Yes exactly! Since patient movement within a hospital is done primary with v2 and then hours or even days later a patient summary CCD might get sent across. Unless you’re dealing with encounter based CCDs. But those still aren’t live.
Yup, there are a few EHR vendors that have some limited support. Intersystems’ whole platform is shifting towards have pure native support for FHIR. It’s still very rough and to into the weeds of things you sadly have to delve into that very old language (objectscript = MUMPS). But thankfully there bindings for more modern languages for it.
RHIOs exist predominantly to allow the exchange of patient information between participating hospitals or even regions. I personally only have insight into how two RHIOs operate. Both are very interested how they can turn FHIR into another avenue to distribute patient information.
The issue is that most EHR/EMR vendors have very limited limited interoperability with FHIR. As a lot of these vendors are struggling with CCD 2.1 implementations. The exciting space is allowing patients through 3rd party apps to request specific information or even send it to the HIE (RHIO in this case) and let there GPs know of certain events.
Which means a lot of work to bend over backwards to get APIs exposed for these 3rd parties.
Not OP but I can tell you that due to the object size limitations of FHIR objects, document exchange is just not feasible. Using FHIR to register a patient is pretty pointless currently as every older and larger hospital sends HL7v2.
RHIOs building gateways for 3rd party apps is very much the future of FHIR. But they’ll still be interacting with that crufty legacy system.
Could not agree more! As someone who works as a contractor for two relatively large RHIOs I was absolutely dumbfounded by how contradictory everything is when I first started. I’m in a unique position where I get to interact with dozens of EMR/EHR vendors. They’re all terrible.