PlugIT results: Methods and experiences for application integration and production Juha Mykkänen HIS R & D Unit, University of Kuopio PlugIT seminar 30 August 2004, Kuopio

In this presentation Challenges for application integration and production PlugIT application integration results (other than interfaces), some examples PlugIT application production and development results, some examples Experiences Where to find more information –marked with [ ]

Recognized challenges for application integration Heterogeneity on many levels: functionality, technology, architecture, standards, terminologies Software processes (research + standardization) do not consider existing applications, lack of implementations Integration solutions (industry) cheap and fast (once), expensive and laboursome (repeated), lack of systematic approach Different types of integration needs (usability, redundancy, interactivity, data transfer) Huge amount of local adaptation  Integration specification methods, integration models  Precise definition, standardization, conformance testing

Recognized challenges for application production Lack of reuse Need for architectural vision Migration from legacy systems New technologies give new possibilities  Component-based software-engineering Quality problems in applications  Software verification and validation, software testing Gather experiences, apply several different methods, technologies and tools

Goals of method portfolios (in 2002) How to Plug IT (integration) –integrate application easier, faster, more efficiently –define and test new approaches for integration –support open interfaces with examples, methods and practices –improve reuse of integration solutions –increase use of standards and ease their introduction How to Do IT (production) –efficient production of new applications  move towards component- and service-based development –support tool selections for application production and integration –support software development process (engineering, implementation, testing, introduction, maintenance) with methods and tools –identify and acknowledge integration goals in software production

Results: background studies etc. (integration AND production) Survey of current status of healthcare software development [15] Number of related studies –technologies [1] –tools [2] –testing methods and tools [various] –healthcare standards [various, 3, 16] Workshops –biannual seminar workshops (interface and method development, training) –software testing day –BEA Systems, Microsoft, Oracle, PICNIC workshops

Results: Application Integration

Results: Integration methods Supporting assets for integration work (and interfaces) of PlugIT project –multilateral collaboration for open integration specification [4] –integration specification process for integration projects in general [4] –specification guidelines and examples [4] –evaluation and selection of standards [3] –PlugIT interface conformance testing (PlugIT-leima) [5] –reference implementations [5] –dynamic model for integration of business applications [15] Available for integration solution specification and evaluation of integration solutions

Goals of application integration Process and workflow improvements, e.g. reduce overlapping actions (re-keying, maintenance, development) and data Right information, right place,right time –users / professionals + management (~EAI)  PlugIT focus –partner organizations, regional systems (~B2B) –customers, patients (~B2C) Cost savings Requirements for methods and solutions –reduce local tailoring, repeatability, reuse –low introduction threshold for real-world integration projects –must fit into various organizations, application environments, technologies –must find balance between: Local requirements + Standards + Existing systems –emphasis on collaboration and open solutions

Phases in integration project Requirements-driven Goal-oriented Multilateral Participants have also ”other duties” In PlugIT –open specifications (design) –local or product-specific implementation [adapted from: Saranummi, Tolppanen: Järjestelmäintegraatio-projektin vaiheet, 2003.] Project startup Funcional design Technical design Application finalization/ implementation of components Implementation of process changes, education Deployment, introduction Project conclusion Design phase Implementation phase Constant process improvement

Results: multilateral integration + specifications [4] [Mykkänen, Tikkanen, Rannanheimo, Eerola, Korpela. Specification Levels and Collaborative Definition for the Integration of Health Information Systems. Proceedings of Medical Informatics Europe 2003]. Three types of participants – solutions must benefit all Background, prioritization, design – real needs Specification of open and reusable integration solutions Benefits of implementation and introduction

Results: how to define integration solutions? [4] [Mykkänen, Porrasmaa, Rannanheimo, Korpela: A process for specifying integration for multi-tier applications in healthcare. Int J Med Inf 2003:70(2-3): ] Requirements + process improvement Solutions in the participating applications Healthcare-specific standards and models Technology standards, tool support Incremental specification, examples and guidelines for phases, aim at comprehensive and accurate solutions, but straightforward and repeatable method

Results: Conformance testing in PlugIT [5]

Results: Conformance testing experiences [5] Developed and used conformance testing method, test cases and test tool with Context management case Test suite (test cases, reports, tools) for conformance testing Specifications (and their conformance clauses) not enough for certification Implementations required to validate specifications –reference implementations provided by PlugIT: also testing services needed Testing gives valuable feedback –to software developers, quality improvement –to the specification process and standardization –interface testing is not certification, necessary but not sufficient for interoperability

Dynamic model for the integration in enterprise service architecture [15] Dynamic model to improve interoperability of business applications in service-based architecture Businesses produce outcome products in collaborative networks Business process of an enterprise or an organisation is seen as set of services Business process consists of result of several services Evolve software architecture with service paradigm to improve integration of business applications Goal is to provide an information system migration path for enterprises to achieve business goals and competitiveness Karhunen H: Dynaaminen malli liiketoimintasovellusten integroimiseksi. PlugIT-hankkeen selvityksiä ja raportteja 15.

