Integrating the Healthcare EnterprisePatient Care Device Domain (IHE-PCD)
Authors : Jack Harrington, Ray Zambuto, Todd Cooper
September, 2005
What IHE Delivers
Agenda
Evolution of the IHE PCD Year 1 - Device Enterprise Communication Profile Year 2 – Survey and Proposed Profile Development
1
IHE Patient Care Device (PCD) – A New Domain
Electronic Health Record
Radiology
16 Integration Profiles
Cardiology
4 Integration Profiles
Laboratory
5 Integration Profiles
IHE IT Infrastructure
13 Integration Profiles
Patient Care Coordination
1 Integration Profile
Future Domains Pathology Eye Care
Patient Care Device
Oncology
2
IHE Patient Care Device (PCD)
HIMSS Survey IHE pre-2005 Annual Conference results:
• Survey of all IHE Users
• Over 50% of those surveyed said patient care devices should be the next area developed for IHE *
3
IHE 2005 Summer Survey Results
Highest priority devices for integration are Vital Signs Monitors, Blood Gas Analyzers (POC), and Infusion Pumps Highest priority departments are ICU, Emergency, OR/Anesthesia, and Lab (POC)
Highest technology priority is Enterprise Wide Sharing
Highest priority for clinical application is EHR or CIS integration followed by Improved Management and Decision Support
4
IHE PCD Formed in September 2005
In September, 2005, the PCD gathered 60 vendors, purchasers, providers, and regulators in Washington D.C. for 2 days to explore the value propositions, explore the scope and mission of the domain, and begin the process of use case development.
IHE Charter - The Patient Care Device Domain is concerned with Use Cases in which at least one actor is a regulated patient care device. The PCD coordinates with other IHE clinical specialty based domains such as medical imaging.
Current membership is 100+ and growing.2
5
IHE-PCD Domain Vision Statement
The IHE Patient Care Device Domain (IHE PCD) is the nexus for vendors and providers to jointly define and demonstrate unambiguous interoperability specifications, called profiles, which are based on industry standards, and which can be brought to market.
6
IHE-PCD Mission
The IHE Patient Care Device Domain will apply the proven, Use Case driven IHE processes to:
Deliver
the technical framework for the IHE-PCD domain profiles; Validate IHE-PCD profile implementations via Connectathons; and Demonstrate marketable solutions at public trade shows.
7
Agenda
Evolution of the IHE PCD Year 1 - Device Enterprise Communication Profile Year 2 – Survey and Proposed Profile Development
8
IHE Patient Care Devices (PCD)
One Patient – Many Devices
9
IHE Process
Product IHE Integration Statement
IHE Connect-a-thon Results
IHE Technical Framework Standards IHE IHE Integration Integration Profiles B Profile A
Product With IHE
Easy to Integrate Products
IHE Connect-a-thon
IHE Demonstration
User Site
RFP
10
IHE PCD Technical Framework Volume1 Integration Profiles
11
IHE PCD Technical Framework Volume 2 Transactions
12
Device Enterprise Communication (DEC) Profile - Year 1
Data O bse rvat io n C usto me r (DO C)
EHR, CDR, CDSS…
PC D-01: Co mmunicate viceData De
De vice Obse rvat io n Re po rte r (DO R)
Map Device Data to Consistent Syntax and Semantics
De vice
Mo nito r, Ventilato r, Infusio n Pump …
13
DEC Profile Mapping Model
ISO/IEEE 11073 Domain Information Model and Nomenclature mapped to HL7 Observation Report ISO/IEEE 11073 Data Types mapped to HL7 Data Types Mapping preserves measurement context for complex devices.
