RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 1 The RIDE Roadmap Methodology and the Current Progress Prof. Dr. Asuman Dogac, Turkey Dr. Jos Devlies, Belgium

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 2 Project Objectives  A roadmap project for interoperability of eHealth systems leading To recommendations for actions and To preparatory actions at the European level  Will prepare the ground for future actions as envisioned in The action plan of the eHealth Communication COM 356 by coordinating various efforts on eHealth interoperability in member states and the associated states  Focusing on “semantic operability”

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 3 RIDE Roadmap Phases

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 4 Work Package 2: state of the art & user requirements  WP2 collects information that is used later in the project to develop our vision, incl. goals and challenges (WP3) develop a roadmap from „here“ to „there“ (WP4)  WP2 collects information about where we are today and where we want to go to T2.1: State of the art (where are we today?) T2.2: Standardization (where are we today, what‘s coming out of standardization next?) T2.3: Requirements (where would we actually like to be?)

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 5 More on “User Requirements”  Identify real-world use cases that involve the use of eHealth systems, that are affected by semantic interoperability issues (which implies cross-enterprise communication!), and that touch the specific RIDE topics  From the use cases, derive user requirements and quality attributes for successful handling of the semantic interoperability issues

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 6 Deliverable D2.3.1 Content  One cannot discuss „user requirements for eHealth“ as such the term eHealth is too vague many different things subsumed under this term, with very different user requirements  Therefore, we have tried to split the area of eHealth into 36 different „application scenarios“ all of which are eHealth applications all of which are cross-enterprise in nature some overlap and some ambiguity is unavoidable  For each application scenario, user requirements are discussed

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 7 D2.3.1 Application Scenarios  Management and Exchange of Clinical Data Longitudinal Electronic Health Record Longitudinal Electronic Health Record – Images and Signals Electronic Booking Electronic Prescribing Documentation of Current Medication Episodic Medical Summary Collaborative Medical Summary Permanent Medical Summary Emergency Dataset Laboratory Results

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 8 D2.3.1 Application Scenarios  Telemedicine Applications Tele-Expertise Tele-Diagnosis Telecare Tele-Processing Tele-Surgery Tele-Teaching Tele-Consultation with the Patient Tele-Access to Medical Knowledge Prehospital Telemedicine for Mobile Intensive Care Units Applications for Nursing Services

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 9 D2.3.1 Application Scenarios  Applications for the Patient Personal Consumer Health Record Health Service Yellow Pages Patient Information and Training Patient Support Groups Copying Summaries and Billing Information to Patients  Public Health Applications Epidemiological Registries Public Health Surveillance

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 10 D2.3.1 Application Scenarios  Other Applications Reimbursement, Claim Attachments, Health Insurance Services Virtual Competence Centers Management of Clinical Trials Blood Bank/Transplant/Donor Registers Quality Management, Quality Assurance Cross-enterprise Workflow Managed Care Genomics and Proteomics Research E-Health Applications in Sociology

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 11 Scenario Structure  Homogeneous Structure for each Application Scenario: Motivation, Description of the Application (“what is this”?) Value Proposition (“what is the intended benefit?”) Actors (“which actors/roles participate to this scenario”) Use Case Diagrams (for the various use cases of the scenario) Interoperability Requirements of the scenario:  IT Infrastructure, Interfaces and e-Health Messaging Systems  Documentation: EHR, Patient Summaries, Emergency Datasets  Clinical Guidelines and Decision Support Systems  Semantic Interoperability, Classification Standards and Coding Schemes  Patient, Health Professional and Institution Identifiers  Security, Privacy and Legal Issues  Business Processes Potential for European Harmonization (“are there benefits for a European harmonization of implementations of this scenario?”) Related Projects and Standards (list of references)

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 12 Current Progress in WP2  Completed Deliverables: RIDE Deliverable D – Current eHealth interoperability practices in all of the EU countries and Canada and USA are surveyed RIDE Deliverable D – Current Standardization Activities in eHealth are surveyed RIDE Deliverable D2.3.1 – Requirements Analysis for the RIDE Roadmap  All the completed Deliverables are available from the project Web Site es.php?name=Deliverables es.php?name=Deliverables

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 13 Current Progress in WP3 (Goals and Challenges)  RIDE D – Goals and Challenges, Version 1  One of the goals: Establishing a Europe-wide Secure Network to Exchange Medical Summaries (EHR) across Member States European Healthcare Network proposed is the sum of the intercommunicating Member State Networks Minimum necessary specification is provided to make the framework as widely adoptable as possible The technologies that can be used to implement such a network includes:  CEN prEN 13606, or  IHE Profiles, or  HL7 messaging, or, …… All will be detailed as possible alternatives in the RIDE Roadmap specification Version 1

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 14 Functionalities of the European Healthcare Network  Transmission of complete requested Medical Summary to a remote clinician at another Member State,  Providing authorization services to determine appropriate clinician access to Medical Summaries, respecting patient’s privacy and patient’s consent,  Providing a technical infrastructure which will support secure communication (authentication of systems, message integrity, message confidentiality) between two healthcare provider systems even when they are located at different Member States,  Providing patient identity matching between Member States,  Providing document (Medical Summary) integrity, attestation for possible legal cases about medical errors,  Providing auditing systems to monitor and audit the medical events and transactions  To provide this Member State Networks need to provide some functionalities

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 15 Hospitals, Clinics,etc Individual Healthcar e Providers Regional Health Organization Healthcare Profession al Registry Healthcare Provider Registry Patient Identity Registry Locator Service Audit Services Professional Identity Service Provider Identity Service Member State Healthcare Network Interface Member State Healthcare Network European Healthcare Network Member State Healthcare Network European Healthcare Network

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 16 Current Progress in Others WPs  RIDE D – Vision for a Europe-wide eHealth Interoperability Infrastructure with special emphasis on semantic interoperability (An interim Version is available)  RIDE D – Goals and Challenges, Version 1 (An interim Version is available)  RIDE D – Gap Analysis, Version 1 (An interim Version is available)  RIDE D – RIDE Roadmap: An early version will be presented by Angelo Rossi Mori in this workshop

RIDE ConsortiumRIDE Workshop, December 8, 2006, Brussels 17 Thank you