This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">

Difference between revisions of "201709 Provider Directories and Scheduling"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{subst::Template for FHIR Connectathon Track Proposals}}")
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
__NOTOC__
 +
===Background for Service Provider Directory===
 +
If considering implementing more than a simple client, extensive pre-connectathon work is recommended.
 +
 +
Specification Page(s):
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/organization.html Organization]
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/location.html Location]
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/practitioner.html Practitioner]
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/practitionerrole.html PractitionerRole]
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/endpoint.html EndPoint]
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/organization.html HealthcareService]
 +
 +
===Background For Scheduling===
 +
If creating a client application, this track should require minimal work in advance of the connectathon, though at least a bit of playing is recommended.  If creating a server, advanced preparation will be required, but this scenario should somewhat limit the effort involved.
 +
 +
Specification Page(s):
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/appointment.html Appointment]
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/appointmentresponse.html AppointmentResponse]
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/schedule.html Schedule]
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/slot.html Slot]
 +
[http://build.fhir.org/encounter.html Encounter]
  
−
[[Category:201709_FHIR_Connectathon_Track_Proposals|Sept 2017 Proposals]]
+
<!-- What will be the actions performed by participants? -->
−
__NOTOC__
+
The introduction section on the "usual" workflow can be found here:
−
=Track Name=
+
http://build.fhir.org/appointment.html#5.29.1.1
 +
 
 +
If you're trying to work out what statuses mean, and what would be expected, there is a summary at the bottom of that same page including a collection of examples
 +
http://build.fhir.org/appointment.html#typical
 +
Which tie together the 4 resources...
  
 
==Submitting WG/Project/Implementer Group==
 
==Submitting WG/Project/Implementer Group==
 
<!-- Who is asking for this track? -->
 
<!-- Who is asking for this track? -->
 +
Patient Administration/Implementer Communities
  
 
==Justification==
 
==Justification==
−
<!--Why is this an important track to include in the connectathon - include implementer need, impact on ballot, FMM readiness of the resources, etc. -->
+
A key challenge of healthcare is knowing about the resources available in the local, regional, and global healthcare networks. When a patient's care is transitioned from one setting to another, it's critical to know about the doctors, hospitals and clinics available to receive that patient. When a patient is travelling, it improves care when local healthcare facilities can retrieve the patient's up to date medical history  from a primary care provider.
 +
There are currently no widely adopted standards for exchanging this directory information. Currently, healthcare organizations use a variety of labor intensive processes to gather, normalize, de-duplicate and consume this data. They share custom flat files, scrape web pages, or pay 3rd parties to curate their practitioner data. Organizational data is often isolated in different networks and aren't easily shared.
 +
 
 +
This track will test how FHIR can be used to standardize the exchange of services/provider directory data. Defining how healthcare organizations can participate in a federated healthcare directory will promote interoperability and innovation.
 +
(And hopefully review the Provider Directory created by MiHN, and some mappings on the IHE HPD profile into FHIR)
 +
 
 +
This track will also lead into the creation of Appointments based on schedules found associated with the above services/providers, and also verify the workflow of proceeding from a booked appointment into the creation of the Encounter.
  
 
==Proposed Track Lead==
 
==Proposed Track Lead==
−
<!-- Name, email and Skype id of individual who will coordinate the track at the connectathon -->
+
Coordinator: [mailto:bpostlethwaite@healthconnex.com.au Brian Postlethwaite](sgtshultzpos)
 
See [[Connectathon_Track_Lead_Responsibilities]]
 
See [[Connectathon_Track_Lead_Responsibilities]]
  
 
==Expected participants==
 
==Expected participants==
 
<!-- List of the individuals and/or organizations that have indicated a desire to attend the connectathon and implement this track -->
 
<!-- List of the individuals and/or organizations that have indicated a desire to attend the connectathon and implement this track -->
 +
* Telstra Health (HealthConnex)
 +
<!-- SureScripts (uncertain) -->
 +
* Epic
 +
* Sequoia
 +
* Touchstone (AEGIS)
  
 
==Roles==
 
==Roles==
−
Please include information here regarding how much advance preparation will be required if creating a client and/or server.
 
