Enhanced Semantic Interoperability by Profiling Health Informatics Standards

Summary

Objectives: Several standards applied to the healthcare domain support semantic inter-operability. These standards are far from being completely adopted in health information system development, however. The objective of this paper is to provide a method and suggest the necessary tooling for reusing standard health information models, by that way supporting the development of semantically interoperable systems and components.

Methods: The approach is based on the definition of UML Profiles. UML profiling is a formal modeling mechanism to specialize reference meta-models in such a way that it is possible to adapt those meta-models to specific platforms or domains. A health information model can be considered as such a meta-model.

Results: The first step of the introduced method identifies the standard health information models and tasks in the software development process in which healthcare information models can be reused. Then, the selected information model is formalized as a UML Profile. That Profile is finally applied to system models, annotating them with the semantics of the information model. The approach is supported on Eclipse-based UML modeling tools. The method is integrated into a comprehensive framework for health information systems development, and the feasibility of the approach is demonstrated in the analysis, design, and implementation of a public health surveillance system, reusing HL7 RIM and DIMs specifications.

Conclusions: The paper describes a method and the necessary tooling for reusing standard healthcare information models. UML offers several advantages such as tooling support, graphical notation, exchangeability, extensibility, semi-automatic code generation, etc. The approach presented is also applicable for harmonizing different standard specifications.

Keywords

Integrated health care systems - standards - semantic interoperability - profiles - reusability - UML - HL7 - Java components

• References

• 1 ISO/DTR 20514.. Health informatics – electronic health record: definition, scope and context. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2005
• 2 HL7 Inc.. (homepage on the Internet) (cited 2008 Sep 15). Available from: http://www.hl7.org
• 3 ISO 13606-1.. Health informatics – Electronic health record communication – Part 1: Reference model. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2008
• 4 Beale T. (ed.). The openEHR Archetype Model (AOM) version 1.0.1 (online) (cited 2008 Sep 15). Available from http://svn.openehr.org/specifica tion/TAGS/Release-1.0.1/publishing/index.html
• 5 HL7 Inc.. (homepage on the Internet). HL7 Development Framework (cited 2008 Dec 05). Available from: http://www.hl7.org/v3ballot/html/help/hdf hdf.htm
• 6 IHE (homepage on the Internet). (cited 2008 Sep 15). Available from: http://www.ihe.net
• 7 Object Management Group (OMG). UML 2.1.1 Superstructure Specification 2007
• 8 Blobel B. Educational challenge of health information systems’ interoperability. Methods Inf Med 2007; 46 (01) 52-56.
• 9 Lopez DM, Blobel B. A development framework for semantically interoperable health information systems. Int J Med Inform 2009; 78 (02) 83-103.
• 10 Decreto 3518 de 2006.. Sistema de Vigilancia en Salud Pública (monograph on the Internet). Bogotá: Ministerio de la Protección Social, República de Colombia; 1998. (Cited 2008 Sep 15). Available from: http://www.minproteccionsocial.gov.co
• 11 Lopez DM. Interoperable Architectures for Advanced Health Information Systems. PhD thesis, Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg; Germany: 2009
• 12 xmlmodeling.com (homepage on the Internet).Hypermodel Tool (cited 2008 Sep 15). Available form: http://www.xmlmodeling.com/hypermodel overview/
• 13 Walderhaug S, Mikalsen M, Hartvigsen G, Stav E, Aagedal J. Improving systems interoperability with model-driven software development for healthcare. Medinfo 2007; 12 Pt 1 122-126.
• 14 Jürjens J, Rumm R. Model-based security analysis of the German health card architecture. Methods Inf Med 2008; 47 (05) 409-416.
• 15 Carlson D, Singureanu I. Importing MIF to UML and Generating XDS. Veteran’s Administration Research Report. January 2007
• 16 Phillips J. et al. The caCORE Software Development Kit: Streamlining construction of interoperable biomedical information services. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2006; 6: 2.
• 17 Garde S, Knaup P, Hovenga E, Heard S. Towards semantic interoperability for electronic health records. Methods Inf Med 2007; 46 (03) 332-343.
• 18 Blobel B, Pharow P. A model driven approach for the German health telematics architectural framework and security infrastructure. Int J Med Inform 2007; 76 2–3 169-175.
• 19 Raghupathi W, Umar A. Exploring an MDA approach to health care information systems development. Int J Med Inform 2008; 77 (05) 305-301.
• 20 Mathe J, Werner J, Lee Y, Malin B, Ledeczi A. Model-based design of clinical information systems. Methods Inf Med. 2008; 47 (05) 399-408.
• 21 Mykkanen J, Porrasmaa J, Rannanheimo J, Korpela M. A process for specifying integration for multi-tier applications in healthcare. Int J Med Inform 2003; 70 2–3 173-182.
• 22 Winter A, Brigl B, Wendt T. Modeling Hospital Information Systems (Part 1): The Revised Three-layer Graph-based Meta Model 3LGM2. Methods Inf Med 2003; 42: 544-51.
• 23 Lopez DM, Blobel B. Connecting public health and clinical information systems by using a standardized methodology. Medinfo 2007; 12 Pt 1 132-136. (Best Student Paper Award).
• 24 Blobel B, Engel K, Pharow P. Semantic interoper-ability – HL7 Version 3 compared to advanced architecture standards. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45 (04) 343-353.