14
Measurement Context is Dynamic
15
IEEE 11073 Domain Information Model Defines Device Context
1
Medical Device System (MDS)
0..*
0 . . n
1
1 Virtual Medical Device (VMD) * 1 Channel (Chan) * 1 Metric *
Numeric
Enumeration
16
Mapping preserves measurement context
Medical Device System (MDS)
0..*
1
1 Virtual Medical Device (VMD) * 1 Channel (Chan) * 1 Metric *
Subject
Numeric
Containment Tree Hierarchical Level
Medical:
Enumeration
OBX-4
Examples
1 2 3
Virtual (Medical) Ordinal Virtual (Medical) Ordinal Virtual (Medical) Ordinal
1 1 1
1 1 2
1 2 1
1 2
3
Recommend that Ordinal value is unique among entire set
17
Example PCD-01 Message
MSH|^~\&|INFO_SRC_PHILIPS^ACDE48234567ABCD^EUI-64||||20061215153500||ORU^R01^ORU_R01|PMS116621490051| P|2.5|||NE|AL||8859/1 PID|||AB60001^^^Philips Medical^PI||Brooks^Albert^^^^^L||19610101|M PV1||I|UNIT_1^^Bed1 OBR|1|PMS116621490051^INFO_SRC_PHILIPS^ACDE48234567ABCD^EUI-64| PMS116621490051^INFO_SRC_PHILIPS^ACDE48234567ABCD^EUI-64| 69837^MDC_DEV_METER_PHYSIO_MULTI_PARAM_MDS^MDC|||20061215153500 OBX|1|ST|184326^MDC_ECG_STAT_ECT^MDC|1.5130.1.184326|""||||||F OBX|2|ST|184327^MDC_ECG_STAT_RHY^MDC|1.5130.1.184327|Sinus Rhythm||||||F OBX|3|NM|150456^MDC_PULS_OXIM_SAT_O2^MDC|1.5238.1.150456|99|262688^MDC_DIM_PERCENT^MDC|||||F OBX|4|NM|147842^MDC_ECG_HEART_RATE^MDC|1.5130.1.147842|81|264864^MDC_DIM_BEAT_PER_MIN^MDC|||||F OBX|5|NM|150037^MDC_PRESS_BLD_ART_ABP_SYS^MDC|1.5190.1.150036|126|266016^MDC_DIM_MMHG^MDC|||||F OBX|6|NM|150038^MDC_PRESS_BLD_ART_ABP_DIA^MDC|1.5190.1.150036|76|266016^MDC_DIM_MMHG^MDC|||||F OBX|7|NM|150039^MDC_PRESS_BLD_ART_ABP_MEAN^MDC|1.5190.1.150036|92|266016^MDC_DIM_MMHG^MDC|||||F OBX|8|NM|148065^MDC_ECG_V_P_C_CNT^MDC|1.5130.1.148065|0|264864^MDC_DIM_BEAT_PER_MIN^MDC|||||F OBX|9|NM|150045^MDC_PRESS_BLD_ART_PULM_SYS^MDC|1.5190.1.150044|26|266016^MDC_DIM_MMHG^MDC|||||F OBX|10|NM|150046^MDC_PRESS_BLD_ART_PULM_DIA^MDC|1.5190.1.150044|9|266016^MDC_DIM_MMHG^MDC|||||F OBX|11|NM|150047^MDC_PRESS_BLD_ART_PULM_MEAN^MDC|1.5190.1.150044|14|266016^MDC_DIM_MMHG^MDC|||||F OBX|12|NM|149538^MDC_PLETH_PULS_RATE^MDC|1.5238.1.149538|55|264864^MDC_DIM_BEAT_PER_MIN^MDC|||||F OBX|13|NM|150067^MDC_PRESS_BLD_ATR_LEFT_MEAN^MDC|1.5190.1.150064|4|266016^MDC_DIM_MMHG^MDC|||||F OBX|14|NM|150087^MDC_PRESS_BLD_VEN_CENT_MEAN^MDC|1.5190.1.150084|12|266016^MDC_DIM_MMHG^MDC|||||F
18
IHE PCD Connectathon Systems
ADT A04 Feed CT (Time) Feed MWB
DOC
LiveData OR Mgr
GE Centricity Periop CIS
Philips CareVue CIS
Validated Vitals export, Batch
Validated VS, Vent, Anesth & Med Export, max every 3 minutes
Unvalidated VS, Vent, Anesth. Data export every 1 minute
Unvalidated VS, Vent, Anesth. Data export every 1 minute
Validated VS, Vent, Anesth & Med Export, max every 5 minutes
Unvalidated Med (Infusion System) exported every 1 minute
DOR
Welch Allyn Connex CIS
VS Mon
Draeger Innovian CIS
Pt Mon, Vent, Anesthesia
GE Aware GW
Pt Mon, Vent, Anesthesia
Philips IIC GW
Pt Mon, Vent, Anesthesia
Philips CareVue CIS
Pt Mon, Vent, Anesthesia
B. Braun DoseTrac GW
Infusion Devices
19
Connectathon 2007: 430 engineers, 80+ organizations, 160+ systems and applications
20
THE HI MS S / I H E IN TER OP ER A BI LI TY SHO WC AS E Proudl y pre se nts
A H EARTFELT P ATIENT
Starr ing: IBM, Mysis, Epic, Medinotes, GE, Acuo, McKesson, Alert, Siemens, Eclipsys, CPSI, Draeger, Philips, LiveData, Allscripts, eClinicalWorks, NextGen, Capmed, GHNIHE, Dy namic, Agfa, Kodak, Quovadx, Axolotl, Initiate Systems, Quadramed, HXTI, WebChart, NDMA , Welch Allyn, B. Braun
…
Cardiologist Office Primary Care Physician Office XDS, XDR Medical Summary
And YOU
XDS Medical Summary HIS SWF, XDS-I Radiology XDS EDR
EKG
Cardiology
Home
Ambulatory Care XDM, XPHR
XDS Medical Summary
Acute DEC Care
ICU Act 3 Act 4
OR
Act 1 Act 2
DEC
21
HIMSS Showcase Scenario
Emergency Care Intensive Care Perioperative Care
Philips
Intellivue Clinical Information Portfolio
LiveData
OR-DashBoard
GE
Centricity® Periop Anesthesia
Welch Allyn
ConnexTM Data Management System
GE
Aware Gateway
Philips
Intellivue Information Center
B. Braun
DoseTracTM Infusion Management Software
Draeger
Innovian® Solution Suite
Vital Signs Monitor
Patient Monitor, Ventilator
Patient Monitor, Ventilator
Infusion Devices
Patient Monitor, Anesthesia Sys
22
Agenda
Evolution of the IHE PCD Year 1 - Device Enterprise Communication Profile Year 2 – Survey and Proposed Profile Development
23
Device Enterprise Communication Profile – Year 2
Data O bs ervation Cus tomer (DOC)
PCD-0 2 : Su b scrib e PCD Da ta to P CD-01 : Co mm un icatDev iceDat a e
Device Observation Filter (DOF)
P CD-01 : Co mm un icatDev iceDat a e
Device Obs ervation Reporter (DOR)
Device
24
Process for Year 2
2006 Survey Call for Short Proposals “Vetting” by Planning and Technical Committees Setting of Priorities
25
IHE-PCD Survey Summer-Fall 2006
Survey Managed by HIMSS Analytics Open Solicitation to HIMAA, ACCE, AdvaMed, Anesthesiologist Patient Safety Foundation, ECRI
171 Responses, (103 Users, 68 Vendors)
26
Respondent Demographics 171 Individual Responses
Purchaser / Materials Mgr. Regulator - Government or Other Hospital CIO Hospital Department Head User of Medical Devices / Caregiver Other Hospital Based I.T. Professional Other Hospital based Clinical Engineer Vendor 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
= Hospital Based
27
Vendor Position on IHE and Interoperability 68 Vendor Responses (Checking all that apply)
We are designing IHE co mpliance into o ur pro ducts as they emerge
We wo uld use IHE based so lutio ns if they were available
We have pro prietary co nnectivity so lutio ns
We do no t currently pro vide co nnectivity o ptio ns o utside o f o ur o wn pro ducts/systems
0
10
20
30
40
50
28
Vendor Demographics: Vendor Products 68 Vendor Responses
Women's Health Pharmacy Bone Density Scanner Ultrasound Laboratory
Dialysis
Defibrillators
Ventillators POC Lab Devices Infusion Devices Anesthesia Home Care Other Monitors - Vital Signs 0 5 10
Imaging - PACS ECG 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
15
20
25
30
29
Demographics: User Organization Types 77 Hospital Based Respondents*
Ot her For P r of i t Chai n 100-299 B ed Non P r of i t M uni ci pal or St at e I nst i ut i on Smal l er Non P r of i t 300+B ed Non P r of i t Uni ver si t y / T er t i ar y Car e
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
*26 of the 103 Non-Vendor Respondents do not work in hospitals
30
Relationship of Clinical Engineering and IT at Respondents’ Hospitals 77 Hospital Based Respondents*
CE i s Par t of IT CE and IT ar e separ ate - wor k cl osel y
Do not cr oss paths
CE i s Outsour ced
Do not know
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
*26 of the 103 Non-Vendor Respondents do not work in hospitals
31
Importance of Interoperability to Hospital Based Respondents
IHE compl i ance i s a r equi r ement f or pur chase i f i t i s avai l abl e Movi ng to compl i ance wi l l i ng to pay a pr emi um f or i nter oper abi l i ty
Pr ef er i nter oper abl e devi ces but not r equi r ed
Not a Pr i or i ty
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
32
Survey Question: With respect to Medical Devices, how important is it for the following devices to become integrated under the IHE?
Vital Signs Reporting Devices Physiological Waveform Monitors Ventilators Anesthesia Systems Infusion Pumps Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumps Dialysis (acute / chronic) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Percent of respondents that consider it important
= Vendors
= Users
33
Survey Question: Rate the importance to each department below in terms of the benefit from implementing IHE
ICU Surgery ED Pharmacy Anesthesia General Med/Surg Infusion Therapy OB/GYN Oncology Home Health 0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent of respondents that consider it important
= Vendors
= Users
34
Survey Question: Which clinical applications should IHE target?
Communicating physiologic measures to the EHR Real-time medical error detection / mitigation Medication Management Drug Administration Remote Viewing of patient information on PDA or Tablet devices Alarm Notification Management Clinical Decision Support Integration of live waveform information into Clinical Systems Remote viewing of waveforms Asset Utilization Management (Such as asset tracking, self-diagnosis / reporting systems) Image Guided Surgery Remote Consultation Home Health monitoring (Such as remote monitoring of key indicators, smart healthcare appliances, etc.) Wellness Monitoring (Such as non-clinical fitness activities)
0
= Vendors
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Percent of respondents that consider it important
= Users
35
Survey Question: Which technological areas are the most important for Patient Care Device integration?
Common Terminology / Data Structures / Protocols Cross-enterprise information sharing Security RF Wireless Quality of Service Management 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
= Vendors
= Users
36
IHE Profile Proposal (Short) Proposed Profile: Patient Identification Proposal Editor: Ray Zambuto Date: February 16, 2006 Version: 3 Domain: Patient Care Devices The Problem Manual entry of patient identification to Patient Care Devices is inefficient and subject to error. Patient Identification is perhaps the most essential component of any interoperability and communication process, particularly when PCD data is exported to the enterpri se. It is the basis for communication and control of any medical device, data analysis, reporting and record keeping. Automation of the entry of patient identification to Patient Care Devices has the potential for reducing errors, and is an essential component of any effort to increase safety, device and drug effectiveness, and efficiency. Key Use Case 1) Setup of PCD. The caregiver connects the patient to a Patient Care Device. The patient is physically identified by some institutionally unique means of identification such as a wrist band barcode, RFID or other means which may or may not be solely considered as author itative. The caregiver uses the information from the physical patient identification to obtain an authoritative electronic identifier which is associated with all data communicated from the PCD. The interaction may involve direct entry of the data to the device based on the physical identifier, a dialog between a PCD Manager and an authoritative source, and the use of more than one identifier. The end result is that data communicated from the PCD or PCD Manager contains an authoritative institutionally unique identifier. 2) Disconnect PCD. The caregiver removes the PCD causing the data from that device to no longer be communicated to the enterprise. Standards & Systems This profile is intended for identification of patients by patient monitors, infusion pumps, ventilators, point of care glucometers etc..> ISO/IEEE 11073, HL7, IHE-ITI Patient Administration, IHE-ITI PDQ Discussion Patient identification is a fundamental requirement for any electronic communication from or to a medical device. As such, the IHE with its broad scope, full range of stakeholders, and present or future involvement in the development of interoperability specificati ons for the vast number of types of medical devices and information technology is the ideal (and only) logical place for this universally needed specification.
37
Short Proposals Submitted for 2007
Version Profile File Name Patient ID RealTimeClinicalDataManagementStorageAndRetrieval CrossEnterpriseSharingofPatientCareDeviceData-Synchronous IHE-ECG-Workflow InfusionPumpIntegrationToBPOC PoCRealTimePnPDeviceIntegration No. 4.11 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Author/ Champion Name Ray Zambuto Jack Harrington Jack Harrington Jack Harrington Scott Zaffrin Todd Cooper
SmallDataElementExchange
HomeTelehealth AlarmInteroperability
1.1
1.1 1.0
Karen Witten, Beth Hurter
Vern Williams, Jim McCain Elliot Sloane, Tobey Clark
PCAInfusionSafety
PCD-02Query
1.0
1.0
Julian M. Goldman, MD
Paul Schluter
38
Short Proposals Vetting 2007 vs reconsideration in 2008
Version Profile File Name No. Author/ Champion Name
Patient ID
RealTimeClinicalDataManagementStorageAndRetrieval CrossEnterpriseSharingofPatientCareDeviceData-Synchronous IHE-ECG-Workflow InfusionPumpIntegrationToBPOC PoCRealTimePnPDeviceIntegration
4.11
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Ray Zambuto
Jack Harrington Jack Harrington Jack Harrington Scott Zaffrin Todd Cooper
SmallDataElementExchange
HomeTelehealth
1.1
1.1
Karen Witten, Beth Hurter
Vern Williams, Jim McCain
AlarmInteroperability PCAInfusionSafety
PCD-02Query
1.0 1.0
1.0
Elliot Sloane, Tobey Clark Julian M. Goldman, MD
Paul Schluter
39
Short Proposals Setting Priorities Polling Results of Planning Committee Three Proposals for 2007*
Author/ Champion
Profile File Name Name
Ray Zambuto Paul Schluter Todd Cooper Vern Williams, Jim McCain
1
2 3
Patient ID PCD-02Query PoCRealTimePnPDeviceIntegration
HomeTelehealth
SmallDataElementExchange PCAInfusionSafety
Karen Witten, Beth Hurter Julian M. Goldman, MD
* Based on resource limitations. Additional work can be added if author/champion demonstrates sufficient additional resources
40
Summary
From its inception in September 2005 the IHE PCD has grown to 100+ members representing vendors, purchasers, providers, and regulatory agencies. The Device Enterprise Communication (DEC) Framework for Trial Implementation published in August 2006. 6 Vendors and 8 systems/applications tested at Connectathon 2007
Process for developing Year 2 profiles is in progress.
41
Your Participation in IHE PCD is Encouraged
http://www.ihe.net/Technical_Framework/index.cfm PCD CoChairs:
Todd Cooper
- t.cooper@ieee.org Jack Harrington - jack.harrington@philips.com Ray Zambuto - rzambuto@techmed.com Other Contacts:
Manny Furst Elliott Sloane
- efurst@imp-tech.com - elliot.sloane@villanova.edu
42
September, 2005
What IHE Delivers
sammyc2007 4/16/2008 |
97 |
1 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 3/24/2008 |
125 |
6 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 4/15/2008 |
13 |
0 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 4/27/2008 |
173 |
0 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 3/24/2008 |
476 |
36 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 4/15/2008 |
16 |
0 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 3/24/2008 |
364 |
38 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 4/27/2008 |
129 |
2 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 3/24/2008 |
121 |
9 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 4/16/2008 |
44 |
0 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 3/24/2008 |
208 |
16 |
0 |
educational
sammyc2007 6/13/2008 |
309 |
4 |
0 |
legal
sammyc2007 6/13/2008 |
270 |
0 |
0 |
legal
sammyc2007 6/13/2008 |
329 |
4 |
0 |
legal
sammyc2007 6/13/2008 |
286 |
3 |
0 |
legal
sammyc2007 6/13/2008 |
546 |
2 |
0 |
legal
sammyc2007 6/13/2008 |
452 |
1 |
0 |
legal
sammyc2007 6/13/2008 |
266 |
0 |
0 |
legal
sammyc2007 6/13/2008 |
244 |
0 |
0 |
legal
sammyc2007 6/13/2008 |
368 |
0 |
0 |
legal
sammyc2007 6/13/2008 |
334 |
0 |
0 |
legal