View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Assessing the use of archetypes in ED Information System
Jon Patrick, Richard Ly
Centre for Health informatics Research & Development
Donna Truran, National Centre for Classification in Health
2
Project Description openEHR Basic Principles
Reference Model & Archetypes Model Archetypes
Data Model Archetype Data Dictionary (ADD) Demographics Model (DM) Generic Data Structure (GDS) Composition Package
Findings and Issues
Outline
3
Project Description
Problem: Emergency Department (ED) Information System lacks
interoperability, intelligent querying, effective use of terminology.
Medical environment is highly volatile.
Objective Investigating openEHR Architecture by developing a data
model Feasibility of using openEHR as a basis for an ED
Information System
4
Introducing openEHR
openEHR – open Electronic Health Record International organisation.
Goals: Interoperable health systems Life Long health records
5
openEHR idea 2 level frame work:
Reference Model (RM): Information model Semantics of storing and processing in system
Archetype Model (AM): Knowledge model Domain level structure and constraints placed on the RM
Why?
Separate knowledge (domain experts) and information (IT experts) models.
Interoperability
6
Archetype Archetypes are fundamental to openEHR.
Definition: “An archetype is a formal expression of a distinct,
domain level concept, expressed in the form of constraints on data whose instances conform to some RM”
1..1
Concept: “Blood Pressure”
Name: “systolic”Value: mm[Hg]
Name: “Core Data”
Name: “diastolic”Value: mm[Hg]
1..1
1..1
7
Methodology1. Archetype Data Dictionary
2. Demographics Model
3. Generic Data Model
Reference Model
Persistent Layer
9
Archetype Data Dictionary (ADD) ADD is a repository of archetypes
Contains the definition of archetypes.
Enables software layer to correctly instantiate EHR data by ensuring these instances adhere to defined archetypes.
10
Archetype Data Dictionary
ARCHETYPE ELEMENT
TERM BINDING
UNIThas
Is_binded_to
has
Id IdELEMENT.Id
Name
Id
11
Archetype Data Dictionary1. Archetype Name and Type
2. Archetype elements3. Constraints on attributes
12
Demographics Model (DM) openEHR assumes distributed model
Demographics model describes any party who has interaction with health care facility.
In an ED Information System, demographics model will record patient administrative data.
Similar to Patient Master Index (PMI) in EDIS
13
Demographics Model (DM)
PARTY
Id
ACTOR
PARTY.Id
ROLE
PARTY.Id
PerformsSpeaks
Identified_by
Contacted_by ADDRESS
Id
includes
Is_related_by
has
Is_described_by
ELEMENT
EntityId (FK)**
eType
LANGUAGE
Id
PARTYIDENTITY
Id
CAPABILITYId
CONTACT
Id
PARTYRELATIONSHIP
Id
CONTACT.Id
**Note: FK ‘EntityID’ is used to link the ACTOR, ROLE, PARTY_IDENTITY, ADDRESS and PARTY_RELATIONSHIP together. The PK ‘{EntityId,eType}’ distinguishes its uniqueness.
14
Generic Data Model (GDM)
A generic data structure flexible enough to model most, if not all logical structures in clinical records.
Why? It is the basis for storing instances of archetyped information in a relational database.
It must cater for: Instantaneous and interval measurements Historical and Time series events Structures: SINGLE, LIST, TREE, TABLE
15
Generic Data Model (GDM)
Made_up_of
EVENT.Id
HISTORY ITEM
STRUCTURE
Id
*** Note: FK ‘StructureID’ is from either ACTIVITY, EVENT CONTEXT or ENTRY tables.Candidate Key: {Structure Id, Type}
DATA STRUCTURE
Id
ITEM STRUCTURE
DATA STRUCTURE.Id
HISTORY
DATA STRUCTURE.Id
EVENT
Id
POINT EVENT
INTERVAL EVENT
EVENT.Id
Recorded_by Dedscribed_by HISTORY ITEM
Id
has
ELEMENT VALUE
ITEM.Id
HISTORY ELEMENT
VALUE
HISTORY ITEM.Id
ITEM
Id
Described_by has
17
Generic Data Structure1. Data identifier
3. Data Attributes
4. Attribute’s associated values
2. Generic Structure type
18
Findings and Issues
Performance – Retrieving, Storing, Querying Complexity Interoperability
Advantages and Disadvantages of the architecture.
