Public Health Centers - Revision history

Tomjones: /* References */

2020-12-05T21:56:33Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:56, 5 December 2020
Line 42:		Line 42:
	This work is an outgrowth of the Identity Ecosystem Framework – Registry (IDEF-R) which was a work-effort under IDESG which was designed and partially built with funding from the US Department of Commerce NSTIC Program office and administered by NIST. That effort continues is in the Kantara FIRE Work Groups (Federated Identity Resilient Ecosystem) and the Health Identity Assurance. The software is available for demonstration.		This work is an outgrowth of the Identity Ecosystem Framework – Registry (IDEF-R) which was a work-effort under IDESG which was designed and partially built with funding from the US Department of Commerce NSTIC Program office and administered by NIST. That effort continues is in the Kantara FIRE Work Groups (Federated Identity Resilient Ecosystem) and the Health Identity Assurance. The software is available for demonstration.

			* [https://www.mavenproject.org/ The Maven Project] healthcare for the vulnerable population.
	* Desig[https://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/healthidassurance/Identity+Assurance+Principles n Principles/Goals for a Healthcare Identity Environment Architecture] shared with the ONC in February 2020 in support of the Cures Act formalization. Signed by Dr. Thomas Sullivan, chair of the Healthcare Identity Assurance Work Group, and Jim Kragh, chair of the Federated Identifiers Work Group, of the Kantara Initiative.		* Desig[https://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/healthidassurance/Identity+Assurance+Principles n Principles/Goals for a Healthcare Identity Environment Architecture] shared with the ONC in February 2020 in support of the Cures Act formalization. Signed by Dr. Thomas Sullivan, chair of the Healthcare Identity Assurance Work Group, and Jim Kragh, chair of the Federated Identifiers Work Group, of the Kantara Initiative.
	* See the wiki page on the [[Patient Registration with Distributed Attributes]] for technical deatails.		* See the wiki page on the [[Patient Registration with Distributed Attributes]] for technical deatails.
Line 48:		Line 48:
	* See the wiki page on [[Patient Choice]] as requiring a high level of protection for patient health information outside of HIPAA servers.		* See the wiki page on [[Patient Choice]] as requiring a high level of protection for patient health information outside of HIPAA servers.
	* See the wiki page on [[Patient under 13 and Homeless Use Case]] for the case of the public school as one of the [[Public Health Centers]] for vulnerable populations.		* See the wiki page on [[Patient under 13 and Homeless Use Case]] for the case of the public school as one of the [[Public Health Centers]] for vulnerable populations.

	[[Category:Vulnerable Populations]]		[[Category:Vulnerable Populations]]
	[[Category:Health]]		[[Category:Health]]
	[[Category:Use Cases]]		[[Category:Use Cases]]

Tomjones: /* Context */

2020-05-19T18:53:25Z

Context

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:53, 19 May 2020
Line 13:		Line 13:
	The first challenge is Patient Matching which is a life or death as well as a medication fraud issue. The second challenge is the [https://www.healthit.gov/curesrule/ ONC’s Cures Act Final Rule] which makes clear that all Patient Health information needs to be available to patients. Since a large fraction (91%) of the US population at large as well as the vulnerable population have cell phones, this use case will focus on vulnerable patients that have access to a cell phone. The large majority of those are smart phones. When patient outcomes are considered, it may even be cost effective to provide the vulnerable patient with a smart phone. The Cures act explicitly notes that applications provided with smartphones need to be from certified developers and the TEFCA adds the requirement for NIST IAL2 and AAL2 (SP 800-63-3) Identity integrated with HIE’s and record locator services to ensure interoperability and patient safety.		The first challenge is Patient Matching which is a life or death as well as a medication fraud issue. The second challenge is the [https://www.healthit.gov/curesrule/ ONC’s Cures Act Final Rule] which makes clear that all Patient Health information needs to be available to patients. Since a large fraction (91%) of the US population at large as well as the vulnerable population have cell phones, this use case will focus on vulnerable patients that have access to a cell phone. The large majority of those are smart phones. When patient outcomes are considered, it may even be cost effective to provide the vulnerable patient with a smart phone. The Cures act explicitly notes that applications provided with smartphones need to be from certified developers and the TEFCA adds the requirement for NIST IAL2 and AAL2 (SP 800-63-3) Identity integrated with HIE’s and record locator services to ensure interoperability and patient safety.

	During the COVID-19 pandemic where vulnerable populations were granted emergency access to remote healthcare, it became clear that patient identifiers were inadequate to enable a high level of patient matching. What ican be achieved is a program to ~~put in place~~ a trusted entity infrastructure for certified ~~on-ramp~~ coupled with a trust registry that is linked to a record locator service for the specific purpose of serving a vulnerable population. in most cases with a user friendly app with core functionality content that is interoperable. ~~And there~~ is ~~a way~~ to incentivize user/patients to want to participate ~~that can~~ increase compliance, quality of life and generate ~~a positive ROI~~.		During the COVID-19 pandemic where vulnerable populations were granted emergency access to remote healthcare, it became clear that patient identifiers were inadequate to enable a high level of patient matching. What ican be achieved within a few months is a program to build out a trusted entity infrastructure for certified onboarding coupled with a trust registry that is linked to a record locator service for the specific purpose of serving a vulnerable population. in most cases with a user friendly app with core functionality content that is interoperable. There is extension to the program that can incentivize user/patients to want to participate to increase compliance, quality of life and thus generate better long-term results at lower cost.

	==Preconditions==		==Preconditions==

Tomjones: /* Context */

2020-05-19T18:48:40Z

Context

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:48, 19 May 2020
Line 13:		Line 13:
	The first challenge is Patient Matching which is a life or death as well as a medication fraud issue. The second challenge is the [https://www.healthit.gov/curesrule/ ONC’s Cures Act Final Rule] which makes clear that all Patient Health information needs to be available to patients. Since a large fraction (91%) of the US population at large as well as the vulnerable population have cell phones, this use case will focus on vulnerable patients that have access to a cell phone. The large majority of those are smart phones. When patient outcomes are considered, it may even be cost effective to provide the vulnerable patient with a smart phone. The Cures act explicitly notes that applications provided with smartphones need to be from certified developers and the TEFCA adds the requirement for NIST IAL2 and AAL2 (SP 800-63-3) Identity integrated with HIE’s and record locator services to ensure interoperability and patient safety.		The first challenge is Patient Matching which is a life or death as well as a medication fraud issue. The second challenge is the [https://www.healthit.gov/curesrule/ ONC’s Cures Act Final Rule] which makes clear that all Patient Health information needs to be available to patients. Since a large fraction (91%) of the US population at large as well as the vulnerable population have cell phones, this use case will focus on vulnerable patients that have access to a cell phone. The large majority of those are smart phones. When patient outcomes are considered, it may even be cost effective to provide the vulnerable patient with a smart phone. The Cures act explicitly notes that applications provided with smartphones need to be from certified developers and the TEFCA adds the requirement for NIST IAL2 and AAL2 (SP 800-63-3) Identity integrated with HIE’s and record locator services to ensure interoperability and patient safety.

	~~Today~~ that ~~is not~~ a ~~realistic or even an achievable goal for vulnerable populations~~. What is ~~achievable is that our work group can start~~ to put in place a trusted entity infrastructure for ~~a CSP~~ on-ramp coupled with a trust registry that is linked to a record locator service for the specific purpose of serving a vulnerable population with a user friendly app with core functionality content that is interoperable. And there is a way to incentivize user/patients to want to participate that can increase compliance, quality of life and generate a positive ROI.		During the COVID-19 pandemic where vulnerable populations were granted emergency access to remote healthcare, it became clear that patient identifiers were inadequate to enable a high level of patient matching. What ican be achieved is a program to put in place a trusted entity infrastructure for certified on-ramp coupled with a trust registry that is linked to a record locator service for the specific purpose of serving a vulnerable population. in most cases with a user friendly app with core functionality content that is interoperable. And there is a way to incentivize user/patients to want to participate that can increase compliance, quality of life and generate a positive ROI.

	==Preconditions==		==Preconditions==

Tomjones: /* Context */

2020-05-19T18:41:27Z

Context

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:41, 19 May 2020
Line 9:		Line 9:

	==Context==		==Context==
	The existing context is the [https://tcwiki.azurewebsites.net/index.php?title=TEFCA Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement (TEFCA)], the Sequoia [https://rce.sequoiaproject.org/SEQUOIA Recognized Coordinating Entity] and health information exchanges,. ~~they hav~~ encouraged an ongoing dialogue regarding the data sharing agreement, interoperability, electronic health records using FHIR formats. This is a plan for engaging vulnerable populations with access to their records and strong patient matching.		The existing context is the [https://tcwiki.azurewebsites.net/index.php?title=TEFCA Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement (TEFCA)], the Sequoia [https://rce.sequoiaproject.org/SEQUOIA Recognized Coordinating Entity] and health information exchanges. Those efforts have encouraged an ongoing dialogue regarding the data sharing agreement, interoperability, electronic health records using FHIR formats. This is a plan for engaging vulnerable populations with access to their records and strong patient matching.

	The first challenge is Patient Matching which is a life or death as well as a medication fraud issue. The second challenge is the [https://www.healthit.gov/curesrule/ ONC’s Cures Act Final Rule] which makes clear that all Patient Health information needs to be available to patients. Since a large fraction (91%) of the US population at large as well as the vulnerable population have cell phones, this use case will focus on vulnerable patients that have access to a cell phone. The large majority of those are smart phones. When patient outcomes are considered, it may even be cost effective to provide the vulnerable patient with a smart phone. The Cures act explicitly notes that applications provided with smartphones need to be from certified developers and the TEFCA adds the requirement for NIST IAL2 and AAL2 (SP 800-63-3) Identity integrated with HIE’s and record locator services to ensure interoperability and patient safety.		The first challenge is Patient Matching which is a life or death as well as a medication fraud issue. The second challenge is the [https://www.healthit.gov/curesrule/ ONC’s Cures Act Final Rule] which makes clear that all Patient Health information needs to be available to patients. Since a large fraction (91%) of the US population at large as well as the vulnerable population have cell phones, this use case will focus on vulnerable patients that have access to a cell phone. The large majority of those are smart phones. When patient outcomes are considered, it may even be cost effective to provide the vulnerable patient with a smart phone. The Cures act explicitly notes that applications provided with smartphones need to be from certified developers and the TEFCA adds the requirement for NIST IAL2 and AAL2 (SP 800-63-3) Identity integrated with HIE’s and record locator services to ensure interoperability and patient safety.

Tomjones: /* Context */

2020-05-19T18:40:01Z

Context

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:40, 19 May 2020
Line 9:		Line 9:

	==Context==		==Context==
	The existing context is the [https://tcwiki.azurewebsites.net/index.php?title=TEFCA Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement (TEFCA)], the Sequoia [https://rce.sequoiaproject.org/SEQUOIA Recognized Coordinating Entity] and health information exchanges, ~~there is~~ ongoing dialogue regarding the data sharing agreement, interoperability, ~~electronica~~ health records using FHIR formats. This is a plan for engaging vulnerable populations.		The existing context is the [https://tcwiki.azurewebsites.net/index.php?title=TEFCA Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement (TEFCA)], the Sequoia [https://rce.sequoiaproject.org/SEQUOIA Recognized Coordinating Entity] and health information exchanges,. they hav encouraged an ongoing dialogue regarding the data sharing agreement, interoperability, electronic health records using FHIR formats. This is a plan for engaging vulnerable populations with access to their records and strong patient matching.

	The first challenge is Patient Matching which is a life or death as well as a medication fraud issue. The second challenge is the [https://www.healthit.gov/curesrule/ ONC’s Cures Act Final Rule] which makes clear that all Patient Health information needs to be available to patients. Since a large fraction (91%) of the US population at large as well as the vulnerable population have cell phones, this use case will focus on vulnerable patients that have access to a cell phone. The large majority of those are smart phones. When patient outcomes are considered, it may even be cost effective to provide the vulnerable patient with a smart phone. The Cures act explicitly notes that applications provided with ~~smart phones~~ need to be from certified developers and the TEFCA adds the requirement for NIST IAL2 and AAL2 (SP 800-63-3) Identity integrated with HIE’s and record locator services to ensure interoperability and patient safety.		The first challenge is Patient Matching which is a life or death as well as a medication fraud issue. The second challenge is the [https://www.healthit.gov/curesrule/ ONC’s Cures Act Final Rule] which makes clear that all Patient Health information needs to be available to patients. Since a large fraction (91%) of the US population at large as well as the vulnerable population have cell phones, this use case will focus on vulnerable patients that have access to a cell phone. The large majority of those are smart phones. When patient outcomes are considered, it may even be cost effective to provide the vulnerable patient with a smart phone. The Cures act explicitly notes that applications provided with smartphones need to be from certified developers and the TEFCA adds the requirement for NIST IAL2 and AAL2 (SP 800-63-3) Identity integrated with HIE’s and record locator services to ensure interoperability and patient safety.

	Today that is not a realistic or even an achievable goal for vulnerable populations. What is achievable is that our work group can start to put in place a trusted entity infrastructure for a CSP on-ramp coupled with a trust registry that is linked to a record locator service for the specific purpose of serving a vulnerable population with a user friendly app with core functionality content that is interoperable. And there is a way to incentivize user/patients to want to participate that can increase compliance, quality of life and generate a positive ROI.		Today that is not a realistic or even an achievable goal for vulnerable populations. What is achievable is that our work group can start to put in place a trusted entity infrastructure for a CSP on-ramp coupled with a trust registry that is linked to a record locator service for the specific purpose of serving a vulnerable population with a user friendly app with core functionality content that is interoperable. And there is a way to incentivize user/patients to want to participate that can increase compliance, quality of life and generate a positive ROI.

Tomjones: /* Full Title */

2020-05-19T18:33:01Z

Full Title

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:33, 19 May 2020
Line 5:		Line 5:
	# The patient is reliably matched to their Electronic Health Records (EHR) at a portable kiosk.		# The patient is reliably matched to their Electronic Health Records (EHR) at a portable kiosk.
	# The patient is given access to their health information in a secure manner.		# The patient is given access to their health information in a secure manner.
	# Patients have the means to access remote ~~connection~~ to a practitioner ~~with a linkage to~~ their PHI on an EHR.		# Patients have the means to access remote connections to a practitioner who can reliably access their PHI on an EHR. (ie patient to provider.)
	# The patient outcomes are improved by easy exchange and monitoring patient compliance with the care plan (ie patient to computer.)		# The patient outcomes are improved by easy exchange and monitoring patient compliance with the care plan (ie patient to computer.)

	==Context==		==Context==

Tomjones: /* Goals */

2020-05-19T16:59:30Z

Goals

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:59, 19 May 2020
Line 5:		Line 5:
	# The patient is reliably matched to their Electronic Health Records (EHR) at a portable kiosk.		# The patient is reliably matched to their Electronic Health Records (EHR) at a portable kiosk.
	# The patient is given access to their health information in a secure manner.		# The patient is given access to their health information in a secure manner.
	# Patients have the means to access ~~on line~~ connection to a practitioner with a linkage to their PHI on an EHR.		# Patients have the means to access remote connection to a practitioner with a linkage to their PHI on an EHR.
	# The patient outcomes are improved by easy exchange and monitoring patient compliance with the care plan (ie patient to computer.)		# The patient outcomes are improved by easy exchange and monitoring patient compliance with the care plan (ie patient to computer.)

