10/6/2015 3:12 PM Standards Communities Working Together A guide to why you should care May 2006 Ken Rubin EDS Co-Chair, OMG Healthcare Domain Task Force Co-Chair, HL7 Services-oriented Architecture SIG Ken Rubin EDS Co-Chair, OMG Healthcare Domain Task Force Co-Chair, HL7 Services-oriented Architecture SIG

Page 2 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Overview “The beauty of standards…” HL7, OMG, and HSSP Getting Involved Project Details

Page 3 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted “The beauty of Standards is that there are so many to choose from.” –Unknown

Page 4 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Standards wouldn’t be important, if… Patients always saw the same care providers Products remain static in the marketplace People remained geographically static Technologies wouldn’t change Care provision was uniformly consistent Business drivers were predictable (or even stable)

Page 5 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Back to Reality Care is given by the best available resource to do Organizations are constantly adapting to changing rules, technologies, and business drivers Heterogeneity is here for good. This applies to products, technologies, and workflow “Crossing” an institutional boundary means loss of control Patients are mobile and actively engaing in their own care The community ecosystem is always changing

Page 6 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Fundamental Truths about Standards Groups Getting a group to identify the need for a standard is pretty easy Achieving consensus on what that will be is hard Getting two (or more) groups to agree to work together is easy Getting groups to agree what needs to be done is very hard Getting two (or more) groups to actually do the work is nearly impossible Now, what do you think it takes for that product to be something useful ?

Page 7 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted HL7, OMG, and HSSP

Page 8 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted What is HL7? * Slide content courtesy of HL7, used with permission Health Level Seven (HL7) is an ANSI accredited standards organization (ASO), working in areas of: Electronic Data Exchange Healthcare Messaging Arden Syntax Visual / Context Integration (CCOW) Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) Electronic Health Record System (EHRS) Functional Model Service-oriented Architecture Members include providers, vendors and consultants, government & others. There are also now 30+ international affiliates. ISO’s Open Systems Interconnect (OSI) model: Application Level” – level 7 ISO’s Open Systems Interconnect (OSI) model: Application Level” – level 7

Page 9 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted What is OMG?* The Object Management Group--a 15-year-old not-for-profit Computer Industry Standards Consortium Home of UML, the Industry’s Modeling Standard and the Model Driven Architecture (MDA) Open Membership and Adoption Process –One-member, One-vote Specifications Available Free on our Website Vendors using OMG specifications may or may not be OMG members Over 500 members including Companies, Government Agencies, Universities * Slide content courtesy of OMG, used with permission

Page 10 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted So, what is HSSP? The “Healthcare Services Specification Project” Effort to create practical interface specifications for services important to health IT A joint sponsored activity by HL7 and OMG Current focus activities –Define a “Roadmap” for Services in Healthcare –Entity Identification Service (EIS) –Retreive, Locate, and Update Service (RLUS) –Common Terminology Service (CTS) –Decision Support Service (DSS) –Migration guidance for Web Services in HL7 (SOA4HL7) –Produce a methodology

Page 11 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Why Collaborate for HSSP? HL7 has a world-class functional community …but HL7’s strength is not service architecture HSSP project needed to leverage talent of a strong architectural community OMG has history and demonstrated leadership in service definition and SOA OMG provided the ability to interact with multiple vertical domains (pharma, manufacturing, etc.)

Page 12 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted The Challenges Prior negative history between the two organizations HL7 and OMG had very different membership composition Drastically different processes Differing intellectual property models between HL7 and OMG Potential for added complexity by involving additional organizational dependency

Page 13 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Attractions about the Collaboration Allowed project to leverage each group to its core strength “Whole” better than the sum of the parts: better specs! Opportunity to broaden marketplace impact Core tenets of OMG process ensure technical viability and marketplace availability (e.g., remove the shelfware stigma) Rapid adoption model: 18 months from concept to standard Methodology embraces multi-platform standards specifications

Page 14 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted The Result… HL7 brings… –Healthcare semantic interoperability expertise and credibility –Rich, extensive international community perspective –Diverse membership base OMG brings –distributed systems architecture and modeling excellence –Effective, efficient, rapid process –Premise that standards must be implemented Resulting in… –Specifications that address business needs –Software meeting those business needs –Standards that are in use in the marketplace

Page 15 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted The Opportunity Created... HSSP is open to any type of participant: –National, Federal, State, Local Governments –Payers, Providers, Consultants –Individual stakeholders The process facilitates each party participating to their maximum advantage –Discussions are “community of interest” focused Healthcare discussions in healthcare venue Technical discussions in technical venues Processes and results are open and available –All proceedings are published on web and listserv –Consistent multinational/multicultural participation “Guiding Principles” ensure we don’t lose sight of our objectives

Page 16 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Getting Involved

Page 17 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted What does involvement mean? The “return” is a byproduct of the investment Investment = time invested and travel “Typical” Metrics for Effective Participation: –¼ to ⅓ of a dedicated person (per standards area) –Adding tasks to overextended resources doesn’t work –Align standards work to their ‘day job’ –Send your “A” Team

