Roadmap for Personal Health Standards and Interoperability

Document Sample
Roadmap for Personal Health Standards and Interoperability
Shared by: Kyle Peterson
Stats
views:
226
posted:
1/29/2009
language:
English
pages:
30
Roadmap for Personal Health

Standards and

Interoperability

Douglas P. Bogia, PhD

Standards Architect

Intel Corporation, Digital Health Standards Group

Chair - ISO/IEEE 11073 Personal Health Data Work Group

Member - Bluetooth Medical Devices Working Group

Member – Continua Healthcare Alliance Technical Working Group



September 27, 2006

Version 1.0

Agenda



Introduction

Personal Health Ecosystem

Benefits of Standards

Interoperability Strategy

Exciting Opportunities Ahead

Summary









Digital Health Group

2

Emerging Personal Health Device

Opportunity

HOME CARE Focus Area

100% Healthy,

Independent Living Community

Clinic

Chronic Doctor’s

Disease Management Office



RESIDENTIAL CARE

Assisted Living ACUTE CARE

QUALITY

of LIFE Specialty

Skilled Clinic

Nursing Facility

Community

Hospital



ICU





0%

$1 $10 $100 $1,000 $10,000

COST of CARE/DAY

Digital Health Group

3

Personal Health Ecosystem

Device Examples Aggregation/ Services

Computation Diet or

Medication Weight

Tracking Fitness

Scale

Service

Baby Blood-

Monitors pressure PC









Services Interface

Disease









Device Interface

Glucose Personal Management

Pedometer Meter Health Service

System

Pulse

Fitness Oximeter Healthcare

equipment Provider

Cell Service

Bed / Chair Spirometer Phone

Sensors Personal

Health

Implant PERS Record

Monitors Service

Consumer Set Top Box

Home Electronics Implant

control Monitoring

Service

Aggregator



Digital Health Group What are the benefits of standardizing these interfaces?

4

Standardization Benefits

Consumer/Provider Perspective

Enables consumers/providers to:

– Mix and match products to fulfill needs and usage models

– Select products based on

– Price

– Quality

– Brand preference

– Create best of breed solutions

– Preserve investment by allowing reuse of devices

– Reduce risk of obsolescence

– No single vendor can phase out support

– Automate manual tasks

– Use products more easily due to consistency



Digital Health Group

5

Standardization Benefits

Vendor/Integrator Perspective

Broader available market

Different vendors can tailor solutions to particular

usages

Simpler integration

– Easier to incorporate well known interfaces into a system

– Reduced need for shims

Lower costs

– Increased competitive supplier market results in a

decreased component cost

– Training cost for developers probably lower







Digital Health Group

6

Standards for the Personal Health

Ecosystem

To assist with standardization, we want to:

– Collaborate with vendors, providers, and customers

– Facilitate standard creation efforts

– Leverage the strengths of partners to solve a critical need





Many vendors and providers recognize the value of

standards









Digital Health Group

7

Conceptual Device

Interface





OSI

Pulse Blood

Device Specializations

Oximeter Pressure Glucose Pulse Weight

Thermo-











Layer 7

meter



Consistent Data/

Command Framework









Layers 1-6

Ethernet







Upcoming slides provide

overviews of these two

Digital Health Group * Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others.



8

ISO/IEEE 11073 Personal Health

Data Work Group Overview









9

ISO/IEEE 11073 Data Work Group -

History

 March ’06 – Intel engaged with IEEE to address

Personal Health Device Data standards

 May 11, ’06 - Proposed formation of a Personal

Health Device Data work group to ISO/IEEE 11073

general committee

 June 22, ’06 – General committee approval (23 yes,

0 no, 10 abstain, 3 abstain with comment)

 July 6, ’06 – Group began regular meetings

 Aug 4, ’06 – Nine Project Approval Requests

submitted to the new standards committee

 Targeting release in mid 2007





10

IEEE 11073 Data Work Group -

Participation

 Weekly conference calls (9 am Pacific on Thursdays)

 Voting rights depend on attendance

 See graph for weekly attendance (roughly 40%)

 Face to face meetings planned every 2 – 3 months

 ~18 participants in September F2F (roughly 25%)

 International involvement in the Work Group

Individual membership count

 62 members Participation Company count

Meeting attendance

70

 34 organizations 60

50

40

30

20

10

0

13 6









10 6









06

7/ 06







20 6



27 6

8/ 06







17 6



24 6



31 6



9/ 06

7/ 0 0



7/ 0 0









8/ 0 0



8/ 0 0



8/ 0 0

7/ 00









8/ 00









20

0









0









0

2









2

/2







/2



/2



/2







/2



/2



/2



/2

6/









3/









7/

29

6/









11

IEEE 11073 Data Work Group -

Current Activities

 Documenting Use Cases

 Requirement gathering has begun

 Evaluating Data Models for Reuse

 Currently in education phase

 Excellent alignment and coordination with

Bluetooth Medical Devices Work Group









12

Overview

Bluetooth Medical Devices WG - Quick History



January ‘06 - Study Group was approved and formed within

Bluetooth SIG



April ’06 – Completed Team Charter and Marketing

Requirements document



May ’06 - Medical Devices Work Group approved



May ’06 – Work Group approved working with ISO/IEEE 11073

for data development



Sept ’06 – Base transport selected









14

Bluetooth Medical Devices WG - Participation



Weekly conference calls (8 am Pacific on Thursdays)

Participation requires Bluetooth Promoter or Associate

membership

Voting rights depend on attendance



Face to face meetings planned every 2 – 3 months



International involvement in the Work Group

56 members

26 companies









15

Bluetooth Medical Devices WG - Progress Overview



Use Case collection is complete



Prioritized requirements list created



Initial profile document is in development



Working closely with ISO/IEEE 11073 Personal

Health Data Work Group



Planning for initial Prototype testing late this year



Targeting profile completion ~ Mid 2007



16

Standards are not equivalent to

Interoperability

Standards are necessary for interoperability,

but not sufficient

Standards vary by sponsoring organization.

