Healthcare Apps decision choice
-
Hello guys, We are into healthcare application development. I see there's a good amount of Standardization of the healthcare data. Like HL7 / FHIR etc. All these are needed for interops between different HC systems. The question is, Should our App DB schema that will be used internally should also adhere to FHIR standards? I see these options: 1. Store App Data in application domain schema - just plain JSON with our own attributes. Snappy format helps faster transfers between the Apps. 2. Store App Data in FHIR transformation-compatible format. (Make it easier for ETL later into FHIR std). Schema needs some effort. 3. Sore App Data in full FHIR format. This makes the json payloads heap up like a landslide. A lot of effort upfront and bloated transport all around. What would you recommend?
If you have a standard, use it. It means your apps can be more flexible, more generic - and can interface with other manufacturers apps, which is why we have standards in the first place!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
If you have a standard, use it. It means your apps can be more flexible, more generic - and can interface with other manufacturers apps, which is why we have standards in the first place!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Healthcare implementations are complex. If you notice, Azure FHIR architecture examples never insist we store our Application Data in FHIR standard. They say just go with what our App needs and don't worry about interop with external systems. When there's a need for interop, Azure FHIR adaptors can transform the app domain data into standard Healthcaredata. This has been the recommendation from different corners. But still want to hear from you guys here.
-
Hello guys, We are into healthcare application development. I see there's a good amount of Standardization of the healthcare data. Like HL7 / FHIR etc. All these are needed for interops between different HC systems. The question is, Should our App DB schema that will be used internally should also adhere to FHIR standards? I see these options: 1. Store App Data in application domain schema - just plain JSON with our own attributes. Snappy format helps faster transfers between the Apps. 2. Store App Data in FHIR transformation-compatible format. (Make it easier for ETL later into FHIR std). Schema needs some effort. 3. Sore App Data in full FHIR format. This makes the json payloads heap up like a landslide. A lot of effort upfront and bloated transport all around. What would you recommend?
Apps have a shelf life. One day, someone is going to need to migrate the data in your (presumably) massive vertical healthcare application to some other system. Use the standard, even if it's a lot of extra work up front. You'll recoup some of it on the back end, because you won't have to do things like document every nook and cranny rather than refer to existing standard docs for your data format. Gosh just reading your post feeds into my burnout. Ugh, not your fault, it's just, my days of coding monolithic enterprise applications is over.
Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
-
Apps have a shelf life. One day, someone is going to need to migrate the data in your (presumably) massive vertical healthcare application to some other system. Use the standard, even if it's a lot of extra work up front. You'll recoup some of it on the back end, because you won't have to do things like document every nook and cranny rather than refer to existing standard docs for your data format. Gosh just reading your post feeds into my burnout. Ugh, not your fault, it's just, my days of coding monolithic enterprise applications is over.
Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
-
dandy72 wrote:
you're just creating [standards]+1 xkcd: Standards[^]
FTFY
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
dandy72 wrote:
you're just creating [standards]+1 xkcd: Standards[^]
FTFY
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Hello guys, We are into healthcare application development. I see there's a good amount of Standardization of the healthcare data. Like HL7 / FHIR etc. All these are needed for interops between different HC systems. The question is, Should our App DB schema that will be used internally should also adhere to FHIR standards? I see these options: 1. Store App Data in application domain schema - just plain JSON with our own attributes. Snappy format helps faster transfers between the Apps. 2. Store App Data in FHIR transformation-compatible format. (Make it easier for ETL later into FHIR std). Schema needs some effort. 3. Sore App Data in full FHIR format. This makes the json payloads heap up like a landslide. A lot of effort upfront and bloated transport all around. What would you recommend?
You store it in the form that normalization dictates; taking into consideration access paths; which means buying off the DBA to forget theory for a minute.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
Hello guys, We are into healthcare application development. I see there's a good amount of Standardization of the healthcare data. Like HL7 / FHIR etc. All these are needed for interops between different HC systems. The question is, Should our App DB schema that will be used internally should also adhere to FHIR standards? I see these options: 1. Store App Data in application domain schema - just plain JSON with our own attributes. Snappy format helps faster transfers between the Apps. 2. Store App Data in FHIR transformation-compatible format. (Make it easier for ETL later into FHIR std). Schema needs some effort. 3. Sore App Data in full FHIR format. This makes the json payloads heap up like a landslide. A lot of effort upfront and bloated transport all around. What would you recommend?
-
I reject the premise of the question.
-
Hello guys, We are into healthcare application development. I see there's a good amount of Standardization of the healthcare data. Like HL7 / FHIR etc. All these are needed for interops between different HC systems. The question is, Should our App DB schema that will be used internally should also adhere to FHIR standards? I see these options: 1. Store App Data in application domain schema - just plain JSON with our own attributes. Snappy format helps faster transfers between the Apps. 2. Store App Data in FHIR transformation-compatible format. (Make it easier for ETL later into FHIR std). Schema needs some effort. 3. Sore App Data in full FHIR format. This makes the json payloads heap up like a landslide. A lot of effort upfront and bloated transport all around. What would you recommend?
Nand32 wrote:
All these are needed for interops between different HC systems....App DB schema
I guess you really mean something like 'data model' rather than 'database' which would be what I see when you say "DB".
Nand32 wrote:
What would you recommend?
That requires much more detail about the architecture than what you presented here. Given that there are different systems then who controls/owns those systems? That is important. But other than that transforming data between systems on communication pipelines is always a given. Even if was a good idea to use the same standard for all each system must still serialize/deserialize the binary into data. So the transform layer will always exists. And it depends on the systems on the pipe. It would seem really unlikely that you could create one template/definition to which every single system must conform when those systems must in fact be each doing something different. Not without adding unneeded complexity. What happens if you provide one standard to which 100 systems must adhere and yet a change is needed so just 2 of those systems can be updated? So ignoring all of that, if the existing external models can be easily broken down (important) to sub-models which mostly meet the communication needs of two systems, then you can use that between those two systems. But I suspect you will still need an envelope into which the sub-model is passed.
