Panelists:

  • Micky Tripathi, President & Chief Executive Officer, Massachusetts eHealth Collaborative (moderator)


  • Eric Heflin, Chief Technology Officer / Chief Information Officer, The Sequoia Project/Texas Health Services Authority (representing Sequoia)
  • Luis C. Maas III, MD, PhD, Chief Technology Officer, EMR Direct


  • David Kendrick, Chief Executive Officer, SHIEC, MyHealth Access Network


  • Chas Fuller, Director of Product Development, RelayHealth (now Change Healthcare) representing the CommonWell Health Alliance


  • Monica Farah-Stapleton, PhD, Chief Engineer, PM DHMSM, DoD/VA Interagency Program Office (IPO)


  • Tara Dragert, Director, Product Innovation, Clinical Interoperability Services, Surescripts, LLC


To participate in the discussion please post a comment below. Comments will be made anonymously, if you would like to be identified or contacted after the event is over, please include your name. Your registration email address can then be used to contact you after the event.

  • No labels

12 Comments

  1. Anonymous

    Question for Dr. Maas - Blockchain is making lot of buzz in this area. How can blockchain play a role to build trust between actors? 

  2. Anonymous

    Let's talk about successful interoperability!!  How many CCDs are transacted is mostly meaningless.  Unless/until we determine how best to (algorithmically) scan the flood of data fragments and make them digestible and immediately fit for purpose/use (e.g., primary use - immediate patient care, interventions and decision making), we are placing an enormous burden on the front-line clinicians and other users.  Currently they must sort through the morass to find those useful morsels, or not!  And most simply don't bother.

  3. Anonymous

    While the network folks love to talk about secure authentication, it must extend beyond technical actors (sending/receiving systems, networks, nodes, etc.) to the authentication of source health data/record content (data integrity) and authentication of human authors and verifiers of source content (accountability).

  4. Anonymous

    Interoperability is an end-to-end problem - starting at the point of health data/record origination to each ultimate point of access/use - not just point-to-point (sender to receiver).

  5. Anonymous

    Let's assess (achievement of) interoperability as a function of what went in (what was captured) vs. what came out (presented to the end user).

  6. Anonymous

    Question for David Kendrick. The premise for any meaningful interoperability is that it is at the point of care. So how does SHIEC achieve that if the integrations to three state and regional HIEs are not embedded in the EMR workflows?

    1. Anonymous

      In many cases the alert of the event or the ADT message an be embedded into workflows of the providers through several methods such as HL7 messages into the EHR, or secure Direct email to the provider (or staff), or secure file drop, or many other options.  

  7. Anonymous

    Dr Kendrick makes a good point about often not even knowing that he needs data on a patient he cares for and that the patient showed up outside his network. We need to alert so that the provider can then know to query for more data.  PCDH can help with both the push and also ensure the subsequent query actually returns data on the patient.  

  8. Anonymous

    Depending on the EHR, the data is moved directly into the EHR workflow.  For example, if the EHR is querying the HIE for data the HIE will pull all applicable records from the other HIEs of  the patient and them compile them into a single CCD that can be consumed by the EHR.  Likewise if the EHR can consume  the hospital notifications, then the HIE will push the information on per the EHR requirements.  The advantage of PCDH is that the local HIE knows what the provder's EHR can consume as well as the preferences of the provider for notifications and can ensure that the data meets those requirements.

  9. Anonymous

    Data flowing from CCDAs is a step in the right direction but context and data integrity need to be of paramount by importance.  To that end, what steps is the industry doing to prevent garbage-in-garbage-out?  For example avoiding duplicate entries or incorrect care data?

  10. Anonymous

    Remember that FHIR resources are but a new way to specify data containment (containers), not really a lot different than HL7 v2 or NCPDP messages or HL7 CDA/CCD documents.

  11. Anonymous

    A lot of claims were made regarding the nationwide coverage of the networks that presented.  Claims ranged as high as 200 million American's "covered" by the network and 1.4 million electronic end-points interconnected.  This is very impressive but what isn't unclear is how much inter-nodal exchange is actually happening.  A network with 100 nodes where each node is connected to every other node and data is flowing would be a strong indicator that what is currently in place is working very well and disrupting it would be ill advised.  If a user could reasonably expect that a message sent to one of the 1.4 million end points would not only be delivered but actually received and and internalized by the intended recipeint who uses some new information delivered in the transaction we'd have a good measure of what the real maturity of the nation's network coverage.

    If, however, for every 100 nodes in the network only groups of 3 and ten and sometimes 20 or thirty are actually connected the true network power of the network is not the same.

    Perhaps there is a Graph Theory metric that could be calculated to ascertain not only the apparent breadth of the various markets but the actual depth as well?