I'm in Rochester tomorrow morning to present my HL7 Ambassador presentation on HL7 Standards for Meaningful Use at the Rochester RHIO's CIO Breakfast. As the release below explains, these are short (30-60 minute) presentations which explain key facets of HL7 standards at a high level. HL7 also delivers these by webinar, and the release below is the latest one. These presentations are also recorded here, and occasionally, one even shows up on video (which is how I got this gig). More good, free stuff from HL7, cool.
-- Keith
-- Keith
Health Level Seven® International
For Immediate Release
Contact: Andrea Ribick
+1 (734) 677-7777
HL7 Offers Free Ambassador Webinar on the Electronic Health Record and Personal Health Record System Functional Models on October 12, 2012
Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA – October 4, 2012 – Health Level Seven® International (HL7®), the global authority for interoperability and standards in healthcare information technology with members in 55 countries, will present a complimentary Ambassador webinar on the HL7 Electronic Health Record System Functional Model (EHR-S FM) and the Personal Health Record System Functional Model (PHR-S FM) on Friday, October 12 from 12:00 pm – 1:00 pm EDT.
The HL7 EHR-S Functional Model is an international standard approved by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) that outlines the features and functions that should be contained in an EHR system. The current standard contains approximately 1,000 conformance criteria across more than 100 functions, including medication history, problem lists, orders, clinical decision support, and those supporting privacy and security. The function list is described from a user perspective and enables consistent expression of EHR system functionality. The model can be constrained through the development of profiles to represent a department (Emergency Medicine), a realm (The Netherlands), or other specialty (Behavioral Health). The webinar will also cover the development of Release 2 of the standard—having recently been balloted internationally.
The PHR-S Functional Model defines the functions for PHR systems and offers guidelines that facilitate health information exchange among different PHR systems and between PHR and EHR systems. The PHR-S Functional Model Release 1 is currently being balloted as an HL7 normative standard as well as with ISO. The Draft Standard for Trial Use (DSTU) version is available for vendors to use and incorporate the model’s requirements into their products.
Both models can be used as a basis for certification development and testing purposes.
The webinar will be presented by Pat Van Dyke, RN, director of information security, privacy and EDI representing The ODS Companies and Delta Dental Plans Association; co-chair of the HL7 Electronic Health Record Work Group; and HL7 ambassador. Ms. Van Dyke is also a practicing emergency room nurse. In addition, she helped develop both the EHR-S and PHR-S functional models and has participated in the development of functional profiles.
This webinar is free and open to anyone interested in healthcare IT or standards development. To register for this free webinar, please visit http://www.hl7.org/events/ambassador20121012/.
HL7 Ambassadors present standardized presentations about HL7 as speaker volunteers. They are available to present at local, regional or national conferences. Please contact HL7 at +1 (734) 677-7777 if you would like to schedule an HL7 Ambassador for an upcoming event.
About Health Level Seven International (HL7)
Founded in 1987, Health Level Seven International is the global authority for healthcare Information interoperability and standards with affiliates established in more than 30 countries. HL7 is a non-profit, ANSI accredited standards development organization dedicated to providing a comprehensive framework and related standards for the exchange, integration, sharing, and retrieval of electronic health information that supports clinical practice and the management, delivery and evaluation of health services. HL7’s more than 2,300 members represent approximately 700 corporate members, which include more than 90 percent of the information systems vendors serving healthcare. HL7 collaborates with other standards developers and provider, payer, philanthropic and government agencies at the highest levels to ensure the development of comprehensive and reliable standards and successful interoperability efforts.
HL7’s endeavors are sponsored, in part, by the support of its benefactors: Abbott; Accenture; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Duke Translational Medicine Institute; Epic; European Medicines Agency; the Food and Drug Administration; GE Healthcare Information Technologies; GlaxoSmithKline; IBM; Intel Corporation; InterSystems Corporation; Kaiser Permanente; Lockheed Martin; McKesson Provider Technology; Microsoft Corporation; NICTIZ National Healthcare; Novartis; Oracle Corporation; Partners HealthCare System, Inc.; Pfizer, Inc.; Philips Healthcare; Quest Diagnostics Inc.; Siemens Healthcare; Thomson Reuters; the U.S. Department of Defense, Military Health System; and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
Numerous HL7 Affiliates have been established around the globe including Argentina , Australia , Austria , Brazil , Canada , Chile , Colombia , Croatia , Czech Republic , Finland , Germany , Greece , Hong Kong , India , Italy , Japan , Korea , Luxembourg , The Netherlands, New Zealand , Norway , Romania , Russia , Singapore , Spain , Sweden , Switzerland , Taiwan , Turkey , United Kingdom , and Uruguay
For more information, please visit: www.HL7.org
# # #
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Chilling PHR Patents
This was an interesting press release that crossed my desk a couple of days ago. Quoting from the release [emphasis mine]:
Relevant patents referenced in the release are:
The earliest filing date seems to be in Q3 of 2005.