– May allow multiple, incompatible implementations

– May contain ambiguity or too many options to

implement all possibilities

– May not require multiple implementations prior to

finalization

– May not require interoperability compliance testing









Digital Health Group

17

Continua Health Alliance - History





• Interoperability often solved by Industry

Alliances

• June 6, 2006 - Continua Health Alliance was

launched

• June 21, 2006 – European launch

• August 2, 2006 – Continua fitness summit

• August 8, 2006 – Use Case & Technical Work

Group face to face



18

Continua Health Alliance - Participation





• Work groups have conference calls weekly

• Face to face meetings every 3 months

• International involvement

– 42 companies and growing

– Over 100 members in technical work group









19

Continua Interoperability Efforts





• Use Cases

– First round of use cases collected

– Evaluated for technical barriers

– Prioritized to address critical use cases first

• Architecture and guidelines

– Initial architecture proposed and reviewed

– Support for end to end data flow

– First release anticipated in second half of 2007

• Interoperability test specifications

• Product interoperability certification



20

Additional Continua Focus Areas





• Continua enables the ecosystem with:

– Marketing and logo programs to assist

consumer purchase decisions

– FDA & EU regulation agency collaboration

– Addressing reimbursement costs









21

Exciting Opportunities Ahead



Integrating home automation information

Incorporating fitness devices

Standardization efforts

– Select appropriate standards for the interfaces described

– Fill gaps with new standards or profiles, if appropriate

Addressing technical challenges

– Multiple users

– Identification

– Privacy and security









Digital Health Group

22

Summary



Standardization and Interoperability are valuable to

– Consumers

– Product vendors

– Integrators

– Healthcare providers

Several coordinated efforts are underway

Broad participation is useful, so if you wish to join…









Digital Health Group

23

Invitation to Get Involved!

Continua Health Alliance

For more information, please visit: www.continuaalliance.org









ISO/IEEE 11073 Personal Health Data WG

For more information, please contact:



Douglas P. Bogia, PhD

Chair, ISO/IEEE 11073 Personal Health Data WG

Douglas.P.Bogia@intel.com









Bluetooth Medical Devices Working Group

For more information, please contact:

med-chair@bluetooth.org



(Requires Associate membership within Bluetooth SIG)









Digital Health Group * Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others.



24

Backup





Digital Health Group

25

Related Materials



http://216.55.183.13/mix06/NGW028_Wilson.ppt#

257,1,Open, De Jure, De Facto And Proprietary:

Standards and Microsoft

http://www.retailsystems.com/Index.cfm?PageNam

e=Ram

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/interopmigratio

n/ndam.mspx

http://www.openstandards.net/viewOSnet1C.jsp?s

howModuleName=businessCaseForOpenStandards

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_jure





Digital Health Group

26

Types of standards

Du jure standards

– Standard “based on law”

– A solution endorsed by a standards organization

– Often, but not always, developed as an open standard

De facto standards

– A standard used “in practice”

– A widely used solution, but not endorsed by a standards

organization

– Often, but not always, held in a proprietary fashion

Government standards

– Direct dictates in the form of laws

– Mandates via regulatory bodies carrying the force of law





Digital Health Group

27

Attributes of Standards

Openness

– Participation

– Who can contribute, create, and modify? Is there a fee?

– Availability

– Is access free or available at a reasonable cost?

– License structure

– Can it be implemented royalty free or with a reasonable and

non-discriminatory license?

International or Local

– Is the standard internationally recognized or valid in the

targeted market area?

Adoption rate

– Is the standard widely adopted or a “paper” standard?



Digital Health Group

28

Personal Health Data Standards Work



-00103 Technical Report - Overview



Device Specializations OSI

-10404 -10407 -10417 -10406 -10415 -10408 Phase II

Pulse Blood Glucose Pulse Weighing Thermo- …

Oximeter Pressure Scale meter



-10400 Common Framework









Layer 7

-20601 Optimized Exchange Protocol









Layers 1-6

Serial IrDA Bluetooth USB ZigBee

Digital Health Group

29

Migration to Standards

Ideal ecosystem

Interoperability



Interoperable Data and Messaging



Device Interface









Data Abstraction Interface









Services Interface

Blood-

pressure

Cuff

Gateway

Healthcare

Provider

Service

Proprietary Data and Messaging



PC

Blood-

pressure

Cuff









Adapted Interoperability from

Legacy or Proprietary



Digital Health Group

30


Share This Document


Related docs
Other docs by Kyle Peterson
by registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!