...
Standard | Fit for Purpose | Stewardship | Quality | |||||
Fits | Implementation | Vendor Support | Canadian | SDO | Complexity | Standard | Training, Support and Tooling | |
Pilot |
| No | Yes |
| Draft for Use |
| ||
pan-Canadian Immunization | Production | Yes | Localized |
| Normative |
| ||
Architectural Constraints and Considerations | Secondary Benefits | |||||||
FHIR’s modular components, foundation on web standards and support for RESTful architectures make the standard generally less complex and more accessible to developers of client applications than the pan-Canadian standards which are based on HL7 v3. | No notable secondary benefits. | |||||||
Recommendation | Supporting Rationale | |||||||
It is recommended that Panorama based new implementations adopt FHIR. | FHIR supports the use cases described above without further extension or localization. In the event that extension is required to support future requirements, FHIR provides a straightforward mechanism for creating extensions. Canada-specific terminology value sets can be used while remaining “FHIR conformant”, as the FHIR Immunization resource only specifies examples; implementers are free to use any value set they choose. FHIR has significant momentum among vendors and developers, meaning the long-term sustainability of FHIR-based implementations will likely be superior. There is a substantial ecosystem of open-source tools and reference implementations for FHIR that implementers can leverage to accelerate their projects. |
...