Health Level Seven (HL7) and Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) are two widely used standards in the healthcare industry. They are used to enable the exchange of electronic health records (EHRs) between different healthcare providers and systems. In this article, we will explore HL7 and FHIR in detail and compare them.
What is HL7?
HL7 is a set of international standards for the exchange of electronic health information between different healthcare providers and systems. It was first developed in 1987 and has since undergone several revisions. HL7 provides a framework for the exchange, integration, sharing, and retrieval of electronic health information.
HL7 is organized into several standards, including HL7 v2.x, HL7 v3, and Clinical Document Architecture (CDA). HL7 v2.x is the most widely used standard and provides a framework for the exchange of clinical data between healthcare providers and systems. HL7 v3 is a newer standard that aims to provide a more comprehensive framework for the exchange of electronic health information. CDA is a standard for the exchange of clinical documents, such as discharge summaries and progress notes.
Read more about HL7 (Health Level Seven)
What is FHIR?
FHIR is a modern standard for the exchange of electronic health information. It was developed by HL7 and is designed to be easy to implement and use. FHIR uses a resource-based approach, which means that clinical data is represented as resources that can be easily exchanged and queried. FHIR also uses modern web technologies, such as RESTful APIs, to enable the exchange of clinical data between different healthcare providers and systems.
FHIR provides a framework for the exchange of clinical data, such as patient demographics, diagnoses, and medications. It also provides a framework for the exchange of administrative data, such as insurance information and billing codes. FHIR is designed to be flexible and extensible, which means that it can be easily customized to meet the specific needs of different healthcare providers and systems.
Comparison between HL7 and FHIR
HL7 and FHIR are both standards for the exchange of electronic health information. However, there are several key differences between them.
- Complexity: HL7 is a complex standard that requires a high degree of technical expertise to implement and use. It can be challenging to implement in a way that promotes interoperability, and it can be time-consuming to set up. FHIR, on the other hand, is designed to be easy to use and implement. It uses modern web technologies, such as RESTful APIs, which are familiar to many developers.
- Resource-based approach: FHIR uses a resource-based approach, which means that clinical data is represented as resources that can be easily exchanged and queried. This makes it easier to exchange and integrate clinical data between different healthcare providers and systems. HL7, on the other hand, uses a message-based approach, which can be more difficult to exchange and integrate clinical data.
- Interoperability: FHIR is designed to promote interoperability between different healthcare providers and systems. It provides a flexible and extensible framework for the exchange of electronic health information. HL7, on the other hand, can be more challenging to implement in a way that promotes interoperability. While HL7 has been widely used in the healthcare industry for many years, its complexity can make it difficult to achieve interoperability across different systems.
- Adoption: FHIR is a newer standard that is rapidly gaining adoption in the healthcare industry. Many healthcare providers and systems are adopting FHIR because of its ease of use and flexibility. HL7, on the other hand, is a well-established standard that has been used in the healthcare industry for many years.
- Versioning: HL7 has several versions, including HL7 v2.x and HL7 v3. Each version is designed to address different needs and requirements. However, this can make it challenging to achieve interoperability across different versions of HL7. FHIR, on the other hand, is designed to be flexible and extensible, which means that it can be easily customized to meet the specific needs of different healthcare providers and systems.
- Standards development: HL7 is developed by a non-profit organization, while FHIR is developed by HL7 itself. This means that FHIR is closely aligned with the needs of the healthcare industry, and it can be more responsive to changes in the industry. HL7, on the other hand, is developed by a larger community of stakeholders, which can make it more challenging to coordinate updates and changes to the standard.
Table comparing some of the main differences between HL7 and FHIR:
| HL7 | FHIR | |
|---|---|---|
| Complexity | Complex standard that requires technical expertise to implement and use | Designed to be easy to use and implement using modern web technologies |
| Approach | Message-based approach | Resource-based approach |
| Interoperability | Can be challenging to achieve interoperability across different systems | Designed to promote interoperability between different healthcare providers and systems |
| Adoption | Well-established standard that has been used in the healthcare industry for many years | Rapidly gaining adoption in the healthcare industry |
| Versioning | Has several versions, each designed to address different needs and requirements, which can make it challenging to achieve interoperability across different versions | Designed to be flexible and extensible, which means it can be easily customized to meet specific needs |
| Standards development | Developed by a larger community of stakeholders | Developed by HL7 itself and closely aligned with the needs of the healthcare industry |
Conclusion
HL7 and FHIR are both standards that play a crucial role in the exchange of electronic health information. While HL7 is a more established standard, FHIR offers several advantages, including a resource-based approach, ease of use, and flexibility. FHIR is rapidly gaining adoption in the healthcare industry, and many healthcare providers and systems are adopting it to enable better interoperability and exchange of clinical data. Ultimately, both HL7 and FHIR have their strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of which standard to use will depend on the specific needs and requirements of each healthcare organization. However, it is clear that the adoption of these standards is essential for improving the quality of care, reducing costs, and improving patient outcomes in the healthcare industry.