There seems to be quite a bit of prior art that I'm aware of, but I've not fully groked the patents in question either.
I know I was thinking about PHRs prior to Q3 2005, and using the Internet to exchange information. We created XDS in 2004, and prototyped it in 2003. The original XDS (XDS.a to newbies) included e-Mail as a transport mechanism for health data for patients back in 2004 (ftp to PDF). You'd want to look at the off-line mode of operation, in which IHE specifically talks about using SMTP (e-mail) to communicate health data between systems. In that specification, we discuss the creation of a patient health record account, and the submission of documents to that account using the Provider and Register transaction. In off-line mode, that includes transmission via e-mail.
We considered patients to be part of this network back then, and also in early PCC days (see 6/1/2005 Minutes). Using e-mail for notifications was one of the early additions to the IHE family of XDS related profiles. I started in the NAV project in late 2004, and we published the first draft of Notification of Document Availability in 2005.
I'd be interested in hearing what others think about these patents.
According to Ted Ward of the law firm Liner Grode Stein Yankelevitz Sunshine Regenstreif & Taylor LLP (www.LinerLaw.com), which represents the Company as patent litigation counsel, "The MMR health IT Patent Portfolio means that anyone who provides a consumer with a Web-based portal, including hospitals, physicians and pharmacies, where the consumer can access personal health information may be infringing on MMR's IP." Ward added that Liner is in the process of contacting hundreds of hospitals and physician group practices to discuss opportunities to license the Company's IP in advance of 2014 Meaningful Use requirements to provide patients online access to their health information within four days of the information being available to the doctor and within 36 hours of being discharged from the hospital.Chilling, especially the part in bold.
Relevant patents referenced in the release are:
- Method and System for Providing Online Records (which will soon be issued), and which links to this application.
- 8,117,646 Method and System for Providing Online Records
- 8,117,045 Method and System for Providing Online Records
- 8,121,855 Method and System for Providing Online Records
There's nothing fundamentally surprising to one versed in the art of the Internet in these patents as far as I can tell. It's not clear to me (because I am not a lawyer), how fundamentally this could impact things like Direct. The patents seem relevant when e-mail is involved. I'll be looking at them to see how they impact ABBI. So far, what I'm dealing with can use any back end that can provide health information in a certain way.
The earliest filing date seems to be in Q3 of 2005.
There seems to be quite a bit of prior art that I'm aware of, but I've not fully groked the patents in question either.
I know I was thinking about PHRs prior to Q3 2005, and using the Internet to exchange information. We created XDS in 2004, and prototyped it in 2003. The original XDS (XDS.a to newbies) included e-Mail as a transport mechanism for health data for patients back in 2004 (ftp to PDF). You'd want to look at the off-line mode of operation, in which IHE specifically talks about using SMTP (e-mail) to communicate health data between systems. In that specification, we discuss the creation of a patient health record account, and the submission of documents to that account using the Provider and Register transaction. In off-line mode, that includes transmission via e-mail.
We considered patients to be part of this network back then, and also in early PCC days (see 6/1/2005 Minutes). Using e-mail for notifications was one of the early additions to the IHE family of XDS related profiles. I started in the NAV project in late 2004, and we published the first draft of Notification of Document Availability in 2005.
I know AHIMA had developed a practice brief on Personal Health Records back in 2005, I'd love to see that version of the brief. What you can find today was updated not too long ago. You can also see what the www.myPHR.com site looked like back in late 2003.
So, what do you think about this press release? And the claims of these patents? I'd be interested in hearing from you.
-- Keith
So, what do you think about this press release? And the claims of these patents? I'd be interested in hearing from you.
-- Keith
I'd be interested in hearing what others think about these patents.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
IHE XDS for mHealth access to HIE
I submitted (late) a proposal to the IHE IT Infrastructure workgroup a proposal for an IHE Profile titled XDS for mHealth. I was graciously given time by the planning co-chair to present it even though it was submitted late, to allow the committee to understand it, and determine whether or not to accept it as a late submission.
The committee did agree to accept the proposal through the process, and so now I'll explain it a bit using the same presentation materials I used this morning, just reformatted for this blog. The next step is to see if it makes the prioritization cut at the October 11-12 IHE ITI Face to Face meeting. There are 3 other profile submissions and documentation maintenance work to consider. Ensuring that the committee has identified resources who are willing to work on it is very important in this next step. After that, it has to make the technical committee cut with respect to "do-ability". I'll shortly be working on a prototype to show that it is in fact feasible.
If you aren't an IHE member, but want to support this project, join now (it's free). If you are a member, please show up to the face to face meeting I mentioned above. I expect there will be T-con access for members who cannot be present at the face to face (there usually is).
