Thursday, 3 March 2011
Saturday, 19 February 2011
Case for Standards
The idea that Healthcare continuum (using information systems) extends not just across the departments in a healthcare enterprise, but across healthcare enterprises in different care settings (necessitating information exchange) has accelerated the adoption of standards. The other fact that the best of breed systems for different departments are now the preferred option to a single monolithic system for a single enterprise (requiring information and data exchange within the organisation to function as single entity) has again brought the notion of standards to the forefront. Even for organisations which have single enterprise wide system, healthcare standards are relevant as they need to standardise the entry and capture of healthcare data.
In summary standards are needed for representing and exchanging information to
- Not compromise the safety of patients by preventing exchange of incorrect, insufficient and not understandable information , e.g. allergies , adverse reactions
- Provide access to data for patients from different providers in uniform fashion
- Allow aggregation of data for performance measurements and monitoring
- Provide access in disparate systems for a longitudinal view of the patients medical history
- Lower IT support costs by reducing need for data cleansing and data quality
Types of Standards
In general the implementation of standards fall in the following areas of categories
Voluntary Standards: These standards are usually developed in voluntary consensus by industry bodies or market groups associated with the industry. As these standards are developed by industry or someone associated with industry the standards are usually well regarded. The voluntary nature of standards will allow the implementers of standards to innovate on the base standards.
However the voluntary natures of standards ensure no enforcement mechanism, ambiguous interpretation and absence of mechanism for conflict resolution.
E.g. HL7V2.x standards developed by HL7 Inc which is a voluntary organisation
Regulatory Standards: These standards are usually legally binding contracts, laws or authority enforced regulations. Everyone must adhere to these standards and non-compliance is recognisable. There usually will be regulatory who ensure the compliance and assess the compliance.
However the regulatory standards encourage no innovation and sometimes do not cover all possible situations. Any conflicts on interpretation lead to long legal wrangles and the need for compliance assessment and inspection leads to large regulatory inspection teams
E.g. Usage of READ standards in UK NHS primary health care
Implementation and Conceptual Standards: Implementation standards are those have are dominant and wide usage and reinforce existing patterns. Conceptual standards are those which are developed to bring in new ways of thinking and working in the industry
E.g. Usage of XML, SOAP-WS
Product Standards: There are some standards which prescribe and recommend products or services. This can lead to better design of existing products and services or future products and services. This lead to a consistent and uniform feel to users of different products across the industry.
E.g. standards recommending common CUI (Clinical user interface)
Process Standards: A process is usually defined as a series of activities and logic that form a repeatable pattern. Process standards are those that focus on bringing efficiencies to the industry by developing repeatable processes.
E.g. Standard pathways for treating patients based on NICE guidelines
PS: Thanks to a friend who kept asking me for my next blog post and helping me revive my interest