“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review July 16, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Electronic Submission of Medical Documentation (esMD) Face to Face Informational Session esMD Requirements, Priorities and Potential Workgroups – 2:00pm.
Advertisements

“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review September 17, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs and Michael Dufel Jericho Systems Corporation.
Candidate Standards Analysis by Transaction 0 SDC Solution Diagram.
Electronic Submission of Medical Documentation (esMD) Face to Face Informational Session Charter Discussion – 9:30am – 10:00am October 18, 2011.
Query Health Business Working Group Kick-Off September 8, 2011.
Initial slides for Layered Service Architecture
Presentation to HL7 S&I Framework Data Segmentation for Privacy Initiative 9/25/2013 Johnathan Coleman, CISSP Initiative Coordinator, Data Segmentation.
S New Security Developments in DICOM Lawrence Tarbox, Ph.D Chair, DICOM WG 14 (Security) Siemens Corporate Research.
Public Health Tiger Team we will start the meeting 3 min after the hour DRAFT Project Charter May 6, 2014.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review June 18, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review July 9, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
1.View Description 2.Primary Presentation 3.Element Catalog Elements and Their Properties Relations and Their Properties Element Interfaces Element Behavior.
Cross-Enterprise User Assertion IHE Educational Workshop 2007 Cross-Enterprise User Assertion IHE Educational Workshop 2007 John F. Moehrke GE Healthcare.
Query Health Operations Workgroup HQMF & QRDA Query Format - Results Format February 9, :00am – 12:00am ET.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review April 9, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
S&I Public Health * We will start the meeting 3 min after the hour October 7 th, 2014.
OpenPASS Open Privacy, Access and Security Services “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review April 23, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Public Health Tiger Team we will start the meeting 3 min after the hour DRAFT Project Charter April 15, 2014.
Data Segmentation for Privacy Agenda All-hands Workgroup Meeting May 9, 2012.
“Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review April 16, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Dynamic Document Sharing Detailed Profile Proposal for 2010 presented to the IT Infrastructure Technical Committee Karen Witting November 10, 2009.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review August 27, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Key Issues of Interoperability in eHealth Asuman Dogac, Marco Eichelberg, Tuncay Namli, Ozgur Kilic, Gokce B. Laleci IST RIDE Project.
Structured Data Capture (SDC) UCR to Standards Crosswalk Analysis July 11, 2013.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review May 7, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review May 14, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Data Provenance Community Meeting November 6, 2014.
Health eDecisions Use Case 2: CDS Guidance Service Strawman of Core Concepts Use Case 2 1.
1 Healthcare Information Technology Standards Panel Care Delivery - IS01 Electronic Health Record (EHR) Laboratory Results Reporting July 6, 2007.
Cross-Enterprise User Authentication John F. Moehrke GE Healthcare IT Infrastructure Technical Committee.
Ongoing/Planned Activities for Week of 4/29 Final UCR Crosswalk due COB 4/30 Hold two working sessions to complete UCR Crosswalk on 4/30 Hold working session.
IG Development Working Session September 4 th, 2013.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review May 21, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Data Segmentation for Privacy November 16 th, 2011.
Data Access Framework All Hands Community Meeting April 23, 2014.
Structured Data Capture (SDC) Gap Mitigation July 18, 2013.
Data Segmentation for Privacy VA/SAMHSA/Mitre/Jericho/HIPAAT Pilot Sprint 7 Review Sprint #7 Technical Objectives – (2 week sprint ending August 24, 2012)
The Patient Choice Project Project Kickoff December 14 th, 2015.
Ongoing/Planned Activities for Week of 4/22 Initial feedback on UCR Crosswalk due COB 4/23 Hold working session to continue filling out the UCR Crosswalk.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review June 25, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review June 4, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Ongoing/Planned Activities for Week of 4/29 Final UCR Crosswalk due COB 4/30 Hold two working sessions to complete UCR Crosswalk on 4/30 Hold working session.
The Patient Choice Project Use Case Working Session January 8 th, 2016.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review May 28, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Dynamic/Deferred Document Sharing (D3S) Profile for 2010 presented to the IT Infrastructure Technical Committee Karen Witting February 1, 2010.
Public Health Reporting Initiative November 14, 2012 Dial in: ; #
Data Access Framework All Hands Community Meeting April 9, 2014.
Standards Analysis Summary vMR – Pros Designed for computability Compact Wire Format Aligned with HeD Efforts – Cons Limited Vendor Adoption thus far Represents.
Cross-Enterprise User Authentication Year 2 March 16, 2006 Cross-Enterprise User Authentication Year 2 March 16, 2006 John F. Moehrke GE Healthcare IT.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review August 13, 2013 Presented by: Michael Dufel and David Staggs Jericho Systems Corporation.
The Patient Choice Project Use Case Working Session February 12 th, 2016.
The Patient Choice Project Use Case Working Session February 5 th, 2016.
The Patient Choice Project Use Case Working Session January 29 th, 2016.
Data Access Framework All Hands Community Meeting April 16, 2014.
Longitudinal Coordination of Care LCP SWG Thursday, May 23, 2013.
PCOR Privacy and Security Research Scenario Initiative and Legal Analysis and Ethics Framework Development Welcome and Please Sign In »Please sign into.
What IHE Delivers Basic Patient Privacy Consents HIT-Standards – Privacy & Security Workgroup John Moehrke GE Healthcare.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review April 30, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Data Provenance All Hands Community Meeting February 19, 2015.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review June 11, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review November 5, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Data Access Framework All Hands Community Meeting April 16, 2014.
Dynamic/Deferred Document Sharing (D3S) Profile for 2010 presented to the IT Infrastructure Technical Committee Karen Witting February 1, 2010.
Data Provenance Tiger Team April 28 th, 2014 Johnathan Coleman Johnathan Coleman - Initiative Coordinator Bob Yencha Bob Yencha – Subject Matter Expert.
IT Infrastructure Plans
EHR System Function and Information Model (EHR-S FIM is based on EHR-S FM R2.0) AS.4.1 Manage Registry Communication aka S.1.1 in EHR-S FM R1.1
Basic Data Provenance April 22, 2019
US Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI): Data Provenance IG
Presentation transcript:

“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review July 16, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation

207/16/2013 Agenda Administrative issues Pilot scope Data flow diagram Test Cases Functional requirement cross-walk Potential Test Cases Conformance Effort Timeline Questions POA&M Meeting Schedule Announcement

307/16/2013 Pilot Administrivia This pilot is a community led pilot –Limited support provided by the ONC Apurva Dharia (ESAC) Jeanne Burton (Security Risk Solutions) Melissa Springer (HHS) In conjunction with DS4P bi-weekly return of an All Hands meeting Access to DS4P Wiki, teleconference, and calendar Meeting times: Tuesdays 11AM (ET) –Dial In: Access code: URL: d= d=

407/16/2013 Scope of the Pilot 1. Define the exchange of HL7 CDA-compliant PCD between a data custodian and a PCD repository that includes a report on the outcome of the request back to the healthcare consumer. 2. Additional goal: use of identifiers that can uniquely identify the healthcare consumer and PCD repository used to report the outcome of the request back to the healthcare consumer by healthcare consumer’s provider and subsequent EHR custodians. 3. Stretch goal: use of the PCD repository as a proxy allowing direct authentication by the healthcare consumer to the provider, subsequently reducing correlation errors. 4. Stretch goal: mask and/or redact the clinical document based on PCD choices retrieved from the PCD repository.

