This
page
is
part
of
the
Continuous
Integration
Build
of
FHIR
Specification
(v5.0.0:
R5
-
STU
).
This
is
the
current
published
version
in
it's
permanent
home
(it
will
always
(will
be
available
incorrect/inconsistent
at
this
URL).
For
a
full
list
of
available
versions,
see
times).
See
the
Directory
of
published
versions
.
Page
versions:
R5
R4B
R4
Responsible
Owner:
Work
Group
FHIR
Infrastructure
|
Standards Status : Informative |
FHIR is designed as an interface specification - it specifies the content of the data exchanged between healthcare applications, and how the exchange is implemented and managed. FHIR defines the following methods for exchanging data between systems:
Each of these approaches can be used to exchange information, and each has its own strengths and weaknesses and applicability. Note that applications are allowed to use any other method to exchange resources; the methods described in this specification are the common methods that are used enough to justify the effort to describe or standardize their use.
The Approaches to Exchanging FHIR Data page explores the various ways of sharing FHIR content, covering the above primary mechanisms as well as variations of them, including providing guidance on how to choose the architectural approach that best suits a particular use-case.
Most
implementers
focus
on
RESTful
API
.
This
is
a
client/server
API
designed
to
follow
the
principles
of
RESTful
design
for
C
reate,
R
ead,
U
pdate
and
D
elete
operations,
along
with
S
earch
and
E
xecute
(Operations)
support.
The RESTful API is a general-purpose interface that can be used to push and pull data between systems. Which is appropriate depends on architecture and deployment considerations. The RESTful API also supports Asynchronous Use and GraphQL .
In addition to the RESTful API, a messaging exchange framework is documented, which supports exchange between systems by sending routed messages from system to system. This exchange can be implemented on the RESTful API or using some other messaging technology.
Implementers should note that the messaging framework is not provided to fill any functional deficiency in the RESTful API (or vice versa), these frameworks are provided to allow implementers to choose how to exchange content based on their own architectural and deployment considerations. Messaging may be more suitable for exchange between disparate organizations with low levels of process integration and/or trust.
This specification also defines a document based exchange framework , where content to be exchanged is wrapped by a Composition that provides the context of the content, and that has a fixed presentation for a human reader. The document framework is provided to help with computer-assisted human to human communication uses - which are not uncommon in healthcare.
Typically, exchanging documents is associated with exchanging clinical information across clinical governance borders, while data-based exchange using the RESTful API is appropriate within where there are well established clinical governance arrangements.
In
addition,
this
specification
describes
the
use
of
FHIR
in
a
services
framework
(e.g.
(e.g.,
a
SOA).
Note
that
any
use
of
any
of
the
above
approaches
in
production
is
a
'service'
by
some
or
many
definitions.
The
services
description
provides
context
regarding
the
use
of
FHIR
(and
particularly
the
RESTful
API)
in
a
wider
enterprise
architecture.
Another way to make use of the resources defined by FHIR is to store them natively in a database or persistent store, where different applications or modules write and read the resources as part of their implementation. Using resources in this fashion is described here .
The Subscriptions Framework can be used to establish proactive event notifications from a FHIR application to another system. Applications which have implemented support for Subscriptions will advertise their use via the resources Subscription and SubscriptionTopic . Operations allowed on these resources may be discovered via the FHIR Application's CapabilityStatement .
All forms of data exchange should be appropriately secured. This requires the following:
This subject is described further in the Security Page.
With
regard
to
the
RESTful
API,
implementers
should
always
consider
the
Smart
App
Launch
protocol
as
part
of
the
overall
secure
API
approach
| RESTful API | This is stable and mostly published as Normative (see Note about normative status ). No breaking changes are expected. No significant development is planned, but HL7 will continue to respond to user experience |
| Messaging | Messaging has only been implemented in a few projects; some of the infrastructure has not yet been used in production. It is not clear whether significant development will be needed or appropriate |
| Documents | Documents have mostly only been used in prototype projects, though there is considerable impetus around implementation at this time. No significant development is planned, but HL7 will continue to respond to user experience |
| Services | At this point in time, it's not clear whether further work is required or appropriate in terms of service orientated architecture / enterprise integration. HL7 will continue to monitor implementer experience and feedback |
| Database / Persistent Storage |
This
is
a
new
area
with
considerable
action
at
this
time,
and
many
production
|