Page 18 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted What can I expect for my investment? Standards will emerge that align with your business interests Cost-Avoidance resulting from community problem solving (and not trying things where others have tried and failed) “Networking” with some of the best in industry that have incredible depth and breadth of experience Improved organizational positioning due to added insight into the specifications (such as reduced design costs)

Page 19 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted What is the risk of doing nothing? This work is happening and will influence the marketplace Not participating means that your needs may or may not be met Worse, the result could be detrimental to your business objectives Organizations incur significant costs in “one-off” solutions (development and life cycle maintenance)

Page 20 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Project Details

Page 21 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted HSSP Project Organisation One overarching project with five subproject efforts Overall project –Meets at HL7 and OMG meetings –Status teleconferences biweekly –Owns responsibility for planning, marketing, etc. “Infrastructure” Subgroup –Developed and maintains methodology Subprojects –Determine their own deadlines, meeting schedules, etc. –May be hosted by other committees –Leverage project infrastructure and methodology

Page 22 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted 2006 HSSP Schedule (major milestones) Jan: Charter HL7 SOA SIG HL7UK Information Day Jul: HL7 Educational Summit Issue 4 ballots (3 + 1) Feb: Announce intention to ballot Aug: Ballot review Mar: Issue ballots for RLUS Sep: HL7 Boca Raton (Reconciliation); RLUS DSTU’s Adopted! OMG Anaheim (Issue RFPs) Apr: OMG Meeting St. Louis (RLUS RFP prep) Oct: Intent to ballot DSS, EIS, CTS2 May: HL7 San Antonio (RLUS ballot reconciliation) Nov: Issue DSS, CTS2 Ballots Jun: Announce intention to ballot (3 committee, 1 membership) OMG Boston (Issue Draft RFPs) Dec: OMG Washington (Review Initial RFP Submissions)

Page 23 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted HSSP Differentiators Active participation from three continents and 15+ organizations Significant cross-cutting community involvement Providers (Kaiser, VHA, Intermountain Health, Mayo) Vendors (CSW Group, IBM, PatientKeeper, Universata) Value-added Providers (MedicAlert, Ocean Informatics, Eclipse Foundation, etc.) Payers (Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Kaiser) Integrators (IBM, EDS) Governments (Veterans Health Administration, Canada Health Infoway, HealthConnect (Australia), SerAPI (Finland)) Managing differences between SDOs in terms of membership, intellectual property, and cost models

Page 24 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Where should I engage? Interest Area (including representative communities-of-interest) Venue Setting functional priorities; selecting priority services (Consumers, Providers, Vendors, Integrators) HL7 Defining behaviour; service capabilities (Consumers, Providers, Vendors) HL7 Defining functional conformance/compliance criteria (Consumers, Regulatory) HL7 Technical specification, interface specification, evaluation criteria (Consumers, Regulatory, Integrators) OMG Technical conformance/compliance criteria (Consumers, Regulatory, Integrators) OMG Architectural considerations; service interdependencies, SOA (Integrators, Vendors, Implementers) OMG Product development; technical standard creation; API definition (Vendors, Implementors) OMG

Page 25 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted References HL7 Website: OMG Website: Services Project Homepage

Page 26 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Thank you! Ken Rubin, EDS desk mobile

Page 27 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Supplemental Slides

Page 28 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Timeline of Key Events 1996: First OMG Healthcare Service Spec Adopted (PIDS?) 2003: HL7 ServicesBOF formed 2004 September: HL7, OMG Collaboration MOU 2005 January: Joint Project Chartered 2005 April: Project Kickoff 2006 March: Issue Ballot for Functional Specs 2006 Q4: Technical Specs RFP (planned) 2005 September: Methodology and MetaSpecs Baselined (planned) 2005 October: Interoperability Services Workshop & Conference

Page 29 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted How the priorities were determined… Based on an open selection process Brainstorming gave way to successive refinement and downselect Priorities determined by business need and resources Initial list included Terminology, Entity ID, Record Location, Record Retrieval Record Location and Retrieval activities subsequently merged Decision Support added later based upon community interest and resources

Page 30 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Why Participate in HSSP? Relentless focus on added business value for healthcare and project participants –focused on and driven by business-need –not an “academic exercise” striving for perfection –Acknowledgement that standards must be used to be useful –Emphasis on practical, achievable, & marketplace-relevant Without these standards, we’re building “service stovepipes” Aggressive timelines encourage progress Assembled community of top industry talent Project structure promotes targeted participation

Page 31 © 2006 HSSP Project, Reuse with attribution permitted Why participate in Standards? This is happening—the only way to influence the outcome is to engage Prime opportunity to directly engage with complementing stakeholder groups (provider-to- vendor, vendor-to-payer, SDO-to-SDO, etc) Benefit from “lessons learned” from others Reduce design burden Significant networking opportunities Establish/maintain market presence as thought-leader