Patterns of Interoperability 1 16 th December 2014 Adam Hatherly (HSCIC) Inderjit Singh (NHS England)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SIP and Instant Messaging. SIP Summit SIP and Instant Messaging What Does Presence Have to Do With SIP? How to Deliver.
Advertisements

VON Europe /19/00 SIP and the Future of VON Protocols SIP and the Future of VON Protocols: Presence and IM Jonathan Rosenberg.
Fall VoN 2000 SIP for IP Communications Jonathan Rosenberg Chief Scientist.
Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise
Web Services Architecture An interoperability architecture for the World Wide Service Network.
Directory and Trust Services (D&TS) Define an Abstract Model Purpose: Document a common terminology that the group can use between the various tracks Identify.
EHR Governance in South Western Ontario eHealth 2013 Glenn Lanteigne CIO South West and Waterloo Wellington LHIN and SWO Cluster Lead May 29, 2013 Tweet.
Policy interoperability in electronic signatures Andreas Mitrakas EESSI International event, Rome, 7 April 2003.
Current developments: A View from Social Care Terry Dafter Chair of ADASS Informatics Network November 2014.
S&I Framework Provider Directories Initiative esMD Work Group October 19, 2011.
Sue Bracey Head of software development & Integration Benefits of Spine Mini Services.
Integrated Digital Care Records and Interoperability Inderjit Singh Head of Enterprise Architecture 12 November 2014 Health Insights.
Information Sharing Options Phil Walker. Outline I have been asked to present a range of options for lawful data sharing. There is unlikely to be one.
Massachusetts: Transforming the Healthcare Economy John D. Halamka MD CIO, Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
NHIN Specifications Richard Kernan, NHIN Specification Lead (Contractor), Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT Karen Witting, Contractor to.
1 THE HEALTH iNNOVATOR An Integrated Care Record Service The Durham & Darlington Approach The Simulator.
Rheeve: A Plug-n-Play Peer- to-Peer Computing Platform Wang-kee Poon and Jiannong Cao Department of Computing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University ICDCSW.
S.R.F.E.R.S. State, Regional, and Federal Enterprise Retrieval System Inter-Agency & Inter-State Integration Using GJXML.
NextGRID & OGSA Data Architectures: Example Scenarios Stephen Davey, NeSC, UK ISSGC06 Summer School, Ischia, Italy 12 th July 2006.
Report Distribution Report Distribution in PeopleTools 8.4 Doug Ostler & Eric Knapp 7264.
OpenID And the Future of Digital Identity Alicia Bozyk April 1, 2008.
© 2004, The Trustees of Indiana University 1 OneStart Workflow Basics Brian McGough, Manager, Systems Integration, UITS Ryan Kirkendall, Lead Developer.
A Primer on Healthcare Information Exchange John D. Halamka MD CIO, Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
Identity and Access Management IAM A Preview. 2 Goal To design and implement an identity and access management (IAM) middleware infrastructure that –
Developing a target ‘future state’ in social care informatics Andrew Fenton DH.
Organizing IHE Integration Profiles related to the Electronic Health Record Input to the IHE ITI Tech Committee November 2002 Charles Parisot, GE Medical.
24 th September 2012 (Redditch) 27 th September 2012 (Leeds) 4 th October 2012 (London) 8 th October 2012 (Exeter) 10 th October 2012 (London) QIPP Digital.
Cross Domain Patient Identity Management Eric Heflin Dir of Standards and Interoperability/Medicity.
E-Referral enabled collaborative health care Opportunities and considerations Presented by: Sasha Bojicic Emerging Technology Group Canada Health Infoway.
Requirements for Epidemic Information Management Farrukh Najmi XML Standards Architect Sun Microsystems
NHS Interoperability Programme Workshop Overview Indi Singh 16 th December 2014.
