System Integration Issues for Next-Generation Remote Healthcare System

  • Cristiano Paggetti
  • Carlos Cavero Barca
  • Juan Mario Rodríguez


The system integration is always a terrible headache for IT technologists. Several aspects are related to a proper integration of different components and services into remote healthcare solution. Furthermore the overall integration issue cannot be regarded only from a technical point of view but it has to take into account aspects such as deployment scenario, service organization, educational and business context, resource sharing with other services. The system integration is a crucial activity and requires to be properly planned, it is based on system and service architecture design however it must be empowered taking into account use case and deployment scenario, functional and technical specification and interoperability requirements with other services. Due to the variety and complexity of system integration, in this chapter only some of the major issues related to system integration are taken into account; in particular the authors have selected the following main issues: system integration topics checklist; the interoperability and portability of data as one of the crucial aspects enabling system integration and proper deployment of solutions into the healthcare domain; structured approach for solution deployment; the user interface design as basic aspect to engage the medical professionals. Finally the critical issues are raised breaking down the lessons learnt.


Unify Modelling Language Electronic Health Record Unify Process Semantic Interoperability Model Drive Architecture 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Beale T, Heard S, Kalra D, Lloyd D (2007) The openEHR reference model—EHR information model. [Online] openEHR foundation [Cited: 15 June 2013].
  2. Bernstein K, Tvede I et al (2009) Can openEHR archetypes be used in a national context? The Danish archetype proof-of-concept project. Stud Health Technol Inform 150:147–151Google Scholar
  3. Blobel B (2010) Architectural approach to eHealth for enabling paradigm changes in health. Methods Inf Med 49(2):123–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen R, Klein G et al (2009) Archetype-based conversion of EHR content models: pilot experience with a regional EHR system. BMC Med Inform Decis Making 9(1):33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Collins (2013) Portability. Accessed 15 Jun 2013
  6. Duftschmid G, Wrba T et al (2010) Extraction of standardized archetyped data from electronic health record systems based on the entity-attribute-value model. Int J Med Inform 79(8):585–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edelstein L (1943) The Hippocratic oath: text, translation, and interpretation. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, MDGoogle Scholar
  8. European Commission (2007) Article 29—“Data Protection Working Party”. Working document on the processing of personal data relating to health in electronic health records (EHR), WP131.
  9. European Commission—DG Information Society/Q-REC (2007) Inventory of relevant standards for EHR systems. European Commission—DG Information Society/Q-REC, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  10. Glazer I, Blakley B (2009) Identity and privacy strategies—privacy. Burton Group, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  11. Henry T (2009) Security and risk management strategies, information confidentiality. Burton Group, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  12. Iakovidis I, Dogac A et al (2007) Interoperability of eHealth systems‚ a selection of recent EU’s Research Programme Development. eHealth: Combining Health Telematics, Telemedicine Biomedical Engineering and Bioinformatics to the Edge, Regensburg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  13. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) (2007) The role of standards in engineering and technology. Accessed 15 June 2013
  14. ISO/DTR 20514 (2005) Health informatics—electronic health record: definition, scope and context. Accessed 15 June 2013
  15. Jacobson I, Grady B, Rumbaugh JE (1999) The unified software development process—the complete guide to the unified process from the original designers. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  16. Kabak Y, Dogac A, Köse I, Akpinar N, Gürel M, Arslan Y et al (2008) The use of HL7 CDA in the National Health Information System (NHIS) of Turkey. In: Ninth international HL7 interoperability conference (IHIC), Crete, Greece, pp 49–55Google Scholar
  17. Kruchten P (2003) The rational unified process an introduction. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  18. Leslie H, Heard S (2006) Building archetypes. In: Proceeding of learn about openEHR, CEN and SNOMED. Ocean Informatics and the National Centre for Classification in Health AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  19. LinkEHR (2011) LinkEHR. [Online] Biomedical Informatics Group. Universidad Politécnica de Valencia [Cited: 15 June 2013].
  20. LiU Archetype Editor (2007) LiU Archetype Editor. [Online] Linköpings universitet. Institutionen för medicinsk teknik [Cited: 15 June 2013].
  21. Main T, Slywotzky A (2012) The volume-to-value revolution. Oliver Wyman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Marand & IBS (2013) Marand provides IBS with Think!Med EHR platform to create information infrastructure for electronic healthcare in Moscow. Accessed 15 June 2013
  23. McCay C, Kalra D, Worden R (2008) Results of investigating the transformability between HL7 V3, openEHR and EN/ISO 13606. NHS Connecting for Health, LeedsGoogle Scholar
  24. MDA Success Story, OMG (2013). M1 Global Solutions. Model driven software development and offshore outsourcing. Accessed 15 June 2013
  25. Murray PJ, Wright G, Karopka T, Betts H, Orel A (2009) Open source and healthcare in Europe—time to put leading edge ideas into practice. Stud Health Technol Inform 150:963–967Google Scholar
  26. NEHTA CKM (2012) NEHTA CKM. [Online] NEHTA CKM [Cited: 15 June 2013].
  27. Niski J (2008) Application security frameworks. Burton Group, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  28. OASIS (2008) Reference architecture for service oriented architecture version 1.0. OASIS Standard SpecificationGoogle Scholar
  29. Ocean Archetype Editor (2012) Ocean Archetype Editor. [Online] Ocean Informatics [Cited: 15 June 2013].
  30. OpenEHR Foundation (2010) Clinical Knowledge Manager [Cited: 15 June 2013].
  31. openEHR Foundation (2012) What is openEHR? [Online] openEHR Foundation [Cited: 15 June 2013].
  32. openEHR Healthcare Providers and Authorities (2012) openEHR Healthcare Providers and Authorities. openEHR Foundation. Accessed 15 June 2013
  33. openEHR Wikipedia (2011) Wikipedia. Accessed 15 June 2013
  34. Prince R (2003–2005) Using RUP/UP: 10 easy steps—a practical guide. Toolbox: a knowledge sharing community [Online].
  35. Semantic HEALTH (2009) Semantic interoperability for better health and safer healthcare. Semantic Health Report. European Commission. Information Society and Media Directorate-General, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  36. Stroetman KA, Artmann J, Stroetman VN et al (2011) European countries on their journey towards national eHealth infrastructures. eHealth strategies report. http//
  37. Swedish openEHR CKM (2010) Swedish openEHR CKM. [Online] Swedish openEHR [Cited: 15 June 2013].
  38. Think!Med Clinical (2013) Marand. Accessed 15 June 2013
  39. Wikipedia (2013) Software portability. Accessed 15 June 2013
  40. Williams G (2003) Telehealth—a keystone for future healthcare delivery. Health Informatics Europe [Online]. Accessed 11 Mar 2003Google Scholar
  41. Yong H, Jinqiu G, Ohta Y (2008) A prototype model using clinical document architecture (CDA) with a Japanese local standard: designing and implementing a referral letter system. Acta Med Okayama 62(1):15–20Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cristiano Paggetti
    • 1
  • Carlos Cavero Barca
    • 2
  • Juan Mario Rodríguez
    • 2
  1. 1.Connected Health Unit, I+ S.r.l.FlorenceItaly
  2. 2.ATOS Research and Innovation (ARI), ATOSMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations