Comparing HL7 Messages to HL7 Documents
January 25th, 2008 by Mike Stockemer
(9 votes, average: 4.33 out of 5)
Loading ...Posted in CDA, Healthcare Integration, HL7 Messaging, HL7 Standards
For those who have been involved with the HL7 Standards over these past decade, there has been a slow evolution to expand the standards, change the approach (i.e., HL7 V2 to HL7 V3), and include clinical documentation. Healthcare integration initiatives are benefiting from the changes, but confusion rises as to the differences and the growing complexity.
One question that arises is: what is the difference between HL7 messages and HL7 documents? Outlined below is quick review of differences.
HL7 Messages: HL7 messaging is usually a real-time flow of patient and clinical information. They convey current information about a patient, including updates to admissions or discharges (ADT), orders for tests (ORM), and test results (ORU). The more current the data, the more relevant it is in the delivery of patient care. HL7 messaging impacts the ongoing process of delivering care by delivering the most current, updated patient information available.
HL7 Documents: HL7 documents are static - accurate given the point-in-time in which the information was captured. HL7 documents contain important information, but it is a snapshot. The documents are useful in providing relevant information in referrals to other physicians or healthcare organizations. Accordingly, it provides a starting point for the next step in patient care.
The differences in HL7 messages and HL7 documents can be summarized as active vs. passive information. HL7 messages are continuously delivered as status changes or new information is obtained. HL7 documents contain information at one specific point in time. Both are critical, however, especially when delivering connectivity or integration to Electronic Medical Record (EMR) applications in various healthcare provider offices.
How do the healthcare standards apply? In HL7 messaging, HL7 V2.X and HL7 V3 apply. In HL7 documents, HL7 Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) and ASTM Continuity of Care Record (CCR) standards apply. Both approaches deliver value to healthcare integration initiatives.
Last 5 posts by Mike Stockemer
- Comparing HL7 Messages to HL7 Documents - January 25th, 2008
- Monitoring and Alerting for HL7 Interfaces - October 22nd, 2007
- Variations of the HL7 ORU^R01 Message Format - September 10th, 2007
- Point-to-Point Interface vs. Interface Engine in Healthcare - August 23rd, 2007
- Getting Started with Your HL7 Interface - August 16th, 2007
Although this post seems to be mostly related to v2 messages and v3 documents, a more general discussion on whether a specific use case could be better supported by a message or a document can be found in this whitepaper: http://www.ringholm.de/docs/04200_en.htm
The whitepaper captures the opinions of a large part of the HL7 user community.
[…] - from Continuity of Care Record (CCR) to a faction-within-a faction, that is, HL7 V2, HL7 V3, HL7 Clinical Document Architecture (CDA), and HL7 Continuity of Care […]