Experiences from multilateral integration definition and implementation [4] 9 teams, 14 integration targets, different types of needs Specification and implementation of integration solutions –Knowledge of integration domain necessary in solution specification –Most urgent integration needs in first iterations (minimum level), versioning –Specification and implementation as separate “projects”, especially in open integration (implementation benefits, protection of competitive edge) –Controlled introduction of new solutions and technologies, migration for applications and organizations, reference implementations Standards and local solutions –Standards, technologies and tools have effects on many levels, support and resources needed to evaluate solutions –Top-down: healthcare-specific standards should be based on common technologies –Bottom-up: collection of solutions from existing applications requires, generalization (design conventions, harmonization, standardization process) –Evaluation and certification is necessary, external certification authority –Flexibility using open technologies and separation of data from functionality Multilateral integration projects –Participants from different disciplines, combination of expertise, common language –Management-level commitment – requirements, resources, timeframe –Research group as a neutral moderator in specification, “consultant” in implementation –Local and product-specific aspects (introduction, maintenance, ownership) separated from open specification [Mykkänen, Porrasmaa, Korpela, Häkkinen, Toivanen, Tuomainen, Häyrinen, Rannanheimo. Integration Models in Health Information Systems: Experiences from the PlugIT project. Medinfo 2004].

Results: Software development process

Results: software development process Technology and tool studies [1,2] Pakkanen: case study of software development process [13] –requirements engineering –component-based software –related to integration and testing in PlugIT Software testing methods and studies [various] –UML-based testing –testing component-based systems –how to test software –control of testing processes –testing tools, automatization –defect management

Pakkanen: case study of software development methods [13] Piloting many different methods for software design and development: Case: user id management (university) Applied component-based software design process (Cheesman&Daniels) Requirements: combination of three methods, input for design Design: defined service architecture, interfaces, components, database Implementation: implemented components using many tools and technologies (J2EE,.NET), database migration example, integration example Testing: system and acceptance testing Evaluated methods and technologies: main lesson: Adequate specifications before implementation provide savings in implementation, deployment and maintenance – understanding does not necessarily require laborious analysis

Pakkanen publication: Soveltamiskokemuksia ohjelmistotuotannon menetelmistä: vaatimusmäärittely, käyttöliittymäsuunnittelu, arkkitehtuurisuunnittelu, toteutus ja testaus. [13]

Pakkanen: implementation tools used [13] = user interface= application logic

Results: software testing [various] Identified goal: improve methods and practices for software quality assurance and testing UML-based testing Testing component-based systems How to test software Control of testing processes Testing tools, automatization Defect management Software inspections

Testing results examples Applied software inspection method with Pakkanen [13] –goal: to introduce and evaluate the inspection method –two inspection meetings were organized –results: increased quality of documentation: about 40 improvement suggestions/defects in one meeting Research of Test Process Management -Levels and methods of Software Testing -Sample test documents with test cases More examples tomorrow –component-based testing –testing experiences of a Hospital Information System

Summary These results are not separated from requirements (previously today) or integration solutions (next) Application integration and development are more and more related –1/3 of system acquisition costs deals with integration Requirements and testing phases in software development (and integration) need more support –methods, tools, relation to development Interdisciplinary research teams and multilateral collaboration to achieve concrete goals –new ideas, useful results –and new research topics..

References [1] Component and service technology families. Mykkänen, Sormunen, Karvinen, Tikkanen, Päiväniemi. Studies and reports of the PlugIT project 1. [2] Ohjelmistotuotannon välineselvitys - näkökulmia terveydenhuollon ohjelmistoyrityksen välinesalkun kokoamiseen. Karvinen, Riekkinen, Virkanen, Mykkänen, Sormunen, Porrasmaa, Tikkanen. PlugIT-hankkeen selvityksiä ja raportteja 2. [3] Standardien arviointi ja valinta terveydenhuollon sovellusintegraatiossa. Mykkänen, Häyrinen, Savolainen, Porrasmaa. PlugIT-hankkeen selvityksiä ja raportteja 3. [4] Terveydenhuollon sovellusintegraatioratkaisujen määrittely. Mykkänen, Porrasmaa, Rannanheimo, Tikkanen, Sormunen, Korpela, Häyrinen, Eerola, Häkkinen, Toivanen. PlugIT-hankkeen selvityksiä ja raportteja 4. [5] Avointen integrointiratkaisujen hyödyntäminen, toteuttaminen ja testaus. Mykkänen, Toroi, Karhunen, Virkanen, Mäki, Sormunen, Rannanheimo, Tuomainen. PlugIT-hankkeen selvityksiä ja raportteja 5.

References [13] Soveltamiskokemuksia ohjelmistotuotannon menetelmistä: vaatimusmäärittely, käyttöliittymäsuunnittelu, arkkitehtuurisuunnittelu, toteutus ja testaus. Riekkinen, Karvinen, Virkanen, Reponen, Ikävalko, Silvennoinen, Savolainen, Porrasmaa, Laitinen. PlugIT-hankkeen selvityksiä ja raportteja 13. [14] Ohjelmistotuotannon nykytilaselvitys kohderyhmänä terveydenhuollon ohjelmistoyritykset ja organisaatiot. Porali, Riekkinen, Pohjolainen, Mykkänen, Toroi, Kärkkäinen, Eerola. PlugIT-hankkeen selvityksiä ja raportteja 14. [15] Dynaaminen malli liiketoimintasovellusten integroimiseksi. Karhunen. PlugIT-hankkeen selvityksiä ja raportteja 15. [16] HIPAA-lainsäädäntö terveystietojen sähköisen käsittelyn näkökuömasta - katsaus USA:n terveyslakiin. Reponen. PlugIT-hankkeen selvityksiä ja raportteja 16. [various] See: