1 / 13

HL7 Quality Reporting Document Architecture DSTU

HL7 Quality Reporting Document Architecture DSTU. CDA Release 2, US Realm. Pele Yu, MD MS FAAP. HL7 September 2008 WGM (Vancouver, BC, Canada). Quality Reporting Document Architecture.

elyse
Download Presentation

HL7 Quality Reporting Document Architecture DSTU

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HL7 Quality Reporting Document Architecture DSTU CDA Release 2, US Realm Pele Yu, MD MS FAAP HL7 September 2008 WGM (Vancouver, BC, Canada)

  2. Quality Reporting Document Architecture To develop an electronic data standard for exchange of patient-level quality measurement data between healthcare information systems.

  3. Requestors of Quality Data QualityImprovement Organizations Accrediting Organizations, Medical Societies, The Alliance Payers Status Quo in Quality Measure Reporting Future of Quality Measure Reporting Feedback to clinicians Data Entry 100% manual process: data abstraction and data mining Prepare data for analysis Paper Medical Records Key-boarding or manual entry Point of Care clinicians Electronic Health Records Proprietary data formats QRDA Complete?

  4. Coordination with Related Efforts NQF, NCQA, AMA, APQ.... Measure definition Measure Development HITEP AHIC, HITSP Use Cases The Collaborative eMeasure specification Data Elements for Quality eMeasure Specification ok? ok? ok? HIMSS IHE: Multi-party choreography using HL7 messages, services feedback QRDA QRDA QRDA Aggregators, Requestors

  5. QRDA Project History • Phase 1: September 07 – January 08 • Proof of concept, use CDA for quality reporting • HAI reports for CDC (SDTC) • SDTC interest in CDA based non-clinical reporting documents – Structured Documents Architecture (SDA) • Domain Analysis • Requirements Analysis • Phase 2: May 2008 to present • DSTU Ballot • QRDA Implementation Guideline for 2 Pediatric Measures (CHCA) • QRDA Reporting Categories (MedAllies) • NHIN Trial Implementation demonstration project in NY • Summary patient record exchange using CDA

  6. QRDA Draft Standard 2008 • Category 1 – Patient-Level Reports • For DSTU Ballot • Category 2 – Summary Reports • Informational, for Comments • Category 3 – Calculated Reports • Informational, for Comments

  7. QRDA Category 1 Specifications • Header • Header • US Realm • Unique CDA template ID, LOINC code, and Title • Participants • Target  a single patient • Author  one or more entities (person, organization, device) • Informant  one reporting entity (person, organization) • Custodian  one custodian (person, organization) • Legal Authenticator  one legal authenticator (person, organization) • Body • One body • One or more sections, subsections (Measure Set, Measure) • Section • Measure Set Section (measure set name, version, OID, description) • Measure Section (measure name, version, OID, description) • Reporting Parameters Section (applicable reporting period) • Patient Data Section (Re-use of CCD and CDA, if applicable)

  8. QRDA Specifications – RIM Constructs • Header • Header • US Realm • Unique CDA template ID, LOINC code, and Title • Participants • Target  a single patient • Author  one or more entities (person, organization, device) • Informant  one reporting entity (person, organization) • Custodian  one custodian (person, organization) • Legal Authenticator  one legal authenticator (person, organization) • Body • One body • One or more sections, subsections (Measure Set, Measure) • Section • Measure Set Section (measure set name, version, OID, description) • Measure Section (measure name, version, OID, description) • Reporting Parameters Section (applicable reporting period) • Patient Data Section (Re-use of CCD and CDA, if applicable) QRDA Phase 1

  9. QRDA Deliverable • Implementation Guides for QRDA Category 1 Pediatric Measures • VON Neonatal Admission Hypothermia Measure • Outcome measure • CHCA Body Mass Index (BMI) • Process measure • Rationale • Few data points, well-defined • Pilot potential • Pediatric measures on NQF Roadmap • Relevant to project stakeholder (CHCA)

  10. Implication of DSTU • QRDA is feasible • RIM adaptable • CDA adaptable • Strong HL7 support • Industry awareness achieved • Ready for industry use • HITSP • IHE • Pilot efforts • Barriers for adoption and progress • Lack of continuity in effort • Lack of formal project management structure

  11. Next Steps • QRDA DSTU Ballot reconciliation next few months • Resolve issues without substantive change and publish DSTU, or • Resolve issues w/ substantive changes, then re-ballot • Implications • QRDA Phase 3 • Funding for future development to refine DSTU leading to Normative Standard • Category 1  DSTU • Category 2 and 3  include in next ballot cycle/s, if enough work is done (MedAllies, etc) • Create solid links with industry • Harmonize efforts (IHE, Collaborative, JCAHO, HEDIS, etc) • Engage vendors and MDOs • Pilot and demonstration projects • Vendors, hospitals, QIOs

More Related