 
<!-- Roles are sets of functionality (generally defined by a Conformance resource) that a single system can take on -->
 
<!-- Roles are sets of functionality (generally defined by a Conformance resource) that a single system can take on -->
−
===Role 1 Name===
+
===Service Provider Directory Server===
 +
A Server that has Service/Provider directory data in it
 +
(with associated schedule information)
 +
 
 +
===Provider Consumer application===
 +
An application that should be used by a provider to search for information to support creating a referral, and can book an appointment on a client's behalf
 +
 
 +
===Requester===
 
<!-- Provide a description of the capabilities this role will have within the connectathon -->
 
<!-- Provide a description of the capabilities this role will have within the connectathon -->
 +
A client that creates appointments (as either booked resources, or requests which need a placer to fill)
 +
 +
===Placer===
 +
<!-- Provide a description of the capabilities this role will have within the connectathon -->
 +
A placer is a client (or server) that processes appointment requests and allocates either participants, or times to these requests.
  
 
==Scenarios==
 
==Scenarios==
 
<!-- What will be the actions performed by participants? -->
 
<!-- What will be the actions performed by participants? -->
  
−
===Scenario Step 1 Name===
+
===1 Directory Search - Provider, Location, Organization===
−
:Action: <!--Who does what?  (Use the role names listed above when referring to the participants -->
+
:Action: Perform a search for Provider Directory related resource.
−
:Precondition: <!-- What setup is required prior to executing this step? -->
+
:See '''[http://argonautwiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=2016_11_Argonaut_Provider_Directory_Connectathon_2 Argonaut Provider Directory Connectathon]''' for 1-6 (which have example queries there also)
−
:Success Criteria: <!-- How will the participants know if the test was successful? -->
+
:Precondition: Directory FHIR Resources should already be on a FHIR server to query
−
:Bonus point: <!-- Any additional complexity to make the scenario more challenging -->
+
:Success Criteria: The desired resources were found
 +
:Bonus point: The criteria for the resources used several restrictions, possibly Specialty or Location
 +
 
 +
We would also like to test to see if extracts can work using paging over an open search, or history can work in these scenarios.
 +
 
 +
===2 Check Availability===
 +
:Action: Now that we have been able to search for a resource, check for an endpoint that references a location for schedule/slot information
 +
:Precondition: The Organization/Location/Practitioner or HealthcareService has an endpoint defined to a FHIR server where a Schedule/Slot can be queried
 +
:Success Criteria: The list of slots available for this connectathon weekend (or the week of the WGM) could be located
 +
:Bonus point: Were able to locate a slot that was not available
 +
 
 +
 
 +
===3 Create Appointment===
 +
:Action: Create an appointment resource and store on a server (Requester)
 +
This appointment should have a status of proposed or pending, and participant statuses of needs-action
 +
:Precondition: None
 +
:Success Criteria: Appointment passes validation against the Appointment schema and schematron, and has these statuses set
 +
:Bonus point: Define an Appointment with multiple participants
 +
:Bonus point: Define an appointment with a Location
 +
:Bonus point: Define an Appointment with varied Participant statuses
 +
:Bonus point: Define an Appointment against multiple slots
  
 
<!-- Provide a description of each task -->
 
<!-- Provide a description of each task -->
  
−
==TestScript(s)==
+
===4 Check Schedule===
−
<!-- Optional (for initial proposal): Provide links to the TestScript instance(s) that define the behavior to be tested.   
+
Test the ability to interrogate a schedule to book an appointment
−
These should be committed to SVN under trunk/connectathons/[connectathon]
+
:Action: Query a server for a schedule/slots
−
-->
+
:Action: Create an appointment against one of the slots returned
 +
:Action: Update Slot to mark Status
 +
:Precondition: A Server must have a some schedule and slot resources available to search
 +
:Success Criteria: The server is able to indicate that the client searched for the content, and created an appointment against one of the slots.
 +
:Bonus point: The slot was marked as booked
 +
 