507/16/2013 Pilot Data Flow Custodian of Data being Provided at  Patient PCD Repository 2 nd Requestor 1 st Requestor   B ,  = Clinical data A,B = PCD data = audit record And Subsequent Custodian of Data being Provided at 

607/16/2013 Test Methodology (from 6/18)

J-UT Pilot Sequence Detail (1) 07/16/ Applying PCD / reporting during patient discovery

807/16/2013 Consent to Patient Discovery Test Case Title: –Consent to Patient Discovery Test Case Description: –Verify PCD is applied to patient discovery request Test Case Detail –Document custodian receives XCPD request –Document custodian identifies potential matching subjects –Document custodian sends data set A to PCD repository –PCD repository applies data set A to filter returned PCD –Document custodian sends response to XCPD request –Document custodian audit data set A to PCD repository –PCD repository stores audit data set A

J-UT Pilot Sequence Detail (2) 07/16/ Applying PCD / Reporting when retuning document list

1007/16/2013 Consent to Document Set Query Test Case Title: –Consent to Documents Query Test Case Description: –Verify PCD is applied to query for list of available documents Test Case Detail –Document custodian receives “retrieve document set” request –Document custodian identifies potential matching documents –Document custodian sends data set B to PCD repository –PCD repository applies data set B to filter returned PCD –Document custodian sends response to request –Document custodian audit data set B to PCD repository –PCD repository stores audit data set B

J-UT Pilot Sequence Diagram (3) 07/16/ Applying PCD / Reporting when retuning the clinical document

1207/16/2013 Consent to Retrieve Document Test Case Title: –Consent to Retrieve Document Test Case Description: –Verify PCD is applied to request for a clinical document Test Case Detail –Document custodian receives “retrieve document” request –Document custodian identifies matching document –Document custodian sends data set C to PCD repository –PCD repository applies data set C to filter returned PCD –Document custodian sends response to request –Document custodian audit data set C to PCD repository –PCD repository stores audit data set C

Functional Requirements Summary Precondition Functional Requirements –Document format for establishing authentication exchange * –Document format for exchange of repository account holder and HIO identifiers? (in proxy) * –Document format for clinical data request (NwHIN) Functional Requirements –Document format for requesting consent directive –Document format for returning consent directive –Document format for sending result of decision to consent directive repository Post-Condition Functional Requirements –Document format for exchange of repository location and account holder identifier to 2nd requestors associated with data 07/16/201313

1407/16/2013 Additional Possible Test Titles Possible Test Case Titles: –Establishing authentication exchange Use of profile to exchange PCD and document custodian identifiers after authenticating the patient to a portal –Exchange of repository location in clinical document Use of Identifiers in the CDA-r2 document sufficient to identify source of the PCD for certain blocks of data previously requested –Masking data in returned clinical documents based on the PCD Use of HCS labels to exchange content the subject does not want to disclose

J-UT Pilot Sequence Diagram (1) 07/16/

J-UT Pilot Sequence Diagram (2) 07/16/

1707/16/2013 Conformance Effort The J-UT will document changes to the IG based on our pilot Create and track conformance against IG (with our additions) –Conformance statements tested –Conformance statements used Add issues for discussion/resolution in the IG –Input from implementers (e.g. filtering PCD on demand) –Standards gaps Change, removal for some items in the IG –Discussion of pilot recommendations may be needed

07/16/2013 UT Student Contribution Students: John Bender and Adrian Tan Requirements for Request of a PCD (within PCD scope): –Sensitivity, POU, requester role, custodian metadata Fields of HL7 Security Observation Vocabulary: –Sensitivity, POU, requester role, custodian metadata Other data that can be included in exchange (not in PCD scope): –Identifying Service Location –Clinical Reports (ex. Behavioral health assessment) –Payment Type (ex. 42 CFR or Veteran's Health Benefits) –Obligations, Refrain Policies Response from PCD Repository: –1. Custodian of Data will receive PCD –2. Custodian of Data will be notified of denial

1907/16/2013 Pilot Timeline General Timeline, conditioned on agreement of stakeholders

20 Relevant Standards Standards from previous discussions: XCA and/or XDS.b (IHE) XUA (IHE) – IHE profile includes SAML (OASIS) XCPD (IHE) – not fully integrated into DS4P IG ATNA (IHE) in ISO format – returned access decision log CDA r2 (HL7) – for PCD location in released clinical document – for format of the directive (includes XACML) XACML (OASIS) – specifically to PCD NwHIN specification ODD (IHE) - On-Demand Documents (Trial) Supplement Note: PCD (HL7) – just updated last WGM, will re-ballot 07/16/2013

2107/16/2013 Questions? For example: How do we identify the test points and conformance in the test documentation?

