HMIS community "big targets" for 2017-2018

Hi all.

I have a few ideas for “big target” goals that our HMIS community could pursue over the next 12 months. I’d like to garner some feedback on these and use this thread as a way to collect others’ ideas, too. :slight_smile:

1. Person-centred outcomes research (PCOR)

There is work underway in many developed countries (e.g. US PCORI initiative, https://www.pcori.org/) to create de-identified but longitudinal datasets that can be used to track case progress. Anyone using Tracker is setting up an opportunity for DHIS2 to be used in this way. I think it would be worthwhile to look at how data feeds from EMRs (including an “EMR light”, like Tracker) could be drawn into standards-based HMIS databases to support PCOR. The analytic opportunities of such datasets are astoundingly rich. Personally, I’m working on a project in Palestine that might be able to be leveraged as a “test” scenario. I know there is also a case-based tracking project CDC is doing (with Regenstrief, I think) – and perhaps we could draw in colleagues from these, and other, projects.
2. ADX-based schema

Presently, DHIS2 is coded to accept “any” inbound ADX message as long as it has the 3 mandatory data elements. The ADX profile, however, affords data exchange partners a way to quite precisely define the normative schema of the data message for a particular indicator report. An IHE work item is being considered to develop, for example, such a schema for HIV care and treatment. This ADX-based schema would describe mandatory and optional message content that satisfies, for example, PEPFAR DATIM reporting… or Global Fund reporting… or UNAIDS reporting… or whatever. I would like our HMIS community to actively engage in this work item (if it is ultimately launched in the IHE Quality, Research and Public Health (QRPH) committee). Ideally… we could try to draw in representatives from one or more of these organizations so that a **single normative schema for HIV reporting **could be developed and balloted as part of the IHE work item. What a mercy that would be for country MOHs if that could happen!
3. Context-appropriate KPIs

There are key performance indicators that are used by OECD countries to compare and track the “strength” of their health systems. Some subset of these are applicable in low resource settings… others are not. My sense is that a set of 10-12 actionable KPIs could be developed that would provide a dashboard for national public health decision-makers. These KPIs would provide sentinel information regarding the present state of the care delivery network across a number of axes (disease burden, relative resource allocation, equity of access, etc.). As an illustrative example, a set of sentinel indicators was developed for domestic use in the US a few years ago; their tracking “infographic” is found here: https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/data-search/midcourse-review/lhi. Hopefully, we could engage with folks from WHO and from various national and super-national organizations (e.g. WAHO, AeHIN, etc.) in developing such a KPI set.

I’d welcome thoughts on these idea… and new ones for us to consider in as our community’s “projects” for the coming year.

Warmest regards,

Derek.

Sorry to have ended with such a garbled call to action… I inadvertently hit SEND before I’d finished editing! What I wish I’d said is:

"I’d welcome thoughts on these ideas… and new ones for us to consider as our community’s “projects” for the coming year."

I also wish I’d included, in the KPI section, a link to the OECD’s framework for how to measure the quality of a health system. It is here: http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-care-quality-indicators.htm.

-Derek.

···

On Tuesday, September 5, 2017 at 9:51:16 AM UTC-4, Derek Ritz wrote:

Hi all.

I have a few ideas for “big target” goals that our HMIS community could pursue over the next 12 months. I’d like to garner some feedback on these and use this thread as a way to collect others’ ideas, too. :slight_smile:

1. Person-centred outcomes research (PCOR)

There is work underway in many developed countries (e.g. US PCORI initiative, https://www.pcori.org/) to create de-identified but longitudinal datasets that can be used to track case progress. Anyone using Tracker is setting up an opportunity for DHIS2 to be used in this way. I think it would be worthwhile to look at how data feeds from EMRs (including an “EMR light”, like Tracker) could be drawn into standards-based HMIS databases to support PCOR. The analytic opportunities of such datasets are astoundingly rich. Personally, I’m working on a project in Palestine that might be able to be leveraged as a “test” scenario. I know there is also a case-based tracking project CDC is doing (with Regenstrief, I think) – and perhaps we could draw in colleagues from these, and other, projects.
2. ADX-based schema

Presently, DHIS2 is coded to accept “any” inbound ADX message as long as it has the 3 mandatory data elements. The ADX profile, however, affords data exchange partners a way to quite precisely define the normative schema of the data message for a particular indicator report. An IHE work item is being considered to develop, for example, such a schema for HIV care and treatment. This ADX-based schema would describe mandatory and optional message content that satisfies, for example, PEPFAR DATIM reporting… or Global Fund reporting… or UNAIDS reporting… or whatever. I would like our HMIS community to actively engage in this work item (if it is ultimately launched in the IHE Quality, Research and Public Health (QRPH) committee). Ideally… we could try to draw in representatives from one or more of these organizations so that a **single normative schema for HIV reporting **could be developed and balloted as part of the IHE work item. What a mercy that would be for country MOHs if that could happen!
3. Context-appropriate KPIs

There are key performance indicators that are used by OECD countries to compare and track the “strength” of their health systems. Some subset of these are applicable in low resource settings… others are not. My sense is that a set of 10-12 actionable KPIs could be developed that would provide a dashboard for national public health decision-makers. These KPIs would provide sentinel information regarding the present state of the care delivery network across a number of axes (disease burden, relative resource allocation, equity of access, etc.). As an illustrative example, a set of sentinel indicators was developed for domestic use in the US a few years ago; their tracking “infographic” is found here: https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/data-search/midcourse-review/lhi. Hopefully, we could engage with folks from WHO and from various national and super-national organizations (e.g. WAHO, AeHIN, etc.) in developing such a KPI set.

I’d welcome thoughts on these idea… and new ones for us to consider in as our community’s “projects” for the coming year.

Warmest regards,

Derek.

Has anyone worked with the PHCPI framework?

I haven’t, but they look like a great organization. Nice catch, Liz! :slight_smile:
Warmest regards,

Derek

+1 (905) 515-0045

···

On Sep 20, 2017 1:18 PM, “Liz Mwashuma” elizamwashuma@gmail.com wrote:

Has anyone worked with the PHCPI framework?

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Open HMIS” group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to open-hmis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.