 +
<!-- Provide a description of each task -->
 +
 
 +
===5 Process Appointment (Response)===
 +
:Action: Server recieves an AppointmentResponse resource, and updates the Appointment with details of the participants answer
 +
:Precondition: an appointment existed with a participant status of needs-action<!-- What setup is required prior to executing this step? -->
 +
:Success Criteria: only the participant defined in the appointmentresponse has its status updated as per the response
 +
:Bonus point: If all participants in the appointment are now accepted and the appointment was in pending or proposed then the appointment status can be changed to booked.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
===6 Cancel Appointment===
 +
:Action: Mark an appointment with a cancelled status <!--Who does what? (Use the role names listed above when referring to the participants -->
 +
:Precondition: an appointment was present on the server with a booked status <!-- What setup is required prior to executing this step? -->
 +
:Success Criteria: The history of the appointment will show that it had a booked status, then was changed to a cancelled status <!-- How will the participants know if the test was successful? -->
 +
:Bonus point: server reject a status change to cancelled if an encounter was created - (if business rules justify this)<!-- Any additional complexity to make the scenario more challenging -->
  
−
==Security and Privacy Considerations==
+
===7 Create Encounter===
−
<!-- Optional (for initial proposal): Address the topic of Privacy and Security.
+
:Action: Create an encounter to represent when a patient arrived at the facility for an appointment created earlier
−
* What Authentication/Authorization will be used (e.g. SMART on FHIR (OAuth), HEART (UMA/OAuth), IHE IUA (OAuth), generic OAuth, generic SAML, mutual-Auth-TLS), or explicitly indicate that it is out of scope and left to implementations.
+
:Precondition: An appointment existed that was ready to be turned into an encounter
−
* What Privacy Consent management will be used? When the Consent Resource is used, define how.
+
:Success Criteria: An encounter can be found on the server and can be retrieved through searching on the encounter's appointment search parameter
−
* What Audit Logging will be used? When the AuditEvent Resource is used, define expectations of what events will be logged and what each AuditEvent will contain.
+
:Bonus point: Can show a history for the encounter and move it through some of the various states
−
* How will Provenance be used? Provenance use should be mandated when data is imported from other systems, so as to track that source of that data. Provenance should be used when data is authored by unusual sources, such as the Patient themselves or devices.
 
−
* How will security-labels be used? Security-labels are meta tags used to classify the data into various confidentiality, sensitivity, and integrity classifications. These security-labels are then available for use and available for access control decisions.
 
−
I am happy to help: JohnMoehrke@gmail.com -- security co-chair
 
−
-->
 

Revision as of 21:08, 14 June 2017

Background for Service Provider Directory

If considering implementing more than a simple client, extensive pre-connectathon work is recommended.

Specification Page(s): 

Organization
Location
Practitioner
PractitionerRole
EndPoint
HealthcareService

Background For Scheduling

If creating a client application, this track should require minimal work in advance of the connectathon, though at least a bit of playing is recommended. If creating a server, advanced preparation will be required, but this scenario should somewhat limit the effort involved.

Specification Page(s): 

Appointment
AppointmentResponse
Schedule
Slot
Encounter

The introduction section on the "usual" workflow can be found here: http://build.fhir.org/appointment.html#5.29.1.1

If you're trying to work out what statuses mean, and what would be expected, there is a summary at the bottom of that same page including a collection of examples http://build.fhir.org/appointment.html#typical Which tie together the 4 resources...

Submitting WG/Project/Implementer Group

Patient Administration/Implementer Communities

Justification

A key challenge of healthcare is knowing about the resources available in the local, regional, and global healthcare networks. When a patient's care is transitioned from one setting to another, it's critical to know about the doctors, hospitals and clinics available to receive that patient. When a patient is travelling, it improves care when local healthcare facilities can retrieve the patient's up to date medical history from a primary care provider. There are currently no widely adopted standards for exchanging this directory information. Currently, healthcare organizations use a variety of labor intensive processes to gather, normalize, de-duplicate and consume this data. They share custom flat files, scrape web pages, or pay 3rd parties to curate their practitioner data. Organizational data is often isolated in different networks and aren't easily shared.

