Ferranti Jeffrey M, Musser R Clayton, Kawamoto Kensaku, Hammond W Ed
Division of Newborn Intensive Care, Department of Pediatrics, Duke University Medical Center, Box 3179, Durham, NC 27710-0001, USA.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006 May-Jun;13(3):245-52. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1963. Epub 2006 Feb 24.
Health care provides many opportunities in which the sharing of data between independent sites is highly desirable. Several standards are required to produce the functional and semantic interoperability necessary to support the exchange of such data: a common reference information model, a common set of data elements, a common terminology, common data structures, and a common transport standard. This paper addresses one component of that set of standards: the ability to create a document that supports the exchange of structured data components. Unfortunately, two different standards development organizations have produced similar standards for that purpose based on different information models: Health Level 7 (HL7)'s Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) and The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM International) Continuity of Care Record (CCR). The coexistence of both standards might require mapping from one standard to the other, which could be accompanied by a loss of information and functionality. This paper examines and compares the two standards, emphasizes the strengths and weaknesses of each, and proposes a strategy of harmonization to enhance future progress. While some of the authors are members of HL7 and/or ASTM International, the authors stress that the viewpoints represented in this paper are those of the authors and do not represent the official viewpoints of either HL7 or of ASTM International.
医疗保健提供了许多机会,在这些机会中,独立站点之间的数据共享非常必要。需要若干标准来实现支持此类数据交换所需的功能和语义互操作性:一个通用的参考信息模型、一组通用的数据元素、一种通用的术语、通用的数据结构以及一种通用的传输标准。本文讨论了该组标准中的一个组件:创建支持结构化数据组件交换的文档的能力。不幸的是,两个不同的标准开发组织基于不同的信息模型为此目的制定了类似的标准:卫生信息与管理系统学会(HL7)的临床文档架构(CDA)和美国材料与试验协会(ASTM国际)的连续护理记录(CCR)。这两种标准的共存可能需要在两者之间进行映射,而这可能会伴随着信息和功能的损失。本文对这两种标准进行了研究和比较,强调了各自的优缺点,并提出了一种协调策略以促进未来的发展。虽然部分作者是HL7和/或ASTM国际的成员,但作者们强调,本文所表达的观点是作者们的观点,并不代表HL7或ASTM国际的官方观点。