-- Keith
The committee did agree to accept the proposal through the process, and so now I'll explain it a bit using the same presentation materials I used this morning, just reformatted for this blog. The next step is to see if it makes the prioritization cut at the October 11-12 IHE ITI Face to Face meeting. There are 3 other profile submissions and documentation maintenance work to consider. Ensuring that the committee has identified resources who are willing to work on it is very important in this next step. After that, it has to make the technical committee cut with respect to "do-ability". I'll shortly be working on a prototype to show that it is in fact feasible.
If you aren't an IHE member, but want to support this project, join now (it's free). If you are a member, please show up to the face to face meeting I mentioned above. I expect there will be T-con access for members who cannot be present at the face to face (there usually is).
-- Keith
Support for XDS in mHealth Evironment
The Problem
- mHealth platforms are resource constrained
- SOAP Stack missing or buggy (e.g., WSDL support for Objective C)
- Bandwidth constrained (10Kbps to 10Mbps)
- Limited resources (e.g., memory), often no “back-end” server
- Increasing proliferation of unconnected apps
- ~9,000 consumer health apps1 in Apple’s App store
- ~13,000 by 2012
- mHealth is an emerging market, failure to support this space could reduce relevance of IHE
- Difficult to use XMLHttpRequest for browser-based, multi-platform mHealth apps.
1Source:
MobiHealthNews http://shar.es/HMlff
Use Case
- Patient sees a specialist for a particular condition.
- The specialist asks for detailed information from the patient.
- The patient, not remembering their list of medications, pulls out their mobile device and activates an application.
- The application queries the HIE and retrieves a list of clinical summaries in date order, from most to least recent (or on-demand medication list document).
- They select the most relevant document, and it is downloaded to the device. The application extracts and displays their medication list.
Proposed Standards & Systems
Standards
- XML
- XDS Metadata
- ebXML
- XSLT
- JSON, JSON Schema
- XMLHttpRequest
- OHT APIs (not really a standard, but a place to start from)
Systems
- EHR
- PHR
- Patient Portal
- HIE
- Mobile Device (iPhone/iPad/iPod, Tablet, Android, Smart Phone, Windows Phone, etc.)
- There has been substantial work already in simplifying the XML in OHT, that could be used as one basis for the effort.
- Metadata could be transformed from a simplified representation to ebXML representation using XSLT.
- Transactions could be optimized to use W3C standard XMLHttpRequest object.
- Below is one example of how the actors and transactions could be organized:
Monday, August 22, 2011
The Collaborative Health Record
John Moore over at Chillmark Research had a great guest post from Dr. Louis Siegel.
In this post, he talks about the Collaborative Health Record. This is a record of a patient's health that both the physician and the patient have access to.
He makes that point that a PHR is really only a small lens into the entire realm of health information available.
Outside the US, the term "Electronic Health Record" has a slightly different meaning. It is the longitudinal record of care for a patient which both can access. Many countries are creating systems to access this information. In Australia, they call it the "Personally Controlled Health Record". In HITSP, we defined PHR based on the definition of EHR. Instead of saying that it was an IT system designed for Physician use, the PHR was a system designed for Patient use.
The reality is that EHR and PHR are simply two sides of the same coin, and that we need to think about them together. Innovation that applies to one also applies to the other. For example, with respect to the Public Health Alerting scenario I'm demonstrating today at #2011PHI, the same interface could also be used from a PHR to show patients what public health alerts are related to their symptoms.
We need more of this kind of thinking in Healthcare. I applaud John and Dr. Siegel for their insight.
I cannot wait (although I must) until my healthcare provider installs their patient portal. That system is connected to the EHR and will be a great tool to assist me in collaboration with my doctor.
Now if we could just update our secondary (and primary) education systems to teach people how to work with their physicians. Then we could enable collaboration around health, instead of disease.
-- Keith
In this post, he talks about the Collaborative Health Record. This is a record of a patient's health that both the physician and the patient have access to.
He makes that point that a PHR is really only a small lens into the entire realm of health information available.
Outside the US, the term "Electronic Health Record" has a slightly different meaning. It is the longitudinal record of care for a patient which both can access. Many countries are creating systems to access this information. In Australia, they call it the "Personally Controlled Health Record". In HITSP, we defined PHR based on the definition of EHR. Instead of saying that it was an IT system designed for Physician use, the PHR was a system designed for Patient use.
The reality is that EHR and PHR are simply two sides of the same coin, and that we need to think about them together. Innovation that applies to one also applies to the other. For example, with respect to the Public Health Alerting scenario I'm demonstrating today at #2011PHI, the same interface could also be used from a PHR to show patients what public health alerts are related to their symptoms.
We need more of this kind of thinking in Healthcare. I applaud John and Dr. Siegel for their insight.
I cannot wait (although I must) until my healthcare provider installs their patient portal. That system is connected to the EHR and will be a great tool to assist me in collaboration with my doctor.
Now if we could just update our secondary (and primary) education systems to teach people how to work with their physicians. Then we could enable collaboration around health, instead of disease.
-- Keith
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)