Tomjones: /* Goals */

2020-05-19T16:56:14Z

Goals

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:56, 19 May 2020
Line 5:		Line 5:
	# The patient is reliably matched to their Electronic Health Records (EHR) at a portable kiosk.		# The patient is reliably matched to their Electronic Health Records (EHR) at a portable kiosk.
	# The patient is given access to their health information in a secure manner.		# The patient is given access to their health information in a secure manner.
	# Patients have the means to access ~~telemedicine~~ with a linkage to their PHI on an EHR.		# Patients have the means to access on line connection to a practitioner with a linkage to their PHI on an EHR.
	# The patient outcomes are improved by easy exchange and monitoring of patient compliance with the care plan.		# The patient outcomes are improved by easy exchange and monitoring patient compliance with the care plan (ie patient to computer.)

	==Context==		==Context==

Tomjones: /* Goals */

2020-05-19T16:43:42Z

Goals

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:43, 19 May 2020
Line 5:		Line 5:
	# The patient is reliably matched to their Electronic Health Records (EHR) at a portable kiosk.		# The patient is reliably matched to their Electronic Health Records (EHR) at a portable kiosk.
	# The patient is given access to their health information in a secure manner.		# The patient is given access to their health information in a secure manner.
			# Patients have the means to access telemedicine with a linkage to their PHI on an EHR.
	# The patient outcomes are improved by easy exchange and monitoring of patient compliance with the care plan.		# The patient outcomes are improved by easy exchange and monitoring of patient compliance with the care plan.

Tomjones: /* Context */

2020-05-17T08:25:55Z

Context

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:25, 17 May 2020
Line 8:		Line 8:

	==Context==		==Context==
	In context of the [https://tcwiki.azurewebsites.net/index.php?title=TEFCA Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement (TEFCA)], the Sequoia [https://rce.sequoiaproject.org/SEQUOIA Recognized Coordinating Entity] and health information exchanges, there is ongoing dialogue regarding the data sharing agreement, interoperability, electronica health records using FHIR formats. This is a plan for engaging vulnerable populations.		The existing context is the [https://tcwiki.azurewebsites.net/index.php?title=TEFCA Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement (TEFCA)], the Sequoia [https://rce.sequoiaproject.org/SEQUOIA Recognized Coordinating Entity] and health information exchanges, there is ongoing dialogue regarding the data sharing agreement, interoperability, electronica health records using FHIR formats. This is a plan for engaging vulnerable populations.

	The first challenge is Patient Matching which is a life or death as well as a medication fraud issue. The second challenge is the [https://www.healthit.gov/curesrule/ ONC’s Cures Act Final Rule] which makes clear that all Patient Health information needs to be available to patients. Since a large fraction (91%) of the US population at large as well as the vulnerable population have cell phones, this use case will focus on vulnerable patients that have access to a cell phone. The large majority of those are smart phones. When patient outcomes are considered, it may even be cost effective to provide the vulnerable patient with a smart phone. The Cures act explicitly notes that applications provided with smart phones need to be from certified developers and the TEFCA adds the requirement for NIST IAL2 and AAL2 (SP 800-63-3) Identity integrated with HIE’s and record locator services to ensure interoperability and patient safety.		The first challenge is Patient Matching which is a life or death as well as a medication fraud issue. The second challenge is the [https://www.healthit.gov/curesrule/ ONC’s Cures Act Final Rule] which makes clear that all Patient Health information needs to be available to patients. Since a large fraction (91%) of the US population at large as well as the vulnerable population have cell phones, this use case will focus on vulnerable patients that have access to a cell phone. The large majority of those are smart phones. When patient outcomes are considered, it may even be cost effective to provide the vulnerable patient with a smart phone. The Cures act explicitly notes that applications provided with smart phones need to be from certified developers and the TEFCA adds the requirement for NIST IAL2 and AAL2 (SP 800-63-3) Identity integrated with HIE’s and record locator services to ensure interoperability and patient safety.