Assessing State EHDI Programs’ Capability for Standards-Based Health Information Exchange. Jim Jellison, MPH Deb Bara, MA. Topics. Overview of EHDI Barriers to EHR – Public Health interoperability EHDI interoperability capability maturity model. PHII’s Mission.
Jim Jellison, MPH
Deb Bara, MA
Overview of EHDI
Barriers to EHR – Public Health interoperability
EHDI interoperability capability maturity model
To improve health outcomes worldwide by transforming health practitioners’ ability to apply information effectively.
CDC MMWR (1/30/2004)
CDC Annual EHDI Data Reports
Shulman, et al. Pediatrics (Suppl., Aug 2010)
No Hearing Loss
No Hearing Loss
2014 Clinical Quality Measure: % screened for hearing loss before
Sources: Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH); Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
Device Enterprise Communication*
Early Hearing Care Plan*
IHE QRPH Domain
Lisa Nelson (consultant)
Lura Daussat (OZ Systems)
* To be replaced with
Sending care plans
Data & Standards
Adapted from C4ISR AWG Architectures Working Group, Department of Defense. 1998.
Levels of Information Systems Interoperability (LISI). Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Defense.
Use evaluation results to improve
Evaluation of procedures, processes
Routine processes, documented procedures;
Established governance, policies
Repeat early successes;
Begin to establish processes
Isolated, ad-hoc efforts;
Adapted from the Capability Maturity Model developed by the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University.Capability Maturity Model is registered service mark of Carnegie Mellon University.
No awareness or efforts
Use of evaluation findings to improve live birth event identification process.
Evaluation of automated live birth event identification process.
Consistently good results;
Few unresolved duplicate birth events.
Combine manual, automated approaches; Inconsistent results;
Some unresolved duplicates.
Many unresolved duplicate birth events.
Unable to conduct these activities.
Agency uses evaluation findings to improve governance of information systems development.
Agency has established such a governance process and evaluates how well it guides IT projects towards agency objectives.
Agency has established such a governance process and exercises it regularly.
Agency has made sustained attempts at governing information system projects.
Agency has made isolated, ad-hoc efforts to govern information systems projects.
No such governance structure.