“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review April 30, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EDOS Workgroup Update July 16, 2013 Laboratory Orders Interface Initiative.
Advertisements

EDOS Workgroup Update Laboratory Orders Interface Initiative.
EDOS Workgroup Update Laboratory Orders Interface Initiative.
EDOS Workgroup Update June 18, 2013 Laboratory Orders Interface Initiative.
Electronic Submission of Medical Documentation (esMD) Face to Face Informational Session esMD Requirements, Priorities and Potential Workgroups – 2:00pm.
Electronic Submission of Medical Documentation (esMD) for Medicare FFS Presentation to HITSC Provenance Workgroup January 16, 2015.
S&I Framework Provider Directories Initiative esMD Work Group October 19, 2011.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review September 17, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs and Michael Dufel Jericho Systems Corporation.
ONC Standards and Interoperability Framework Use Case Simplification Key Steps Forward 3 November 2011.
S&I Data Provenance Initiative Presentation to the HITSC on Data Provenance September 10, 2014.
S&I Framework Doug Fridsma, MD, PhD Director, Office of Standards and Interoperability, ONC Fall 2011 Face-to-Face.
Candidate Standards Analysis by Transaction 0 SDC Solution Diagram.
Query Health Business Working Group Kick-Off September 8, 2011.
S New Security Developments in DICOM Lawrence Tarbox, Ph.D Chair, DICOM WG 14 (Security) Siemens Corporate Research.
Local Data Access User Story Sub Workgroup Thursday August 29 th, 2013.
“ 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.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review July 16, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Query Health Distributed Population Queries Implementation Group Meeting October 25, 2011.
Standards Analysis Summary vMR – Pros Designed for computability Compact Wire Format Aligned with HeD Efforts – Cons Limited Vendor Adoption thus far Represents.
“ 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.
Finalized Solution Plan July 1 st, Solution Planning Work Group Approach 1. Overlay standards currently in general use per transaction - focus on.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review April 23, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Data Segmentation for Privacy Agenda All-hands Workgroup Meeting May 9, 2012.
HIT Policy Committee Privacy & Security Workgroup Update Deven McGraw Center for Democracy & Technology Rachel Block Office of Health Information Technology.
Public Health Data Standards Consortium
“Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review April 16, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Consent Directive Management Adding patient privacy support to OpenHIE Derek Ritz, P.Eng., CPHIMS-CA Architecture Virtual Meeting, August 2015.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review August 27, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
EDOS Workgroup Update May 21, 2013 Laboratory Orders Interface Initiative.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review May 7, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Data Provenance Community Meeting August 21st, 2014.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review May 14, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Structured Data Capture (SDC) Pilots Template Insert the Name of Your Pilot / Organization Here MM/DD/YYYY.
Health eDecisions Use Case 2: CDS Guidance Service Strawman of Core Concepts Use Case 2 1.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review May 21, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Health Delivery Services May 29, Eastern Massachusetts Healthcare Initiative Policy Work Group Session 2 May 29, 2009.
Query Health Distributed Population Queries Implementation Group Meeting October 11, 2011.
Data Segmentation for Privacy November 16 th, 2011.
S&I Public Health Education Series: Data Provenance July 9th, 2014 Johnathan Coleman Initiative Coordinator – Data Provenance ONC/OCPO/OST (CTR)
HIT Policy Committee NHIN Workgroup HIE Trust Framework: HIE Trust Framework: Essential Components for Trust April 21, 2010 David Lansky, Chair Farzad.
The Patient Choice Project Project Kickoff December 14 th, 2015.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review June 25, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Electronic Submission of Medical Documentation (esMD)
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review June 4, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
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.
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.
Longitudinal Coordination of Care LTPAC SWG Monday, April 22, 2013.
“ 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.
Public Health Data Standards Consortium
Longitudinal Coordination of Care LCP SWG Thursday, May 23, 2013.
EDOS Workgroup Update Laboratory Orders Interface Initiative.
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.
Data Provenance All Hands Community Meeting February 26, 2015.
“ Jericho / UT Austin Pilot” Privacy with Dynamic Patient Review November 5, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation.
Automate Blue Button Initiative Pull Workgroup Meeting December 13, 2012.
Dynamic/Deferred Document Sharing (D3S) Profile for 2010 presented to the IT Infrastructure Technical Committee Karen Witting February 1, 2010.
Query Health Operations Workgroup Standards & Interoperability (S&I) Framework October 13, :00am – 12:00pm ET.
Structured Data Capture (SDC) FHIR SDC Pilots Template
Longitudinal Coordination of Care LCP SWG Thursday, April 25, 2013.
Laboratory Orders Interface Initiative
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 April 30, 2013 Presented by: David Staggs, JD, CISSP Jericho Systems Corporation

204/30/2013 Agenda Administrative issues Review and discussion of user stories Functional requirements in general First draft of functional requirements (Spreadsheet) –Basic flow from IG vs. J-UT –Functional requirements from IG vs. J-UT –System requirements from IG vs. J-UT Detailed functional requirements Questions POA&M first draft of functional requirements Call for new members

304/30/2013 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=

404/30/2013 Review of User Stories 1.Requestor makes request to a provider for patient data on eHealth Exchange 2.Provider receives request from eHealth Exchange for patient information, retrieves PCD from PCD repository and applies, returns status to PCD repository 3.PCD repository receives request for PCD from eHealth Exchange partner, returns PCD, accepts status from AC decision 4.PCD repository receives request for new account from healthcare consumer, possibly involving providers 5.PCD repository allows management of PCD from healthcare consumer 6.Healthcare consumer manages PCD from PCD repository account, views AC status reports