22 Plan of Action Upon agreement of the participants the POA is: Identify the elements available from previous DS4P pilots Scope level of effort, decide on extended scenario Determine first draft of functional requirements Review standards available for returning information on requests Determine any gaps or extensions required in standards Stand up information holders and requestors Create XDS.b repository holding PCD Identify remaining pieces Document and update IG with results of our experience 07/16/2013

2307/16/2013 Meeting Announcement No meeting next week: Next meeting will be on July 30 Expected topics will be progress on the pilot demonstration and test documentation

2407/16/2013 Backup Slides

DS4P Standards Material Location of DS4P Standards Inventory: Location of DS4P Standards Mapping Issues: xlsx/ /Copy%20of%20DataMappingsIssues% xlsx General Standards Source List: %20Analysis.xlsx/ /General%20SI%20Framework%20Standards%20A nalysis.xlsx Standards Crosswalk Analysis monizationhttp://wiki.siframework.org/Data+Segmentation+for+Privacy+Standards+and+Har monization (at bottom of page, exportable) Implementation Guidance 20Guidance_consensus_v1_0_4.pdf/ /Data%20Segmentation%20Impl ementation%20Guidance_consensus_v1_0_4.pdf 07/16/201325

2607/16/2013 DS4P References Use Case: ases ases Implementation Guide: nsensus nsensus Pilots Wiki Page: +Pilots+Sub-Workgroup +Pilots+Sub-Workgroup

2707/16/2013 Pilot Data Flow Custodian of Data being Provided at  Patient PCD Repository 2 nd Requestor 1 st Requestor   B ,  = Clinical data A,B = PCD data = audit record And Subsequent Custodian of Data being Provided at 

2807/16/2013 Pilot Data Flow Custodian of Data being Provided at  Patient PCD Repository 2 nd Requestor 1 st Requestor Clinical exchange #  Clinical exchange #  B ,  = Clinical data A,B = PCD data = audit record And Subsequent Custodian of Data being Provided at  Fetch PCD Send audit

2907/16/2013 Pilot Data Flow (1) Custodian of Data being Provided at  Patient PCD Repository 2 nd Requestor 1 st Requestor  ,  = Clinical data A,B = PCD data = audit record

3007/16/2013 Pilot Data Flow (2) Custodian of Data being Provided at  Patient PCD Repository 2 nd Requestor 1 st Requestor  ,  = Clinical data A,B = PCD data = audit record

3107/16/2013 Pilot Data Flow (3) Custodian of Data being Provided at  Patient PCD Repository 2 nd Requestor 1 st Requestor  B ,  = Clinical data A,B = PCD data = audit record And Subsequent Custodian of Data being Provided at 

3207/16/2013 Pilot Data Flow (4) Custodian of Data being Provided at  Patient PCD Repository 2 nd Requestor 1 st Requestor  ,  = Clinical data A,B = PCD data = audit record And Subsequent Custodian of Data being Provided at 

3307/16/2013 Pilot Data Flow (5) Custodian of Data being Provided at  Patient PCD Repository 2 nd Requestor 1 st Requestor ,  = Clinical data A,B = PCD data = audit record And Subsequent Custodian of Data being Provided at 

3407/16/2013 Pilot Data Flow (updated) Custodian of Data being Provided at  Patient PCD Repository 2 nd Requestor 1 st Requestor   B ,  = Clinical data A,B = PCD data = audit record And Subsequent Custodian of Data being Provided at 