Generic Framework Toolkit Mike Martin Centre for Social and Business Informatics Newcastle University.
OASIS ebXML Registry Standard Open Forum 2003 on Metadata Registries 10:30 – 11:15 January 20, 2003 Kathryn Breininger The Boeing Company Chair, OASIS.
1.View Description 2.Primary Presentation 3.Element Catalog Elements and Their Properties Relations and Their Properties Element Interfaces Element Behavior.
Working Together to Advance Terminology Tooling Presentation to OHT Board, Birmingham Jennifer Zelmer & Karen Gibson.
Biosafety Clearing House Training Workshop December, 2008 Bangkok.
Dr. Bhavani Thuraisingham October 2006 Trustworthy Semantic Webs Lecture #16: Web Services and Security.
Calculating Quality Reporting Service – an introduction Chris Brown CQRS Design, Build and Test Project Manager 05 September 2012.
Introduction to the Summary Care Record (SCR)
I Information Systems Technology Ross Malaga 4 "Part I Understanding Information Systems Technology" Copyright © 2005 Prentice Hall, Inc. 4-1 DATABASE.
NHS Connecting for Health A National Framework For Implementing Electronic SAP Summary of Recommendations.
Topic Rathachai Chawuthai Information Management CSIM / AIT Review Draft/Issued document 0.1.
Web Services Management Framework by Umut Bultan & Gül Hünerkar.
Presented by: Presented by: Tim Cameron CommIT Project Manager, Internet 2 CommIT Project Update.
1 Schema Registries Steven Hughes, Lou Reich, Dan Crichton NASA 21 October 2015.
NMI End-to-End Diagnostic Advisory Group BoF Fall 2003 Internet2 Member Meeting.
Distribution and components. 2 What is the problem? Enterprise computing is Large scale & complex: It supports large scale and complex organisations Spanning.
1 Healthcare Information Technology Standards Panel Care Delivery - IS01 Electronic Health Record (EHR) Laboratory Results Reporting July 6, 2007.
GBIF Data Access and Database Interoperability 2003 Work Programme Overview Donald Hobern, GBIF Programme Officer for Data Access and Database Interoperability.
HSCIC – The journey on adopting FHIR
Integrated Digital Care Record Work stream The Offers Michael A. Bewell Interoperability Engagement Lead.
HIT Policy Committee NHIN Workgroup HIE Trust Framework: HIE Trust Framework: Essential Components for Trust April 21, 2010 David Lansky, Chair Farzad.
AMQP, Message Broker Babu Ram Dawadi. overview Why MOM architecture? Messaging broker like RabbitMQ in brief RabbitMQ AMQP – What is it ?
QIPP Digital Technology and ITK Care Co-Ordination: Interoperability WebEx4. 8 th November 2012.
Discussion - HITSC / HITPC Joint Meeting Transport & Security Standards Workgroup October 22, 2014.
E-Science Security Roadmap Grid Security Task Force From original presentation by Howard Chivers, University of York Brief content:  Seek feedback on.
OASIS ebXML Registry Standard Open Forum 2003 on Metadata Registries 10:30 – 11:15 January 20, 2003 Kathryn Breininger The Boeing Company Chair, OASIS.
Directory Services CS5493/7493. Directory Services Directory services represent a technological breakthrough by integrating into a single management tool:
1 Overview of the Hub Concept & Prototype for Secure Method of Information Exchange (SMIE) April 2013 Prepared by NZ & USA.
Information Sharing for Integrated Care A 5 Step Blueprint.
CSRP: Post-bind Submission (PbS) On-line Submission Portal High Level Design July 2015.
AMSA TO 4 Advanced Technology for Sensor Clouds 09 May 2012 Anabas Inc. Indiana University.
Interoperability Capability Roadmaps
NATE Blue Button Directory Detailed overview
Choosing the Discovery Model Martin Forsberg
RAIN Live Oak Data Provenance API
Model-View-Controller Patterns and Frameworks
Dashboard eHealth services: actual mockup
National Record Locator Service
Great North Care Record: Health Information Exchange (HIE) July 2019
Presentation transcript:

Patterns of Interoperability 1 16 th December 2014 Adam Hatherly (HSCIC) Inderjit Singh (NHS England)

Topics to Cover Information Sharing Patterns Supporting Capabilities Sharing across Boundaries Group Discussion

Introducing Patterns A “pattern” is a formal way of documenting a solution to a design problem in a particular field of expertise – this case sharing clinical information between systems. Patterns are not mutually exclusive: many real solutions will use more than one pattern. Solutions may evolve from simpler to more complex patterns over time. Some patterns will be better for specific sharing needs than others – there is no “one size fits all”. Some patterns will scale better to larger populations. Some patterns require additional capabilities or services to be in place. Which patterns can best support your local needs?

Single Shared Application In some local health communities, an existing centrally hosted clinical system is already in place and is used across a number of care settings. In this case, it is logical to make use of this shared system to share patient information across services in that community. Typically modular – modules tailored for each care-setting’s workflows Data is (typically) shared via a common shared data store. Clinical System Module A care setting A Module B care setting b Shared data store

Click-Through The Click-Through pattern can provide a simple mechanism for allowing a user to view the contents of another clinical system launched as a new “tab” or window from their own system. This is typically achieved using a simple web address (URL) to allow the remote application to be opened with a specific patient context. Clinical System A Clinical System B Click-through

Point-to-Point / Broadcast Document Source Document Consumer Send Document The Document Source sends a copy of the full document to each of the Document Consumers. The document source typically has prior knowledge of the Document Consumers who would like to receive a copy of the document. Document Source and Document Consumers now hold copies of the same information An extension of the point-to-point pattern is to broadcast documents to multiple recipients. Document Consumer N

Message Broker In order to simplify the process of connecting multiple systems to one-another a message broker (a.k.a. middleware / integration engine / TIE) may be used. This may provide message routing, transformations, etc. It may also allow more advanced orchestration, flow control, security or other features. Document Source Message Broker Send Document Document Consumer Send Document

Portal Clinician views a summary of information extracted from multiple clinical systems via the portal Integration between the portal and clinical systems managed on a case-by-case basis Typically provides a read-only view of data, but may allow some limited write-back capabilities Typically, no data is persisted in the portal Portal Clinical System A Get Patient Information Clinical System B Clinical System N

Store and Notify When a new or updated piece of information (or document) is created, the Document Source sends the document into a Document Repository. The Document Repository then sends out notifications to inform other parties that new or updated information is available. Document Consumers would then be able to store a “pointer” to the information, and add a flag to the appropriate patient record to indicate that the information is available. The Document Consumer may then retrieve the document electronically, either immediately or when it is required for display. Document Source Document Repository Document Consumer Put Document Notification Get Document Document Consumer Notification

Shared Repository In large organisations with multiple systems, a single shared repository is sometimes used to provide a central point for sharing information (typically documents). This generally performs two key roles: –Provides a “registry” or index of the documents that are held about each patient. –Provides a “repository” of the information / documents, and a means to add, update and delete Document Source Document Repository Document Consumer Put Document Get Document List Get Document

Registry Repository This is an evolution of the shared repository pattern in which the “registry” and “repository” components are separated. This allows a single registry to provide indexing and querying of information and documents held across multiple repositories. This can be implemented in a variety of ways – the repository can initiate the creation of the registry entry, or vice-versa, or it can be done directly by the Document Source. Document Source Document Repository Document Registry Document Consumer Register document Put DocumentGet Document Get Document List

Summary of Patterns Sys AB Data AB SrcCon SrcBrk Con Single Shared Application Click-Through Send point-to point / Broadcast Message Broker Src Rep Con Portal Store and Notify Shared Repository Registry Repository Ptl A B N Do cu m en t So ur ce Src RepCon D oc u m e nt S o ur ce SrcRep RegCon

Introducing Supporting Capabilities A “capability” in the context of these slides, is a piece of functionality which can support implementation of specific interoperability patterns. Capabilities listed here are “logical” – they may be separate services, but may also be built into other systems. Not all capabilities are necessarily required to successfully implement individual patterns, but they will generally aid wider scalability of the patterns. Some capabilities exist nationally, although their use may be limited to specific services (e.g. Spine messaging). Which capabilities should be provided nationally?

Connectivity System A System B N3 Broker / Middleware Using N3 to provide connectivity Internet Broker / Middleware

Identity System A System B Patient Identity (NHS Numbers) Organisation Directory User Directory Lookup Organisation Identity Lookup User Identity and Roles Patient Index Lookup Citizen Identity Citizen Identity (For Online Access) N3 Internet Broker / Middleware

Discovery System A System B System and Service Discovery Patient Information Discovery Organisation Directory User Directory Lookup Registry Query Patient Index Lookup Citizen Identity N3 Internet Endpoint Directory Broker / Middleware

TLS MA System A System B Security Public Key Infrastructure (Trust and Encryption) Organisation Directory User Directory Lookup SSORBAC Single Sign-On Role-Based Access Control Endpoint Directory Lookup Registry Query Patient Index Lookup Citizen Identity N3 Internet PKI Broker / Middleware

TLS MA System A System B Messaging Messaging Standards Messaging Reference Data Terminology, etc. SSORBAC Organisation Directory User Directory Lookup Endpoint Directory Lookup Registry Query Patient Index Lookup Citizen Identity N3 Internet PKI Broker / Middleware

TLS MA System A System B Notifications SSORBAC Organisation Directory User Directory Lookup Endpoint Directory Lookup Registry Query Patient Index Lookup Citizen Identity Reference Data Messaging Standards Subscription Service Manage Subscriptions and Topics Publish PKI Messaging N3 Internet Broker / Middleware Subscribe

