As the FHIR project has progressed, many organizations are starting to face the difficult question: when should we think about using FHIR for our production interfaces?
Making this kind of evaluation depends on the technical merits of the various possible alternative standards, the existing ecosystem and how much is already invested in alternative approaches, and what kind of maturity rating is appropriate for the standard.
With regard to the last, see Dixie Baker’s JAMIA paper, “Evaluating and classifying the readiness of technology specifications for national standardization”, but note that what kind of maturity is best for a project depends on that nature of the project and it’s participants. National regulations need something different than smaller projects with a shorter time line.
Saint-Petersburg government started project, whose goal is to create united integration bus for exchanging laboratory orders and results for state ambulatories, hospitals and laboratories.
Surely there are a lot of small technical questions, but we have to resume, that FHIR perfectly fits the needs & requirements of this project.
There’s no single answer as to whether FHIR is ready or not; while we’ve still got lots of the healthcare space to cover, some of what’s in FHIR is based on well understood concepts. If FHIR meets a project requirements, then there’s no reason not to use it, and take advantage of it’s advantages compared to other approaches.
I’m pleased that FHIR meets the needs to the St Petersburg Project.
p.s. check out Nicolai’s Russian version of FHIR too.