19
Performance
Entity-Attribute-Value (E.A.V) modelling allows representation of generic data structures in a relational database.
However, it has performance trade offs. Insertion, retrieval, validation and querying can be
costly due to the amount of processing required to reconstruct information from generic tables.
20
Performance According to a performance study on E.A.V
modelling by Yale University;
“E.A.V modelling can be up to 3 to 5 times less efficient than its conventional counterpart (traditional modelling methods)”
“… differences in query efficiency became greater as database size increased”
Source: Ronald S. Chen et. al. (2000). ‘Exploring Performance Issues for a Clinical Database Organised Using an Entity Attribute Value Representation‘ Journal of the American Medical
Information Association. Pp 475-478
21
E.g. SQL Querying
What is a SQL statement to find:
The NMDS information relating to an ED visit from patient with health record = 1?
22
SELECT ehr.EHR_ID, ehr.PATIENT_ID, ehr.EHR_DATE_TIME_STAMP, c.COMPOSITION_COMPOSER, ec.HEALTH_CARE_FACILITY, ec.EVENT_CONTEXT_START_TIME,
ec.EVENT_CONTEXT_END_TIME, ds.DATA_STRUCTURE_TYPE, ds.DATA_STRUCTURE_NAME, its.ITEM_STRUCTURE_NAME, i.ITEM_NAME,
ev.ELEMENT_VALUE, ev.ELEMENT_UNITFROM
EHR AS ehr, COMPOSITION AS c, EVENT_CONTEXT AS ec, DATA_STRUCTURE AS ds, ITEM_STRUCTURE AS its, ITEM AS i, ELEMENT_VALUE AS evWHERE
ehr.EHR_ID = c.EHR_ID And c.COMPOSITION_ID = ec.EVENT_CONTEXT_ID And ec.EVENT_CONTEXT_ID = ds.STRUCTURE_ID And ds.DATA_STRUCTURE_TYPE= 'EVENT_CONTEXT' And ds.DATA_STRUCTURE_ID = its.ITEM_STRUCTURE_ID And its.ITEM_STRUCTURE_ID = i.ITEM_STRUCTURE_ID And i.ITEM_ID = ev.ELEMENT_VALUE_ID And ehr.EHR_ID = 1;
3. Filter joined tables for correct rows
1. Select all appropriate attributes
2. Join generic tables
23
Advantages of openEHR
Interoperability Use of shared repository of archetypes allows
information exchange between systems.
Generic data structures Adaptable to other health systems. Information model does not have to be altered if
domain knowledge changes.
Life long electronic health records
24
Disadvantages of openEHR Performance issues
Significant overhead in processing Recall E.A.V modelling 3 to 5 times less efficient than
conventional modelling.
Models are very generic Not intuitive conceptually. Complex attribute querying is less efficient and technically
more difficult.
Must get everyone to agree on a set of archetypes Archetype governance
25
Python Implementation (Brendan Cheng)Model Complexity
3 models
Reference Model, 5 packages, 90 classes
Archetype Model, 10 packages, 40 classes
Service Model
30% of first 2 models implemented in 3,000 lines
Content is strongly coupled and complex
Prescription archetype requires 30 classes
26
Implementation contd.
The interconnection means all classes must be implemented before testing can begin.
Sometimes there is no clear or detailed explanation (600 pages of specs spread across 10 files)
E.g. logical_paths (a_lang:String): Set<String> Def. Set of language-dependant paths extracted
from archetype. Paths obey the same syntax as physical_paths, but with node_ids replaced by their meanings from the ontology
27
Implementation contd.
More variables, arguments & functions in the Eiffel implementation than in the Specification
Answers from the Open EHR team are not always informative and indicate the documentation is not always in sync with specification:
“It has already been implemented in Java and C# actually, so we should be able to find out the approach used by those two groups”