Functional Requirements Definition of a Functional Requirement –Address function (what) not implementation (how) –Does not reference other requirements –Contains all information required –Contains only one functional requirement Exercise: how are we changing IG use case 3 predicates in the proposed J-UT user stories? –Illustrates change from original –Allows mapping of existing UC 3 requirements 04/30/2013 5

Basic Flow of Use Case (UC) 3 Use Case Development and Functional Requirements for Interoperability (Implementation Guide) Basic Flow –Actor –Role –Event –Inputs –Outputs –Type Mapped to J-UT pilot for coverage test –Consider the Information Interchange type of requirements 04/30/2013 6

Functional Requirements of UC 3 Use Case Development and Functional Requirements for Interoperability (Implementation Guide) –Very broadly worded Functional requirements –Initiating System –Action of Initiating System –Information Interchange Requirement Name –Receiving System –Action of Receiving System Mapped to J-UT pilot for coverage test –Consider the Information Interchange type of requirements 04/30/2013 7

System Requirements UC 3 Use Case Development and Functional Requirements for Interoperability (Implementation Guide) System requirements –System –System Requirements Mapped to J-UT pilot for coverage test –New systems added Provider/ Healthcare Provider Organization Electronic System Consent Repository Account Holder's Electronic System 04/30/2013 8

Basic Flow of J-UT Step 1: review “J-UT Basic Flow” for concurrence Result of mapping to J-UT to UC3 Basic Flow –Use exchange format from previous pilots –Review format for request to consent directive, including specifying patient /account number and consent directive repository –Need to review format for returning consent directive, including specifying patient HIO identifier –Use exchange format from previous pilots, #2 –Need to create format for sending result of decision to consent directive repository, including detail appropriate for patient 04/30/2013 9

Basic Flow of J-UT (Pre/Post) Result of mapping to J-UT to UC3 Basic Flow Optional Preconditions –Review format for establishing authentication exchange? –Create format for exchange of Consent Repository Account Holder and HIO identifiers? Optional Post Conditions –Create format for exchange of Consent Repository location and Account Holder identifier to 2nd requestors associated with data exchanged with 1st requester (provenance)? 04/30/

Functional Requirements of J-UT Step 2: review “J-UT Functional Requirements” for concurrence Result of mapping to J-UT to UC3 functional requirements –Need to review format for request to consent directive, including specifying patient /account number and consent directive repository –Need to review format for returning consent directive, including specifying patient HIO identifier –Need to create format for sending result of decision to consent directive repository, including detail appropriate for patient –Need to chose format for sending result of decision to consent repository account holder's electronic system? 04/30/

System Requirements of J-UT 04/30/ Step 3: review “J-UT System Requirements” for concurrence Result of mapping to J-UT to UC3 system requirements –Do we need to create format for exchange of Consent Repository Account Holder and HIO identifiers? –Need to create format for sending result of decision to consent directive repository, including detail appropriate for patient –Need to choose format for sending result of decision to consent repository account holder's electronic system?

Detailed Functional Requirements Step 1: review “J-UT Basic Flow” for concurrence Step 2: review “J-UT Functional Requirements” for concurrence Step 3: review “J-UT System Requirements” for concurrence Step 4: review J-UT detailed functional requirements Assign priority to initial requirements –Requirements from coverage check –Requirements from 04/23/2013 teleconference –Requirements from previous pilots –Additional sources of requirements (future work) E.g. HL7 Implementation Guide for CDA® Release 2: Privacy Consent Directives, Release 1 04/30/

1404/30/2013 Questions? For example: Can we add new functional requirements? Can we suggest new sources of functional requirements? (no standards yet)

15 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 gaps or extensions required in standards Create XDS.b repository holding PCD Stand up information holders and requestors Identify remaining pieces Document and update IG with results of our experience 04/30/2013

16 Call for Pilot Team Members 04/30/2013 NameRoleOrganization David StaggsParticipantJericho Systems Corporation Michael FieldParticipantUT Austin HIT Lab

1704/30/2013 DS4P References Use Case: ases ases Implementation Guide: nsensus nsensus Pilots Wiki Page: +Pilots+Sub-Workgroup +Pilots+Sub-Workgroup

1804/30/2013 Backup Slides

1904/30/2013 Expected Data Flow Patient’s Provider Patient PCD Repository 2 nd Requestor Requestor   B ,  = Clinical data A,B = PCD data = reporting

2004/30/2013 Scope of the Pilot 1. Define the exchange of HL7 CDA-compliant PCD between a PCD repository and a provider evaluating 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.

2104/30/2013 Secondary Goals of the Pilot Exchange and enforce privacy metadata to ensure proper policy- based disclosure and redisclosure of PHI Accept and display reports from information owners on access control decisions for requests for the patient’s PHI Create a token passing scheme that facilitates secondary use reporting Demonstrate dynamic reporting of access to a patient’s PHI and their ability to change their PCD using their PCD central repository

2204/30/2013 Available Roles Holder of PHI that is participating on the eHealth Exchange –Accepts eHealth Exchange compliant request –Retrieves PCD and reports result of request –Synthetic Patient Data is Available Requester of PHI that is participating on the eHealth Exchange –Makes eHealth Exchange compliant request Repository holding subject’s Patient Consent Directive (PCD) –Transmits PCD to trusted eHealth Exchange requesters –Accepts policy created by subject of shared PHI –Passes HL7-compliant PCD –Displays result of the request transmitted from holder of PHI