veterinary informatics standards development and harmonization avma stakeholders meeting july, 2002...
TRANSCRIPT
Veterinary Informatics Standards Development and Harmonization
AVMA Stakeholders Meeting
July, 2002
Nashville, TN
Where do we need standards?
Generally… Communication between computer systems
Laboratory-to-clinic data transmission Laboratory-to-government agency, clinic-to-government
agency Central data repositories (all kinds)
Cancer registries Eye-disease registries
Electronic health certificates Portable electronic medical records “You talk - it types” medical record keeping
Where do we need standards?
Specifically… When we need to transmit or receive the correct
meaning of a concept. “Test for Equine Infectious Anemia” – which one?
When we need to transmit the specific “context” of a concept (Von Willebrand’s Disease).
This dog has “VWD” This dog’s littermate has “VWD” Dog has family history of “VWD”
SNOMED history / future
Reduce storage size Reduce Storage size No longer relevant
Categorize information
Multiple code-based hierarchies
Poly-hierarchical categorization
Pathology content “All Medicine” Veterinary content separate, then integrated
Integrated content
“Computability” for retrieval.
Natural language, artificial intelligence, decision support
SNOP
SNOMED
SNOVET
SNOMED III
SNOMED RT
SNOMED CT
1965 2000
Funding models
LOINC – NIH Grant from inceptionHL7 – Membership (dues) from 2200+ medical records vendors, hospitals, medical device suppliers, government organizationsSNOMED – College of American Pathologists (99%), AVMA (1%) SNOMED hopes to establish a government-
funded national license. Not clear if veterinary medicine will share in this support.
What standards are incomplete, underutilized or missing?
Vocabulary Laboratory tests Disorders / findings Procedures Anatomy, organisms, substances, etc.
Data structure
Messaging
Veterinary standards?
ReferenceLab A
ReferenceLab B
RegulatoryAgency A
RegulatoryAgency B
RegistryA
RegistryB
Practice System A Practice System B
Without standards: 13 vocabulary technologies, 13 transmission formats
With standards: 2 vocabulary technologies, 1 transmission format
Effects of “global” veterinary standards?
Reduce cost to system developers IF amortized across multiple projects Learn, manage, deploy a single technology for
each major standards component.
Reduce total cost of standards development.
Facilitate outcomes assessment, epidemiology, disease surveillance, etc.
Effects of global veterinary standards?
Increased cost to system developers Adhering to a global standard
Increased costs of cooperation?
Perceived loss of control, loss of specificity
Complaints about global standards
It’s too… Big Complicated Expensive
Is this work “expensive?”
Yes, but… We are currently losing opportunities:
Early discovery of new diseases Critical evaluation of outcomes of therapy, surgery Early alerts of disease outbreaks (reportable,
foreign) Ability to analyze and forecast trends
Is this work “expensive?”
IF the long-range goal is useful… Costs shift from individual organizations that would
build “mini” standards to a central organization. There may be cost savings to the profession as a whole.
The selected standards are more complex, complete and (we believe) more functional than those likely to be undertaken by individual organizations.
The cost of standards development may be somewhat higher to the profession as a whole.
Is this work “expensive?”
IF the long-range goal is useful… The selected standards adhere to design
specifications that have developed through hard experience in the medical profession.
Essential / desirable features have been documented. The selected standards represent extraordinary
functionality, produced and maintained at great cost to the medical profession.
We can leverage these standards for 10¢ / $1.00
Equine reportable disease system.
Equine breeds
Equine “occupations”
Brief list of reportable diseases
Lab tests that support disease list
Message structures clinic to regulatory authority Lab to regulatory authority
Equine medical record
Equine BreedsEquine lab testsAll applicable disorders, findings, proceduresMessage structures lab to clinic clinic to lab clinic to clinic
SNOMED-CT, HL-7,LOINC
Mixed practice
Subsets of standards
Equine practice
Equine disorders
Equine Reportable
WNVRabies
FMD
SNOMED1 LOINC1
HL72
Disease reporting system
1 = three independent subsets
2 = one subset of necessary messages
AVMA-adopted standards
HL-7 Messaging and medical record infrastructure
LOINC Lab test vocabulary
SNOMED General medical vocabulary
Questions for audience discussion:
Are veterinary-wide information standards worth pursuing?
What’s the appropriate time-frame?
What has been accomplished so far?
All three standards are (literally) open and committed to veterinary inclusion.
All three standards publicly recognize veterinary commitment and expertise.
What has been accomplished so far?
LOINC Extensive list of veterinary-specific concepts are
present in the nomenclature.
HL7 Standard now recognizes animals, animal
identification, animal groupings, owners, etc.
SNOMED Considerable veterinary content is present. Mechanisms for improving the functionality of
veterinary anatomy.
Can standards be implemented now?
Yes, but NOTHING about standards is, currently, “off the shelf.” LOINC – yes, veterinary labs can manage their
test lists in LOINC (with an investment in mapping).
HL7 – yes, although specific veterinary messages definitions must be derived…
SNOMED – yes but capturing the medical information currently requires considerable manual labor.
What has to be done to make standards “practical”
LOINC – consensus and mapping by labs, distribution to computer system vendors.
HL7 – develop a library of messages, maintain work-group to continue development.
SNOMED – make anatomy functional, make species functional, develop subsets for all conceivable purposes in a medical record system.
Manual Semi-Automatic Intuitive Staying current
Functionality
Inve
stm
ent
Current funding / costs…
SNOMED ½ time veterinarian ½ time full professor Travel to 7 - 8 working meetings per year
LOINC 1/6 time full professor Travel to 3 meetings per year
HL-7 1/6 time full professor Travel to 6 meetings per year
Current funding / costs…
SNOMED - $100,000+ per year
LOINC – $30,000 per year
HL-7 - $30,000 per year
AVMA covers 40%
UC Davis and Virginia-Tech currently cover almost 60%.
VMDB provided start-up funding for standards selection, development. Continues to support veterinary health information managers at veterinary schools.
Current funding…
NominalNOT
Optimal
What does AVMA offer?
Technical expertise…
Infrastructure providing connection to users, vendors, etc.
Established relationships with standards organizations…
Past and ongoing investment…
What does your group have to offer?
A market…Content expertise… Presence Definition
Subsetting expertise…Financial support…Willingness to understand…Contacts with foundations, granting agencies, etc.Subject-specific grant writing expertise.
Veterinary Information Standards Development Institute (VISDI)
Purpose: provide infrastructure and expertise necessary to develop and deploy veterinary information standards.
Approach: membership-based as an initial funding mechanism.
Activities: standards liaison, standards development, project consultation, subsetting and mapping services.
Veterinary Information Standards Development Institute (VISDI)
Resources: Human
Board of Directors (drawn from “membership”) Case & Wilcke Veterinarians Computer systems support personnel Business staff
Technical Computer (hardware, database, communications and internet
services) Office
Veterinary Information Standards Development Institute (VISDI)
Membership ABVS Colleges (ACVO, ACVIM, ACVS, etc.) Professional organizations (AVMA, AAEP, AAHA,
AASP, etc.) Data Repositories (VMDB, etc.) Government Organizations Veterinary Schools / Teaching hospitals Medical records vendors Private practices