This track will test how FHIR can be used to standardize the exchange of services/provider directory data. Defining how healthcare organizations can participate in a federated healthcare directory will promote interoperability and innovation. (And hopefully review the Provider Directory created by MiHN, and some mappings on the IHE HPD profile into FHIR)

This track will also lead into the creation of Appointments based on schedules found associated with the above services/providers, and also verify the workflow of proceeding from a booked appointment into the creation of the Encounter.

Proposed Track Lead

Coordinator: Brian Postlethwaite(sgtshultzpos) See Connectathon_Track_Lead_Responsibilities

Expected participants

  • Telstra Health (HealthConnex)
  • Epic
  • Sequoia
  • Touchstone (AEGIS)

Roles

Service Provider Directory Server

A Server that has Service/Provider directory data in it (with associated schedule information)

Provider Consumer application

An application that should be used by a provider to search for information to support creating a referral, and can book an appointment on a client's behalf

Requester

A client that creates appointments (as either booked resources, or requests which need a placer to fill)

Placer

A placer is a client (or server) that processes appointment requests and allocates either participants, or times to these requests.

Scenarios

1 Directory Search - Provider, Location, Organization

Action: Perform a search for Provider Directory related resource.
See Argonaut Provider Directory Connectathon for 1-6 (which have example queries there also)
Precondition: Directory FHIR Resources should already be on a FHIR server to query
Success Criteria: The desired resources were found
Bonus point: The criteria for the resources used several restrictions, possibly Specialty or Location

We would also like to test to see if extracts can work using paging over an open search, or history can work in these scenarios.

2 Check Availability

Action: Now that we have been able to search for a resource, check for an endpoint that references a location for schedule/slot information
Precondition: The Organization/Location/Practitioner or HealthcareService has an endpoint defined to a FHIR server where a Schedule/Slot can be queried
Success Criteria: The list of slots available for this connectathon weekend (or the week of the WGM) could be located
Bonus point: Were able to locate a slot that was not available


3 Create Appointment

Action: Create an appointment resource and store on a server (Requester)

This appointment should have a status of proposed or pending, and participant statuses of needs-action

Precondition: None
Success Criteria: Appointment passes validation against the Appointment schema and schematron, and has these statuses set
Bonus point: Define an Appointment with multiple participants
Bonus point: Define an appointment with a Location
Bonus point: Define an Appointment with varied Participant statuses
Bonus point: Define an Appointment against multiple slots


4 Check Schedule

Test the ability to interrogate a schedule to book an appointment

Action: Query a server for a schedule/slots
Action: Create an appointment against one of the slots returned
Action: Update Slot to mark Status
Precondition: A Server must have a some schedule and slot resources available to search
Success Criteria: The server is able to indicate that the client searched for the content, and created an appointment against one of the slots.
Bonus point: The slot was marked as booked


5 Process Appointment (Response)

Action: Server recieves an AppointmentResponse resource, and updates the Appointment with details of the participants answer
Precondition: an appointment existed with a participant status of needs-action
Success Criteria: only the participant defined in the appointmentresponse has its status updated as per the response
Bonus point: If all participants in the appointment are now accepted and the appointment was in pending or proposed then the appointment status can be changed to booked.


6 Cancel Appointment

Action: Mark an appointment with a cancelled status
Precondition: an appointment was present on the server with a booked status
Success Criteria: The history of the appointment will show that it had a booked status, then was changed to a cancelled status
Bonus point: server reject a status change to cancelled if an encounter was created - (if business rules justify this)

7 Create Encounter

Action: Create an encounter to represent when a patient arrived at the facility for an appointment created earlier
Precondition: An appointment existed that was ready to be turned into an encounter
Success Criteria: An encounter can be found on the server and can be retrieved through searching on the encounter's appointment search parameter
Bonus point: Can show a history for the encounter and move it through some of the various states
Retrieved from "https://wiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=201709_Provider_Directories_and_Scheduling&oldid=140963"