TLS MA System A System B Information Governance Reference Data SSORBAC Organisation Directory User Directory Lookup Endpoint Directory Lookup Messaging Standards PKI DSA Repository Data Sharing Agreements Relationship Service Legitimate Relationships Consent Service Consent Preferences Registry Query Other IG Capabilities Sealed Envelopes Privacy Makings Subject Access Request Handling Patient Index Lookup Citizen Identity Subscription Service Query Messaging N3 Internet Broker / Middleware Publish Subscribe

Messaging TLS MA System A System B Summary Endpoint Directory Lookup Organisation Directory User Directory Lookup Reference Data SSORBAC Messaging Standards Registry Query Citizen Identity Patient Index Lookup DSA Repository Relationship Service Query Consent Service Query PKI Subscription Service N3 Internet Broker / Middleware Publish Subscribe

Sharing across Boundaries The boundaries of different health and social care organisations vary greatly, meaning there is rarely an obvious boundary that information stays within. Local Authority GP Ambulance Trust CCG Community Trust Acute Trust Hospice GP CCG GP Local Authority CCG GP

Scaling Patterns Any of the patterns described can support local sharing within an organisation, or between a small number of organisations There are likely to be many cases where wider sharing is required: –When a patient receives treatment in a neighbouring organisation. –When a patient accesses services from an ambulance trust or other organisation whose boundaries differ from the local sharing boundary. –When a patient fall ill away from home Some patterns are able to scale better to these wider sharing scenarios than others Local sharing is likely to include larger more detailed data about patients, with wider sharing focused on simpler “core” data-sets agreed across a wider community (or nationally).

The n*(n-1)/2 Problem (Spaghetti) The “single shared application” approach was the original approach of the National Programme for IT – which had limited success. Some of the patterns discussed rely on point-to-point integrations between pairs of systems. This includes: –Click-Through –Send point-to-point / Broadcast –Portal These patterns often suffer from the n*(n-1)/2 problem: –Every node has to be able to connect to every other node –As the number of nodes (n) grows, the number of links grows rapidly –This can rapidly become difficult to manage

Moving from “push” to “pull” Some patterns allow information to be stored and retrieved when required – e.g. : –Store and Notify –Shared Repository –Registry Repository This means the sender only needs to know about the repository it is sending information to. A system wanting to retrieve information may use a registry to locate the relevant repository – this may also be federated. Src Rep Con

National Capabilities National capabilities can allow point-to-point patterns to scape but providing the information to allow senders, so they can discover endpoints as required, and establish secure connections: Organisation Directory Endpoint Directory PKI Patient Index Document Source Document Consumer Send Document A consistent identity for patients is required to ensure the document consumer can link received document to the correct patient. In order to establish a connection to a document consumer, an endpoint directory may be used – which may be linked to an organisation directory allowing the document source to look up end-points for organisations they wish to send to. To establish secure connectivity between trusted systems, a PKI would generally be used to issue endpoint certificates

Region 1 Federated Capabilities If a national approach is defined, capabilities can be delivered nationally, but could also be delivered in a federated way. For example, we could consider a federated “registry” – with a simple national registry which can point to regional registries: This can only work if common standards are agreed up-front – otherwise regional capabilities can’t be linked together. D oc u m e nt S o ur ce SrcRep RegCon Region 2 D oc u m e nt S o ur ce SrcRep RegCon Region 3 Reg Con Query Retrieve Query

Building a Roadmap It is not realistic to wait for national standards and capabilities before beginning to address local sharing challenges. Equally, once national capabilities and standards are in place, it will take some time for these to be adopted by system suppliers. We therefore need to prioritise national capabilities and standards. Local organisations also need to build roadmaps that allow them to progressively migrate to using more mature patterns, and national capabilities when they are in place, and it makes sense to do so. For example, a locality may build a roadmap for sharing a specific type of information (e.g. care plans): Simple notification and click-through patterns to provide access to plans held in clinical systems Implement a shared repository and submit plans to it Link the repository with a region-wide registry to link up with other repositories across a wider region Link the region-wide registry into a national registry to allow records to be located nationally.

Discussion We would like to work with a small number of organisations who want to actively help in defining the roadmap and standards and capabilities required at a local and national level. We have resource to work with early adopters of key capabilities to support making it work through national standards / capabilities, and supporting implementation where we can. Which standards and capabilities should be prioritised? What patterns are you using / planning to use / interested in looking into? Of these, what has to be national, and what could be local and/or federated? Who would like to work with us on this?